With the numerous threads from Chaos players, let s compare in terms of damages output macros and lances.
1/ Before making the comparison, lets find the point cost comparison between macros and lances.
ADMech Gothic cost 218 pts and ADMech Lunar costs 215, they both differ only on 2 6 DPS macros vs 2 3 DPS lances batteries. SO it means that 6 DPS macro +1.5pt = 3 DPS lance. For easier maths, lets take 3 DPS lance = 6 DPS macro
2/ Raw calculations
I won t make the maths in all possible situations but I all take an average armor of 67% (seems the most common armor value and also the average between the 50 armor Eldar and the 83 armor Necrons and SM).
Also I will consider an accuracy of 60 (again seems the most classic fights occus at around 9-10k range)
With those considerations, the 3 DPS lance will have to face 42 armor so a real DPS of 1.74.
The 6 DPS macro will have a real DPS of 1.2
So it seems that lances deals more damages than macros for the same point cost, so why the fuck my full lance fleet seems to hit like wet noodles?
3/ Additionnal considerations
Shields : As shields have 0 armor, the AP removal from lances is useless. Taking same values as above vs 0 armor, Lances have a real DPS of 3 (so + 1.26 DPS increase vs hull) while macros have a real DPS of 3.6 (so +2.4 DPS increase vs hull). It means that macros will strip of shields faster than lances and start damages hulls when lances are still hiting shields and so everytime the shield is reloaded
Stances : Thanks to stances, Macros have either a 40% increased reload rate (so DPS vs hull frm 1.2 to 2) or a +20 flat accuracy (DPS from 1.2 becomes 1.6). Lances "only" get a crit increase
Upgrades : I didn t checked all factions but Macros have access to accuracy bonus (demonic sight / tau targetting) and AP (at 4.5 range or lower).
Lances have +4.5k range (Tau range upgrade only works for Ion cannons)
Armor critics : There is a critic that ignore armor, this one is most efficient for armor than for lances because it is overlapping the basic lance AP (very minor factor but still another advantage to macro)
All these additonnal considerations shows that even if at (almost) same point cost comparison, lances are better than macros (1.74 vs 1.2), in a real fight macros will overperform (macro + reload alone totally outclass lances, vs shields it is not even the same world)
Possible solutions (taking in account lances are a damage dealer and not only a crit dealer):
1/ With the comparison above, I think lances are overpriced to their real damage output and their cost should be reduced.
2/ AP should be upped from 25 to 33 (Very careful because it will make lances much more dangerous vs Necrons/SM)
3/ Damages of lances should be increased (same as 2 can totally wreck some match ups)
4/ The armor removal crit is changed from ignore armor to deal a fix damage amount. This way lances are dealing damages through criticals (careful very impactful vs low HP factions and also relies on luck)
5/ Include a lance bonus (rate of fire/damage) to stances (careful because it will make some stances a must have for lances and make also deck crits almost mandatory to have)
6/ Specific lances upgrades (will create some mandatory upgrades if you want to play lance fleets and will reduce fleet variety)
PS : I only compared the macros vs lances. If we want to push the things further, in all cases, torps/bombers/boardings/ramming will kill things faster than any lance/macro. Also in today meta, long range fights are not efficient unless you are using mass bombers/homing missiles. Always better to go brawl