How odd IG tb's are 150, Cadians 150, amtl 150...just codex marines
If the iron hand warlord has better wep then stands to reason price increase
Good for the Space Wolves then, but the 650 & 825 cost for the other titans still applies

So in that case allies draw upon the codex space marine list- not codex specific space marines who fight & org differently case in point Space Wolves

But when looking @ Skitarai costs for titans are:

Emp 1250
Warlord 725
Reaver 575
WH remains 275 & pack 500

They start the builds with 0 cost weps yet when purchasing the reaver on amtl it gives 3 identical weps (without surcharge) @ 650, now the cost of chassis I put up reflected the amtl list.

Points may vary from army to army as proven - but isnt amtl amtl? why so fractured between what is the same force?

[headbang]
No. Codex list is the codex list. The costs of units there are independent of the other lists (where applicable analogs exist). Yes though in general widely tend to be the same general cost in other lists of the same faction as they have the same basic utility so little need to alter the PPU. However that's due to internal balance, not due to another list "dictating" anything. Since you seem to be getting caught up on otiose correlations inside factions, do note then that the identical Terminator formation in Codex list is 25 points more than the same one in the Imperial Fists as they lack the same utility there. So can you please just take the dev members word on it FFS?

So, I'll make it easy for you to digest with this absurdity:
If Vaaish wants to make a Warlord chassis 25 points and individual weapons 50 points each, for super cheap Warlords, that's his prerogative. It doesn't change the other lists with Warlords as they're 100% independent. Good luck getting 225 point Warlords through the approval process but that's not really cogent to the conversation.

Honestly dude you're trolling at this point.

Vaaish, sorry to cock your thread up. Best of luck with this.
-I do think dropping the surcharge is a good one. Marking a few weapons as being limited on a single titan is better.
-Getting those collector items in is wonderful fan service. Kuddos.
-Probably a 25 point drop on Reaver/Warlord chassis is great. Drops on Warhounds is pure silly talk as they're mathematically one of the best units in EA.
-I like the unmounted skitarri. It will especially remove the tendency of players in way older versions of AMTL from parking titans and just sitting there camping I suspect (dull.as.dishwater.)

When you get a proposal update out I'll be happy to throw some batreps your way. I've been wanting to get some traction with the newer versions anyways.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

That's not what that says at all and there's no possible way to interpret that as meaning that MW or TK negate shields.
If you roll 6 on d3 TK causing 3 hits and the target has 2 shields 2 of the 3 TK hits remove shields and the 3rd causes a point of damage.
Nothing except CC hits negates shields

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

if you roll 3 on a d3 its 2, read the example of play they hit the DC not the shields as it states when hitting the warhound there are tk & mw tk weps - the example states clearly shadowsword hitting the DC of the Warhound

It's obvious Steve is referring to rolling 3 hits, not a 3. Terribly worded though so fair enough.

And no, you're 100% absolutely incorrect that they bypass shields and I suggest you reread the Void Shield rules as to why. That example of play was showing how TK weapon damage allocation works in principle and to keep from cluttering things up with orthagonal concerns was obviously using a shield-less titan. I can understand your misreading and we should update that example to have better, more clear, and precise wording. Good on ya for spotting that. However it's clearly discussing hits, not damage so I must quote Pauli and state, das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

Edited my post to clarify it's plainly obvious meaning

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Please read page 66 of the same rule book Void Shield section and look at the Q. and A. underneath.
What you are quoting is an example of play not a RULE.

To chime in with the others a second, the game-play example on p41. is referring to the allocation of hits, and makes no mention of shields. In summary;

Three Shadowswords (SS Company) shoot at a pair of Warhounds (Warhound pack).
- Each Shadowsword hits a target, so each shot is considered in turn to determine how many hits are caused.
- The first shot causes 2x hits which are allocated to WH#1
- The second shot causes 2x hits again allocated to WH#1, which exceeds the DC of the Warhound
- The third shot would be diced for (lets say it causes 3 hits) and these would be allocated to WH#2

NOW we consider the actual damage caused, and in the above scenario;
- WH#1 saves two hits (shields) and loses 2x damage from the other TK hits
- WH#2 saves two hits (shields) and loses 1x damage from the other TK hit

Does that make more sense?

Hey Ginger,
My understanding is that the hits are allocatef first. As in 3 SS fire 3 volcano cannon shots. All 3 hit. As the warhound has 3 dc all hits are allocated to warhound 1. It is only after hits are allocated that damage rolls occur. Meaning that you can only destroy one warhound in that example. Or have read your post wrong and are you just quoting from an example of play?

Cheers
Jim

This has always been the issue with titan armies imho - the EA rules are kinda broken by titans. To start their weapons are un-suppressible and have void shields, plus they have the 3 best abilities in the game : RA, Fearless and 1+ activation by default. It hamstrings them enough in normal armies as the big titans are usually un-competitive in games under 4k. Given these constraints the writers have done a great job to get them to work at all as a viable army (NetEA and EpicUK.)

Reminds me of the problems they had implementing ogre only teams in BB - the players might be good enough to justify their points, but without enough team members to cover the field they couldn't play the game. This might be old ground (i think i was only lurking when the original discussions were had and didn't play EA at the time) but would it be worth trying a similar approach ? ie. strip some of the special abilities off the chassis by default ?

Fearless could be an upgrade - a relic machine spirit or something - could knock around 1/200 odd points off a warlord i would say as it would also limit the assault strength.

Likewise void shields could be made 2 by default with extras added as upgrades up to the normal maximums. Not really sure how to cost it though.

Finally, 2+ activation could be default with a Veteran Crew upgrade to 1+.

It would allow greater titan numbers on the table to make the games more flexible and make the possible list builds more varied. Fluff-wise, it could be justified that only the elite titans and crews get sent out to support other armies as vanguards, but when fighting alone the TLs have to draft in other less experienced or powerful titans.

I also echo DK and the others about the "carapace mount only" option to limit multiple weapons might be a good way to go (though i understand there was an issue with people with old models with existing load-outs?)

Hi V,
I think all of blips suggestions are definitely worth playtesting. I think that would overcome the issue identified that titan list are really only fun/effective at 10k (wink that's the only way to play epic wink), while also allowing them to be competitive at 3k. The upgrades suggestion would allow lists at 10 and 3 k to be balanced and reasonable.
However, it's pretty drastic and difficult to points cost.


I would also support dropping walords by 50 and reavers by 25 or 50.

I would also add that it may be worth looking at adding skittari with triaros and maybe krios tanks. Although that may be moving too far away from the theme for some people, i personally think that its still within the bounds of a thematic list.

Cheers
Jim

Hi Jim
I was following the example from p47 in the PDF of the rules. The full answer is here

Well that was an exciting 24 hours. I seem to have kicked a hornets nest here.

Personally I would still love to implement a "plasma generation" rule where each titan gets one point of plasma for every DC remaining. Each weapon would require a certain amount of plasma to fire: Scout weapons, 1 point. Battle Titan weapons, 2 points. This would allow titans to degrade over the course of a game as they take damage. However, I don't think anyone else wants that so moving on...

First up, let me add to the chorus, SS do NOT ignore shields. Unless your weapon stat line specifically says "ignore's shields" you don't get to use random bits of text to justify doing that because I want shield ignoring VC to use against gargants.

Now, to what I'm seeing here on ideas. I think we can put these directly to playtesting and see what happens:

Weapons.
We won't be changing stats on weapons, however we can look into carapace restrictions. I believe this is already the case with the Plasma Destructor, Carapace Landing Pad, and Support Missile. I'm not seeing anything else that screams to have that limitation. Was there something I missed?

Support formations.
1. Remove Skitarii Corvus restriction, increase cost to 250 points.

Upgrades
1. Reduce CML to 25 points. (note. this used to be 25 points but was increased so it wasn't an autobuy, not that it matters)

Titans
1. Reduce Warlord hull to 675 points
2. Reduce Reaver hull to 550 points (note. this was increased due to OP armies taking only free weapons. May no longer be an issue with the removal of sentinels.)

Future options
1. Increase titans to 2+ initiative
2. Vet Princeps grant 1+ initiative
3. Integrate Collectors weapons/ equipment (I would do this now, but I think the other changes are more important and it'll be hard to gauge with these in play as well)

Not happenin'
1. Single Weapon surchage. I think this helps promote weapon variety more than it does balance which isn't a bad thing.
2. Adding modern skitarii vehicles. This is a titan list and they'd be out of place. Use the Skitarii list.
3. Base Void shield changes. These are pretty well established for the chassis and I don't want to mess with them.
4. Remove fearless. I think this is a can of worms we don't need to open. No one wants to see their Warlord die from a BM.
5. Changes to the Crusader formation size. They are four for fluff reasons and to allow folks to proxy sentinels.


I think that's everything, let me know if I missed something.

_________________
-Vaaish

By the way, since we are being pedantic, if I roll a 3 on a D3 I really do get a 3. Because a D3 is a 3 sided dice.

If on the other hand I roll a 3 on a D6 proxying for a D3... But of course there are many alternative ways of proxying for a D3, like a D12.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

Good ideas for change (first 4 ones anyways).

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam