Tactical Command | View topic

Page 2 of 4

[ 46 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts | View new posts | View your posts

Towards 3.11

Ginger

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 12:25 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5483
Location: London, UK

Guys; I think we all tend to agree that the list needs some stability, but that there are still some slight problems with balance and direction.

1) Do you all agree that the 'standard' fully armed titans should be 850, 650 and 275?
2) Do these figures work in the AMTL list?
3) What are the minimum and maximum activations you would reasonably expect at 3000 and 5000 points?

Answering these questions will guide us on the cost of titans and the number of additional activations that should be available. I might add, that this is one of the reasons why I would prefer to keep three activations and allow the list to encompass the Skitarii; enabling players to choose a wider range of armies from maxed out titans to a few titans supported by a number of other appropriate formations.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Top

Onyx

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 2:01 am

Purestrain

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:14 am
Posts: 3416
Location: Western Australia

(Evil and Chaos @ Apr. 30 2008,17:08)

QUOTE

- No more that 2 'free' weapon systems allowed on a Battle Titan.

I don't have a problem with this.

- Rocket Launcher goes to being a +25pt weapon.

As long as the standard Reaver still costs 650pts its all good.

- Ordinatus Minoris and Majoris removed from the list, and only available for the Skitarii army.Not happy about this at all. I've bought 2 Minoris' and used them and I really like the unit.

LINK to more info.

I think it fits and should be left in. If these Ordinatae are so old and valuable, wouldn't they be protected by the Legions finest forces ?ie Titans?!

- Forge Knight introduced.Yes please.

- A restriction that says 'Single Warhounds may not carry two of the same weapon', or an increase of 25pts.Not interested in this at all. Unnecessary restriction.

- Scrap the unweildy 3 support formations/only one of each restriction and simply set it at 2 support formations per battle titan.Yup.

- Set a 0-1 on the Supreme Commander, and by popular demand make him non-compulsory for Emperor class titans.I support this.
What about being allowed on a Reaver?

Thanks again for all the effort E&C!!

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 11:25 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

On dual fit Warhounds.

I agree with TRC that dual fit Warhounds are a problem... they are qualitatively better than Warhounds with two different weapons.

Therefore I propose:

COSTING NOTE : WARHOUND WEAPON SYSTEMS

When selecting warhound weapon systems, if two of the same type of weapon are selected for a Warhound Titan, it must pay a 25pt surcharge.

This would be instead of TRC's proposal of only allowing dual-fit Warhounds in Warhound Packs.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 11:36 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London

Nice model Onyx.

You have to have something in the list to stop warhounds only being mono weapons fit. Be honest everyone, whats better, two VMB/TLD warhounds or one VMB and one TLD? The way Epic works mono fits are more effective (unless engaging mechanised formations). Unless there is some balance everyones lists start to resemble me and Tim's. Paired weapons in packs is fine, but singly a bit to good (saying that why would you not take the TLD pack, my dice rolling aside - 1 Leman Russ from 16 3+ attacks??!!!)

But take a step back for a second. Each iteration brings out a bunch of riders to stop min maxing. Its getting a bit like UK tax law.

The max 2 free weapons is also a bit restrictive. If you had a CC titan 600 points for two weapons and a hydra turret or VMB looks alright.

At this point what is the real difference in making the 25 point weapons free and upping the hull costs? CC weapons are a tactical not points consideation as to whether you take them. No battle titan would ever want a PG, and the VMB will simply lose out (the inferno is alright on a FF orientated titan as you are within FF charge range, pointless for warhounds though unless you want to be open to assaults! Hell I would consider reducing it to -25 points if no dual single hounds allowed as 250 for an inferno and vmb hound is about right).

Try building the lists you think people 'should' be considering, then look at alternate ways to achieve that.

I still favour the 'battle groups' for this style of titan list
Emperor
Which type
4 support from the following list (could include reaver guards here for a discount maybe)

Warlord, weapons
Upgrades
3 support from the following list

Reaver, weapons
Upgrades
2 support from the following list

Warhound pack (maybe 550)
Upgrades
1 Support (basically air)

I can write it neatly if you want with the various options.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 11:50 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

Paired weapons in packs is fine, but singly a bit to good (saying that why would you not take the TLD pack...??)

But take a step back for a second. Each iteration brings out a bunch of riders to stop min maxing. Its getting a bit like UK tax law.

That only seems to indicate that the dual-fit TLD Pack is too good too.

+25pts for a Dual-Fit Warhound.

Unlike the 'dual fit in packs, but not singles' it's a template that works for both unit types.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 12:16 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

Not happy about this at all. I've bought 2 Minoris' and used them and I really like the unit.

I'm not entirely happy about it either... but it does seem as if they have a more balanced home in the Skitarii army list (Where you can still take 1/3rd of your list as Titans).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 12:32 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

My current 3.11 changelist:

Both Ordinatus moved to the Skitarii army list.
Apocalypse Rocket Launcher changed to +25pts
Carapace Landing pad made Free for both Titans.
ForgeKnight added (It Infiltrates!)
+25pts for dual-fit Warhounds
'Titanfall' Special Rule added.
Two support formations per Titan, restrictions on support formation types scrapped.
Set supreme commander to 0-1, and allowed him on Reavers.

Once we have the 3.11 changelist codified, I'd like the list to lie static again for at least a month for us to playtest (Barring any changes that require immediate attention).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

Onyx

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 12:45 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:14 am
Posts: 3416
Location: Western Australia

It seems to me that a lot of these restrictions are being proposed beacause of a percieved ability to manipulate the list.

Any list can be manipulated (especially if you know what army your opponent is using).

"- but I have never succeeded in coming up with a system that players can't exploit in some way or another."
Jervis Johnson (maybe out of context but trying to make a point).

It seems somewhat unfair to restrict all of us because some want to min/max the daylights out of something. If opponents want to win so badly then let em. The games will not be fun for any of the players.
Fortunately my opponents and I are playing the game for fun - not to make the unbeatable list.

I see no reason at all to restrict Warhound weapon loadouts. I just don't. Is 25pts really going to make that much difference? If not, then why do it?
Is there something in the Ad Mech fluff that says thou shalt not have 2 Turbo Laser Destructors on your Warhound? ? :glare:

Seriously, with all these little rule amendments/additions/restrictions, the list is gonna become way to unwieldy - something I thought we were trying to avoid?

If all this is going thru (proposed 3.11), I'll probably just keep using 3.10 (or maybe even 3.09) and playing fun games using the units I've grown to like.

I'm just not a fan of the over-complication of the list.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 1:18 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

I'm just not a fan of the over-complication of the list.

At the same time as introducing a new rule (making dual mount Warhounds a tad more expensive) we're also removing a rule (The awkward support formations rule), and simplifying a rule (Supreme Commander loses restrictions).

As far as list construction goes, 3.11 should be less complicated, not moreso.

It's moving the Ordinatus that's really going to hurt... perhaps there's scope for keeping the Majoris, and making the Minoris a Skitarii-only beast.

Any list can be manipulated (especially if you know what army your opponent is using).

Certainly. I don't think TRC (Who prompted several of these proposed changes) would mind if I said that he's a very skilled powergamer... which is quite a different mindset to the way I personally approach Epic.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

Tiny-Tim

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 1:51 pm

Hybrid

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:32 pm
Posts: 4893
Location: North Yorkshire

Hi Onyx, we're trying to break the list so that we can build it so that it is generally a fair army to play against in a tournament when you face an army blind.

_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion

Top

Mephiston

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 1:53 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:52 pm
Posts: 4262

Unfortunately Oynx, this list will be used in both friendly and Tournament games. As such we should make every effort to ensure it is balanced to the same level as the other 'approved' lists. As you say in your fiendly games you can decide to use whatever version of a list you and your friends agree, in tournaments a standard list has to be used by all.

Top

Dwarf Supreme

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 3:44 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11149
Location: Canton, CT, USA

(Evil and Chaos @ May 01 2008,07:32)

QUOTE

ForgeKnight added (It Infiltrates!)

I re-read your stats for the Forge Knight. Is it purposely not a WE like all other Knights or was that an oversight?

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 6:34 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

(Dwarf Supreme @ May 01 2008,15:44)

QUOTE

(Evil and Chaos @ May 01 2008,07:32)

QUOTE

ForgeKnight added (It Infiltrates!)

I re-read your stats for the Forge Knight. Is it purposely not a WE like all other Knights or was that an oversight?

That's intentional, so that we don't have to include notes explaining why it's a DC1 War Engine. For the same reason the Knight Shield is replaced by an Invulnerable Save.

In the Knight-specific army list, they're represented in their full glory.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Fri May 02, 2008 5:05 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London

So, +25 for a mono fit hound. Suicide hound choice now 275 - VMB and PG, or 300 PG and TLD!

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Towards 3.11

Posted: Fri May 02, 2008 5:09 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

So, +25 for a mono fit hound.

Dual fit?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 2 of 4

[ 46 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:

Towards 3.11

Who is online