Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 7
  [ 98 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Streamlined Titan list
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:52 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
All the notes, army list, units data and stuff are in the pdf file but I will cut and paste the text here for those that wish to get the gist.

Overall

Adeptus Mechanicus
The AM for the purposes of Epic consists of 4 parts ? Titans, Ordinatus, Skitari and Knights. The latter are a PDF force based on AM supply worlds.
The objective
Develop lists as quickly as possible based on 3 years of playtesting and discussion.
I believe the best way to do this is strip things down to their iconic concepts and remove unnecessary variables. Most key list and one frankly close to completion is the Titan Legion list.

Concept
3+ lists. Each centred on a fighting arm.
Titan Legion List(s)
Battle Titans and the necessary supporting troops to make a viable army.

Skitari List(s)
The War Engines and other high tech toys supported by AM infantry. Resist urge to stick all the marine and guard stuff in.

Knight World PDF List(s)
Lists centered on knights where knight fans can go wild.

Legio Victorum

Image/Concept
Overall the image of the list for me is something akin to the front cover of the rulebook, only with the Titan in the centre field and the marines, infantry, aircraft in the background.

Objective
Produce a list as quickly as possible with a tight focus on Titans. This should allow other variants to be done by fans. As a ?core? list its job is to establish the Titan build system but leave as much as possible open to other lists to leave them maximum flexibility.

To achieve speed as little as possible should change while as many units as possible should go. With enough tested components and as few variables beyond weapon loads a final article should be swiftly forthcoming. 3 years is enough time to get any list ready and if it isn?t, well, I hate to think about future expansions to the game!

The following has received dozens of playtests. I do believe it can be finalized relatively quickly. The list is based around titans that can be configured to fulfil most battlefield tasks. In support are specialized units such as infantry for urban areas, flak for AA defence etc.
Key questions
1) How do knights fit in? What role do they have? Will stripping them out help the list become official?
2) What to do with shared Warhound/Reaver weapons? Pre range change it would have been fine but now we have a situation where 60cm range is too good for a warhound, but okay for a Battle Titan. The different names are inelegant. Any other solution?
Designers notes

The Epic A system and Titans
Epic A does have some flaws. Airpower for instance. And also Titans. Demonstrated most clearly by the Warhound horde playtests a mass of void shielded WE are nigh unstoppable. This is true to a lesser extent with their larger brethren, at least at low point games. Titans are best fought with certain specialised weapons and the smaller the game the less chance they appear. They do though have a major weakness in the GT scenario, that of low activation count.

All this feeds into what sort of game experience should be had? Titans are deployed to take out strong points or counter threats. Militarily they area lot of power in a small space. Game wise they should simultaneously give the feel of being nigh unstoppable in their advance with being, well, stoppable.

How to balance then the value of a Titan with the need for enough activations? This is necessary to allow Titan legion armies to a) capture enough objectives and b) not be a one-dimensional army to defeat. Namely knock out two or three activations then avoid for the rest of the game.

Further the force should not have too much capability to knock out threats too early on. Artillery, teleporters and air assaults all make perfect strategic sense to support such key assets, but game wise simply mean the Titans become no fun to play against.

Character wise its all about big war machines and to a lesser extent the Adeptus Mechanicus, an aspect easily lost when using Titan allies in Imperial armies.

Several aspects then become clear when looking for the feel of the force. It should give the owner the feel of being a giant improbably engine of destruction and the opponent a problem different to other armies, but one that still can be overcome. A movie analogy would be in a well-known scene involving giant walkers and aircraft. Both players there would have fun ? the walker commander getting to stomp Norwegians and the rebel commander getting to pull off impossible feats fairly regularly.
So then?

Not much in the way of special counter measures. Artillery, air assaults etc etc. Enemy threats should remain threats for as long as possible. The Titans would have to rely on risky Warhound attacks, specially configured expensive Battle Titans or simply their innate toughness.
Speeds should be fairly low. The majority of the force should not be that nippy. This gives an opponent a chance to outmanoeuvre them and play a game of feint, misdirection and concentration of force, conversely the Titan commander should be trying to see through the fog of battle to achieve the GT objectives.
The Titans should have enough activations to ensure defeat isn?t a simple stripping away of lesser mortals ever game. At some point the enemy should fight a Battle Titan. Whether they have to fight more than one is up to the Titan commander!

Historically much of this was achieved with a wide mix of supporting units, tempered by a restriction of at least 50% of the army being spent on Titans. This had problems with Warhounds so costs have been tweaked a bit. My last few games before going abroad with a variant Titan list from 2004 showed a simpler alternative. Limit the list to having two support formations per battle Titan and ensuring that they would cost lass than 350 points. This list convention means two things. 1) that at least 50% of points will be spent on appropriate formations and 2) that supporting formations ain?t going to be that tough. In deference to those that would like to field a light probing or perhaps flank attack force the option to pick Warhound packs without first buying Battle Titans is there, however they do no allow the purchase of support formations. Playtests showed it was the mass of single Warhounds that was the problem, not the packs. A major niggle for me was that the pressure for maximising activations is always there, making the Reaver a better choice than the Warlord. A points cut is no good as the Warlord is frankly one of the best bits of kit in Epic. Instead the option of a free Supreme Commander has been introduced, but only if a Warlord is taken. This is something of a boost to the list, but in my defence I rarely used the re-roll and later armies largely dropped it.

Something else in the list that needs testing to find out if it is needed are the Tarantula. These are a very old idea mooted for similar reasons as the grots in the OGBM list. I personally have always loved AM imagry, especially al the tech bits that accompany them. The idea of spider like sentry guns dropping off around titans, or guarding them at night, is one I have always liked.

We tried them a lot back in 2005 as no matter how well I played against my regular opponents back then the best I or they could do was draw, every time over the activation issue. They were dropped as the list grew and entered its x iterations, as there were plenty of other formations about. I?ve stuck them back in when cutting units but they overlap with sentinels and both aren?t needed. In brief Sentinels allow garrisons, movement, scout shields, cheap activations etc. Tarantula are immobile but cheaper, give limited scout shielding, allow garrisons and some objective capture, if a Titan is going that way. Sentinels are more of a fluid unit with possibilities for the player and threats to the opponent. Tarantula are more static problems to be rolled over, but on the plus side do not detract from the Titans.

Knights are a weird one. My instinct is to leave them for a knight list but they have many supporters and some fluff of accompanying campaigns, if only to snag new suits. They must though have a role in the list. Sticking them in because people like them don?t cut it. So far the best suggestion was a recent one by Ilushia. To quote:-

I think they work wonderfully as forward assault elements of the army. The current stats aren't bad for them, with the 3/6 unit sizes they can heft out some significant damage... Paladins are a bit too slow, I think, at 20cm to be really functional in that role as things stand, though. I'd actually really like to see Knights become a primarily melee-centric assault force, as opposed to fire-fighting which Titans excel at thanks to their void shields. With Lances being first-strike melee weapons and their other melee weapons going to MW status. Faster then a tricked out melee Reaver, but not as lethal. Slower then Warhounds, but with better hit numbers and attacks for point-values. At least, that's the way I see them working.

Personally I see the max point size for the formation as 350, preferably less.

Aerospace support is another one. First off they aren?t navy. These are AM fliers. Two options to include them present themselves. As they are AM gear why not as support units? They aren?t that useful as activations ? indeed the more pressure that is put on support slots the better, it makes stuff like all Warhound armies tougher as flak cover would be non-existent. It also reinforces the idea of an institution going to war, rather than the various arms as Imperials currently experience. I?m try this if others will. Otherwise they get knocked into a separate box with a 20% max slapped on.

Praetorians. They were included for a very specific purpose, to fill corvus assault pods. With weapon streamlining this could go and so then should they. If it comes back well then so can they :)

Ordinatus. Leaving aside that fact the models suck they could be problematic. With total lack of surprise I note the artillery option is everyone?s favourite. As the list shouldn?t have arty this should go, as should its sonic cousin. This leaves the Armageddon which can for now stay as its got the planets name and duplicates a Titans capabilities, giving some interesting arming options if you wish to rely on its TK abilities.

Finally then Titan weapons. I like variety and choice but recognise too much is a bit much :) The assault weapons really suffer here. As a less taken option they get the chop, which also perhaps leaves as opening for knights. Don?t forget though that void-shielded battle titans are fantastic assault engines, especially with some of the characters. One-shot missiles also suffer as again a rare option. And I must say I don?t like scout weapons. Is there a good way round this?
Overall I hope with a limited amount of support the various combos can be done to death.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Ilushia
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 10:30 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
I like it. Looks pretty neat! I'll give it a test go around tomorrow, most likely, as I already have a list which is legal for it. I especially like  the free Legate with Warlord (Not like the Supreme Commander re-roll is likely to be that necessary to the AMTL, but it's still useful), makes fielding a supreme commander much more tolerable then the old rules, 950 points for an SC is a bit much!

On weapons: LIke the changes to the meltacannon, helps fix its profound brokenness fairly well. The VMB, though, went down to 5 shots sometime  after the 2.0 rules were released when it was decided that 6 shots made it too good against tanks, I believe, as when fielded in mass they could out-shoot even the TLDs against tanks due to the superior number of shots... Could be wrong, anyone else remember that?

Should the Support Missile have Indirect Fire? Not sure, but looks nice. TK(1) is kinda neat, means it can't ever kill a titan all on its own unless that titan is already damaged pretty badly, but nasty against heavy infantry and tanks.

I think the assault weapons look good too, ofcourse I only ever fielded laserburners and chainfists before so I may be biased!

On the Scout Inferno Gun: No matter how many times I've fielded this thing, I've never been able to use it  to an extent to justify its use over the VMB. It has around 1/3 the functional range, worse to hit numbers to start with and its only advantage is the ability to potentially cover more then 4 units in a formation. But I've found this very rarely happens without a double action, which makes it so inaccurate that it's almost not worth the effort! Given the extremely low range I'd suggest a change to either 3+/5+ or adding Disrupt to it. 3+/5+ means you don't have to fight with why it gets Disrupt but the non-Scout one doesn't, too. It's not an untested 'I think this is bad' opinion either. I've fielded these repeatedly, including two to a formation of two warhounds multiple times, and I've never seen them get the kind of kill power that a VMB has, to be honest. Probably better left for another thread though.

Dig the Tarantulas, might replace my Sentinels with them, even. Cheap, weak, reasonable weaponry. Nice thing to throw on garrisoning overwatch to slow the enemy down, which is what my Sentinels usually do anyway! Or to position around a titan to avoid teleport attacks, or lots of other possibilities. Neat prospect on having them magnetically attach to the outside of the titan (I"m guessing that's how it works, anyway) and dropping into position on the board.

Spacecraft are a nice addition, not sure how likely I'd be to field them, but it's good to see them in the list. Gotta get those titans to a planet somehow after all!

Overall: Very nice, I like it a lot! I'll give it a go tomorrow and see what happens!
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 12:54 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
I tried to keep the weapons changes to the ones I remember from playtesting (was a while ago now) and others reports.

I think I also remember a big VMB discussion. I only ever played it as a 4 shot weapon on warhounds, never testing it on battle titans so bowed to Nicks experience. Numbers wise turn one you would have to double for the same range so (VMB) 3AP, 1AT vs (TLD) 1 1/3AP, 2 2/3AT, turn 2 advance 4AP, 2AT vs 1 1/3AP, 2 2/3AT, and if sustain 5AP, 3AT vs 2AP, 3 1/3AT. Of course the TLD has a range advantage but I can see wy people would want the shots down to 5.

The missile shouldn't have indirect simply because I think in the list titan weapons get indirect when they add a landing pad. Having one not need it seems a bit odd. The stats for it are incidentally conjured out of the air, I just wanted to have a synthesis missile as they seemed to be rare choices for me and others.

Scout inferno gun - I thought I had made it 3+/6+, but clearly not. I have a suspicion that when I used it I used a 2nd edition flamer template which was probably a bit niftier. One possible change is that a player could shorten the range at will? I.e. make the start point half way along or so to catch nearby enemies and make positioning a bit easier?

Magnet wise I wonder if I should buy some and clamp my tarantula on :) They are incidentally quite poor. When this list was trialled originally by me and General_Ng we ended up giving them to the titan player for free, though we had a slightly different selection of support units.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Ilushia
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:16 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189

(Hena @ Nov. 18 2007,06:56)
QUOTE
Tarantula. I'm actually not happy with the stats. Better to make it as it is in the v2 list. Why the move 20?

Tarantulas are move 0 as far as I can tell. They're immobile unless transported by a Titan. Just cheap, reasonably armed garrison formations, or something to hold onto an objective while your titan goes off and does its own thing!

Supreme Commander: Well what does it actually add to the AMTL list? A re-roll, but most of the army is 1+ to begin with and doesn't retain very much, so the re-roll isn't that useful. And considering it requires fielding an 850 point model to use, I'd hardly call it 'free'! But I can kinda understand your comment... But it encourages people to field Warlords which are otherwise incredibly expensive units which many people avoid because they drive down your activation numbers... So I'm for it, personally.

Agree on the fire control center. Being able to split between formations, while neat, seems kinda potent especially on Reavers... Two volcano cannons and a FCC anyone?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 2:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I love the list structure, and the limited number of unit types; Now I'm going to be hellishly critical, please don't take offense.




I intensely dislike 'free' upgrades, especially when used in this manner (Basically a '1' choice instead of '0-1', the same as the IG Vanquisher, providing a concrete benefit and with no drawbacks).

Just have a restriction that SC's can only go on Warlord Titans, and charge a smaller than normal price (25-50pts). Making them free takes the skill out of list building.

If a points drop for Warlord Titans is nessesary (For this list), then give Warlord Titans a points drop, don't crowbar in a way that makes fielding one Warlord useful, but fielding two Warlords pointless.



No need to have variant aircraft... rip out the Marauder Destroyer and Lightning and use the normal aircraft.


If you're going to include ordinatae, include them all; The restriction doesn't make sense fluffwise.


I would also remove the Tarantulas. (In 40k they're used by bog-standard IG & Space Marines, if they don't get them, why should the Ad-Mech, especially as they're basically just incredibly cheap objective-contesters?). Note that Tarantulas are one of the few units in 40k that cannot contest objectives / claim terrain as they're brainless.


Drop the variant turrets on the Chimeras.


Skitarii are supposed to wear carapace armour (5+ save), this was a failure of the original AMTL list. Likewise, why should they use Heavy Bolters, when they are supposed to have superior equipment to normal IG?

I dropped the 'one shot per two bases' restriction in my proposed Skitarii stats, which may be OTT.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
BlackLegion
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 4:20 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
I like the list structure. :)

For Flyers. The AM has it's own flyers? Thats new to me. They are Imperial Navy, nothing else.
Restirction of one Imperial Navy formation per Battletitan would be good.
I don't care if they are the rulebook aicraft or a?ternative ones. Personally the alternative ones should be included in the IG and SM armylists too. Orks have the numbers, but the Imperium has more variety in flyers.

VMB: The new Wh40k stats suggest that the VMB is a Multi-laser with an enormous number of shots. 60cm 6 x AP5+/AT6+ would do it justice.

Inferno Gun: The Flamer has AP5+, the Heavy Flamer AP4+, The Hellhouds Inferno Cannon AP3+, so the next bigger weapon the Inferno Gun should have AP2+ and perhabs AT6+ too.
The decreasing range at will for the template sounds goot :)

I like the Tarantuals. A note in it's stats that they may only contest and not hold objective would show their "brainlessness".

And Ordinati should only be Armageddon variant. They are build locally for a purpose.

General thought on Titanweapons: Some time ago i made a list based on the description and firepower given in the Codex Titanicus (the box with the Imperator Titan). It must be somwhere here on the forum :D

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 4:31 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I don't care if they are the rulebook aicraft or a?ternative ones. Personally the alternative ones should be included in the IG and SM armylists too. Orks have the numbers, but the Imperium has more variety in flyers.


I actually agree, but they should be saved for an 'extra equipment' suppliment / rules patch, which would also add every other FW/SG model that doesn't have rules.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
To everyone who likes the list structure, great! Hopefully Blarg has the same idea and they can merge seamlessly and we can spend the next 3 years arguing about supporting formations :)


(Ilushia @ Nov. 18 2007,18:16)
QUOTE
Fire Control Centre is too good. I'd remove it altogether most likely.


Agree on the fire control center. Being able to split between formations, while neat, seems kinda potent especially on Reavers... Two volcano cannons and a FCC anyone?

I tried this out time and time again both playing it and fighting against it (AMTL lists give very fast games incidentally :) ).

It really is crap. On a reaver forget it. The VC combo was tried and discarded, you simply fall behind the enemy, for instance Guard could have 4 shadowswords for that cost. Eventually it became a Warlord only weapon and the best combo was sifted down to being a fire control centre, VC and either two TLD or two Gatling Blasters, depending on whether you feared lots of small formations or lots of small LV formations.

Eventually it died a death as we tried more and more supporting formations. A reaver and 8 sentinels was a better bet than a warlord with a FCC.

One of the most annoying things on turn 2 onwards is you realise just how restrictive Titan fire arcs are.

I actually thought people might remember the batreps and say its to weak a weapon, give it a boost of some sort like an extra FF attack or something.


(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,21:31)
QUOTE
I actually agree, but they should be saved for an 'extra equipment' suppliment / rules patch, which would also add every other FW/SG model that doesn't have rules.

I disagree I think all lists should stick with some sort of fighter/bomber combo (or fighter/fighter bomber etc) designed to fit the style of that list. Is also an easy way to differentiate variant lists.


(Hena @ Nov. 18 2007,18:33)
QUOTE
Though i do think that adding centaurs to pull the things might be worthwhile. Same idea as the Sieges have (if I remember correctly).

I prefer the popping off and crawling around the battle titans - gives a bit of the creepy tech stuff that is otherwise hard to capture about these wierdo's.


(Hena @ Nov. 18 2007,18:33)
QUOTE
I really also think that the Carapace Landing Pad should be considered a Support weapon. Mainly as the Reaver with 2 Quake and CLP is, I think, overpowered for 650. All comparisons that I do with the IG Arty company makes the Reaver better.

The CLP was in theory balanced just for that very combo. We used it a lot and never found it overpowered - apart from the time it wiped out Dystartes terminator formation in close combat for no damage :) Its hard to see it being used for much else other than a mrl reaver. Warlord wise in this army unless you are fighting necrons you have to double or advance making the upgrade useless.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:32 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I disagree I think all lists should stick with some sort of fighter/bomber combo (or fighter/fighter bomber etc) designed to fit the style of that list. Is also an easy way to differentiate variant lists.


Aye, but the problem is that fluffwise, any army that has Marauder Destroyer backup should really have Marauder backup too, the same with the fighter craft, and heck, even the Marauder Colossus.

I think the best way to fit these variant aircraft (and tanks) into lists is to create a rules 'patch' document, which will include rules as to which armies they're allowed to join (No lightnings for Siegemasters but allow them in most other IG lists, for example).

To impose artificial restrictions is to build an abstract 'game', rather than a simulation style 'wargame'.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:39 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

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

(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,22:32)
QUOTE
I disagree I think all lists should stick with some sort of fighter/bomber combo (or fighter/fighter bomber etc) designed to fit the style of that list. Is also an easy way to differentiate variant lists.


Aye, but the problem is that fluffwise, any army that has Marauder Destroyer backup should really have Marauder backup too, the same with the fighter craft, and heck, even the Marauder Colossus.

To impose artificial restrictions is to build an abstract 'game', rather than a simulation style 'wargame'.

Ah but we are abstracting. Why doesn't the core marine list have all the marine toys? Likewise the Guard?

To aid balance in a competitive army list set up we artificially limit options for armies. Airpower is an adjunct for Epic, listing 8 aircraft options is a bit much. Limiting to a few, just like we do with Titan load outs in the non titan lists, ensures they do not detract from the core army and still provide a bit of colour. they are not meant to be game winning units, they don't need the diversity.


(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE
For Flyers. The AM has it's own flyers? Thats new to me. They are Imperial Navy, nothing else.

Yep they have their own Navy. This includes attack craft. Check out the BFG supplement that is now official. All types of space ships including carriers, all kitted out with AM flown attack craft.


(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE
Restirction of one Imperial Navy formation per Battletitan would be good.

The way the list is built means the restriction isn't needed. If you want to max out on fliers you will end up with a 3-4 Reavers, little else besides air and, well, lose.


(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE
VMB: The new Wh40k stats suggest that the VMB is a Multi-laser with an enormous number of shots. 60cm 6 x AP5+/AT6+ would do it justice.

VMB ain't changing as it works well on the Warhound. Clearly in 40k they use the (insert humorous pattern name here) Vulcan Mega Bolter.


(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE
Inferno Gun: The Flamer has AP5+, the Heavy Flamer AP4+, The Hellhouds Inferno Cannon AP3+, so the next bigger weapon the Inferno Gun should have AP2+ and perhabs AT6+ too.
The decreasing range at will for the template sounds goot :)

Yeah, prob have something, would depend on the playtest reports but it should have been AP3+ reguardless.


(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE
General thought on Titanweapons: Some time ago i made a list based on the description and firepower given in the Codex Titanicus (the box with the Imperator Titan). It must be somwhere here on the forum :D

On titan weapons I hark back in my heart to AT1, where they were carrying 40k weapons. Over the years this because for me that they carried the next step up to each 40k weapon - so TLD bigger lascannon etc. Has no impact on stats, just how I think of them.


(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE
Now I'm going to be hellishly critical, please don't take offense.

Low down cur, I will crush you under the plimsolled heel of my siegemasters if we ever get to play a game in January!


(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE
I intensely dislike 'free' upgrades, especially when used in this manner (Basically a '1' choice instead of '0-1', the same as the IG Vanquisher, providing a concrete benefit and with no drawbacks).

Just have a restriction that SC's can only go on Warlord Titans, and charge a smaller than normal price (25-50pts). Making them free takes the skill out of list building.

If a points drop for Warlord Titans is nessesary (For this list), then give Warlord Titans a points drop, don't crowbar in a way that makes fielding one Warlord useful, but fielding two Warlords pointless.

Really? I quite like them :) As has been pointed out the list is populated with void shielded tough 1+ initiative monsters. He is handy for re-rolls of moral tests but that?s mostly it. Sticking him in the Warlord at least makes the BTS also the SC which is rarely a good idea.

Actually it makes no odds to me if he is free, 25 points or 50. I doubt I will be taking Warlords much. This is simply the result of dozens of games trying to make them work at 3000 points. At 4000+ you need the toughness as now there are enough TK weapons knocking around to take out 2 or 3 or your Reavers with ease. But at 3000 you need the activations more. If anyone ever gets more than one to work I will applaud them, I never could. And even then that one was basically the spearhead unit and also the BTS, somewhat annoying. As a result if I ever did by the SC (and he ain?t worth it compared to another activation of sentinels) he would get stuck in a Reaver.

Dropping the points doesn?t work either. If anything the Warlord is discounted as it is. Any points drop and things go downhill. Sadly in this force structure Reavers rule (in the old one the Warhound did but the less said about that the better). I want to see the iconic Epic unit in the game and this is the only way I can think of making it attractive.


(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE
No need to have variant aircraft... rip out the Marauder Destroyer and Lightning and use the normal aircraft.


See previous (or after my editing latter) post/point.


(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE
If you're going to include ordinatae, include them all; The restriction doesn't make sense fluffwise.


(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE
And Ordinati should only be Armageddon variant. They are build locally for a purpose.

First off ? why not? Armageddon ? Ordinatus Armageddon. Second as mentioned in the designers notes every bugger apart from Dystartes takes the Golgotha. We may as well have that as the only option. It is one unit. It will appear in a minority or lists. The Armageddon variant does not bring significant new capabilities to the list. So I think limiting it to one keeps the flavour, and more importantly limits to variables.


(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE
Drop the variant turrets on the Chimeras.

:) Now contary to the ordinatus argument above this is a small dash of colour which more importantly is already tested to death and balanced. Yes they can go ? but if they do go or stay it ultimately makes no difference to development time, balance or detract from the Titans. The biggest argument against them is they are a bit fiddly. Maybe they will all become Heavy Flamer variants because?


(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE
Skitarii are supposed to wear carapace armour (5+ save), this was a failure of the original AMTL list. Likewise, why should they use Heavy Bolters, when they are supposed to have superior equipment to normal IG?

The Skitari are in this list as Tech Guard to titans. They are for this measure equipped with AP weaponry for anti infantry/infiltrator/scout/urban work. Maybe Skitari serving other purposes tote lascannon. Who knows.

The skitari stats were a result of a long convoluted debate on the old SG forum and a bunch of playtests. They are pretty much ready to go now. I dissagre over the carapace armour and 5+ saves. Guardsmen have flak and get nothing, Guardians have mesh and get nothing, Skitari have bionics and carapace which I guess is one step up from flak so get 6+. Nothing stops other lists giving infantry equipped for a heavier mainstream role better kit ? however remember marines are 4+ saves, I would be amazed if any humans except elites could come near.

As for firepower in their ideal environment (i.e. not in a long range firefight with a support company) for this formation and its size and intended opponenets having twice the AP firepower of a guard squad is the business. As for higher tech, well maybe they carry them Rambo style with suspensors and the like.



(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE
I would also remove the Tarantulas. (In 40k they're used by bog-standard IG & Space Marines, if they don't get them, why should the Ad-Mech, especially as they're basically just incredibly cheap objective-contesters?). Note that Tarantulas are one of the few units in 40k that cannot contest objectives / claim terrain as they're brainless.


As a side note the Tarantula are doing a lot better this time round. In 2004 they were roundly hated, though that might have been before the grots turned up.

They are indeed incredibly cheap objective nabbers. They fulfil three functions ? making it harder for deep striking assaulters to hit titans turn one in their deployment zone, taking objectives and holding your own table half objectives and as cheap activations.

Last time round they had weaker stats (no lascannons) and can happily go back to those. As they aren?t fearless, can break, no save, LV?s etc etc they are remarkably easy to clear, but still better than having hope guard your objectives. In any list structured around two very expensive core choices activations are murder, these help slightly. I say slightly because they don?t get round the 2 support limit and that ultimately is more of a problem.

Here is the original text for them, dusted off for your pleasure.

Basically point defence weapon systems normally used to protect bases and supply areas.
Purpose in game is to ensure the enemy can?t simply walk in and take abandoned objective ? but has to have a token fight at least. Hopefully your attacking units will mean he doesn?t feel that confident about splitting off fighting units.

As for the point about them being a common item, well great. IG and Marines use them after a battle is done to secure bases and similar, I guess the Titan Legions feel after they walk through an area it is secure enough to set up.

Plus imagine the devices dormant, attached like limpets, only for a dozen suddenly pop off, roll to a halt, right themselves then start clearing lines of fire, only to then quietly settle down to wait.

And then of course come under fire, malfunction, shoot their own side etc etc (which is why they aren?t fearless). Human tech isn?t what it used to be.

I think them holding objective is fine ? I ask people to try them as that. They worked for us. If they prove too much they can get downgraded to contesters or written out entirely in favour of the more expensive sentinels (which in practice is what happened if you had a spare 50 points and no support slots left).

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:47 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
The skitari stats were a result of a long convoluted debate on the old SG forum and a bunch of playtests. They are pretty much ready to go now. I dissagre over the carapace armour and 5+ saves. Guardsmen have flak and get nothing, Guardians have mesh and get nothing, Skitari have bionics and carapace which I guess is one step up from flak so get 6+. Nothing stops other lists giving infantry equipped for a heavier mainstream role better kit ? however remember marines are 4+ saves, I would be amazed if any humans except elites could come near.


Storm Troopers have carapace armour and have 5+ saves.

Marine Scouts have carapace armour and have 5+ saves.


Those are AFAIK the only carapace armoured troops in the whole game of Epic right now.

Skitarii are supposed to have carapace armour and cybernetic enhancements to make them tougher than an ordinary human... 5+ armour for them is only logical.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
BlackLegion
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:59 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
@Skitarii: Strom Troopers wear Carapace Armour and have a 5+ save. So there is precedence for a 5+ save for Carapace Armour.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Streamlined Titan list
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:05 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Well they are whatever cool internet symbols mean elite troops - I'm sure with them and the scouts some of their skirmishing ways help make them harder to kill :)

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 7
  [ 98 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net