| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Vote on the future of the CLP http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=26674 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | Vaaish [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 12:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Vote on the future of the CLP |
Ok, so lets see where we stand on this. Whichever option wins the poll will be incorporated into the AMTL list for testing. If you want to discuss the reasons you selected an option, please do so below. |
|
| Author: | GlynG [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 1:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
I dislike all those options! The Epic-UK approach would make it rubbish and never worth using, plus messing up anyone who'd glued together a support titan with 3 barrage weapons and a CLP. I don't think adding disrupt to any weapon is at all fitting, why should a high shoot weapon like a gatling blaster or laser blaster magically get disrupt of a high flying aircraft. The last option isn't appropriate either. We're not discussing a 'Communications Tower' upgrade where linking to a Warhound might work, the Carapace Landing Pad works in concert with a high flying aircraft to provide targeting information itself, with no need of a Warhound. Better suggestion: a Carapace Landing Pad gives +1 to hit for any barrage weapons the titan has, however this does not apply when the titan is on sustained fire. The targeting aircraft guides the titan's aim, keeping it on target despite the movement. You've been keen for more movement in the list, this would help. |
|
| Author: | jimmyzimms [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
Yeha this poll is somewhat flawed in execution. There needs to be a None of the Above. Otherwise you're forced to agree with one or stay silent. At least be aware of that and tally up NO votes as entered in the thread by posters. |
|
| Author: | Vaaish [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
None of the above implies that the CLP can remain unchanged which is not going to happen, but I will tally no votes manually. For the record, I'm not voting in the poll. Yes this has the potential to invalidate people who have glued together Arty titans, but hey, I've got a fully scratch built Minorus Coy with a CLP that becomes worthless too and I'll wager I spent far more time constructing that than anyone who glued a weapon on a titan! If you have a better solution, you are free to post it, but after the last several days of discussion, these are the items on the table. If enough alternative ideas get presented then we'll do a second poll with those options followed by a run off between the winners. |
|
| Author: | Vaaish [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
Quote: Better suggestion: a Carapace Landing Pad gives +1 to hit for any barrage weapons the titan has, however this does not apply when the titan is on sustained fire. The targeting aircraft guides the titan's aim, keeping it on target despite the movement. Wouldn't this invalidate the Sustain order? If the CLP gives +1 to hit and you have the benefit of sustain without the drawback of needing to remain still, why bother sustaining (assuming a 2x quake reaver or 3x quake warlord)? |
|
| Author: | Armiger84 [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
[quote="GlynG]I don't think adding disrupt to any weapon is at all fitting, why should a high shoot weapon like a gatling blaster or laser blaster magically get disrupt of a high flying aircraft.[/quote] My thinking (imperfect as it is), is that a rain of pinpoint-accurate (courtesy of the spotter vehicle) titan weapons fire would be akin to the difference between targeting a grid reference in which infantry and vehicles are located and dropping ordnance right on top of their heads. Hence, the bonus Disrupt blast marker. This was based in part on how pretty much all titan weapons in 40k come with blast templates, so firing has more to do with carpeting an area than hitting a target when firing at little things (from a titan driver's perspective). How much deadlier/demoralizing/apocalyptic, then, would a concentrated salvo be? Think about the difference between "princeps, hostiles in the ruined cathedral!" And "princeps, infantry dug in on the northern balcony of the ruined cathedral, three windows over from the west transept!" One of those fire missions is going to do more harm than the other one. I know, it ain't perfect, but it potentially breaks less than Ignore Cover would. |
|
| Author: | wellspring [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
Vote: No. |
|
| Author: | GlynG [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 3:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
The above proposal should have said +1 to hit with barrage weapons on advance order, not for double. It doesn't absolutely invalidate sustained fire, as the titan could still have other non barrage weapons e.g. carapace multi lasers. Even if it does I don't see that encouraging a little more movement rather than having the titan sitting still all game (which is something you've said you dislike I believe) is really a bad thing. I've thought of another alternative suggestion that I prefer even more anyway - CML "allows the titan to fire any barrage weapons at any target within range, line of sight is not required." Range would NOT be doubled. would encourage more movement, leave normal benefits for sustaining and encourage me to use it a fair bit (particularly on a Reaver with twin Inferno Cannon or AML). |
|
| Author: | Vaaish [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
I do like the sound of that last idea. Would probably need to be reworded to be a bit more concise though. |
|
| Author: | mordoten [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
1. I also agree that this poll is flawed in it's design. 2. GlynG suggestions is very interesting! Best one so far! |
|
| Author: | Armiger84 [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
I'd give support to GlynG's idea for firing barrage weapons at anything in range, no LOS required. Could be explained by indirect firing with a spotter...or just as easily by "titan weapons are just so destructive that as long as they can spot you (ie, spotter speeder/drone has a firing solution for the titan), the barrage weapons can just chew through whatever's in the way to get to you." If its not yet obvious, I just want a fun and fluffy explanation for a balanced ruleset, and I'll be satisfied. Enough years of MMORPGs have acclimatized me to the need to occasionally make sweeping changes for the sake of better balance/more engaging gameplay. Ediut: attributing my support to GlynG's suggestion. |
|
| Author: | Vaaish [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
I'm keeping a list of alternate ideas. We'll see what else turns up; if you think you have a better suggestion then by all means post it. |
|
| Author: | Tiny-Tim [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 9:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
Quote: CML "allows the titan to fire any barrage weapons at any target within range, line of sight is not required." Range would NOT be doubled. would encourage more movement, leave normal benefits for sustaining and encourage me to use it a fair bit (particularly on a Reaver with twin Inferno Cannon or AML). This is an interesting idea that is worth looking at. |
|
| Author: | Onyx [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
Tiny-Tim wrote: Quote: CML "allows the titan to fire any barrage weapons at any target within range, line of sight is not required." Range would NOT be doubled. would encourage more movement, leave normal benefits for sustaining and encourage me to use it a fair bit (particularly on a Reaver with twin Inferno Cannon or AML). This is an interesting idea that is worth looking at. +1 from me (as long as it means CLP and not CML). I think that is the beginning of quite an elegant solution. |
|
| Author: | Borka [ Mon Jan 13, 2014 12:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Vote on the future of the CLP |
Onyx wrote: Tiny-Tim wrote: Quote: CML "allows the titan to fire any barrage weapons at any target within range, line of sight is not required." Range would NOT be doubled. would encourage more movement, leave normal benefits for sustaining and encourage me to use it a fair bit (particularly on a Reaver with twin Inferno Cannon or AML). This is an interesting idea that is worth looking at. +1 from me (as long as it means CLP and not CML). I think that is the beginning of quite an elegant solution. I voiced my support for option three as a good compromise in the other thread. But this is better, it's more simple. |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|