I submitted AMTLv2.0 to JJ on the 3rd of October. Not entirely sure why it ain't online yet, mind you, but the delay is now at his end, not mine
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| AMTL v2.0 http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=5283 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | dysartes [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
I submitted AMTLv2.0 to JJ on the 3rd of October. Not entirely sure why it ain't online yet, mind you, but the delay is now at his end, not mine
|
|
| Author: | Lord Inquisitor [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:01 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 | ||
Cool. Expect some comments as soon as it goes up!  Lord =I= |
|||
| Author: | Tactica [ Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
Lord_I, ... if we all don't shrivel up and die whiel waiting... ... somebody poke JJ with a stick or something! Is he moving still?  |
|
| Author: | Grimshawl [ Tue Oct 18, 2005 2:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
Hey, glad to hear it, dont know what to think about Jervis nowadays, seems hes pulled out to make the show circuit and be visable for GW and then is stuffed right back into the closet. He almost never interacts with the SG forum anymore, hardly ever even writes the Blog either, I do hope he is still critiqing the lists his champions are working up for him. anyway glad to hear you've kept the ball rolling, I've had to move and real life issus recently otherwise I would be here more often myself. Grim |
|
| Author: | dysartes [ Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
Well, I poked JJ on Monday, and got the following back: Hi Nick, Thanks for the email and the reminder. I have received the file; unfortunately it got buried amongst a pile of emails and then Andy went and took a weeks holiday last week further delaying putting it up : ( I'll ask him to put the files up today if at all possible... Jervis | |
| Author: | Tactica [ Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
Every time a list is delayed in posting, we should have a global page noting the log of a community anger counter! Every time there's a name added to the petition for a given entry, person(s) at root cause for the delay should receive an acute, but noticable electrical shock! 
|
|
| Author: | dysartes [ Fri Oct 21, 2005 11:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
OK, I'm fed up with waiting now - I've uploaded AMTLv2.0 onto my webspace until the people at SG get their act together. Linky linky |
|
| Author: | Lord Inquisitor [ Sat Oct 22, 2005 3:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
Right, thanks Dysartes (good call IMO), Okay, first thoughts (I'll go through it properly over the weekend): Praetorians - MUCH much better. However, I can tell you just by eyeballing them that I don't think they're going to be worth 400 points for a formation. With the much-improved CC ability they might be good with a Corvus, though. While it is much better to overcost them than undercost them, I just don't think even now a formation is really worth 100 points less than a warhound pack. I can't see Praetorians toting lasguns though! Multilasers, heavy stubbers, assault-cannon are more their style. I can't think of an example in the canon of Praetorians wielding anything other than a heavy weapon. I'd be inclined to give them some kind of heavy weapon rather than plasma gun (maybe plasma cannon?) and something more impressive for their Small Arms, even if their FF remains the same. Speaking of their FF, the only thing that bugs me about their actual stats now is that they maybe ought to have a better FF. I like their new improved armour save (3+ woo! ) I would suggest a 5+RA would be more appropriate, making them considerably more resilient than Ogryns against MW attacks, but just a little worse against regular attacks.Other than that I love most of the name changes. Not sure about the Warhound packs being 500, there's not much incentive to take them in packs of 2. I'm yet to be convinced that the new weapon system isn't unbalanced, but I haven't tried it yet. I really don't like the 'light' nomenclature for the Scout weapons. No weapon mounted on a titan should be considered 'light!' I'd prefer 'scout' but that's not ideal either. I'll think about it. I know I sound like I'm all ready to whinge, but I'm really very impressed with the list. I missed the passing of the Capitol, why was that removed? Lord =I= |
|
| Author: | dysartes [ Sat Oct 22, 2005 8:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
The Capitol Imperialis was removed for two reasons. Firstly, we felt that it would be inappropriate to have company-sized formations of Skitarii in a list that is meant to be focused more on the Titans, and the CI is designed to transport (at least) a company of Skitarii. Secondly, the CI is a very, very slow vehicle, and was sometimes slower than the units it was transporting. Given that an AMTL list is seen as more of a blitzing style army, it felt a little odd to have such a slow troop transport. It also means we have something unique to add when work begins on a Tech-Guard list. |
|
| Author: | Legion 4 [ Sat Oct 22, 2005 3:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
So where does the CI go/come in ?!  And IIRC the Ordinati needed a little fine tuning ? But generally looked good !
|
|
| Author: | dysartes [ Sat Oct 22, 2005 10:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
L4> For priorities for the playtest period between v2.0 and v3.0, check the Aims & Objectives sticky. As for the CI, I imagine it'll be showing up in the Skitarii list when it shows up, rather than the AMTL list. |
|
| Author: | Legion 4 [ Sun Oct 23, 2005 5:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
Sounds reasonable ! I'll continue to monitor from afar !
|
|
| Author: | Tactica [ Wed Oct 26, 2005 10:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | AMTL v2.0 |
O-kee-do-kee... just downloaded the list from the linky-link.  We'll digest this evening and reply to the other thread where appropriate feedback was asked for. Note: love the red highlights  Also, glad to see pre-v2 or (WIP v2) comments were considered for final v2 proposal. bravo. OK... going to digest this now.
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|