| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Cross-posting Feedback http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=5284 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | dysartes [ Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Cross-posting Feedback |
If you haven't alreday seen these, here's Sotec's comments on the v2.0 list, copied across from the SG forum. ============================================== I've done my list review. Please take this as an objective view on the list. This is the first time I've seen it (been to busy to before now) so these might be gut reactions. Here you go: 1.1.1 Knight Shield OK. 1.1.2 Suggest you drop this and just use BP3 with ignore cover, use flame template note as per blast template but small end must touch titan. Reason: Simplicity. 1.2 list Many things to say here. a) I personally heavily dislike the idea of Ordinatus in the list. Save them for an article like the Harlequins or for a Skitarii only list. b) At the very least Ordinatus should be an Auxillia Formation, not a Legio formation. c) All else looks OK. 2.0 Titan basics. I think I understand this. Because the titans have no points discount they have virtually unlimited access to the arms and armoury. To be straight I think there are some pretty obvious choices and to resist the urge to mount up on plasma weaponry is going to be hard. One of those cases where I have to assume a loooong discussion went into the debate about how much to charge points-wise (or not as the case is). I need to see some games before I pass judgement here. 2.1 titans Nothing to say here. 2.2 titan weapons scout titan weapons a)Repeat comment about repeating un-necessary rules for flamer template. b) Light rocket launcher is a little nutty. Two warhounds can launch a 12 BP strike. Suggest reduction to BP2. Tactical weapons a) I like the balence. Assault weapons a) suggest change "Power Fist" to "Imperial Tian Power Fist" and change from EA(+3) to EA(+2) and change damage from TK(D3) to TK(D3+1). Both to differentiate from Eldar power fists and make it worthwhile to work at getting a warlord into combat... Support Weapons a) I would prefer to see the plasma destructor act as a BFG, slow rate of fire but hurts when it hits. Was thinking of 90cm, 1xMW3+ TK(D6+1), slow fire. Only of use verses WE but very fun (rather than being an obvious choice against the plasma cannon. Suggest a limit of 0-1 plasma weapon per titan. b) Drop vortex "no LOS required". Should require landing pad to get that. Also prevents "over the shoulder" firing at air assaults and the like. A single titan with 2 of these on overwatch would be OTT. 2.3 titan upgrades. a) Legate; good. Suggest no MW on defense turret, replace with EA(+3) instead. (MW is larger than Gatling blaster class!) b) Veteran pincepts; good. c) Carapace multi-lasers; OK but would prefer to see Reaver limited to only one multi-laser emplacement... d) suggest sacred icon item be 25 points not 50. Encourage players to add these. e) What is a Custodian titan? It would be nice to know. Would suggest same as sacred item but +75 points (free if replacing 2 carapace weapons, otherwise 75 points). Change note from the "loadout" wording to "counts as two tactical weapons". f) Suggest replace "carapace landing pad" with "Fire control tower (FCT)". There are many problems inherent with having a model freely zipping around that as left the coherency of it's host formation. It is unclear how this works. Does just having the landing pad constitute gaining the ability? Do you need a speeder miniature? A landing pad could be "counted as" a FCT but I think that a FCT might be easier for people to model, understand etc. 2.4 skitarii and equipment a) Tribune; A tribune is a unit, right? Delete the annoying and confusing fluff about it joining another unit as a character. b) Electro-Preist. Sorry. This just needs to be deleted. It has no basis in 40K mechanus fluff whatsoever that I can recall or find. Replace with "Tech-Preist support staff". Drop fearless. c) Skitarii. Good. d) Praetorians. Good. Would upgrade CC to 4+. e) Drop the Mole Mortar. It was never a good idea and the physics make me want to heave at the silliness of it. f) Thudd gun is excellent. The special rule is simple and the way I wished all artillary functioned. 2.5 Knights a) Shock Lance. Check your physics. In order to arc energy as the shock lance fluff states it does you need a LOT of energy (lightning range) and a short distance between node and anode. Change all shock lances to be Assault weapons. b) Baron is only worth 150 points in my opinion. Would up Cannon to be 4x shots. c) Seneshal good. d) Knight Errent and Knight Lancer; Change armour to 5+. Knight save takes care of rest. That or up points by 25%. These sound and feel like lighter frames (you don't get a warhorse when you sign up with the cavalry, you just get a horse.) e) Paladin. OK. Would up cannon to be 2x shots and speed by 5cm. f) Crucader and Castellan. BIG problem here. There is no reason whatsoever not to amalgamate these two into one profile. Change the secondary weapon into "Secondary armaments" 45cm 2xAP5+/AT5+. 2.6 Ordinatus. 'nuff said already. These are the equivalent of special characters and unless I recall wrong the only limited WE is the Warlock Titan (for good reason!). Ordinatus should be written up in their own article and certainly not be included as part of the "Legio" section of the list! Also please drop the squat references. We want the studio to take us seriously and the squats were an unfortunate evolutionary dead end for the game. The sooner they die completely the sooner the Deniurg might be revealed... 2.7 shared imperial vehicles. I would like to see baneblades, shadowswords, and maybe even stormblades make an appearance here. Perhaps Have the Cataphract cohort consist of 6 Leman russes with an upgrade to add a SHT. 2.8 imperial navy I like the increase of Thunderbolt formaton size. Marauder Destroyer; Front TL heavy bolter should have AP4+ added to it. 2.9 Titan templates. Very cool. a Nice touch but maybe present as a separate file that can be downloaded. I'm not going to comment on the rest as they do not strictly fall under the list. I would suggest separating them and placing them into another document like the titan templates. I hope some of this helps! Cheers! Sotec (Eldar, Exodite, Harlequin Champion. ERC member) ============================================== I've yet to respond to these (as I have to go to work), but does anyone have any thoughts on these comments? |
|
| Author: | wargame_insomniac [ Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Cross-posting Feedback |
Dysartes A couple of comments: Light MRL's - I personally did n't even want these as an option for Warhounds, so would be more than happy if they were toned down further in line with Sotec's comments. The 0-1 limit on Plasma weaponry goes back to original AT rules but has not been repeated since. Therefore mnay players who have assembled & painted their titans afterwardsare going to be very irate if they can't use them even in AMTL list. Would rather balance them in some other way. e.g. keep slow fire limit but only allow 1 plasma weapon to fire per turn? Therefore titan can cycle firing plasma weapons on alternate turns. Just a thought... Ordinatii- I would have no objction to moving them to Auxilia formation but I think they should still be in list, as I do the CI. I want stats for both Ordinatii & CI to appear in AMTL as I am worried that if they are missed off then we will never have decent playtested stats for them. Given the current state of SG I have no confidence that there will be future official army lists for Epic Armageddon that feature these. Knights Castellan/Crusader- I have no problem with these being 1 entry with choice of 2 secondary weapons. However I dislike the idea of combining them into one bastardised profile. If we cut-out too many options from AMTL list then there will be little point in having the list. SHT's- I personally would love the chance to field some SHT's in the list, especially if we can add Stormblades/Stormswords/Stormhammers to the exisiting choice. However I am concerned that would influence the perceptions of other players that AMTL is a cheesy/beardy list. For the same reason although it was shame that Titans got bumped back up to the higher cost, it was probably for the good of the list. Just some quick thoughts in reaction to Sotec's observations. Cheers James |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|