| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| A question about the list... http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=5322 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
Is it intended that the Titans / Titan configurations in this list could be used with other Imperial lists where Titans are a valid army choice, either in or out of a tournament situation? IE; I've been using the light inferno gun variant of the Warhound from this list in my space marine army... |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
No. It might work but its had no serious testing. |
|
| Author: | dafrca [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
This was not the intent when we first created the lists at all. The "Valid" army lists were tested with the Titans as given in those lists. As Chris said, we did nto extend the playtest that way (Could of, just didn't). But I would say that if your friends do not mind, DWWFY, as L4 would say. dafrca |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
Do you think the warhound configurations at least are anything approaching balanced for other armies? Just wondering, since the only one of my warhounds I've painted up so far is the aforesaid twin inferno-gun variant. It seems reasonably balanced to me, if that's any help... but then again I thought titans crumbled from combat resolution until two weeks ago. 
|
|
| Author: | nealhunt [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
It should be relatively close. No guarantees, of course. |
|
| Author: | dptdexys [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
The gaming group I'm in has always used whatever weapons were on the titan wether it was stats from the collectors models or from the stats in the AMTL list and we've had no problems except no-one likes any Barrage weapon with MW and ignore cover (old Inferno gun stats/stormsword etc. come to mind). We have not had any problems with balance issues in our freindly games (use the GT scenario 90% of the time) but we do usually play 6000 point games as the norm so that may account for not being unbalancing. As for tournaments I don't think you will be able to find anyone wlling to let you use any other stats than book stats (I haven't had anyone agree to use the revised version of the titan weapons yet apart from Bill who's from my gaming group). |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 6:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
One of my opponents is a Titan Legions player from way back, (Has 40 Warlords, 3 Imperators, Ordinatii etc). So we've played using the 2.0 AMTL list without recourse to the 'collectors' list from the rule book. I havn't even tried using the Barrage version of my Inferno gun Warhound Titan, since I'm sure the changes were made for a reason. Not having played in any tournaments that aspect of my question was only mild speculation as to whether the AMTL list might eventually be rolled into a sort of Adeptus Titanicus-lite, granting 'official' status to different titan configurations in other Imperial lists, but without the major changes inherant in adding damage locations, critial hit trees etc. |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 9:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
For warlords and reavers, probably not, as it is a power boost for them. Warhounds would depend on us getting the weapons right - but even then certain combo's would work better wih some army selections and not others. |
|
| Author: | Ilushia [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 9:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
I doubt it would be HORRIBLY unbalancing, but it'd make Warlords and Reavers much more attractive. The ability to customize your super-heavy support to be able to fill in the roles your normal troops don't is a powerful powerful thing. Not enought TK? Take a wariord with 2 TLDs and 2 Volcano cannons! Or 4 Meltacannons. Not enough assault ability? Take a Reaver with 2 Meltacannons and 1 Laser Burner. And so on. With the ability to custom-pick weapons it makes titans VERY powerful as they're no longer required to fill a specific role (super-heavy support) and can move to fill whatever holes you have in the list. This is OK in an all-titan force, as it allows a reasonably rounded force consisting entirely of titans, but would result in a vast power increase in a normal army. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 10:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
Aye, I guess it'd need individual points costs for each weapon upgrade, a fair sized project on its own! |
|
| Author: | dafrca [ Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
Some point go and look at the old threads over at the SG forums. Look at the arguments and hand wringing just around what weapons to add to the list, let along their stats and point values. Look at the hundreds of posts just trying to argue out the number of Plasma weapons to leave in the list. TRC knows, he lived through them. Might be worth a little time to read some of them. dafrca |
|
| Author: | Ilushia [ Sat Jun 03, 2006 1:08 am ] | ||
| Post subject: | A question about the list... | ||
This one's been suggested a few times I think. Do it the way that AT-II did, you've got a cheap cost for the basic titan, then more for each weapon, also allowing you to leave off weapons if you want a less expensive Titan. So far it's not been done, I think because most people don't want to try to futz with the costs as much as it'd require. And it'd be very difficult to figure out how expensive the basic carapace is and how much each weapon should be worth. |
|||
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Sat Jun 03, 2006 2:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
If there was a system in AT-II that worked like that, then it should be possible to build a mathematical model for transferring the costs of the carapace, weapons etc, assuming that the weapons that remain in the ATML list still function in a roughly equivilent manner. All that'd need to be decided would be a 'base' titan configuration cost in E:A to make the cost conversions against, and the rest of the weapons would convert themselves. Is there any way I can get ahold of the AT-II rules without going to ebay? Or at least a breakdown of the old points costs. |
|
| Author: | Ilushia [ Sat Jun 03, 2006 3:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
The trouble is the point costs in AT-II are not very well lined up with E:A. infact the whole way many weapons work changed. Void shields are drastically different now (They go down no matter how weak the weapon is, where as before you had to test to see if they went down) and a LOT of other things changed... You might be able to build a model based on the older stuff, SM2 era, though I'm not entirely sure how close you could get it. The potential is there to do it, but it'd be a rather difficult task to be sure. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Sat Jun 03, 2006 1:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | A question about the list... |
Well, I was thinking it could be something I could do while some spray paint dries this weekend, just to see if it would be anything like balanced. I was thinking of taking the standard rulebook configuration Warlord as the 'basic' Warlord and run the points costings off of that. But like I said, I need a list of points costs from somewhere. 
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|