Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

4 Warhounds
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=8511		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Markconz [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:11 am ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds
4 Warhounds ready to be armed up... and the following weapons available:

2x Plasma
2x Vulcan
2x Inferno
2x Turbo Laser

To use the IG/marine list I guess it makes sense to do one pair with plasma and vulcan, and the other pair with inferno and turbo (which will just count as plasma and vulcan in standard lists).

However, if a weapon selection system is used, then it would seem to me to make more sense to do them as plasma and turbo (anti tank), and as inferno and vulcan (anti-infantry). Or is their some justification in having more generalist armament?

Thoughts?
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:24 am ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds
I'd specialise, and go for the big kill.
Author:  Bombot [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:25 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds
Yeah, the plasma with the megabolter isn?t ideal.  The number of times I?ve been firing at Ork Boyz with plasma shots when I would rather go for the big juicy Stompas, just because it?s not actually an AT weapon?
Author:  Markconz [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:51 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds
Seems I'm not alone in thinking this...

Out of interest, does anyone else find it strange that the Orc and Eldar can specialise their titans in the basic list (and the models come with weapon options), but the Imperials are stuck with crappy layouts?  Anyone remember the original design philosophy behind this?
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:03 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds

(Markconz @ Feb. 01 2007,12:51)
QUOTE
Seems I'm not alone in thinking this...

Out of interest, does anyone else find it strange that the Orc and Eldar can specialise their titans in the basic list (and the models come with weapon options), but the Imperials are stuck with crappy layouts?  Anyone remember the original design philosophy behind this?

It was less a design philosophy and more a nessesity.

SG were too poor to put a decent ammount of weapons into production for the Titans, so the Warlord got one config, the Reaver one config, and the Warhound one config.

Basically, this was because the Warhound was a new model (So only one config was available) and the MK3 Warlord had only one weapon config available. It was (Presumably) then deemed daft to have a modular Reaver when the other two Imperial Titans were non-modular.

So we got stuck with fixed configurations due to finance, not due to design.


The Q&A in the Epic rulebook has Jervis saying he intends to release other configurations of Imperial Titans at a later date, with rules 'patches' that would come once per year in an Annual.

Of course, SG got scaled back, and we never got those extra configurations & rules additions to the main lists (Other new units for the core 3 armies were also implied, not just Titans).


Since that time there's been a lot of conservatism as to introducing new rules for new models into the core rules, so we're left with no official rules for incorporating Titans with different weapons into Imperial lists.

Check my .sig. :D
Author:  Bombot [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:09 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds

(Markconz @ Feb. 01 2007,12:51)
QUOTE
Seems I'm not alone in thinking this...

Out of interest, does anyone else find it strange that the Orc and Eldar can specialise their titans in the basic list (and the models come with weapon options), but the Imperials are stuck with crappy layouts? ?Anyone remember the original design philosophy behind this?

I don?t think the Warhound layour is crappy, per se.  It?s not ideal, but at only 250 points, I?m not going to complain.

I saw an SG Warhound in the flesh for the first time last weekend.  It?s so diddy!  I?ll take my Forgeworld ones, thank you very much!
Author:  Markconz [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:34 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds

(Evil and Chaos @ Feb. 01 2007,12:03)
QUOTE
...Since that time there's been a lot of conservatism as to introducing new rules for new models into the core rules, so we're left with no official rules for incorporating Titans with different weapons into Imperial lists.

Check my .sig. :D

Thanks for the explanation, yeah I've seen some of the discussion on points costs.

I actually downloaded that AM2.11 list to mod the basic titans a while ago. I'm pretty sure most people here will be happy using it. Will let you know how it goes.
Author:  nealhunt [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:37 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds
E&C has it right on.  Model production dictated the weapon configuration.  Orks already molds that included alternat parts.

I'm not sure if the Eldar titans did, or if they added the weapons as part of the model development.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:39 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds
I also recomend using Reaver's Modified Titan Rules*.


Note that in the next version Reaver will be changing all 'minus one turn' damage results to 'minus 5cm speed'.

Oh and the speed chart itself will go:

0-10cm - 1 turn
10-20cm - 2 turns
20-30cm - 3 turns
30-40cm - 4 turns



Those are the only major changes IIRC.


Yeah, have fun! :)
Author:  Markconz [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:39 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds

(Bombot @ Feb. 01 2007,12:09)
QUOTE
I saw an SG Warhound in the flesh for the first time last weekend. ?It?s so diddy! ?I?ll take my Forgeworld ones, thank you very much!

Yeah I'm not thrilled with the new SG version. I've got 5 1st edition ones but really like FW versions. My mate likes the new SG version though, and bought 4 of them.
Author:  Markconz [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:45 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds

(Evil and Chaos @ Feb. 01 2007,12:39)
QUOTE
I also recomend using Reaver's Modified Titan Rules*.

Yeah I have those too! However, they seem specialised for Imperials? Any plans for specific crit tables for Eldar, Orks, Nids etc?
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:46 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds

(nealhunt @ Feb. 01 2007,13:37)
QUOTE
I'm not sure if the Eldar titans did, or if they added the weapons as part of the model development.

Since the Eldar Titans were just repros of models that already existed, designing new weapon models for them wasn't a problem, they could just be put right back into production after the list designers chose which weapons they'd like to have (They still had a limited production budget, so not all Eldar Titan weapons were brought back).


But for the Imperials, no compatible models existed for the Warlord or Warhound.


The Warhound was too small to fit the old metal weapons to, and the Warlord had the added difficulty that its weapon hardpoints are very different to previous Warlord models.




However, I believe that not incorporating FW's Titan variants (And other models) into the core lists was a mistake, and has in part led to FW's reluctance to produce new Epic models (Due to reduced sales).

Note that BFG, for example, has FW models as part of its core lists.


Anyway that's my little hobbyhorse. :)
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:08 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds

(Markconz @ Feb. 01 2007,13:45)
QUOTE

(Evil and Chaos @ Feb. 01 2007,12:39)
QUOTE
I also recomend using Reaver's Modified Titan Rules*.

Yeah I have those too! However, they seem specialised for Imperials? Any plans for specific crit tables for Eldar, Orks, Nids etc?

IIRC there was a simple way of converting Imperial Critical results to Eldar Titans back in AT1 by changing certain results that refer to Void Shields to refer to Holofields, but I can't remember exactly how it was done.

I have a list of the several edition's worth of damage result charts around somewhere, maybe I could have a go at digging them up and incorporating them into Reaver's Titan System.
Author:  nealhunt [ Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:43 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds

(Evil and Chaos @ Feb. 01 2007,13:46)
QUOTE

(nealhunt @ Feb. 01 2007,13:37)
QUOTE
I'm not sure if the Eldar titans did, or if they added the weapons as part of the model development.

Since the Eldar Titans were just repros of models that already existed, designing new weapon models for them wasn't a problem, they could just be put right back into production after the list designers chose which weapons they'd like to have (They still had a limited production budget, so not all Eldar Titan weapons were brought back).

The Eldar titan molds weren't just put back into production.  The new Eldar titan production is not exactly the same as the old mold configuration(s) so something was changed.  My question is how the Eldar molds were retooled to end up with the current fixed production.

I don't know if the old Eldar titan molds included a separate basic titan/variant weapon mold or were a single mold with all the variants on it, but it was probably the latter.  They could have added weapons to an existing basic titan mold, cut variant weapons off an existing comprehensive mold, or created a new mold with just the current weapon selection.

My best guess is that the old molds were Titan + lots of variants.  Packaging would split the bits into a titan with random weapons (whatever the packagers grabbed - back when GW was willing to be more labor-intensive) and the "leftover" weapons would go into the variant packs.  In rehabbing the molds to put them back into production they could have just filled in or cut the unused portions/weapons in the mold.  That would give a fixed set of pieces with no sorting for packaging - 1 mold, 1 package.  That would have been the cheapest option for everything from mold creation through production to packaging, but it assumes the old molds were basic + variant bits.

But in the end, I don't know.
Author:  Ilushia [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:22 pm ]
Post subject:  4 Warhounds
On the topic of arming titans... I have thus far in all my games with AMTL not seen the Warhound inferno guns to be worth using over Vulcan Megabolters. While it is potentially possible to get many more shots with them if facing massive ork mobs or IG regiments which are standing close together, they still have less then half the range of a Vulcan Megabolter and hit on higher numbers. A doubling Warhound would have to cover 8 stands with its inferno gun to equal the successful fire rate of a Vulcan Megabolter. And typically to do such a feat leaves your titans so close to the enemy that they'll get counter-assaulted by the remaining enemy forces and badly damaged or wiped out.

On arming them I'd most likely go with VMB/TLD on one set and Plasma Guns/Inferno Guns on the other, as this allows you a long-range shooting group which is good agaist most things and very good against mixed formations, as well as a short-range unit which can get up close, open up then assault.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/