Given the amount of debate about marines fielding too much titans (from a fluff perspective), isn't balancing the warlord so that we get to see it more in marine list a bit contradictory ?

Yeah I'd agree with that. Generally you want to be shooting at infantry as there are in most cases more inf than AV or WE. A warlord armed with apoc missile launchers might be worth some more points to space marines.

The debate was about Marines fielding too many Warhounds (and terminators) and people being SICK of it. Not titans over all.

Here, the Warlord is THE signature Epic unit - much like a space marines is the signature peice for 40k - and yet the walord is virtually never used.

Well, I seem to remember being argued that marines should be an independent and autonomous force that shouldn't need titans, quite separately from balance issues.

Yeah some might have argued that - I think you yourself where doing so - but for others I think it was just the Warhound that was irritating.

There are Space Marine lists out there without Titans - Dark Angels for example - but I think for Epic general picture is supposed to be lots of infantry with a big Titan towering over them. That's what's on the cover!

It's somewhat telling that the Warlord is not taken much in marine armies given that it doesn't compete with thunderbolts, Eldar have to lose nightwings to take a Warlock. The Great Gargant just has more firepower (lots of MW and TK) and better CC/FF (due to it's higher DC). The Warlord though is reasonably popular in the AMTL lists which suggests alternate weapon loadouts would at least help. Also interesting is that in the Tyranid lists the Hydraphant is quite rare (and it's substantially cheaper than the Reaver)

It just seems the big titans, unless they do something special, just aren't that useful outside of Titan lists and larger games.

On a related note I've posted a proposal for some rules allowing some new Titan Configurations, starting with the Warlord Titan, over here:
viewtopic.php?p=379975#p379975

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Yeah, it's their slow speed and the number of activations they take up that's the cause.

Smaller titans and War engines are great - mainly because you get the advantages of war engine rules - combined with other abilities that are often given to war engines, for the same cost as your average tank formation. There-fore you get a better tank, for the same cost, without hurting your activation count.

the following list shows popularity of larger titans (in my experience) in order

Warlock
Gargant
Reaver
Great Gargant
Warlord
Phantom

Actually, I was arguing that Marines weren't an autonomous force and that it would be a sad day when one couldn't field titans in the game, so strictly the opposite.
I was just pointing at the inconsistency, specially as I was told a few weeks ago that titans in marine army were not "fluffy".

I think making alternate weapon load out as E&C suggested might be the first thing to test if we are trying to fix this issue.

Sorry my bad - I got you down wrong there.

Yeah I guess there are those in the 'Titans in marine lists aren't fluffy' camp - but I guess this thread isn't really for them as it presupposes that you do think they are fluffy, indeed iconic, and are sad that only one type (warhound) is of any actual use.

Just an off the wall suggestion for the huge War Engines. Anything Reaver and below should be automatically excluded. And some above probably could as well.

Domineer/Unnerve/Intimidate (sure someone can think of a more apt name)
Each D/U/I in the army allows a player to skip initiatve (nominate no formation, and declare no action) once per turn.

It can probably be worded better, and have a restriction (not when broken), or penalty (like the Avatar rule if killed). I don't know. But it helps smooth out the activation count.

Morgan Vening

An intresting idea...but wouldn't that make warlocks and especially great/gargants a whole lot more popular?

_________________
MoK's Painting Blog
Now Showing:
Mok's Modular Modern Messy Guard Army

Aye, Warlocks and Great Gargants are fine, really.

It's only the Warlord that is seen as an actual "bad" unit.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

That's why I said "and some above" in the first bit. I see it as a boost for those titans that suck, not just for all titans. Off the top of my head, Warlord, Imperator, Banelord (maybe), the Necron thingies. But stuff like the Warlock and Great Gargant could probably skip it. The points drop and fixes to the Manta would probably exclude that, too.

Morgan Vening

I was one of those strongly arguing there were too many Warhounds, but I think you’ve mis-read what we were arguing a bit.

Marines are an autonomous and independent force, that's made very clear in the background. If I was to hazard a guess at numbers I’d say they probably fight alongside allied aircraft/guard/titans somewhere between a third and two thirds of the time. The new FW Badab War campaign book certainly sees a lot of Marine chapters going to war and fighting on their own over the course and an extended and very bloody campaign, some committing their entire chapter and loosing most of it if they were unlucky.

I’d never suggest Marines shouldn’t fight alongside titans or that them doing so in a battle would be against the background – that would be crazy! However when a significant majority of epic battles involving SM see them using Warhounds and they’re more commonly used than Tactical Marines then there is something is clearly wrong with the internal balance of the list and the over/under-representations distorts the feel and look of SM armies used in epic games from what they should be.

It would be nice to be able to have titans balanced comparably with the rest of the units in the list so that using titans could be optional. I think it would be a good to both see more Marines lists with no titans (or Thunderbolts) and a few more with the very rarely taken Warlord, without thinking there’s anything contradictory in that. I really like having as wide a range as possible of good balanced units rather than some that are obviously under or overpowered, as it encourages for variation and different list builds.


Seconded! Sounds like a good call to me.