| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Review of Imperial Titans http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=6617 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
Just thought I'd remind people and tell new people about the proposed changes to Titans, and to add one of my own. Changes proposed from way back (with I add no opposition at the time). Warlord Gatling Blaster range increased to 60cm Turbo lasers range increased to 60cm Reaver Turbo lasers range increased to 60cm Rocket Launcher BP increased to 3 Anyone thought up any problems with this yet? Been using it for a while and it makes 'em decent choices, indeed all the AMTL playtesting was done with these changes in mind. Something all those games, plus 'maxing out' on Titans showed that the Warhound is by far the best choice. 4 at 3000 points for the Imperium is an excellent choice for any army. Indeed its performance is so consistently good i feel the humble warhound should change in all lists to Warhound Pack, 1-2 Warhounds, 275 points each. |
|
| Author: | Ilushia [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
I'd like to see Warhound Packs move to always being 2 units, myself. Meaning that taking them is actually sacrificing activations (As is you can take them at 250, lots of armies can take other formations at 250 or so, so there's no loss of activations there. 4 Warhounds gets you 4 activations, for cheaper then others, and highly resilient). I'd much rather see Warhounds go to always being 2 per pack at 500 then 275 each, myself. Did you play many games where people actually took Warhound PACKs instead of just individual Warhounds? |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
Oh yes. Lots. If you have a high activation army the 2 warhound formation is definatively superior. Means if you take 5 or more hits you get to soak 4 from the VS as opposed to almost lose a warhound. Also 2 advancing in deliver 8 AP3+/AT5+ and 4 MW2+ shots to a target. Enough to rip the heart out of a mech formation. Have them in a guard army, toss in a commissar and you have a '6' strong formation with 4 absorbant void shields, inspiring and a 30cm charge (total 45cm engage range). Typically it went turn 1 move and fire all weapon systems. Turn 2 engage and recharge. Turn three repeat turn 1. |
|
| Author: | Ilushia [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
You can actually put Comissars in Titans? I didn't think you could do that. It's definitely an interesting prospect, that's for certain. Upping them to 275 might well be a good idea. They are really strong for their price, given at present the Reaver costs 2.6x as much as they do, and is probably worse then 2 of them are over-all given their rate of fire. Warlord MIGHT be worth it, but probably not since you can field 3 warhounds, almost 4, for the same price. Do you really think a 25 point increase is enough though? I'd like to see them go to 300 each, even though some people will heavily protest. That means 2 of them is still cheaper then 1 Reaver, but not by a lot. |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
The reaver has advantages of its own (better armour and assault), and a warlord compares fine to 3 warhounds. Don't think 300 is warrented. |
|
| Author: | yme-loc [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
As much as I have suffered at the hands of warhounds I am not quite convinced of a points upgrade to 275pts - I also think that the sacrifice of activations is a weakness for these sorts of fast formations and think just making it 2 for 500pts would solve any problems. |
|
| Author: | dafrca [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 3:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
I agree with yme-loc. Just restrict them to two for 500 and be done with it. dafrca |
|
| Author: | dptdexys [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 3:57 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans | ||
NOOOOOOO !!!!! What with Landers not being able to hold objectives and now nerfing the warhound how are marines supposed to win games or is that the plan  .
|
|||
| Author: | semajnollissor [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
well, presumably marines would get their fixes (discussed in other threads) at the same time these changes are introduced. |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
I would be against the double warhound as default - simply because they are sold one to a pack and you would upset a lot of players who could no longer take them. |
|
| Author: | nealhunt [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
I agree with TRC's stuff at the top. Frightening how often that is happening these days... That said, I could see something like 275 for 1 or 500 for 2. |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
I have to confesse that Neal's on holiday, its me hacking his account. |
|
| Author: | bloodman [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
you sneaky sneaky man you  ....i agree with TRC up to 275 for single warhounds. but give SM the Thawk annilator from the BT list so feilding an SM army without warhounds is viable
|
|
| Author: | Reaver [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 4:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans |
I use a Reaver and a Warhound, 900 pts, in my 3000 pts marine army. Forcing Warhounds to always be in packs will screw me up! If people really are having a problem facing multiple Warhounds, up the points slightly. Or better yet, if the problem is with marine armies, then fix the list so that other units become worth having. Players may take LR formations instead if they were cheaper. Regards, Reaver |
|
| Author: | dafrca [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:56 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Review of Imperial Titans | ||
And what a good job you did too. dafrca |
|||
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|