(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,22:32)
QUOTE I disagree I think all lists should stick with some sort of fighter/bomber combo (or fighter/fighter bomber etc) designed to fit the style of that list. Is also an easy way to differentiate variant lists.
Aye, but the problem is that fluffwise, any army that has Marauder Destroyer backup should really have Marauder backup too, the same with the fighter craft, and heck, even the Marauder Colossus.
To impose artificial restrictions is to build an abstract 'game', rather than a simulation style 'wargame'. Ah but we are abstracting. Why doesn't the core marine list have all the marine toys? Likewise the Guard?
To aid balance in a competitive army list set up we artificially limit options for armies. Airpower is an adjunct for Epic, listing 8 aircraft options is a bit much. Limiting to a few, just like we do with Titan load outs in the non titan lists, ensures they do not detract from the core army and still provide a bit of colour. they are not meant to be game winning units, they don't need the diversity.
(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE For Flyers. The AM has it's own flyers? Thats new to me. They are Imperial Navy, nothing else. Yep they have their own Navy. This includes attack craft. Check out the BFG supplement that is now official. All types of space ships including carriers, all kitted out with AM flown attack craft.
(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE Restirction of one Imperial Navy formation per Battletitan would be good. The way the list is built means the restriction isn't needed. If you want to max out on fliers you will end up with a 3-4 Reavers, little else besides air and, well, lose.
(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE VMB: The new Wh40k stats suggest that the VMB is a Multi-laser with an enormous number of shots. 60cm 6 x AP5+/AT6+ would do it justice. VMB ain't changing as it works well on the Warhound. Clearly in 40k they use the (insert humorous pattern name here) Vulcan Mega Bolter.
(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE Inferno Gun: The Flamer has AP5+, the Heavy Flamer AP4+, The Hellhouds Inferno Cannon AP3+, so the next bigger weapon the Inferno Gun should have AP2+ and perhabs AT6+ too. The decreasing range at will for the template sounds goot  Yeah, prob have something, would depend on the playtest reports but it should have been AP3+ reguardless.
(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE General thought on Titanweapons: Some time ago i made a list based on the description and firepower given in the Codex Titanicus (the box with the Imperator Titan). It must be somwhere here on the forum  On titan weapons I hark back in my heart to AT1, where they were carrying 40k weapons. Over the years this because for me that they carried the next step up to each 40k weapon - so TLD bigger lascannon etc. Has no impact on stats, just how I think of them.
(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE Now I'm going to be hellishly critical, please don't take offense. Low down cur, I will crush you under the plimsolled heel of my siegemasters if we ever get to play a game in January!
(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE I intensely dislike 'free' upgrades, especially when used in this manner (Basically a '1' choice instead of '0-1', the same as the IG Vanquisher, providing a concrete benefit and with no drawbacks).
Just have a restriction that SC's can only go on Warlord Titans, and charge a smaller than normal price (25-50pts). Making them free takes the skill out of list building.
If a points drop for Warlord Titans is nessesary (For this list), then give Warlord Titans a points drop, don't crowbar in a way that makes fielding one Warlord useful, but fielding two Warlords pointless. Really? I quite like them As has been pointed out the list is populated with void shielded tough 1+ initiative monsters. He is handy for re-rolls of moral tests but that?s mostly it. Sticking him in the Warlord at least makes the BTS also the SC which is rarely a good idea.
Actually it makes no odds to me if he is free, 25 points or 50. I doubt I will be taking Warlords much. This is simply the result of dozens of games trying to make them work at 3000 points. At 4000+ you need the toughness as now there are enough TK weapons knocking around to take out 2 or 3 or your Reavers with ease. But at 3000 you need the activations more. If anyone ever gets more than one to work I will applaud them, I never could. And even then that one was basically the spearhead unit and also the BTS, somewhat annoying. As a result if I ever did by the SC (and he ain?t worth it compared to another activation of sentinels) he would get stuck in a Reaver.
Dropping the points doesn?t work either. If anything the Warlord is discounted as it is. Any points drop and things go downhill. Sadly in this force structure Reavers rule (in the old one the Warhound did but the less said about that the better). I want to see the iconic Epic unit in the game and this is the only way I can think of making it attractive.
(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE No need to have variant aircraft... rip out the Marauder Destroyer and Lightning and use the normal aircraft.
See previous (or after my editing latter) post/point.
(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE If you're going to include ordinatae, include them all; The restriction doesn't make sense fluffwise.
(BlackLegion @ Nov. 18 2007,21:20)
QUOTE And Ordinati should only be Armageddon variant. They are build locally for a purpose. First off ? why not? Armageddon ? Ordinatus Armageddon. Second as mentioned in the designers notes every bugger apart from Dystartes takes the Golgotha. We may as well have that as the only option. It is one unit. It will appear in a minority or lists. The Armageddon variant does not bring significant new capabilities to the list. So I think limiting it to one keeps the flavour, and more importantly limits to variables.
(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE Drop the variant turrets on the Chimeras.
Now contary to the ordinatus argument above this is a small dash of colour which more importantly is already tested to death and balanced. Yes they can go ? but if they do go or stay it ultimately makes no difference to development time, balance or detract from the Titans. The biggest argument against them is they are a bit fiddly. Maybe they will all become Heavy Flamer variants because?
(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE Skitarii are supposed to wear carapace armour (5+ save), this was a failure of the original AMTL list. Likewise, why should they use Heavy Bolters, when they are supposed to have superior equipment to normal IG? The Skitari are in this list as Tech Guard to titans. They are for this measure equipped with AP weaponry for anti infantry/infiltrator/scout/urban work. Maybe Skitari serving other purposes tote lascannon. Who knows.
The skitari stats were a result of a long convoluted debate on the old SG forum and a bunch of playtests. They are pretty much ready to go now. I dissagre over the carapace armour and 5+ saves. Guardsmen have flak and get nothing, Guardians have mesh and get nothing, Skitari have bionics and carapace which I guess is one step up from flak so get 6+. Nothing stops other lists giving infantry equipped for a heavier mainstream role better kit ? however remember marines are 4+ saves, I would be amazed if any humans except elites could come near.
As for firepower in their ideal environment (i.e. not in a long range firefight with a support company) for this formation and its size and intended opponenets having twice the AP firepower of a guard squad is the business. As for higher tech, well maybe they carry them Rambo style with suspensors and the like.
(Evil and Chaos @ Nov. 18 2007,19:11)
QUOTE I would also remove the Tarantulas. (In 40k they're used by bog-standard IG & Space Marines, if they don't get them, why should the Ad-Mech, especially as they're basically just incredibly cheap objective-contesters?). Note that Tarantulas are one of the few units in 40k that cannot contest objectives / claim terrain as they're brainless.
As a side note the Tarantula are doing a lot better this time round. In 2004 they were roundly hated, though that might have been before the grots turned up.
They are indeed incredibly cheap objective nabbers. They fulfil three functions ? making it harder for deep striking assaulters to hit titans turn one in their deployment zone, taking objectives and holding your own table half objectives and as cheap activations.
Last time round they had weaker stats (no lascannons) and can happily go back to those. As they aren?t fearless, can break, no save, LV?s etc etc they are remarkably easy to clear, but still better than having hope guard your objectives. In any list structured around two very expensive core choices activations are murder, these help slightly. I say slightly because they don?t get round the 2 support limit and that ultimately is more of a problem.
Here is the original text for them, dusted off for your pleasure.
Basically point defence weapon systems normally used to protect bases and supply areas. Purpose in game is to ensure the enemy can?t simply walk in and take abandoned objective ? but has to have a token fight at least. Hopefully your attacking units will mean he doesn?t feel that confident about splitting off fighting units.
As for the point about them being a common item, well great. IG and Marines use them after a battle is done to secure bases and similar, I guess the Titan Legions feel after they walk through an area it is secure enough to set up.
Plus imagine the devices dormant, attached like limpets, only for a dozen suddenly pop off, roll to a halt, right themselves then start clearing lines of fire, only to then quietly settle down to wait.
And then of course come under fire, malfunction, shoot their own side etc etc (which is why they aren?t fearless). Human tech isn?t what it used to be.
I think them holding objective is fine ? I ask people to try them as that. They worked for us. If they prove too much they can get downgraded to contesters or written out entirely in favour of the more expensive sentinels (which in practice is what happened if you had a spare 50 points and no support slots left).
_________________ If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913 "Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography." General Plumer, 191x
|