Oh I agree entirely here TRC, but the ways and means of doing this will be more flexible and subtle than the straight 2/3 rule.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

I would add that much depends on the terrain coverage and the placement of objectives.

Fighting against the AMTL, you are forced to concentrate the power of your army more than against virtually any other list. If successful, you can reduce the AMTL to the point where they cannot physically acheive their objectives - but against even a moderate opponent it can be quite hard to do this; hence the problems with acheiving a 'balanced' list.

It also depends upon the circumstances; in a tournament situation where you are designing 'generalist' armies to take on all-comers, these can find it a lot harder to win against the AMTL. It is much easier if you know you are facing the AMTL to start with (and design a list accordingly) even if you don't know the actual composition beforehand. Indeed, one of the problems with the AMTL is in finding ways to avoid the predicable and boring 'cookie-cutter' lists.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

in a tournament situation where you are designing 'generalist' armies to take on all-comers, these can find it a lot harder to win against the AMTL

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Note on Reavers - they are actually quite common now Ben. Seen a lot of lists with them, and as you may have guessed from the Britcon thread many Orks love their great Gargants
Still no-one loves warlords though

And changing the metagame too much is also a risk - see my point above.

_________________
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

4000pt lists are different to 3000pt lists, of course.

Still no-one loves warlords though

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

OK Ben, what do you see as the changes for the various lists to cope with the prospect of the current AMTL list? How much of the list changes and how much do you think becomes a predictable part? (Like say 2 warhounds currently are in Imperial lists.)

Or to put it a different way what do you think a list could have to beat the sorts of titan lists I am currently favouring and still be able to take on a horde, an air assault/drop and a manoeuvre army (not to mention the other styles)? (Siegers don't count as the answer is generally more artillery! ).

_________________
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

Eldar might find Cobras and Scorpions more attractive.
Marines might find Reavers and Warlords more attractive.
IG might find Shadowswords and Deathstrikes more attractive.
Orks might find Zzaps more attractive.
etc.

All armies lose a bit of AP, gain a bit of AT, and the status quo shifts but the game remains balanced. That's the theory of how a metagame shifts in a tournament setting anyway.

Give it a year of tournament gaming with *any* new list that adds something new to the mix (instead of just being another Marine variant, etc), and the metagame will change be it slightly or greatly. It's an inevitable part of games development.


Or to put it a different way what do you think a list could have to beat the sorts of titan lists I am currently favouring and still be able to take on a horde, an air assault/drop and a manoeuvre army

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

E&C, I think you are only partially correct.

As more armies become official, each with their particular styles, strengths and weaknesses, there will be a tendency to shift away from adopting lists that play against particular enemy traits towards those lists that play up the strengths of the army (my latest Eldar list would be an example of this).

'Balance' then becomes a question of how far a given list plays outside the 'norm' for E:A as a whole. Put another way, it is one thing to say that every race can build a list to win against particular races, but the question is rather whether a 'standard' list can do reasonably well in 'average' hands.

(Note Dave Thomas seems to be able to make the most of his apparently quite 'ordinary' lists, but then he is the 'Stig' of the E:A tournaments, at least as far as the UK is concerned)

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

I agree, that long-term the metagame becomes more stable.

But the introduction of the AMTL is a big change, and it will undoubtedly affect the metagame of list building.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

without derailing the thread completly, i would like to referece the edition shift of 4th edition to 5th in WH40K. in general, plasma ruled in 4th, due to the lack of cover saveds, the raw power of plasma pistols, guns and cannons were very VERY common. 5th came along, made vehicles harder to kill, and introduced a streamlined cover save system. the plasmagun now took a backseat to the melta gun, dealing with the meta change of more vehicles on the board and caring less about high volume AP 2 weapons in favor of more AT.

i think adding the AMTL offically to the docket doesnt break anything, it just changes things and will make people adapt to changes.

- - and that is the point. For example the Marines were considered pretty balanced against the original races, but as further lists were introduced they became less able to compete - and their lists have become rather one-dimensional as a result. While the Eldar have been toned down to compensate, there is still an element of power 'creep' in most other new races which is almost inevitable given the circumstances.

However we achieve it, I think we all agree that the AMTL list will need some form of constraint to 'encourage' people to build lists that are reasonably 'balanced', while allowing as wide a range of possible formation and weapon choices.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Aye 40k is a good example because the meta game changes always tend to be huge.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Also note that this metagame discussion in no way implies I don't take your comments about the balance of the AMTL army list seriously... it's just that I also consider the future Metagame, and know that an overstep now will result in a very weak list then.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

i can also see that jumping into a large change now could tailspin the list if its not handled carefully. what would be a good way to balance battle titans countign as BTS goals against armies that are "less capable" of dealing with titans?

Pretty much any army out there, even Feral Orks, can bring down a Titan if they put their mind to it.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter