To be honest, I don't think this list represents only things that are particularly associated with AMTL.

They Shall Not Pass is hard to acheive regardless of the opposing army, as is Defend the Flag (obviously they are related).

Blizt objectives tend to be a wash (both sides face the same difficulty).

That really just leaves BTS when playing against, which kind of indicates to me that maybe the the suggested change (are at least a change along those lines) is a good area to investigate.

The whole idea of using a different set of victory objectives would be an interesting discussion to have, though, if someone wanted to make an all-battle titan army list.

What set of objectives would allow a list with 3-5 activations to have a chance to win, but still be equivalent to the chance that the opposing army would have?

Emphasis on 'A' titan. The question raised by this thread (and indeed the poll) is effectively how many titans is one too many? The Chaos lists went through exactly the same stage with its hordes of Decimators (also raised by TRC).

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

From that comment I take it you find a blitz objective covered by along range warlord with a close combat weapon an equal challenge to a few whirlwinds, rallied remnants of broken units or an artillery park? What do you normally cover the blitz with?

That really just leaves BTS when playing against, which kind of indicates to me that maybe the the suggested change (are at least a change along those lines) is a good area to investigate.

_________________
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

Well, with space marines, I don't usually try to hold my blitz, just contest it. It doesn't usually work against hoard armies, which can keep me out of the 15 cm range simply by swamping the area with ZoCs, but with AMTL a pair of Warhounds can't really block a lone assault marine stand (typical remnant) moving to contest late in a turn.

Of course, that keeps me from achieving Defend the Flag and None Shall Pass, but that's a different topic. Also, I'm not saying I tend to be successful vs AMTL (at least not the type of list that you are testing) because I am a terrible player.

In any case, I was just pointing out that while an AMTL force  may make it hard for an opponent to achieve the blitz, the AMTL has their own difficulties to achieve their blitz objective.

Now to change the subject:

Hey, here's a crazy idea...

Instead of the modified BTS rule...

Just make a rule that states...

An AMTL list must win by objectives.
Victory points don't matter against AMTL, only objectives. Fighting to a draw is enough of a challenge, so if an AMTL force cannot achieve victory through objectives, then they do not win the game. (Exception: when 2 AMTL forces face each other, victory point may be used to determine a winner).

I dunno, too radical?

Would be different. However would lead to a lot of boring games
Would also mean you have to pretty much have a charging army as you will in practice need the enemy Blitz. The enemy though could just hide the army and send forth as little as possible!

_________________
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

My earlier comments on not using the tournament scenario as a primary balancing tool as commented on by Chroma and TRC didn't quite come across as intended. Of course the list has to be balanced for the tournament scenario and that is a main goal of any finalised list.

What I was getting at is more inline with E&C's comments on the 'metagame'. TRC's game using a tournament winning Marine list against AMTL is a good gauge of how the list is progressing but cannot be considered as one of the best designed lists because AMTL weren't in that tournament. Introducing AMTL to a tournament will change the underlining list design under the assumption they can be changed. It's a question of which armies have the capabilities to change without unduly hurting the armies ability to deal with other armies.

I think what would really be needed is to get the AMTL list into a number of tournaments with the best players and see where the army list design settles and which armies are doing better or worse. However I think that will only happen after the list is locked down, something of a chicken and egg situation.

I have another variant proposal for the BTS goal. Depending on what people think it would either be based on any battle titan destroyed or automatic. The difference being it is only given from a certain turn onwards (Probably Turn 4) with the standard BTS goal still available. So you can get the BTS goal from turn 1 by taking out the most expensive titan or get it automatically/when any battle titan is destroyed from turn 4. Gives an option for the Titans to go out aggresively to win on objectives or play cautiously for a long game.