I*am*Salvation: How are you finding the current rule?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Just perfect!
It´s a real drawback and this is what a all Titanforce just needs imho!

_________________
www.ttc-cosmophobia.de

It too great of a drawback. You basically can take 6 activations in a 3k game unless you popcorn. That;s six activations to hold objectives of which two or three will likely be battle titans.  You saying it's completely balanced for an army that can easily drop a battle titan to instantly receive BTS while armies that struggle with it are left out in the cold. If AMTL needs a real drawback it should be one any army facing it can benefit from.

Now, one BM might be too few, but it's a starting point. Personally I'd like to to be given if ANY titan is destroyed, not just battle titans and perhaps make it give BM equal to 1/3 the titans starting DC to all units in LOS. That means greater reward for killing larger titans and a means to weaken larger titans by taking down smaller ones.

_________________
-Vaaish

We are talking about balance for Tournaments, right?

It´s just ok to let this list have better chances against some list and lower it chances against other Lists imho.

A Titan Legion will allways have hard Days against Popcorning/High TK Amount Armies, while crushing Armies that don´t wield any TK Weapons/ great amount of MW/AT Fire.

I don´t think you will ever change this... it´s just a Fact of the Game as it stands, it´s for a reason that some Weapons are labled Titan Killer

_________________
www.ttc-cosmophobia.de

Kill any battle titan BTS rule also limits the effectiveness of the Emperor titans as nigh unkillable BTS goals.

If it's too harsh then why not consider these.
1) Standard BTS rules apply until turn X, then this rule kicks in (Turn 4 probably). Give the titans a chance to go for a quick win but are less effective in a protracted battle.
2) BTS can be achieved by killing either of the 2 most expensive formations/Titans. Warlords are still preferable but some of the cheaper Reavers could be used more aggressively.
3) In addition to normal BTS goal you can also achieve it through cumulative damage by removing at least half the DC from the sum of all Battle Titans. 1 Warlord and 2 Reavers has 20DC total, BTS requires you to kill the Warlord or remove at least 10DC in total from those 3 titans.

I like this half DC BTS rule arkturas is proposing. It seems fluffy to me and it would limit over aggressive play regardeless of army composition. So armys that have few TK weapons can focus on destroying warhounds and by killing enough of them would be able to achieve BTS.

If there are still options to explore, I don't see this as ideal. The goal should be balance against whatever army you face not just aggregate balance over the course of the tournament which makes the list no fun to play because the outcome was decided before the game began. Your army is weak against mine, so sorry, but hey, I can't beat X army either so it's all good doesn't seem like a very fun way to play.

@Arkturas:
Your second one is interesting, but I think the third one is too complex. Whatever comes of this should be simple to track.

_________________
-Vaaish

Ballance is illusary; there'll always be an element of scissors/paper/stone - the key is to reduce it as much as possible without compromising the list.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Zombocom: I was just about to post some words spoken by Jervis saying much the same thing... but then you ninja'd me.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I don´t think that arkturas´ third proposal is too complex. IIRC Nids have something similar with their synapse creatures. Just add up DC at the start of the battle and then add up DC left. Really not that complex. I like it.

Point taken on balance.
Grim:
In this case, complex means more paperwork. You have two separate paths to BTS plus having to track the DC totals and individual DC remaining which I think is unnecessarily time consuming for TL. It also doesn't make sense to me that BTS could be achieved without losing any units. If the rule is based on the idea that the Titan Legions are greatly effected by the loss of a titan, why is it the BTS could be gained without actually losing a titan under the proposal.

I don't think the answer is to make the BTS easier to get against AMTL, Instead I think that the God Machines rule should be used to affect the performance of the AMTL army.

Perhaps along those lines, the God Machines rule could read that because the supreme confidence in the invincibility of their machines, Titan units that are not broken may not rally in the end phase and the loss of any titan formation generates a BM on all remaining formations.

_________________
-Vaaish

I agree with these statements.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

I was under the impression that the soppy Admech priests would be weeping while the other Titan units would be pissed off.

But this harsh because of one titan?  I'm either behind times on background, or you're pushing the balance way too hard just to make it more friendly for people who doesn't play this list.

Thank god I haven't spent any money yet.

Hm..I dont see that many bookeeping by counting DC but I take your point that achieving BTS without actually loosing a Titan feels wrong.

Based on the Taros campaign where the Advensus Primaris was destroyed by Tau tigersharks and the remaining warhounds retreated.

_________________
-Vaaish