The ability to count it up is not the issue. The issue is whether it adds to or detracts from fun.

So, what is the net balance of fun to the game if you add this rule? Will reducing the effect of objective camping via this rule increases fun more than the fiddliness of the rule itself decreases it?

I'm not coming down on one side or the other, just helping frame the debate as I see it.

I'd say it would increase fun. They do something that feels kind of immersion-breaking and unfun, you get to win on a technicality.

Of course, it depends on how vindictive you are whether that's fun.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

I wouldn't have though it's that hard to work out, just off the top of my head warlords are worth approx 108pts/DC, reavers are approx 109pts/DC and warhounds are 83pts/DC for packs, 91pts/DC for singles (for basic configurations)

Failing that, just shoot the biggest thing with the fanciest weapons on it

Which, given the numbers above, couldn't you just go with 100pts per DC, or all if destroyed?

I don't mind math, but simplifying it when it's apparently so close, just seems like it's a win.

Can even be fluff argued. A savaged Warhound (reduced to 1DC) is worth more as a percentage of it's cost, because of what it'd take to put it back on the field. A Warlord/Reaver that survives on 1DC is worth less as a percentage because of the status they hold amongst the Mechanicus.

Think of it like cars. A Warhound is a an asian import. If it's received enough damage, it's just written off. Whereas a Warlord is a classic car of your choice. As long as it can still run, it's worth putting back together.

Morgan Vening

seriously, fine, if everyone's super cool with working out cost per DC on every titan, writing it down, then using that to choose what titans to shoot at on the 4th turn, I'll shut my crawhole. It just seems a niggardly, fiddly, micromanaging way of sorting out a game issue that's more in line with the game slowing rules of Space Marine, but if that's what people want, and they do generally seem overwhelmingly keen on it, then knock yourself out. I'm clearly the lone one out here.

I would prefer a simpler method if possible or a means to fix the draw issue without having to delve into mathematics

_________________
-Vaaish

100pts per lost dc is an interesting idea.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Whatever the point value, this sounds much easier than the previous proposals.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Heh, well, there is that...

If it applies to warhounds, would it be 100/dc only for damaged titans? Or would warhounds then be 300vp no matter how many points they cost?

I like 100pt/DC too. It's reasonably close to the base cost/DC, and eliminates any confusion.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

+1 from me.
An elegant, simple solution that no one can call complicated!

*Edit - It's certainly not fun do 7 DC damage to a Warlord, which then rallies on the final turn of the game and basically gives you no reward for all that effort.

_________________
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.

It'd be 100pts per dc, or full points if you kill the Titan outright.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Sounds good to me!

I take it that the rule would make mention of superceding the current unbroken & below 50% DC = 50% VPs rule, it'd be quite nasty to get more than the Titans worth in VPs. You've probably already thought of this so sorry for being pedantic.