Oh, I should add that the changing of the CLP to CLP/Relay and moving it into an upgrade also makes the triple AML reaver a viable build again, especially if you change the AML to gain Disrupt (but remain at 3bp) which was supposed to be on my list of overall tweaks.
a 9bp 120cm disrupt shot on a reaver is a pretty decent build at 675. as a budget artillery support titan (for when one doesnt want to spend 1k on a quakelord) it's a pretty solid choice, and between its increased mobility and range, I'd be much more willing to advance it across the table while laying down supporting fire than currently would be the case

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

Ok to the loss of indirect. I would limit it to just warhounds. The reason is because warhounds are smaller and form a weak link that an enemy can exploit, are physically smaller and more likely to have LOF blocked unless they maneuver, and it prevents an arty titan from basically providing templates wherever it wants. With the restriction to just scout titans, a player has to at least support a battle titan with a scout if he wants to drop "arty".



The ancient thread on the Quake I can find don't seem to indicate it was balanced around the CLP idea. Your more in depth analysis also makes me wonder if the range boost would be too much. For now lets leave this as no range increase and see how it plays and adjust as needed.




This was already part of 3.21



This won't happen. The CLP is a physical model and should take a physical slot on the titan. Doing so also handily kills the idea of triple quake Reavers or even quad quake warlords.



This also won't happen. It's there to make specialized titans cost a bit more due to their efficiency.



OK, I'm on the fence with this one. Yes, it does get titans over the centerline to prevent them from losing VP. But in doing so it also makes DTF and TSNP highly undesirable victory conditions as well as somewhat ironically making it less desirable to defend the blitz with a titan and nothing really to use in place of it.


There's always something that a list relies on and I think the warhound is self limiting.

_________________
-Vaaish

It also increases the cost of an arty titan by 300 points. given the pretty massive reduction in the CLP/Relay capabilities, thats a huge cost spike.
No more "Triple Warlord" lists :(



the current Arty build gains benefits from sustaining in 3 ways.
First and foremost, the increase in range. doubling the range on a weapon has a massive increase in target selection opportunities, allowing the selection of an advantageous target and one vulnerable to the type of firepower present (shooting a AML at a terminator formation is a fairly wasteful shot, shooting it at the tactical+hunter formation standing next to landspeeders is a much better one)
a close second is the +1 to hit, which allows for a much improved chance of success due to the limits of the barrage table and BP increases.
a very distant third is the ability to shoot over buildings. The Titan chassis has an easy time seeing over lots of terrain to begin with, so this ability is of less value than say, basalisks who like to hide behind a forest or some buildings. I've played games where there has been virtually nothing on the table out of LOS for my warlord (though I always try to include some warlord sized terrain to avoid this)

Without any range boost, the chance of needing the LOS adjustment drastically decreases, especially if you need to move anyway. if you are moving, its much easier to get LOS than if you're forced to stand still. when you factor in the loss of a weapon, the CLP/Relay becomes a terrible choice. Without some sort of a range or accuracy boost, it's very hard to justify taking a CLP/Relay over a free PBG

even if the initial building of the Quake was not dependant on the CLP range increase, certainly almost all testing of it since has been. the fact that it wasnt nerfed in the meantime suggests that the problem was not a big one, and that a degree of balance was intended within the range increase.



I don't have a problem with everything in 3.21. some of them are good ideas, but the bad idea totally overwhelms any positive impact the good ones had.



It also largely kills the tripleAML reaver. That said, providing disrupt to the AML would give a benefit sufficient that a playstyle change might let it still work. I've never used the AML Reaver as an assault build.



By "Specialised" you mean artillery, and maybe optimised warhounds. a Tankhunter reaver is entirely capable of taking a mix of Lasblasters and Turbolasers to bypass the surcharge. Infact, I demonstrated some pretty hinky points mechanics using those two in another thread a while back. Likewise, a Pure Plasma titan has several options to choose from. The only time when a titan needs to worry about pure builds are when they're taking Barrage weapons (since they have to combine, so any "I'll just take a more powerful or less barrage weapon to fill the final slot" has a massive impact on the loss of special rules or range) or if their weapon list is so restrictive as to not have two similar role weapons availble. Dual Inferno Warhounds are quite decent, but not, I think, problematically so. Likewise, twin TLD warhounds arent too disruptive. Certainly the 3rd AML is not worth twice as much as the 2nd to a Reaver.
In addition, this dropping in surcharge was suggested as the "make titans a bit cheaper since they're apparently going to suck at defence now" boost. allow titans a degree of specialisation, and you're helping




well, it doesnt actually make DTF/TSNP undesirable, so much as it means you have to be damn sure you're going to win on victory conditions. it provides no direct impact on any game where the victory was determined via the 5 conditions, loss or win. It only comes in when a draw occurs, at which point it penalises any AMTL player who attempted the proposed "problem" strategy.
Defend the blitz, sure, but only if you're sure you're going to win, or if you're going to lose anyway. If the outcome is in doubt, get stuck into the enemy and make every titan count.



the AMTL list has plenty of limiting factors. the high price of core factions, the lack of large size formations and the general lack of overlapping fire are all limiting factors, the list already relies on titans in general. But I'm ok with testing using only warhounds.

but without a range benefit, the CLP/Relay isnt worth any points or weapon slots. take the Quake Cannon. at 90cm, it's got a decent range. If you advance up the table a bit, you can cover a decent chunk of higher value real estate. But LOS isnt a huge concern, so long as you can see atleast part of the target, you can place your first template, then all future templates can be completely out of sight. So why would you decrease your firepower, and dedicate a 300 point unit to do what can be achieved with a bit of movement?
without a range increase, the artillery functions of the titan are basically gone. Basalisks are the default artillery weapon in the game, and they have 90cm in direct fire (same as a quake) but will almost always fire at greater range using indirect.
The combination of "ability to move at a loss of accuracy" and "some range increase and LOS ability in exchange for requiring a combined arms and the loss of 1/3rd or 1/4th of your firepower" is the only way the CLP/Relay remains viable without reverting to a "stand and shoot" style.
Why take a CLP/Relay at all if it costs you a weapon when you would almost always be in a position to use those weapons anyway? why take an AML at all when you could take a newly improved Gattling Blaster, which has the same range, a better to hit vs tanks, and a reliable 6 shots instead of a number that degrades the better your previous shooting had been?

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

You are basing that on the assumption that scout titans are only taken to aid the CLP. If you are already taking scout titans (and most folks are) the effective cost increase is zero within the list. Aiding the CLP is only a small part of the Scout titan value here.

Triple warlord lists aren't all that common to begin with, buuut.... You can still fit in 3 warlords, 1 warhound, and a thunderbolt squadron into a 3k list.



The Triple AML reaver was never possible with the CLP to begin with so nothing changes. More concerning was the prospect of effectively indirect fire "cheap" arty titans with the same "indirect" strength as the current triple quake warlord.



The surcharge only comes into play if you take all of the same weapon type. Taking the CLP to make an arty titan under the current list prevents the surcharge. The surcharge still affects efficiency even if you used weapons in the same family. You are still boosting the cost of the titan by 25 points more than what I'd wager most people would like




Apples and oranges. An arty coy degrades pretty rapidly when they take fire and they don't get MW shots. They also aren't tall enough to see over obstacles a warlord can ignore to direct fire on a target.



There's still lots of use for it, just not the easy i'll wait here and plonk down templates. I don't know what kind of terrain you play on, but we use a lot of building ruins that block LOF quite handily. Same for hills and forests. Even other WE block LOF. The Warhound has the speed to flank these obstacles and establish LOF for a CLP/Relay equipped titan that still has good value for the slot. Yes, it does mean that the AML will probably never be taken for artillery, but it's got Disrupt now which makes it good at breaking formations more than killing them.

_________________
-Vaaish

if i was advocating a straight switch to upgrade, without also a corresponding drop in utility, then yes, you'd be able to get a reaver with the same current firepower of the quakelord. but it'd still be easier to break, easier to kill, and easier to punch with power fists. But I'm not. a Triplequake Reaver whose shots only extend 90cm and requires a scout titan in LOS of the target is not nearly as fearsome as the current Quakelord is. I would go so far as to say significantly less than 200 points less fearsome, which would be the point difference between the two.



not really, as that price boost comes with a corresponding boost in performance (except in artillery, where there is little to no boost in performance)
Example: Tank Hunting Reaver.
Option 1a: 2 TLD, 1 LBlaster. Cost is 675, fires 14 AP5+/AT3+ shots at 60cm
Option 1b: 3 TLD. Cost is still 675, fires 12 AP5+/AT3+ shots at 60cm
Option 2a: 2 LBlaster, 1 TLD. Cost is 700, fires 16 AP5+/AT3+ shots at 60cm
Option 2b: 3 LBlaster. Cost is 750, fires 18 AP5+/AT3+ shots at 60cm

option A is a better value in both occasions. and the price between 1a and 2a, 2 extra shots is worth 25 points. but between 2a and 2b, those two shots are worth 50 points.

If you give people the option between taking a 25 point "it just costs more" or a 25 point "this weapon is a better choice" option, they'll take the one that comes with a benefit.

the equivalent option for barrage titans is the CLP. as it stands, it's a free upgrade, instead of a 25 point one, and while it doesnt directly improve the quality of the firepower, it does provide a set of situations where optimal fire takes place at double range (which is an exponential increase in target possibilities) and avoids LOS
if you change the CLP to only allow the LOS portion of the equasion, and only at specific intervals, it will become a terrible choice.




Thats my point! a warlord has less use for LOS adjustment than a basalisk, and yet even then, the most used part of a basalisk is the ability to fire at ranges greater than 90cm.

If the CLP/Relay provided reduced effectiveness LOS only, with no other benefit, it would not be worth 1/3rd of a reaver, or 1/4th of a warlord. Those LOS benefits are minor. its the range from the indirect fire rule that really matters, that really impacts on the titans capabilies, and that makes up for the corresponding lack of firepower.
a Warlord with 3 quakes and a CLP can currently stand on the blitz, and comfortably hit a pretty decent portion of the enemy deployment zone. a warlord with 3 quakes and a CLP/Relay under your proposed rule would need to deploy 15cm forwards from the backline, directly opposite the target, and still advance in order to be able to hit an enemy unit that deploys on its own forward line. that is a terrible drop in force projection even without the LOS considerations.

Having done the maths, I actually think the +30cm range thing is too short, and should actually be 45cm (this means an AML is 15cm shorter range than before, but due to the ability to move, now has the same or higher threat range on an advance, while the quakelord has lost 45cm range, which is a sizable footprint reduction)
a 0cm range reduction means the CLP/Relay is pretty much useless. While I can think of games I've played with scenery dense enough to justify its use, those are few and far between, and I cannot think of any tournament I've attended where the mix of tables has been high enough to justify its inclusion in any titan when a direct fire build would not have been more beneficial on the majority of encounters.

Without a range boost of some sort to the CLP/Relay, your original (and to my mind, intolerable) CLP proposal is less harmful to the state of the CLP warlord. maybe thats the plan. but this "no artillery, CLP, or quake in my titan list" policy is not a good one.



No, there's really not. Titans arent that fast. Without range, the chance of a titan getting to use it's new CLP/Relay is quite small. certainly it's not likely to do so on turn 1, without the ability to project force onto the opponents side of the board, the titan will be forced into a defensive posture, waiting for the enemy to come into range themselves. this means a more defensive deployment of objectives and units, and a more defensive playstyle.

Obviously, if you provide too much range, and LOS ignoringness, you get a situation like now, when the quakelord stands still and shoots (though again, you tell the AMTL player "you can do that, but you'll give your opponent 500VP for doing so" and they'll damn sure think twice) but if you drop everythings range down to the minimum, there's no reason to take an upgrade that might help you for one or two turns in one in five games, compared to a gun that will help in basically every turn past the first, in every game you play.

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

You're exaggerating considerably if you think it would only be useful for one turn in every five games. Please remember that "minimum" in the context of what folks are using (quakelord) is still 1/2 to 1/3 of the table. That something might not be effective is a risk you run for anything. You take CML and don't face air, or you take a CCW and no one assaults? Why should an arty titan be guaranteed full effectiveness when the only real threat is failing to activate?


Bottom line: You have a good idea with using Warhound LOS and I'm willing to give it a go or at least let the community vote between the eUK solution, Armigers, and this. What isn't going to happen is a range boost.

If you are utterly convinced that a range of more than half the board is necessary for the CLP to function, play some games and tell us what happens. Yes it's going to affect how you deploy and how you play, but different isn't always bad.

_________________
-Vaaish

suggesting I still have "range of more than half the board" is underselling the changes quite a bit

a standard 4 foot by 6 foot board is 122cm by 183cm

Lets assume a standard deployment
Quakelord deploys directly it's blitz. lets say its on a smallish base, and is thus 4cm onto the table.
Current setup, the Quakelord can sit and sustain. it has a 90 degree firearc at 9BP, or a 180 degree one at 6BP (as a note, reavers get the 180 by default, and your current CLP proposale also forces the Quakelord into the 6BP 180 setup, as both carapace slots are filled with CLP, leaving the arms free)
now, as it currently stands, the Quakelord has a 180cm range on the table, which means it can hit anything on its arc. It could sit in one corner, and have its 90 degree arc cover the entire table except for the 3cm edge (which corresponds with the size of the titan anyway) except that then there's this big gap on the opposite corner that is no good.
A canny player will probably make an AMTL player play corners for just such a reason (plus it makes it a longer slog to get to their blitz, which for titans, pretty much means "wont ever get to blitz" but for now lets ignore corners. I dislike playing that way to begin with, so my experience with them is limited


a 90cm range, however, is much less than this. and because each cm you add outwards to a radius increases the size more than the one before, the second 90cm is much much larger than the first (there's some sort of nifty mathematical forumula for this, something about pies, maths is hard, but its a big number)
here's a little diagram or two
The rings are 60cm, 90cm, 120cm, and 180cm
The lines are Fire Arcs
First Diagram is Standard Deployment, with the Artillery standing straight in the centre of the table

so, a Quake Cannon can at this stage, shoot 90cm, so the second ring, in the central segment if a Carapace mount is involved at any point in the barrage, or the full segment if only arm weapons are used.
You'll note that it is possible, if you deploy 15cm forward, and advance, to hit an enemy deployment if they are directly in front of you. but otherwise, you're pretty unlikely to do so, and are mostly waiting till your opponent comes to you.
The AML is currently the first ring. which is pretty puny, and cannot hit diddly squat for the first turn of the game on less than a double, where it can hit the first 5cm of deployment, assuming it deploys as far forwards as it can, and moves in a straight line
the third ring is a pretty healthy segment of the board. It's the range an AML with CLP can currently hit (again, central segments for any carapace mounts, all segments for arm only)
It's also the area proposed by me for the new CLP/Relay Quake. (again, remember that the central segments only will be applicable to a full barage for the warlord
the final ring is invisble. thats the current QuakeLord setup. at 6BP, it can hit anywhere on the table. It's also, incidentally, the range an artillery company can hit. yes, yes, artillery are generally easier to degrade (not really, I'll note, the Ironwarriors Ordinatus though) also note that artillery do not have fixed arcs, and can infact shoot whereever the hell they want)

Second, Is standing in the far left corner

You'll note here, that the three inner rings are covering a minor part of the board. This is the same area as they were in the previous diagram, it just looks less, because the outter "arm only" ring has gone)
You'll also note that the 4th ring is finally visible, and here, even a current quakelord cannot hit everywhere, though it comes close (and clever deployment would suggest moving to the right far enough to clip the entire deployment, and if everything pushes into the channel you've now abandoned on the left, redeploy)

that is not that scary. not for a thousand points.
and I'm proposing the 3rd ring is the safe point.
at 120cm, i have Half The Board, at 90cm, I have about 1/3rd if we're being generous

as to the 1 or 2 turns in 5 games, no, not really. if I was to attend a tournament of 5 games, one on each of 5 different tables. in my experience, about 1 of those tables would contain enough Warlord Sized Terrain to seriously hamper my ability to direct fire. Certainly others, quite probably all 4 others, will have some terrain, but not a lot. not enough to sacrifice a free PBG for instance.
So, one game out of 5 the LOS ability of Indirect will be useful enough to outweigh the loss of weaponry it represents.
In that game, there's a good chance atleast one turn, maybe two my titan will be unable or not need to fire indirectly anyway, due to fire arcs, scouts preventing a sustain, a broken titan, or just because the best target for me is in the open. that leaves one or two turns when it will be optimally useful.
now sure, the PBG might be of limited use, hell, it pretty certainly will be, a turn or two out of every game, but thats still 10 turns worth of fire (and the slow firing means I'm likely to get minimum impact out of some of those missed turns, since i'll be recharging anyway) vs 2
and for those 2 turns, when the CLP would be really useful, I'll probably have an alternate target anyway.

when you halve the range at which I can use that CLP, the chance that LOS will be a problem drops with it. now there's a roughly 1 in 20 chance it'll make the difference worth losing a weapon. Worse, now that I also need a functional warhound in position
do you regularly build your lists around a 1 in 20 shot?

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

Quake Cannons indirect firing to 180cm NEVER sat well with me. Right from the start I always visualised the Quake Cannon as direct firing but with Ignore Cover. For me it is ultimate bunker buster.

Likewise the artillery titan FOR ME, was always the Triple MRL Reaver (or quad MRL Warlord), which for some reason we now know as the AML. Even taking EA rulebook stats of Rocket Launcher, that still means 120cm range when Indirect Firing.

Not this is personal opinion, not backed up by playtesting, and therefore one you can disregard. But would adding Ignore Cover balance out the loss of Indirect Fire for Quake Cannon?

_________________
My TOEG- Blood Angels and Deathbolts
My Painting Blog- Evil Sunz, Goffs
My Epic trades list

That would be nice yes! Really scary weapon then though, maybe too good?

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

But crucially without Indirect Fire, it would only have 90cm range. Not enough to sit on the blitz and target units 180cm away. But would be a more dynamic option, which Vaaish seemed to want.

Plus if Quake Cannon was direct only, then Titans with MRL/AML would be more worth taking. If someone wanted an artillery titan they could still have one. But one WITHOUT MW and with ONLY 120cm range- still pretty useful but not the near auto-include that current Quake Cannon is.

To me that is a simpler change than the one that Vaaish seems to want to push through.

_________________
My TOEG- Blood Angels and Deathbolts
My Painting Blog- Evil Sunz, Goffs
My Epic trades list

Yes for sure! Alot of suggestions have been pretty good and not too complicated. Hopefully they won't be discarded like other opinions and suggestions...

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

MW barrages with Ignore Cover won't happen. It was floated years ago and if you look in the change log in the AMTL list, you can see it was removed too. I believe that it was shown that ignore cover with MW barrages was too good.

_________________
-Vaaish

Look, JTG, there won't be a range increase unless testing shows the list as a whole, not just your preferred playstyle, needs it. Your diagrams show a scary amount of coverage for one titan with hardly any downside. Its not something that can continue in the list. If you want that coverage, take a support missile.

I'll set up a poll for the three directions for the CLP and see where that takes us.

_________________
-Vaaish

Was this with 180cm range Indirect Fire??

_________________
My TOEG- Blood Angels and Deathbolts
My Painting Blog- Evil Sunz, Goffs
My Epic trades list

I'm assuming the indirect fire/range (& possibly sustained fire +1 to hit) combo is the issue, otherwise the Chaos Decimator Siege Tank has some 'splaining to do, Lucy

_________________
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/armiger84/?hl=en

My General Modelling Blog: http://armiger84.blogspot.com/