I might want Warlords to be more desirable. I definitely don't want them to be obligatory.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

I don't want warlords to be obligatory either. I think the goal is to make warlords a bit more attractive than cheap reavers.

_________________
-Vaaish

has cutting points for warlords been tossed out already?

1/3 points max on Warhounds is slightly less restrictive than a maximum of 1 Warhound per Battle Titan in common lists (Allows 4 Warhounds vs 3).

Restricting Warhounds to packs in addition forces 2 or 4 and puts the maximum Titan Activations to 5 (3 Battle Titans, 2 Warhound Packs). The 1/3 limit would remove 2 Battle Titan, 3 Warhound pack lists.

I've got no idea what people are looking for.

I think either one of 1/3 point limit on warhounds or Max 1 Warhound per Battle Titan would be enough to stop hordes of Warhounds.

All Reavers and no Warlords should be an option. In a game where activations are crucial the cheaper Titan will always win unless there is a compelling reason and spare points to buy the expensive one.

How about a Warlord or Emperor gets a free veteran princeps? You have to pay to get it in a Reaver. It'll encourage at least one Warlord.

would a double void shield regen for warlords per end phase be a incentive ?  to strong ?  not strong enough ?  just a bad idea  ?  lol

Yet another warlord idea is it remains at its discounted state while the reaver goes to 625/650 with the pre paid weapon ideas. That still doesn't get around the horde of hulls idea though and the fact in an activation based game the cheaper build wins.

One idea to go back to is one of the version ones with free/cheap robotic sentries and more expensive Titans. Again partly finishes off 'free' weapons on battle titans as a main weapon system but then the limited number of Titan activations doesn't kill the game. So something like 1+ warlord, for every warlord 1 reaver and 1 warhound pack/single and for every battle titan one lot of sentries (the old idea was they were move zero, cc zero, with twin heavy weapons and could drop off battle titans as transported troops. So an all titan list would be say 2 warlord, 1 reaver, 1 pack, 1 single, 3 tarantula. If you wanted more activations/speed you then dip into the AM support options we currently have.

_________________
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

thats a fairly restrictive list enforcement though, it barely offers any freedom of design to the player which i think tales alot of the joy away from making your own armies.

That was always the case with titans though, hence all the effort into a weapon selection system. Here the restrictions mostly come from the number of Warlords you have.

And you can't tell me the ability to take all Reavers in an army is 'design freedom', since thats the biggest difference. Thats just upping your activations.

_________________
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

fewer activations was always going to be a issue with this list and more so in a game based around activations, and to add to that your only really ever fielding a partial AMTL list as you never play enough points in a game to get the true feel of fielding a full "Army" per say, so that only fuels the lack of activations.
Hence the birth of the warhound pack lists etc and people just trying to generate  more activations.
As i see it theres 2 solutions int he big picture with out getting into actual details of whats better or such and what needs to change, but i see it as

1 : points mmodifications to make it more enticing to take a mixed battlegroup

2 : Add some smaller support units to the list so people can boost there activations  by 1-3  or so and then think about putting in titan purchasing restrictions.


just food for thought.


Tim NZ

I think sentinels and Forge Knights are fitting to a titan force as smaller units that can be taken.

_________________
-Vaaish

yeah, if i was to run something besides titans in the list, that is if i HAD too, it would be knights and sentinels.

Sentinels are already in there not strictly because they're an AMTL force, but as a scout and cheap activation.

Ie: They're alredy what's being requested.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Yes, I guess I should have been more clear in my post, I like taking sentinels and forge knights as support. they seem to fit within the idea of an entirely titan force despite being somewhat less imposing than their larger cousins. Sentinels because of the screening they provide, and forge knights with their place as lesser titans and somewhat cheaper activations and large numbers letting you hold a good swath of territory single titans can't usually pull off.

That said, I think it would be nice if there was a 200 point knight titan formation to have a nice range from 100 for the sentinels to 500 for a warhound pack.

_________________
-Vaaish

In addition to activations though you have warlords vs reavers, they should be a equal choice, not reavers out of nessitity.

_________________
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

So making Warlords cheaper or their weapons isn't a good idea? It was already stated that the titans don't have to cost the same as in the Space Marines and Imperial Guard armylists (there could be an appendix with points costs for allied Titans with weapon options for friendly games).

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/