Alrighty, let me start by saying that the current AMTL list is good, especially compared to the previous iterations.

However, there are apparently some combos that are more than competitive, both with min/maxxed weapons on individual titans, and with certain formations taken together.

So, as all the other threads on this topic indicate, there are many ways to address the issue. Let me share one that may be the simplest:

Taking the 3.15 list as is, adjust the weapon and titan base point costs to the following:

245 pts - Warhound base cost
15 pts  -  Inferno Gun
15 pts  -  Vulcan Megabolter
15 pts  -  Plasma Blastgun
30 pts  -  Turbolaser Destructor


560 pts - Reaver base cost
710 pts - Warlord base cost

15 pts  -  Inferno Gun
15 pts  -  Vulcan Megabolter
15 pts  -  Plasma Blastgun
30 pts  -  Turbolaser Destructor

15 pts  -  Laser Burner
15 pts  -  Corvus Pod
15 pts  -  Landing Pad
30 pts  -  Titan CCW
30 pts  -  Plasma Cannon
30 pts  -  Gatling Blaster
30 pts  -  Rocket Launcher
50 pts  -  Melta Cannon (no change)
50 pts  -  Laser Blaster (no change)
50 pts  -  Volcano Cannon (no change)
75 pts  -  Plasma Destructor (no change)
75 pts  -  Support Missile (no change)
75 pts  -  Quake Cannon (no change)

Okay, so this idea really is half-baked, in that I haven't done a proper numerical analysis of what the overall result would be, but...

I just wanted to show that if we leave behind the idea that everything has to be in 25 pt increments, a significant amount of internal balance can be achieved while maitaining parity with titans already allowed in game. Heck, I would bet that a full analysis would produce a distinct value for each weapon. That's not a bad thing.

OR

Just let this post drop off the page. If this is a bad idea not worth discussion, I can handle it. I certainly don't want to distract from forward progress.

This is the sort of suggestion that I prefer of all the options. Simple no complex special rules for weapon configurations or free weapons. Easy to understand.

I have always said i could live with a few small price increases if it means that the multiple Reavers plus Warhounds combo is too strong.

Cheers

James

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

Just let this post drop off the page

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Yeah, do that!

No seriously, your participation is encouraged, and I'd like to hear opinions from the community about this idea.

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

It might be possible to make a system like this work.

However, my concern is that this could lead to more min-maxing rather than less.

My suggestion was to "build in" some weapons cost into the hull, E&C has suggested a cap on free weapons on each titan.  Both these systems work to limit min-maxing, as it stands this system wouldn't do that.

You could easily add a weapons limitations and/or tax for same weaspons to this proposal.

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

I'm in favor of this also. I'm not crazy about it, but if it's necessary to assess a surcharge for multiples of the same weapon to avoid min-maxing, then I can live it.

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

Functionally, this is the same as E&C's current list with an increase in the chassis cost and an offsetting reduction in weapon costs (or at least some of them).  Just put the basic weapon load into the chassis cost and start with the first tier being "free," e.g.

275 pts - Warhound base cost
605 pts - Reaver base cost
770 pts - Warlord base cost

0 pts  -  Inferno Gun
0 pts  -  Vulcan Megabolter
0 pts  -  Plasma Blastgun
15 pts  -  Turbolaser Destructor

0 pts  -  Laser Burner
0 pts  -  Corvus Pod
etc.

_________________
Neal

Neal, that's exactly right. It just depends on what one thinks the basic psychology of the list selection should be. Should there be free weapon choices, or should all weapons have a cost?

Even though the point costs come out the same, I think it would be better for all weapons to have a point cost. That's just my preference. It's really six of one, half a dozen of the other.

I was also kind of hoping that by adjusting point costs as I did, we could possibly do away with the multiple weapon surcharge, to make things simple.

Well I decided to apply these costings to the 3 Reavers I used recently.



I think semajnollissor’s idea plus the first warhound support taken must be a pack, plus an increase in CML to 50pts (with AP/AT attack added) would go along way to limit AMTL activations (3x cheapest Reavers @ 605pts each plus Warhound pack, plus 2 single Warhound = 6 activations with AA, Legate, Princeps, Icons etc to be added).

I spose you could go so far as to increase the 15pt weapons to 20pts each and the 30pt weapons to 40pts each?

I’m not in favour of hard limits on the weapons loadout.
I’d far rather be able to select the weapons I want and pay an appropriate cost for them. I think that it looks better if every weapon has a cost and that may reduce the need for a multiple same weapon surcharge.

Cheers,
Steve.

_________________
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.

If I understand correctly the current objections against v3, the main one was that you could take 100% war engines with large number of activations.

The first one I regard as non-negotiable for AMTL list (I dont see the point of an AMTL list that made it compulsory to take non titans) so for me the focus has to be on reducing the number of titan activations. That is why I am happy for increases in chassis cost and also weapons costs.

There may be no difference between either higher chasis cost + free weapons, or lower chassis cost + cost for all weapons. But to me there is a psychological difference in having to pay for any weapon.

I can also live with increased emphasis on Warhound packs rather than sole Warhounds to likewise reduce the number of activations. Rather than adding extra rule I would prefer a further points surcharge on sole Warhounds- if you really want to take them singly you should be able to but at cost.

Cheers

James

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