primarch wrote:
2. Chaos rewards. My first draft was with random rolls. The problem was what happens when you roll for something you already got? It became somewhat complicated so I discarded it in favor for the one posted. Since the rewards are more powerful as the number goes up, I instituted a "level" cap associated with the number. So the number of honors equals the number of the reward you get. This avoids titans with 1 honor to get lucky and get daemonhood or a grandmaster level titan getting a chaos tail. The reward should be commensurate with the skill level of the titan measured in honors.
Hmm, yes, I can see certain duplicates being problematic. Best to avoid the issue. Point conceded.
primarch wrote:
I agree on the Tzeentch head. We'll eliminate the knight class change and it can only effect units lesser than knight level, which are most units but not the real powerful ones. You swap for the effective unit on and one to one basis. One effected unit for one pink horror. This means you could only get a maximum of 4 since it has 4 attack dice. How does this sound?
So it's one destroyed unit creates one Pink Horror. That works. Well, a maximum of four per turn anyway, unless the Titan has Tactical Genius. Hmm, can these head weapons be selected to receive the effects of other abilities? Such as Augmented Ammo Feed? Personally, I'd say no, as these are Psychic abilities and not real 'weapons' as such.
primarch wrote:
3. Augmented ammo feed. Some clarification is needed. The feed gives yo 1d3 shots to ONE weapon system. You may pick this honor more times but it would be added to OTHER weapon system. So a titan can only have a total of 4 weapons with augmented ammo feed. Thus a weapon system can only get this honor ONCE. There is no adding this honor on top of a previous one for the same weapon system.
Second, the shots occur AFTER you nominate the target and are added to the shots fired to A SINGLE TARGET. In other words, you don't get to spread the extra dice to other targets. Its a sustained fire ability, so its more shots from that weapon system to the previously nominated target. Clearer?
I understand that the way you first presented it that it may only be applied once to any specific weapon. That's not what I have a problem with. (Yes, I know that I proposed multiple applications earlier, but that's still aside from the point that I was trying to make.) The main problem I have is that the effect is unbalanced depending on exactly what weapon it is applied to. If this is intentional, just say so, if not then it needs to be fixed. Applying it to a weapon with few shots is much better than applying it to one that already has many shots. Another issue would be what happens when applying this ability to a Multiple Rocket Launcher or other barrage weapon? Unless NetEpic has changed this rule, you cannot have multiple barrages (from the same source) overlap the same target. Unless the weapon then fires multiple barrages in the same action (which would presumably have to touch each other and would be targeting other models, breaking your intention above) or the effective BP strength of the weapon increases, then it would have no effect at all, that I can think of.
I would also suggest just flat out saying that this ability cannot be applied to any of the one-shot missile systems. Even if just because they cannot be fired more than once.
OK, so you are confirming that the additional 1d3 shots are rolled after targets are declared. This I can live with, pending playtesting.
primarch wrote:
4. Emperor Guide Me. Clarification. The targeting process for units with hit location templates remains unchanged. The only difference is that you get to roll for scatter TWICE and you pick which set of rolls (the first or the second) to keep. You DO NOT get to mix and match dice in those two rolls.
For example the first roll is "blank die" and "left"; the second roll is "up" and "right". You get to pick either a shot that scatter to the "left" from the first roll or a shot that scatters up and right. You don't get to pick "up" and combine it with either "left" of the blank die of the first roll. Clearer?
Somewhat, though I don't think anyone was suggesting mixing results like that. Still, it's good to have it stated before anyone does.
primarch wrote:
6. Titan VP and Cost. The problem with increasing the COST of bringing a titan with earned honors to battle is that according to the play test data we accumulated over the years, players tend NOT to bring them to the battle once they get to expensive.
Most people play games between 3000-6000 points. Imagine if you had a warlord that initially cost around 850 points. If you increase cost by 100 points per honor (this was the usual cost applied when we used to do this) then just 2 honors places the titan cost over 1000 points! In some battles this may tie up 25% or more of your total points in that one unit. It's simple not worth it.
Using an extreme example, say that same titan made it to grandmaster, that would be 600 more points added for a whopping 1450!! No matter how potent it would be, it still retains the basic vulnerabilities of a warlord titan, no way its worth that much!
So its better to keep the cost the same but increase the VP it yields when destroyed. It encourages people to bring them and it is not cost onerous on the player to do so. Also remember, they already have a HUGE target on their back. While it may be easier to accrue XP for honors, I'm betting not many will survive beyond 2 or 3 honors accrued.
Like Bissler said, you EARN those honors, not buy them.

Actually, I entirely agree that honors should not be able to be purchased, and I apologize if anything I said sounded like that, as it was not intended to. However, now that you mention it, there should be some system in play for exactly that so long as it is explicitly for one-off games and playtesting only.
I also agree that the 100 per honor as suggested by 2nd edition Titan Legions (if I recall correctly) is too high for exactly the reasons you mentioned. Just because it's too high is not a reason to throw out the whole system. That why I suggested 50 for normal and 100 for Chaos Rewards (as they ARE more powerful), but 25 and 50 could work as well. What I was trying to say is that I feel that it should cost more to bring an experienced Titan to the game table than to bring a baseline one,
so long as you already have the experienced Titan. Yes, I know that people get hesitant to bring it back to the table. I've been that person. It's not just about cost either. It's also partially, "Do I want to risk losing it for/in this game?" For example, at 25/50 per, a seventh level Titan with one Chaos Reward would cost 200 points more than it did when new. This is approximately the cost of one support card. Even with 50/100 the same example Titan would only be 400 more.
Oh, I forgot to explicitly mention this before, which may have caused some confusion, but I do agree with your progression of increased VP for experienced Titans. Seeing as that is already disconnected from the Titan's cost, adding a little to it's cost is not an issue to that.
I suppose we may have to agree to disagree on additional cost being useful. I would ask though that even if you don't include additional cost for an experienced Titan with the base system, do please include it as an optional rule. NetEpic does include many optional rules in it's books, and it is obvious that some people (me at the least) would use such a system.
Magnus