>If it isn't broken - don't fix it!
I'd say it is broken. Here is a quote from the post you wrote right after
this one Brett:
">I have always found titans to be self limiting - they just aren't worth the
>points!
>As soon as my co-general informs me that he is fielding an Imperator I groan
>inwardly and prepare to face defeat...
>(I don't think I've ever seen a force hampered by an Imperator secure
>victory, although I liked the idea of fielding one against the Tyranids
>'cause I figure the bugs aught to get squished more often than they do...)"
>Titans are just fine the way that they are.
Obviously they aren't if they are not worth their points.
>They are exceptionally fragile (to CC) if they are left unsupported, so
>support the damn things! Don't change the rules to account for poor
>generalship. Think of titans as land going battleships and (IMO) you will
>be close to the truth.
I liked the post someone made about adding support weapons to Titans, I was
thinking of suggesting it myself. We might not want to add just straight
bolters to the heavier titans though, as the Imperators/SHVs don't just use
straight bolters for support fire.
>As to some weapons being "useless" and others "exceptional", I don't know
>that I would agree. I would tend to suggest (in fact I will suggest!) that
>every weapon has its place.
Yeah, but to quote a friend of mine, "the place of some of those weapons is
the spare weapon bin." I don't think that anyone would argue that an
imperial power fist is even close to being equal to a Volcano Cannon. Sure,
the power fist might have its place, but I don't know what that is. I
actually consider using the power fist to be a liability in CC vs an
advantage, that chance of inflicting no damage after winning the round of CC
is just to great to bear.
>The "points cost per weapon" is too much like 40K and we are doing this
>whole net epic thing because of EPIC 40K!!! If we want 40K integrated with
>EPIC it is highly likely that all we have to do is sit back and wait...
Yeah, I'm tending to agree with you here, though I'm not sure why.
Something inside of me is just recoiling at the idea of purchasing weapons
individually. I think it would add to much complexity to the game, make it
too much like war gear cards, and it just does not seem like something I
would enjoy doing. Maybe we could just compensate weapons instead, until
everyone feels that they're equal (frex, the Doom Fist is about equal to a
Volcano cannon IMO).
>At the moment titans are a bit underpowered for their point expenditure
>(especially compared to the Squat SHV's) but people still love 'em, so
>what's the problem?
The problem is, that people shouldn't be forced to pay more for a unit whose
abilities don't reflect its point cost. People love them (or at least I
love them) because I like them for the atmosphere and the feel and just the
idea of huge walking robots stomping on puny hummies. Just because GW made
a mistake here, does not mean we should keep it just because people use
Titans still anyways.
>The only obvious problems with titans that I can see are the fact that the
>Warlord (and Banelord) cost 900pts instead of 750pts, the Imperator starts
>the game with a random amount of plasma instead of a fixed 7 or 12, and
>there is no Slasher Gargant Mob costing 1200pts.
Agreed here. Warlords and Banelords should be 750. The Imperator should
start the game with a full tank of plasma (12) and Slasher mobs should be
purchaseable separately for 1200.
>Agro
Michael the Liu
Received on Thu Feb 20 1997 - 21:50:24 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:10 UTC