thisisnotaseriousaccount wrote:IMHO, the best answer to lords of war is to do two things. Firstly, treat strength D as S10 AP1 Armourbane Fleshbane. This means
SD is still very strong, but prevents it from getting one-hit-kills as easily and devaluing ignore cover weaponry. Infantry can rely on cover to shield them until
SD is taken out but they will still take heavy casualties, and any unit caught out of cover is pretty much dead unless that have an invulnerable save, similarly to something less overwhelming like a Demolisher, just a little better to account for the higher cost. Personally I would also like to see optional D weapons banned so that titans have a reason to actually choose which weapons they want, but for the sake of simplicity this isn't required.
The second change I would implement is using the Horus Heresy lord of war system, minus Primarchs. Firstly, that would limit lords of war to no more than 25% of your force, cutting out the 1750pt Reaver titan builds. Secondly, it would give a few more options - you have the option to take 0-2
SHVs with 6 hull points or less or 0-1
SHV with 7+ hull points, or the option to take 0-2 8 wounds or less gargantuan creatures, or 0-1 9+ wounds gargantuan creature. It might seem ridiculous allowing multiples, but due to the points restriction the only thing you can take multiples of at 2k points is the Malcador, which is literally the most balanced super-heavy in the game and only really relevant for fluffy armies.
You can also just nerf strength D and impose the points limit, but this way you add a cool fluffy possibility and some legitemacy since it's not just arbitrary rules, they are drawn from an official
GW publication. The sections on primarchs and imperial navy support even state heresy-era games only. My only worry with this system is that it's potentially a bit unfair to Tyrnaids, I'm not sure they have a
GC cheap enough to be played at 2k unfortunately.