Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Kirasu wrote:
Its such a large divergence from current warlord pictures.. Looks more like a big Knight. It even has Knight iconography, could simply be a Knight that is closer to the camera.

I like how it's taking the original style and design of the old Warlords, Reaver and Warhounds and modernising them. In fact, the recent GW Knight and Skitarii releases have details and embellishments that match and tie in the Titans of Forgeworld as well as some of the old releases and art. The head has a look that reminds me of the one of the original Warlord heads, the fleur de lys style motifs in the armour is definitely not a new thing - look at the original Warhound for example. I'd argue that the blocky Lucius, although iconic in its own right, is such a divergence from the established Titan look (and was released during Epic 3rd Edition debacle which messerd around with the look a little too much).

Though, I'd also say, this could be a FW photoshop of a pre-production model. So it is entirely plausible that some of the detail may be changed for the finished model.

---

Edit: as an aside, I wonder what the interior detail will be like. Amniotic tank for the Princeps? 4 Moderati linked up to the MIU? The Techpreist out in the reactor room. It'll look glorious

Mr.Church13 wrote:
This is not the Prospero for which I was looking.

Book 7, I'm afraid.

 BrookM wrote:

 Looky Likey wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Or you can use the Leviathan force org chart provided with the Crusade Army list red book.

Does that still have the 25% on LoW restriction? If so, that's a very big game

No, this one waves away the Lord of War restrictions and makes it an army of its own, complete with its own warlord trait.

Would be fun to play on a grassy field board and outflank with it. Just imagine the battlefield chatter from that battle.

Trooper 1: "moving forward through the field. Visibility 2 miles. No contact."

Thundering boom as the Titan comes in from the side of the board

Trooper 2: "where the did that come from?"
Trooper 1 "he must have been hiding behind that cow back there "

 Theophony wrote:

Would be fun to play on a grassy field board and outflank with it. Just imagine the battlefield chatter from that battle.

Trooper 1: "moving forward through the field. Visibility 2 miles. No contact."

Thundering boom as the Titan comes in from the side of the board

Trooper 2: "where the did that come from?"
Trooper 1 "he must have been hiding behind that cow back there "

Hush you! Your spoiling the new Titan for us. Don't bring up the fact that in 40k, Titans with Kilometre ranged weapons fight within the range of small arms and Deathstrike ICBM launchers are front line tanks where they can be axed by baddies. Go play Epic if you want to depict Titans properly

As an aside, in ages past, Forgeworld were rumoured to be re-making Adeptus Titanicus in 6mm scale. Will Hayes even started sculpting a 6mm articulated Warhound Titan. Oh, what a glorious game that would've been
Damn you GW and your scrapping of specialist games

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
Its such a large divergence from current warlord pictures.. Looks more like a big Knight. It even has Knight iconography, could simply be a Knight that is closer to the camera.

Glad it's not just me that thinks it just looks like a big Knight and not like a Warlord.

It looks a LOT like the 'original' Warlords:



An this is a good thing!

Yeah you're right, Im just going off the more recent pictures of Warlord titans.

It could be a warlord then if Forgeworld is going in the direction of "Old epic and old RT is actually heresy era"

Well, the old Epic game (Space Marine) did take place during the Heresy/Scouring anyways.

Saying that though Kirasu, it could also just be a case of being dependant on the Forge World it came from.

locarno24 wrote:With the option of two other lords of war as backup (albeit they are limited to 25%)

In fact, a Venatarii maniple (a Reaver and two Warhounds) is a perfectly legal 3,000 point army.

It'll be nice to see if this is a fair pairing for a warlord. The previous version was 2,500 points or so, but kind of underpowered for its stats compared to the reaver - since it only gained two shields and a single 'scout-weight" weapon. Since this version appears to mount "battle-weight" weapons even in the carapace, thats a whole different animal - even assuming the arm guns are also "battle-weights", that's twelve destroyer shots per turn (if they were all triple turbolasers) - enough to reliably kill two undamaged warhound titans in a single salvo!

To be honest, I love the model - I love all the titan models - but I'd really love to see some more detail put into titan-on-titan fights! Now we can essentially do a 2-3 engine Adeptus titanicus game in 40k scale, it'd be nice if there were enough detail in the superheavy rules to support it...

BrookM wrote:

 Looky Likey wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Or you can use the Leviathan force org chart provided with the Crusade Army list red book.

Does that still have the 25% on LoW restriction? If so, that's a very big game

No, this one waves away the Lord of War restrictions and makes it an army of its own, complete with its own warlord trait.

That is awesome, as that is how I'd probably run it, Warlord, Reaver, 2 Warhounds and 9 knights.

So maybe we can say that the Knights look like Warlords....

 Kirasu wrote:
Yeah you're right, Im just going off the more recent pictures of Warlord titans.

It could be a warlord then if Forgeworld is going in the direction of "Old epic and old RT is actually heresy era"

The original epic "Space Marine" was set during the HH.

 zedmeister wrote:
as an aside, I wonder what the interior detail will be like. Amniotic tank for the Princeps? 4 Moderati linked up to the MIU? The Techpreist out in the reactor room. It'll look glorious

I think it is possible for Warlords to still be controlled by the standard MIU, from reading Mechanicus, but I reckon your right with that FW will use this opportunity to make the first Titan with the amniotic tank. On the other hand, the tank would be much harder to model in a way that looks right IMO. I thought Warlords had 2 Moderati still though? Don't Emperors have 4?

For the people wanting more realistic combat, bringing back the old Apocalypse 1st Edition Superheavy damage table would help somewhat. It annoys me that the fluff description for a Shadowsword states that it is capable of blowing the arm clean off a Titan... except Titans can't have weapon destroyed results, because they are Superheavies.

 Haighus wrote:

For the people wanting more realistic combat, bringing back the old Apocalypse 1st Edition Superheavy damage table would help somewhat. It annoys me that the fluff description for a Shadowsword states that it is capable of blowing the arm clean off a Titan... except Titans can't have weapon destroyed results, because they are Superheavies.

Agreed on the damage. Str D weapons should be able to blow off legs, arms and whatnot off Superheavies. Also, Adeptus Titanicus and Epic 2nd edition had great damage charts. In far too many games I've had (or caused) a Titan arm to be blown off, USS Reliant style, and have it pinwheel into a tank formation or group of infantry. The original Adeptus Titanicus was brilliant as well. For example where, if you get a reactor damage, you'd have to put your Titan into shutdown to prevent the meltdown until you could self-repair

Well time to sell the car and get one of those.

 EmperorsChampion wrote:
Well time to sell the car and get one of those.

I'd bet dimes to doughnuts it will cost more than I paid for my current car.

 Looky Likey wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Or you can use the Leviathan force org chart provided with the Crusade Army list red book.

Does that still have the 25% on LoW restriction? If so, that's a very big game

No way I can't see this having updated, official 40k rules almost as soon as it launches. In fact I would be suprised if they didn't post the rules on the site as experimental.

Does anybody remember when the Reaver came out and if the majority of the weapons launched with it, or did they trickle out?

Reaver came out with Gatling Blaster, Laser Blaster, and Apoc Missile Launcher (and at the time, you bought entire kits with the weapons included, not a la carte weapons)
Melta Cannon and power fist came out about a year later. Volcano Cannon and Chain fist came out earlier this year, and now the turbolaser carapace mount is out, albeit as part of the primus redoubt. Still missing the VMB, Inferno cannon, plasma blastgun, and vortex support missile carapace mounts, and it appears that the original plan for the Reaver and Warlord to share weapons has been abandoned, as the Warlord volcano cannon looks much more detailed than the Reaver one.

 godswildcard wrote:
So maybe we can say that the Knights look like Warlords....

This. The Jes redesign of the Knight in 28mm takes a lot of cues from the Epic Warlord models, blending them with the original knight paladin look.
I do wish that the Warlord head was more the style of the Lucius pattern, rather than the Grey Kniht Terminator look it has, but I'm hoping it has head options. I recall discussing that idea with Will Hayes a few years back, alon with the idea of an amniotic tank princeps and a female princeps. For the price of the Warlord, it would be nice if it came with a few princeps options, instead of just a princeps and an empty chair option.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 Looky Likey wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Or you can use the Leviathan force org chart provided with the Crusade Army list red book.

Does that still have the 25% on LoW restriction? If so, that's a very big game

No way I can't see this having updated, official 40k rules almost as soon as it launches. In fact I would be suprised if they didn't post the rules on the site as experimental.

Does anybody remember when the Reaver came out and if the majority of the weapons launched with it, or did they trickle out?

Reaver came out with Gatling Blaster, Laser Blaster, and Apoc Missile Launcher (and at the time, you bought entire kits with the weapons included, not a la carte weapons)
Melta Cannon and power fist came out about a year later. Volcano Cannon and Chain fist came out earlier this year, and now the turbolaser carapace mount is out, albeit as part of the primus redoubt. Still missing the VMB, Inferno cannon, plasma blastgun, and vortex support missile carapace mounts, and it appears that the original plan for the Reaver and Warlord to share weapons has been abandoned, as the Warlord volcano cannon looks much more detailed than the Reaver one.

Much appreciated, so I'd guess that we get similar with the Warlord, at least that will keep the inital cost down. Still amazes me with the numbers of Reavers they have sold that they haven't fleshed out the extra weapons as it seems an easy project.

 OneManNoodles wrote:


Stop click-bait linking to your blog in every post, if you want to link to your blog simply put it in your signature.

It's only "click-bait" if you click it and don't like what you find there. Heck, in a hobby dominated by "blogs" like Spikey Bits, BOLS, Beasts of War, and Talk Wargaming, dropping two or three links in a forum is hardly abusive.

But far be it from me to want to ruin your Dakka experience, so I'm done linking... at least on this thread.

IIRC, clicks are disabled here, so you can spam it all you want, but you won't get those precious +1's.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Still missing the VMB, Inferno cannon, plasma blastgun, and vortex support missile carapace mounts, and it appears that the original plan for the Reaver and Warlord to share weapons has been abandoned, as the Warlord volcano cannon looks much more detailed than the Reaver one.

It is possible that the Reaver weapons will instead be capable of mounting on the carapace of the Warlord, seeing as it has a Laser Blaster up top that looks very similar to the Reaver version.

Yeah, the Warhound weapons can probably be rigged to fit on top, but would have been much effort for them to make a single large missile to stick on the mount?

The Warhound's weapons will fit straight on top of the Reaver's mounting point using the "adapter" part that comes with the Reaver's Apoc launcher. However I think they do not look quite right and would prefer a proper version.

 Haighus wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:
as an aside, I wonder what the interior detail will be like. Amniotic tank for the Princeps? 4 Moderati linked up to the MIU? The Techpreist out in the reactor room. It'll look glorious

I think it is possible for Warlords to still be controlled by the standard MIU, from reading Mechanicus, but I reckon your right with that FW will use this opportunity to make the first Titan with the amniotic tank. On the other hand, the tank would be much harder to model in a way that looks right IMO. I thought Warlords had 2 Moderati still though? Don't Emperors have 4?

For the people wanting more realistic combat, bringing back the old Apocalypse 1st Edition Superheavy damage table would help somewhat. It annoys me that the fluff description for a Shadowsword states that it is capable of blowing the arm clean off a Titan... except Titans can't have weapon destroyed results, because they are Superheavies.

We play the rules listed in Betrayal (or is it massacre?) That D weapons and Melta can cause weapon destroyed on super heavies and it makes the game much more interesting having crippled god engines fighting till there last breath.

 Looky Likey wrote:
The Warhound's weapons will fit straight on top of the Reaver's mounting point using the "adapter" part that comes with the Reaver's Apoc launcher. However I think they do not look quite right and would prefer a proper version.

What adapter piece? I got my Reaver when it came with the default weapon loadout, and it didn't have an adapter.

 Haighus wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Still missing the VMB, Inferno cannon, plasma blastgun, and vortex support missile carapace mounts, and it appears that the original plan for the Reaver and Warlord to share weapons has been abandoned, as the Warlord volcano cannon looks much more detailed than the Reaver one.

It is possible that the Reaver weapons will instead be capable of mounting on the carapace of the Warlord, seeing as it has a Laser Blaster up top that looks very similar to the Reaver version.

Yeah, the Warhound weapons can probably be rigged to fit on top, but would have been much effort for them to make a single large missile to stick on the mount?

Just held my laser blaster up to the picture of the warlord. Three barrels are the same, though the single barrel is on top. The body of the gun is different though, clearly a different trim/shell piece because the gun is mounted "upside down" relative to the arm laser blaster on the reaver.

The arm Volcano cannons are clearly different from the Reaver- much more detailed, and seem to have a left/right distinction rather than universal like the Reaver arms. Arm mounts look to be more of a pain to magnetize as well, not the simple joint of the reaver but arotating joint at the top of the gun, and a much more complicated shoulder mount.

Hope it comes out with more than just a "all laser" loadout. I'd love to get it with a Volcano Cannon, Gatling blaster, laser blaster and apoc missile launcher.

Yeah, I agree having inspected the Laser Blaster closer, the Reaver one has a much closer fitting weapon shell than the Warlord's.

I would really like it to have a Plasma Destructor option personally

Personally think that's a pair of quake cannons and not a volcano cannon. And if you check the vid again, you'll see as the rReaver is shown, there's a snippet of a Warlord to the left of it - looks like it's head is level with the Reaver's Apocalypse Launcer if the position of the arm weapon lines up about the same

They really need to introduce tiers of Strength D so that rate of fire/template size isn't the only improvement. I second the notion that there needs to be more complexity in the Titan rules. It's just so much more interesting, befitting a much more interesting model.

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
They really need to introduce tiers of Strength D so that rate of fire/template size isn't the only improvement. I second the notion that there needs to be more complexity in the Titan rules. It's just so much more interesting, befitting a much more interesting model.

Yeah, the old Defense Laser rules had a Strength D weapon that was only improved over a Volcano Cannon (Warlord class) by having AP1 instead of AP2 and infinite range (vs 240"). Apparently it is powerful enough to drive off spacecraft in low orbit, but struggles to harm a Titan...

The model looks ace from a technical standpoint, however, does look a like like an upsized Knight (much moreso than the other two Titans), which is a little disappointing.

The FW Titans appear to have diverged a bit from their Epic incarnations. The GW Knight is actually much closer to its Epic incarnation, that one at least had curved armor and hemispherical shoulders while the Titans were much more blocky, making most scratchbuilds actually appear more accurate.

That said, it looks to be a nice kit, I'd love to see more pics of it.

I'm really curious as to how much it will cost however

If you go back far enough, this Warlord Titan looks a lot more like...the first Epic Scale Warlord Titan!

Still looks like a Knight to me looking at the legs and overall design, warlord titans have massive legs, could it be a Warden imp. Knight?