30 components per kit, and they come with 25mm round bases.

Mendi Warrior wrote:
New baby knights available at £32 / €40 for a pack of 3.
I'll pass, I have already spent way too much lately.

Given the fixed weapon options I was expecting £25. I'd only expect £32 to be the price if the kit came with both weapon options for all three models.

Having to buy three of each kit to get a lance-legal banner of helverins or veuglaires is really poor value.

What amazing value and without doubt worth every penny. For only £96 - with postage and packaging - you too can have a minimum lance of nine Armigers on the field of battle, striking fear into the heart of the other player who was foolish enough to purchase a Warmaster titan.

With the specialist team going from strength to strength, we're now looking forward to the next expansion book called Adeptus Knighticus: Attack on Titans. I really don't know how they will top the amazing rules in Doom of Molech, but somehow they will come through for us.

Let us put our hands together and give thanks to both GW and FW for going the extra mile for Household players this year.

From Dakka, with love.

Yikes.

Caved and bought a set each. Hardly bought anything and have had a recent windful from some Oldhammer selloffs. I'll post pictures of the datacards when I have them.

I can't believe they'd require you to buy three packs to run these in a lance. Surely they must have a rule about them being squires and can mix and match. But, this is FW...

AUD$74 for 3 itty-bitty mini-mechs.

GW really do think the world of themselves...

beast_gts wrote:
30 components per kit, and they come with 25mm round bases.

So, 10 per Knight. What do we reckon:

- 2 legs
- 1 Body
- 1 Carapace Weapon
- 2 Shoulder Pads
- 2 Arms
- 2 arm weapons

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
AUD$74 for 3 itty-bitty mini-mechs.

GW really do think the world of themselves...

As this thread proves, people will still pony up for it.

Sadly there's no reason for FW (or GW) to NOT put prices up there.

 zedmeister wrote:

beast_gts wrote:
30 components per kit, and they come with 25mm round bases.

So, 10 per Knight. What do we reckon:

- 2 legs
- 1 Body
- 1 Carapace Weapon
- 2 Shoulder Pads
- 2 Arms
- 2 arm weapons

Looking at it, I think
2 legs
Waist
Body
2 arms
2 arm weapons
Carapace gun
Head

Its a good thing they decided to go with plastic for the main sets and the standard Knights. The models were originally going to be all resin. Imagine how much a Warlord or Reaver would have been at these if the resin knights are this much!!

robbienw wrote:
Its a good thing they decided to go with plastic for the main sets and the standard Knights. The models were originally going to be all resin. Imagine how much a Warlord or Reaver would have been at these if the resin knights are this much!!

Yeah, but wasn't the idea back then to only have 2 or 3 a side, with a full maniple of 5 the absolute maximum

GW have some balls charging that, especially with zero options. I honestly fear these things being that many parts given FW's QA problems. I'd worry about ending up with like 2 left feet or a broken autocannon.

These seem like a better value to use as armigers, a much much much better value. Fewer parts too and metal. And you get weapon options.

@SamusDrake, you could get something like 22 of these for the price of 3 armigers from forge world.. oof

https://vanguardminiatures.co.uk/shop/cybershadow-hk-1l-hunter-killer-combat-automaton/

Yeah, I'll pass.

Those are great looking models, especially for the asking price. Could easily pass as Ad-Mech support units using the Armiger rules.

SamusDrake wrote:
Those are great looking models, especially for the asking price. Could easily pass as Ad-Mech support units using the Armiger rules.

U can even kit bash the legs from them with another kit to make little armiger sized version of these

That definitely needs to be done!

DUDES WE HAVE AD-MECH STRIDERS FOR TITANICUS!!!

SamusDrake wrote:
That definitely needs to be done!

DUDES WE HAVE AD-MECH STRIDERS FOR TITANICUS!!!

The call of photoshop was strong, these really would make cool armigers

Absolutely fabulous!

Yeah but real GW model of the strider would have the little servitor man being probed

SamusDrake wrote:
Absolutely fabulous!

For some reason it reminds me of the old timey bikes with the big wheel.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Chopstick wrote:
Yeah but real GW model of the strider would have the little servitor man being probed

Lol true






Also worth mentioning, battlebling brought back the groin cannon for a limited time only

https://www.etsy.com/ca/listing/978204406/p3n15-groin-cannon-warlord-titan-adeptus?ref=shop_home_feat_4

Absolutely ridiculous pricing for these armigers. And the fact that they don't give you two of each is fething idiotic. For $25 more you could get 2 full size armigers. Epic fail Forgeworld.

Ugh. Not feeling it for armigers, especially being resin.

Trying to think of some Battletech mechs that might work in place ... locusts? Jenners?

Crablezworth wrote:GW have some balls charging that, especially with zero options. I honestly fear these things being that many parts given FW's QA problems. I'd worry about ending up with like 2 left feet or a broken autocannon.

These seem like a better value to use as armigers, a much much much better value. Fewer parts too and metal. And you get weapon options.

@SamusDrake, you could get something like 22 of these for the price of 3 armigers from forge world.. oof

Vanguard's are great, and the pricing on FW's is absolutely insane, bordering on lunacy.

Plus, being resin instead of metal they are inherently flimsier and more delicate, so... yeah, easy win there for Vanguard.

Stormonu wrote:Ugh. Not feeling it for armigers, especially being resin.

Trying to think of some Battletech mechs that might work in place ... locusts? Jenners?

Not really, no. Btech lights would be too big for this.

 Arbitrator wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
AUD$74 for 3 itty-bitty mini-mechs.

GW really do think the world of themselves...

As this thread proves, people will still pony up for it.

Sadly there's no reason for FW (or GW) to NOT put prices up there.

*Some* people will, others might have but now won't.

I might pay 50 bux for plastic armiger.

Also the Warglaive upper arms are too short, and they use the cogwheel trim shoulder pauldron, not the flat one like Helverin. and there're massive gap between the pauldron and the torso. Some lazy no detail part here and there : exhaust pipe, arm connector,etc...

Knight moirax actually have the cogwheel trim Pauldron but with cogwheel emblem instead of arrow like the one used by the Wargliave, also there're no massive gap. So overall looks like a lazy and botched casting of the Warglaive/Helverin by FW.

Should have packed them with the part to make one or the other, or at least in sets of three of the same. This is a pretty lame approach.

Well, you can always 3D print them? I think mine worked out at 35p for 3...



Having said that though. I'm still going to buy the FW ones because I like them. and because, well, I must have one of everything.

 Lord Borak wrote:
Well, you can always 3D print them? I think mine worked out at 35p for 3...



Having said that though. I'm still going to buy the FW ones because I like them. and because, well, I must have one of everything.

Oh, I already did. But others can't/wont.

Man, Kirby was right.

 Nurglitch wrote:
Man, Kirby was right.

Well apparently 12 of them fit on a plate for a bout 90 cents of resin so...

But really, no one wants something that small in 10 parts, especially with forge world doing the quality assurance. And it doesn't help that not a single consumer knows how many they actually need to buy to play them legally, add to that the cynical weapon distribution. Here in canada it's 90$ for two 28mm scale armigers, how in god's name 3 8mm one's could cost 62$ is beyond a vast majority of the potential market's head. Like even the 2018 AT group on facebook, which is usually very enforced positivy/the emperor has no clothes has several posts where everyone is agreeing or at least 8/10 that they just totally priced them out of the market. 9 armigers from forge world is nearly the msrp of a warmaster titan.

I think kirby is was only partially right, if gw upped the QA, stopped doing cynical weapon destruction and go back to including optional bits and priced on the side of sane, the market would gladly support that. A reality I think a lot of designers and manufacturers also may have to come to grips with is, some players just want the miniature, don't plan much posing or conversion and if the model is going to be fairly mono-pose anyway better it be fewer components than 10 pieces for something so small, it sadly is so much simpler to find someone with a 3d printer. It also hurts that they're making them so many pieces/components but still not throwing in arm/weapon options. Even the plastic questoris kit was a bit cynical in its weapon distribution but that became less of an issue with the supplementary sprue with ccw weapons/melta and missile launchers.

3d printing is still a pain in a lot of ways, the simpler an stl is the easier it is for anyone to print. I'm just as lazy as fw's QA, I don't really want to have to review every piece back from a printer to ensure its the right one and not warped/chipped/broken, so honestly the files with the fewest pieces/components sometimes seem more appealing for that reason. These little knights just so happen to be something that have actually been around in file form for some time AND just so happen to range from a few component files to like literal 1 piece prints. As I mentioned, someone in a group said it was 91 cents of resin for 12 of them on a single plate... that's 248$ in forge world land... somethings gotta give. The prob as always for gw is a lot of files are free and exist long before they decide to print legacy model x in a smaller scale. GW and FW aren't exactly helping to make kirby wrong, the iconoclast decision as an FU to third party part makers show they're choosing to just be bitter about it for now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Borak wrote:
Well, you can always 3D print them? I think mine worked out at 35p for 3...



Having said that though. I'm still going to buy the FW ones because I like them. and because, well, I must have one of everything.

The FW ones will likely look better than a lot of the prints out there of varying quality. AT least in forgeworld's case the moirax hasn't been widely seen in 8mm so I can see those selling more than the armigers.

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:
Man, Kirby was right.

Well apparently 12 of them fit on a plate for a bout 90 cents of resin so...

But really, no one wants something that small in 10 parts, especially with forge world doing the quality assurance. And it doesn't help that not a single consumer knows how many they actually need to buy to play them legally, add to that the cynical weapon distribution. Here in canada it's 90$ for two 28mm scale armigers, how in god's name 3 8mm one's could cost 62$ is beyond a vast majority of the potential market's head. Like even the 2018 AT group on facebook, which is usually very enforced positivy/the emperor has no clothes has several posts where everyone is agreeing or at least 8/10 that they just totally priced them out of the market. 9 armigers from forge world is nearly the msrp of a warmaster titan.

I think kirby is was only partially right, if gw upped the QA, stopped doing cynical weapon destruction and go back to including optional bits and priced on the side of sane, the market would gladly support that. A reality I think a lot of designers and manufacturers also may have to come to grips with is, some players just want the miniature, don't plan much posing or conversion and if the model is going to be fairly mono-pose anyway better it be fewer components than 10 pieces for something so small, it sadly is so much simpler to find someone with a 3d printer. It also hurts that they're making them so many pieces/components but still not throwing in arm/weapon options. Even the plastic questoris kit was a bit cynical in its weapon distribution but that became less of an issue with the supplementary sprue with ccw weapons/melta and missile launchers.

3d printing is still a pain in a lot of ways, the simpler an stl is the easier it is for anyone to print. I'm just as lazy as fw's QA, I don't really want to have to review every piece back from a printer to ensure its the right one and not warped/chipped/broken, so honestly the files with the fewest pieces/components sometimes seem more appealing for that reason. These little knights just so happen to be something that have actually been around in file form for some time AND just so happen to range from a few component files to like literal 1 piece prints. As I mentioned, someone in a group said it was 91 cents of resin for 12 of them on a single plate... that's 248$ in forge world land... somethings gotta give. The prob as always for gw is a lot of files are free and exist long before they decide to print legacy model x in a smaller scale. GW and FW aren't exactly helping to make kirby wrong, the iconoclast decision as an FU to third party part makers show they're choosing to just be bitter about it for now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Borak wrote:
Well, you can always 3D print them? I think mine worked out at 35p for 3...



Having said that though. I'm still going to buy the FW ones because I like them. and because, well, I must have one of everything.

The FW ones will likely look better than a lot of the prints out there of varying quality. AT least in forgeworld's case the moirax hasn't been widely seen in 8mm so I can see those selling more than the armigers.

I mean, it's FW, so you're gonna have to carve out and sculpt a bunch of the details on your own, so i wouldn't exactly say they will look better thanks to FW.

 Crablezworth wrote:
the iconoclast decision as an FU to third party part makers show they're choosing to just be bitter about it for now.

As an aside, a quick glance around uk online stores show plenty of iconoclasts in stock which is very unusual for Titanicus. If this turns out to be more than my anecdotal observation and the iconoclast has sold poorly, then hopefully this big blunder isn’t repeated for future releases

 zedmeister wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
the iconoclast decision as an FU to third party part makers show they're choosing to just be bitter about it for now.

As an aside, a quick glance around uk online stores show plenty of iconoclasts in stock which is very unusual for Titanicus. If this turns out to be more than my anecdotal observation and the iconoclast has sold poorly, then hopefully this big blunder isn’t repeated for future releases

Ya, saw 5 in stock last time I got paint. The fluff for it in the traitors book reads like someone from marketing wrote it.

Not really surprising the Iconoclast didn't sell well.

For games, we're talking about a huge titan known for its slowness and difficulty to manoeuver while being meant for close-combat. Not talking about the fact this titan is really playable at games with a significant amount of points, it's not something you play everytimes.

For collection...how many people do really need 2 Warmaster-class like titans ?

Even with weapons sold separately, I doubt it would be that popular as well. This kind of titan is like the Warlord, but even slower. It really needs to be effective at any range, not just close. That's why huge range weapons are necessary for it, IMHO.


As for the armigers...it's FW, so yeah, price sucks. Bothered as well we can't have all weapon options for the 3 of them, not just 2 + 1.

3D prints are indeed your friend here. Otherwise, just wait a bit more 'til Vanguard releases its own version (they showed a preview picture not so long ago).

As for myself, I'll take the FW version for my "smaller scale 40k knight fight / apocalypse". I don't need especially lots of them. Can work as well for collection.

Must say main reason I buy FW instead of Vanguard lies with the fact I live in Belgium and FW takes all import taxes into the EU at their own costs (with free shipping above a certain value) and they deliver fast. I'm still waiting my Vanguard order a month ago and I know I will pay extra costs when it will be there...so there's also that to take into account, mind you.

Prices on the website aren't just the only one to think about...

Releasing the Iconoclast both as it's own kit AND months after the original Warmaster was definitely a weird one. I can't really figure out what their logic was, that the diehard Titanicus fans who 'one of everything' each release would buy a second Warmaster just for the giant chainsword?

Sarouan wrote:


3D prints are indeed your friend here. Otherwise, just wait a bit more 'til Vanguard releases its own version (they showed a preview picture not so long ago).

Must say main reason I buy FW instead of Vanguard lies with the fact I live in Belgium and FW takes all import taxes into the EU at their own costs (with free shipping above a certain value) and they deliver fast. I'm still waiting my Vanguard order a month ago and I know I will pay extra costs when it will be there...so there's also that to take into account, mind you.

Prices on the website aren't just the only one to think about...

Brexit sucks.

Ok, back on topic again!

 Arbitrator wrote:
Releasing the Iconoclast both as it's own kit AND months after the original Warmaster was definitely a weird one. I can't really figure out what their logic was, that the diehard Titanicus fans who 'one of everything' each release would buy a second Warmaster just for the giant chainsword?

I fear that it’s a result of the marketing department enforcing their suspected “everything you need is in the box” methodology which means that for us, the gamer, no mixing weapons. Hell, I’m one of the must buy everything Titanicus players and I’ve not bought an iconoclast because the no mixing weapons thing is beyond absurd and hacks me off no end.

 Arbitrator wrote:
Releasing the Iconoclast both as it's own kit AND months after the original Warmaster was definitely a weird one. I can't really figure out what their logic was, that the diehard Titanicus fans who 'one of everything' each release would buy a second Warmaster just for the giant chainsword?

It's even worse than that, they encoded in the rules that the two warmasters can't even swap weapons - because not only did they intend to not release the sprue, in order to sell the players who need one of everything another 200 dollar titan, but to also screw over third party retailers that may swoop in to fill the gap like battle bling. I was going to order a cc arm from them but there's no point now, especially seeing as I'd need to order 2 of them if I want to run an iconoclast, and still need to source the terminal/cards anyway. It's all really unfortunate, when they first previewed the iconoclast it made me feel better about my original warmaster purchase, like "awesome, they're actually going to support this titan chasis with more weapons". Boy was I wrong. Worst of all the fluff for the iconoclast in the traitor book reads like a marketing guy's email to the dev team.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 zedmeister wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:
Releasing the Iconoclast both as it's own kit AND months after the original Warmaster was definitely a weird one. I can't really figure out what their logic was, that the diehard Titanicus fans who 'one of everything' each release would buy a second Warmaster just for the giant chainsword?

I fear that it’s a result of the marketing department enforcing their suspected “everything you need is in the box” methodology which means that for us, the gamer, no mixing weapons. Hell, I’m one of the must buy everything Titanicus players and I’ve not bought an iconoclast because the no mixing weapons thing is beyond absurd and hacks me off no end.

It's honestly down right insulting, modularity is a core feature of the game. Like questors knights have more arm options than a warmaster because gw marketing is the spawn of satan.

They should just release Tanks and Infantry, and rules for using AI Warplanes.

RazorEdge wrote:
They should just release Tanks and Infantry, and rules for using AI Warplanes.

Naw, honestly knight distract enough from the core game, that being titan on titan combat. I don't mind a sprinkling of stuff for scale, but it really messes up the activation system because it's alternating activation. You can already see this problem by taking two stratagems of titan hunter infantry, that's 4 extra activations per combat phase. When both sides area really out of whack on activations it breaks the alternating activation mechanic because you have a tail end effect where one side is out of things to activate so the other side can do a number of activation is a row.

Epic need not come at the cost of a titan focused combat game called titanicus. Nothing wrong with wanting epic to be sure.

RazorEdge wrote:
They should just release Tanks and Infantry, and rules for using AI Warplanes.

If they’re gonna do that, they should do it as it’s own game (could call it something like, I dunno, ‘Epic’) rather than shoehorn it into Titanicus.

RazorEdge wrote:
They should just release Tanks and Infantry, and rules for using AI Warplanes.

Done sparingly and so long as the unit has any business attacking a titan...yes.

For example, the Shadowsword super-heavy-tank and Titan hunter infantry are units that specifically target and destroy titans. Introducing these particular units makes sense as a titan crew should expect and be prepared to deal with these threats.

A heavily armoured and hovering Vendetta Gunship could add a new dynamic to Titanicus where missile pods and the Warbringer's AA guns are able to target such a threat with greater accuracy. It would also give the avenger and bolt cannons something to do other than use Armigers for target practice...

As the odd auxilary units that support a battlegroup, it could work well enough to add a bit of flavour to the game without hijacking it.

SamusDrake wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
They should just release Tanks and Infantry, and rules for using AI Warplanes.

Done sparingly and so long as the unit has any business attacking a titan...yes.

For example, the Shadowsword super-heavy-tank and Titan hunter infantry are units that specifically target and destroy titans. Introducing these particular units makes sense as a titan crew should expect and be prepared to deal with these threats.

A heavily armoured and hovering Vendetta Gunship could add a new dynamic to Titanicus where missile pods and the Warbringer's AA guns are able to target such a threat with greater accuracy. It would also give the avenger and bolt cannons something to do other than use Armigers for target practice...

As the odd auxilary units that support a battlegroup, it could work well enough to add a bit of flavour to the game without hijacking it.

Disagree, the existing titan hunter infantry aren't even well applied because they let them basically plonk down on buildings so you can't step on them. The bunker that for some reason shoot before everything else in the strat phase are nice for scale, but again they're weird for the reason explain and add to that, like the titan hunters, oddly very very resistant to enemy shooting, like laughably so compared to knights. I'm not saying to close the door all together on having smaller models, but perhaps they should be more something tied to scenario than part of one's force/list. There's an objective from the open engine war cards that's an example of something that could work if modified, basically both sides have 3 objectives in their deployment that from my reccolection could only be destroyed in cc/smash/end movement on/over like ground assets, each one destroyed was 10vp. That could easily be 3 super heavies that can't move but can shoot, or could even be like each side get 3 free battlefield assets but they count for the 10vp and can't be killed by shooting.

It's not that any of the units from epic would be out of place, it's that the whole game is basically focussing on the battles of HH where both sides fielded titans, not the one sided massacre where titans like stomped the side that didn't have them. There's always room in AT for any of the epic or aeronautica stuff as terrain, even destructible scatter terrain if not glued down on a bigger base.

Even compared a single super heavy to the yet to be seen armiger/moirax banners. Those already seem to be pushing the extreme in one direction on scale, but for all we know could be like 9 to a unit, which like with some of the other knight banners seem at odds with like a single super heavy. Best advice if someone wans to run a shadowsword in AT is just glue it on a 60mm and play it as an acastus count as. I don't think many opponents will be too bummed that it has a worse los to a lot of targets, being lower and all.

Keep Adeptus Titanicus for Titans only! (except maybe some super heavies at some time down the line, and ofc maybe some Xenos armour at some point too, once they've run through most of the possibilities for Imperial titans that we haven't seen yet).

JWBS wrote:
Keep Adeptus Titanicus for Titans only! (except maybe some super heavies at some time down the line, and ofc maybe some Xenos armour at some point too, once they've run through most of the possibilities for Imperial titans that we haven't seen yet).

I just don't trust them to implement xenos factions, especially in the HH setting. What would be cool is bringing in xenos as like npc models that attack both sides. There's already rules for xenos beasts in molech, so maybe just more stuff along those lines, perhaps with accompanying scenarios or missions. Like don't piss off the eldar, maybe every time a blast like scatters into the terrain the eldar get pissed off and deploy a titan that just attacks the closest unit. Similarly for ork gargants or stompa mobs, ork would definitely attack both sides just for the sport of it. I'm all for count as, but I got zero trust with GW doing whole new factions, none.

As there aren't really active places to discuss AT on Dakka, I hope no one will mind my asking here... but as someone just about the buy in, is everything I will want/need rules-wise, included with models? I see a LOT of card and terminal packs, and it makes buying in really confusing. Do those packs just duplicate existing options, or are they entirely new ones?

Also, a LOT of books obviously already exist. Will I want/need all of them, or have some invalidated earlier ones?

Obviously it can be a pretty pricey game with finite model options, so I am particularly interested in anything which adds interesting list building options, or good campaign/progression systems as my wife and I will primarily be playing against each-other.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
As there aren't really active places to discuss AT on Dakka, I hope no one will mind my asking here... but as someone just about the buy in, is everything I will want/need rules-wise, included with models? I see a LOT of card and terminal packs, and it makes buying in really confusing. Do those packs just duplicate existing options, or are they entirely new ones?

Also, a LOT of books obviously already exist. Will I want/need all of them, or have some invalidated earlier ones?

Obviously it can be a pretty pricey game with finite model options, so I am particularly interested in anything which adds interesting list building options, or good campaign/progression systems as my wife and I will primarily be playing against each-other.

You can get by with the core book and the Traitor Legios/Loyalist Legios book. The only stuff you're missing out of other books at that point is campaign systems and "make your own legio" rules. I'd have to check my book but I'm pretty sure the core book comes with a basic progression system. Newer books expand on it with battlefield effects, mostly.

Last time I bought a titan, it didn't come with any cards or terminals.

Rihgu wrote:


Last time I bought a titan, it didn't come with any cards or terminals.

Warbringer and warmaster come with terminals and cards in the box. And IIrc the starter box comes with 2 of each warhound and reaver terminal, possibly 2 warlord as well, and weapon cards for the plastic weapon options.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
As there aren't really active places to discuss AT on Dakka, I hope no one will mind my asking here... but as someone just about the buy in, is everything I will want/need rules-wise, included with models? I see a LOT of card and terminal packs, and it makes buying in really confusing. Do those packs just duplicate existing options, or are they entirely new ones?

Also, a LOT of books obviously already exist. Will I want/need all of them, or have some invalidated earlier ones?

Obviously it can be a pretty pricey game with finite model options, so I am particularly interested in anything which adds interesting list building options, or good campaign/progression systems as my wife and I will primarily be playing against each-other.

The non-forgeworld knights don't tend to come with terminals with the exception of the lancers in the starter box. The seperate terminals are in my opinion worth getting because they're thick card and have room for the pips, the ones that come in the starter and with units are thin card.

The loyalist/traitor book are worth getting, the ryza book too for custom legio rules. For terrain to get started I'd suggest this, very affordable and gives a full board worth of terrain https://hawkscenery.myshopify.com/products/cityscape



Has anyone seen the armiger terminals yet?

Thanks for the tip Crablezworth. I actually own two sets from when we played DZC! Now I just need starter sets of AT to come back in stock!

The Knights are a bit easier to get around the terminals as you only need one for the rules( for each type ) and for each additional banner you can make a card strip to hold the orders dice, banner number token and can use a dice to record the structure points; a D6 is ideal for the Questoris and Cerastus.

It also saves room on the table.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Thanks for the tip Crablezworth. I actually own two sets from when we played DZC! Now I just need starter sets of AT to come back in stock!

If you want some affordable plastic terrain you might also wanna check this.

But the DZC buildings might be more of a 'low risk' starter set.

Sarouan wrote:
Not really surprising the Iconoclast didn't sell well.

For games, we're talking about a huge titan known for its slowness and difficulty to manoeuver while being meant for close-combat. Not talking about the fact this titan is really playable at games with a significant amount of points, it's not something you play everytimes.

For collection...how many people do really need 2 Warmaster-class like titans ?

GW will put out the iconoclast with the stupid rules that you can't swap weapons and the fact that huge slow titans suck for melee use in this game, and the Armigers that are stupidly expensive, require 3 kits to run a squad with the same weapons, and can't touch half the stuff on the table in an average game. Then they'll take their poor sales as evidence that nobody plays Titanicus anymore and zero lessons will be learned or applied towards future release strategies.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Thanks for the tip Crablezworth. I actually own two sets from when we played DZC! Now I just need starter sets of AT to come back in stock!

Aren’t there plenty for sale on eBay?

The starter set is great value.

Got me Armiger knights through. They have the Retainers rule - can only include a single banner per Knight Banner as part of a Battlegroup or a single banner as part of a Knight Lance. Can never be taken as part of Maniple. 3-9 knights per Armiger Banner. And, yes, no mixing weapons in a Lance.

Models are stunning, though tiny

(Excuse the Edits - was reading things wrong)

Ah, so they'd be the third odd banner in a lance, which can be different from the other two banners. That sounds reasonable as they'd escort the larger knights into battle.

SamusDrake wrote:
Ah, so they'd be the third odd banner in a lance, which can be different from the other two banners. That sounds reasonable as they'd escort the larger knights into battle.

You'd need at least two packs to make a legal banner for a Lance. Though, the thermal spear with S8 Fusion will be quite nasty if left alone even wiith an 8" range. Autocannons have a 1 dice, Str 4, 16" range and have Ordnance so could be useful on mass. I can hear the 3D printers firing up from here... Oh, and a banner of 3 is 85 points +10pts for a Meltagun per knight

Moirax aren't as useful I'd say, though the Volikite comes in at 2 dice, 16" range Str 4 and Voidbreaker (1) and could do some work. 105pts per three

Crikey, they sound pretty good for the points.

Majorly bummed that these guys weren't a plastic kit but...well...when handed lemons one must make lemonade. Theres a Warbringer titan being delivered today in the next hour or so. It will just have to do!

SamusDrake wrote:
Crikey, they sound pretty good for the points.

Majorly bummed that these guys weren't a plastic kit but...well...when handed lemons one must make lemonade. Theres a Warbringer titan being delivered today in the next hour or so. It will just have to do!

Yeah, they’re good for increasing activations in Titan maniples and they’re good for that last 100 points. Oh, and they’ve on got 2 structure points each and have a 7+ command check. So they die fast and won’t generally be running orders!

7+ command? Oh my word!

SamusDrake wrote:
7+ command? Oh my word!

+1 for the Scion martial

Well thank gawd for that! We'd have Armigers wandering off willy-nilly, doing whatever they feel like doing.

Yorkshire Armigers; "We do what we like, as we like, when we like! Alright?"

@zedmeister is there a link to a pic of the terminal?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually nevermind they were posted in the 2018/2021 facebook groups.



So to starts, they're reinforcement for knight banners. Basically, you need to take a unit of knights to be able to field a unit of these as reinforcements to them. I like that because it means you can't spam a whole bunch of these.

Also good news, they're 3-9 so if you're like me, I tend to want to run the smallest unit of them as possible, to just be able to stay out of los with them and lurk/area control. Reason being is, both units are effectively passing command checks on 6+ assuming the scion is alive, so that means charge orders and moving twice aren't something you can rely on.

The armigers are cheaper than the moirax, likely because moirax have ionic flare shields like the other other mechanicum knights. No repair tho. Both units pay a flat rate in points regardless of weapon loadout, you can't do per arm BUT each unit has 2 loadouts, the ones previewed by fw. So basically dual weapon or weapon and ccw.

I think my fav loadout is armigers with thermal spears and ccw. The ccw is pretty weak tho, S6 and no rending, moirax at least get rending. But either way, getting off charges reliably makes the ccw for both a bit of an after thought. Where the armigers get intersting imo is you can add meltaguns for 10pts a pop like questoris. And like questoris, you can do as many or as few as you want. But honestly, 3 with thermal spear and meltaguns for 115pts isn't terrible. 85pts without them and they're still ok.

The one thing I'm noticing about the meltaguns too is it seems like they can split fire, it's more inferred than explicit but it says in the combat phase each knight can target an emey unit within 3 inches. I basically see them as defensive area control that's easy to hide out of los and the plan is basically move up to 11 inches in the movement phase, hopefully towards the end of it and hope to activate soon in the combat phase. Move out to engage enemy unit within hopefuly a few inches or within voids if need be. Shoot melta, hope for the best.

Biggest factor is you gotta take them in addition to another unit of knights. Cheapest I believe is about 140pts for two stryrix/magaera with dual ccw or obviously if you're fielding an acastus or two you can just tack them on.

Yeah, they're not bad all things considered. I do hope the put out rules/models for the graviton pulsar and conversion beamer as well. But we'll see...

 zedmeister wrote:
Yeah, they're not bad all things considered. I do hope the put out rules/models for the graviton pulsar and conversion beamer as well. But we'll see...

I'm pretty happy with the armigers rules. I feel like they'll hopefully suffice for how I intend to run them, most shooty loadouts tho are just gonna get wrecked by almost any shooting tho.

In a weird turn of events, I think they're make a good go at taking out battlefield assets

They seem reasonable, yeah. Titchy as they come, dying to a stiff breeze and stern words, but zippy and the thermals can do work. The Moirax... seem okay, but the Voidbreaker is basically meaningless in those numbers.

Coordinated Strike Helverins with a couple of Str 12 shots from the flank could open a spot for another Banner before their death.

Retainer rule looks okay too, curbing the worst urges to spam cheap activatons and enforcing proper Knights first.

I like it. Now, to scratch build a few...

And honestly for those that wanna run like 6-9 of them, couldn't think of a better unit for count as just about anything epic scale that would fit on a 28mm base. Like for everyone whose constantly clamoring for the game to have tanks, here you go, 4 tank classes and you can run squadrons of 3-9 tanks in mixed units. Voila, epic.

Same thing for using like 6mm land speeders for marines or contemptor dreads on 28mm bases. If heights an concern maybe just have something armiger height on hand to sub in for los stuff, but honestly the armiger models themselves are pretty damn short.

For people doing count as orks, could totally see little ork dreadnoughts on 28mm bases.

Armiger autocannon should do 2 shot like a weaker rapid fire battlecannon. S8 spam armiger warglaive seem alright for the cost, as expected.

Overall pretty decent addition for Knights, Knight lance still sucks though, lol, the bad command roll also make them vulnerable to be shaken.

Looking again, somethings occurred to me. The armiger Helverin looks to get two shots. It says you take 2 autocannons. They’re listed as singular on the weapon profile and don’t have the paired rule. Same for the lightning lock.

Thoughts?

I'd just fire them as individual weapons.

That was my read on it, otherwise there’s no point in the Helverin model even existing when the Moirax with volkite is right there.
What I don’t get is why they aren’t Acc +1 at long range.

They have two autocannons per model as stated in the terminal, yes, so 2 Dice per Helverin.

1 shot for a weapon known for their high rate of fire is really distasteful, balancing is not a concern since they can just increase the cost, I think the name AUTO should ring some bell even for people who didn't know anything about these.

The Adeptus Mechanicus isn't dumb, if they can only fire 1 shot per gun, they would equip it with lascannon instead. In fact, that's what they did with the Ironstrider Ballistarius.

Chopstick wrote:
1 shot for a weapon known for their high rate of fire is really distasteful, balancing is not a concern since they can just increase the cost, I think the name AUTO should ring some bell even for people who didn't know anything about these.

The Adeptus Mechanicus isn't dumb, if they can only fire 1 shot per gun, they would equip it with lascannon instead. In fact, that's what they did with the Ironstrider Ballistarius.

I would have been content with more range at the current 2 shots or like you can upgrade to have a stubber and it gives +1 to hit or re-rolls to hit. Still for 25pts it's hard to complain. I still think the thermal spear/ccw and meltagun loadout is where it's at.

Heavy Stubber is a completely ineffective weapon again everything AT can offer. Same for Heavy Flamer on the Avenger Gatling and Heavy Bolter of Acheron.

I suspect some weapons are there because they are on the 40K equivalent model, not necessarily because they have an effective place in AT.

Chopstick wrote:
Heavy Stubber is a completely ineffective weapon again everything AT can offer. Same for Heavy Flamer on the Avenger Gatling and Heavy Bolter of Acheron.

Sure but it's not ineffective against exposed titan crew like on a warbringer or warmaster's battlements. Also, it's somewhere between a light and heavy machine gun, so it's likely very effective for clearing debris for the autocannons or ranging shots for them to avoid wasting autocannon ammo, Almost all main battle tanks have a coaxial machinegun and although they can't punch through armor like a 120mm cannon, they can weaken stone and concrete and wood and before the advent of more sophisticated targeting equipment could often be use to aid in ranging the main gun.

I wouldn't say no to extra S1, S2 weapon but then the Titan people would be angry because of the Dakka prowess of Knights.

Chopstick wrote:
I wouldn't say no to extra S1, S2 weapon but then the Titan people would be angry because of the Dakka prowess of Knights.

I get their pain, knights are fun but they're window dressing compared to titans. With all the knight stuff hopefully done for now It would certainly renew some faith to see a new titan release sooner than later, hopefully one that reverses the trend set by the iconoclast.

Yeah, we could do with a small-medium titan right now.

Rules wise they need to slam the brakes on and overhaul the knights, or possibly take them into their own game and relaunch Adeptus Titanicus as just titans on their own.

SamusDrake wrote:
Yeah, we could do with a small-medium titan right now.

Rules wise they need to slam the brakes on and overhaul the knights, or possibly take them into their own game and relaunch Adeptus Titanicus as just titans on their own.

I think now that they've got the dedicated traitor and loyalists book, they need a book that focusses on core game stuff, the matched play scenario just isn't very good and they've made the open engine war cards hard for people to get their hands on.

Goonhammer had an article about and AT even they attended, pics looked awesome, but my only lament was there wasn't really a tournament packet in the traditional sense and even the points were variable, 1250-1750pts I believe. So thankfully it would seem people had enough to field 1750pts but

the scenarios/missions were different from table to table each round, people playing the matched scenario out of the book or the open engine war cards. It was a multiple day event with I believe 5 rounds, so 5 rounds of random missions, and everyone isn't even playing the same mission per round, add to that, the matched play scenario is already pretty random in terms of missions and deployment. I feel like as great as it looked visually with all the painted titans and nice boards, it just sorta bums me out that although we're all playing with the same models/assets we're not all really playing the same game. I feel like there are too many variables in both the engine war cards and the matched play scenario that sorta need locking down for matched play. Also, there's a lot of stratagems that sorta need soft banning because they're too much of a liability to the game.

5th ed 40k had like 6 missions/scenarios. They weren't all great but "crusade" was the best, simply 3-5 objectives, alternating placement and you do it all before you know where to deploy or what deployment map will be to keep it fair. I would love for AT to have some very simple core missions that don't have the big swingy victory point score and allow for attrition. If they can make a new book with some content for the historical mission side/fluff mission side as well as some really focused match play stuff it'd be great.

The open war pack should definitely be available for longer.

SamusDrake wrote:
The open war pack should definitely be available for longer.

Or just print the open war options in a book with numbers to roll for them.

Agreed on the Open War deck or some kind of reprint.

I don’t agree that the game needs to move to more uniform, competitive-style matched play. Most AT events seem happy to be more casual and narrative in nature, and the players seem happy playing in them. I don’t want to see a good game that knows what it is start down that rabbit hole.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:
The open war pack should definitely be available for longer.

Or just print the open war options in a book with numbers to roll for them.

Dammit Wes, is nothing sacred with you?

We would like a nice card deck...y'know, for a bit of class!

 gorgon wrote:
Agreed on the Open War deck or some kind of reprint.

I don’t agree that the game needs to move to more uniform, competitive-style matched play. Most AT events seem happy to be more casual and narrative in nature, and the players seem happy playing in them. I don’t want to see a good game that knows what it is start down that rabbit hole.

There is no reason you cannot have both. Some events can be an uniform, competitive-style matched play. Others can be more casual and narrative in nature. If there isn't interest from a given local community for one or the other, then that format can be dropped. I for one prefer competitive-style events.

SamusDrake wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:
The open war pack should definitely be available for longer.

Or just print the open war options in a book with numbers to roll for them.

Dammit Wes, is nothing sacred with you?

We would like a nice card deck...y'know, for a bit of class!

Just make a second deck; exactly the same drawing rules but different maps, twists, objectives etc. that you can combine with the first one to make an even more open war, but which is still fully standalone.

 gorgon wrote:
Agreed on the Open War deck or some kind of reprint.

I don’t agree that the game needs to move to more uniform, competitive-style matched play. Most AT events seem happy to be more casual and narrative in nature, and the players seem happy playing in them. I don’t want to see a good game that knows what it is start down that rabbit hole.

"Most AT events seem happy to be more casual and narrative in nature" And this wouldn't take away from that at all, it would just allow me and someone on the other side of the planet to discuss the game as "one thing" and not a lengthy list of extra variables, not have to couch every discussion in all the house rules of the particular narrative scenarios that seem common. The tagline of the engine war cards is no game need be the same, for me, there needs to at least exist some optional baseline, can we at least both agree the current matched play scenario could be improved?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

callidusx3 wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
Agreed on the Open War deck or some kind of reprint.

I don’t agree that the game needs to move to more uniform, competitive-style matched play. Most AT events seem happy to be more casual and narrative in nature, and the players seem happy playing in them. I don’t want to see a good game that knows what it is start down that rabbit hole.

There is no reason you cannot have both. Some events can be an uniform, competitive-style matched play. Others can be more casual and narrative in nature. If there isn't interest from a given local community for one or the other, then that format can be dropped. I for one prefer competitive-style events.

To me it's like if you can't make organized play work, I'm not sure how we can then plan more expansive/bigger/longer group games/narrative events. But like 30k here, it's 30k in name only, it's basically just people playing apoc.

My issue with the event I described still stands because if the plan is to do a more narrative thing, that's fine, but this was too in the middle.

I get the T word rubs people the wrong way (tournament). I don't think I'm out for competitive play, just organized and focused play at the minimum.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:
The open war pack should definitely be available for longer.

Or just print the open war options in a book with numbers to roll for them.

Dammit Wes, is nothing sacred with you?

We would like a nice card deck...y'know, for a bit of class!

Just make a second deck; exactly the same drawing rules but different maps, twists, objectives etc. that you can combine with the first one to make an even more open war, but which is still fully standalone.

That could be cool too, as long as they re-release the first one.


Honestly, if a new titanicus book dropped and it has like 6 incredibly simple missions for matched play literally just made up of 3 cards, like primary objective, deployment and either a planetary effect or battlefield effect but not both. And I'd honestly weight everything towards simplicity, so like the easiest ones or least complicated ones to remember.

While I disagree heavily with Crablezworth on the necessity of any such baselines that veer towards homogenizing the game towards a monolithic, optimizable "tournament standard" over the rich and tactically heck of a lot more interesting mix we have now...

Does the Echoes of Glory system in Crucible of Retribution not offer some semblance of that already? Less swingy than the excellent Engine War deck, more about a single mission for both sides than the regular Matched system.

 gorgon wrote:
Agreed on the Open War deck or some kind of reprint.

I don’t agree that the game needs to move to more uniform, competitive-style matched play. Most AT events seem happy to be more casual and narrative in nature, and the players seem happy playing in them. I don’t want to see a good game that knows what it is start down that rabbit hole.

Amen to that. Looking at 40k and the hideous mess that's falling into, replete with its weird table sizes and current fashion for terrain placement, and that's something that I wouldn't want for Titanicus

The game breakers are hellbent on making their game more boring more predictable. Their golden standard is get game down to where result is known before 1st turn even begins.

tneva82 wrote:
The game breakers are hellbent on making their game more boring more predictable. Their golden standard is get game down to where result is known before 1st turn even begins.

Yeah and hockey would be made vastly better by the rules changing from game to game and region to region. Even a re-release of open engine war cards is a good start.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 zedmeister wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
Agreed on the Open War deck or some kind of reprint.

I don’t agree that the game needs to move to more uniform, competitive-style matched play. Most AT events seem happy to be more casual and narrative in nature, and the players seem happy playing in them. I don’t want to see a good game that knows what it is start down that rabbit hole.

Amen to that. Looking at 40k and the hideous mess that's falling into, replete with its weird table sizes and current fashion for terrain placement, and that's something that I wouldn't want for Titanicus

I guess I must have 11 pages of garbage boards and battle over planet L bracket over and over, the matched play scenario as it exists needs streamlining, that's been my point since my first AT game. That doesn't mean everything needs to go as bad as it has for 40k.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/787202.page


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sherrypie wrote:
While I disagree heavily with Crablezworth on the necessity of any such baselines that veer towards homogenizing the game towards a monolithic, optimizable "tournament standard" over the rich and tactically heck of a lot more interesting mix we have now...

It's a set of models that would do nicely to have some sort of game organized around it, yes. The complexity can come from the player's battlegroups.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sherrypie wrote:


Does the Echoes of Glory system in Crucible of Retribution not offer some semblance of that already? Less swingy than the excellent Engine War deck, more about a single mission for both sides than the regular Matched system.

No but there are a handful of primary/secondary objectives from the engine war deck that would do just fine as a tone down primary both players vie over.

But there is a game already, that's an objective fact even if the basic form isn't exactly to your taste. Having an expansive suite of missions and environments to pick from is bloody amazing, especially for a GW game.

Players talking over what type of game they want to enact with the toolbox they are given is great. Tournament organizers having plenty of space to dictate what type of event they want to host is great.

While I admire Crablez' activity and initiative in AT related topics, positing that this is somehow dragging the game down, on the other hand, is utterly ludicrous. The lack of a monolithic game-type that everyone ought to adhere to is a strength that allows for actual examination of tactics on the field instead of optimizing towards a set outcome.

Amazingly, the Psi-Titan is in stock on Forgeworld UK!

Buy, Mortimer! Buy!

 Sherrypie wrote:
But there is a game already, that's an objective fact even if the basic form isn't exactly to your taste. Having an expansive suite of missions and environments to pick from is bloody amazing, especially for a GW game.

Players talking over what type of game they want to enact with the toolbox they are given is great. Tournament organizers having plenty of space to dictate what type of event they want to host is great.

While I admire Crablez' activity and initiative in AT related topics, positing that this is somehow dragging the game down, on the other hand, is utterly ludicrous. The lack of a monolithic game-type that everyone ought to adhere to is a strength that allows for actual examination of tactics on the field instead of optimizing towards a set outcome.

Does the knowledge that every game pic I've posted on dakka depicts a matched play scenario/game take away from the effort put forth? If it doesn't, perhaps consider my point for the entire time I've been playing is the current matched play scenario is bad and needs fixing, I've endeavored to do that myself but I'd very much love if GW did that, it would increase MY enjoyment and my opponents enjoyment of the game. Pearl clutching narrative enthusiasts can be as wounded by that opinion as they feel they need to be, it's a long way from turning AT into 40k bro hammer on planet L. Again, if they re-released the open engine war cards it'd do a lot to lift both narrative and matched plays respective boats. A re-release and a booster pack would be good too, or as other has said just a new book with missions for both narrative and critical a very stripped down set of matched play missions or one over arching mission with very limited secondaries. I think 5th ed's 6 missions (40k) but for AT is what I'd like, that's definitely not pushing for what 40k currently is in its 9th iteration, where people like choose a bunch of missions to do or whatever.

One of the main video game I play is arma 3, it has the same problem man, there are some popular mods that are "one thing" but endless other servers with any possible combination of downloads (mods) required. They all roughly share the same assets like with AT (the titans) but saying arma is one game just sorta doesn't work. I'm not lamenting freedom and choice, I'm lamenting the lack of pre-arranged consensus. Choice can be daunting, not to mention, clearly political. Gaming together requires some consensus, if we both have to rifle through a dozen books and hundreds of missions to argue over which one should be played this week, it's not exactly something that always inspires a positive experience.


So other than that, we all want new titans ya? It seems like they've reference both light and heavy scout titans a lot in the loyalist and now traitor books, So possibly scale 5 and 7. My two concerns for those potential releases are if they continue the trend of the iconoclast, that is having a narrow defined role with arbitrary limits on weaponry, that and like the warmaster and iconoclast, we haven't seen the thick card board terminals for the newer titan chasis since the warbringer, really hoping they continue to offer those without having to buy 5 of them.

@Sherrypie, what do you think might set a new titan or titans apart from exisiting ones other than new scale and possibly new weapon options?


From the 2018 group, posted by Daniel Schulz, list of all the titan chasis/class mentioned in the books/fluff, so whichever sorta fill out the missing scales could potentially be the next titan release. I'm assuming hound/reaver sized bases if its a scale 5 or 7.


"Rapier Class Light Scout Titan (lighter than Warhound)
Dire Wolf Class Heavy Scout Titan (heavier than Warhound)
Jackal Class Scout Titan
Punisher Class Battle Titan
Nightgaunt Class Battle Titan
Nemesis Class Battle Titan
Carnivore Class Battle Titan
Imperator Class Emperor Titan
Warmonger Class Emperor Titan
Apocalypse Class Titan
Reaver PSI-Titan
Also we should get by logic:
non-Nemesis Warbringer with two Reaver Carapace weapons.
Warlord Nemesis with Carapace Suzerain Plasma Annihilator"

Add to that these which were supposed to be in the ancient codex Titanicus II

Atlas Class Titan - a testbed Titan used by the Diviso Investigatus for testing new technologies
Legatus Class Command Titan
Vulcan Class Labour Titan

From here:
https://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?13356-Titan-Legions-So-what-do-you-know&p=365373&viewfull=1#post365373

tneva82 wrote:
The game breakers are hellbent on making their game more boring more predictable. Their golden standard is get game down to where result is known before 1st turn even begins.

This is actually a good point because Titanicus started off that way; I would watch any battle report and would successfully predict the outcome of a game. Now we have more titans - the Nemesis-WB, Warmaster, Psi-Titan - I'm now frequently surprised at the outcomes.

A few more:
Punisher: The Punisher-class titan is a rare, tri-legged pattern of Imperial Titan. The Punisher-class Titan, the Modus Destructor, was armed with twin tezlan accelerators with under-slung plasma annihilators and was deployed to the planet of Ullanor during the War of the Beast to defend the Mechanicus command center on the planet. (source: The Beast Must Die)

Executor: The Executor Titan is a class of Imperial Titan that was deployed to the planet of Ullanor during the War of the Beast. (source: The Beast Must Die)

Siege Titan: The Siege Titan is among the largest class of Imperial Titan, being larger and heavier than a Warlord, and is designed specifically to tear down enemy fortifications. The Titan's hand armaments are a Disruption Field-covered wrecking ball and multi-headed drill. (source: Titandeath)

Mirage: The Mirage Class Titan is a class of Imperial Titan known to be a heavy type comparable to a Warlord or Carnivore. (source: HH Book 5)

Komodo: The Komodo Class Titan is a rare and unique class of Imperial Titan. (source: HH Book 5)

Reviler: This pattern was designed to operate principally as a mobile Inferno Cannon platform and replaced the use of the heavier Knight classes in the Legio's core of retainers. (source: HH Book 3)

 zedmeister wrote:
Amazingly, the Psi-Titan is in stock on Forgeworld UK!

...still not available on the USA site.

I'm not sure it ever was?

It certainly hasn't been since then...

That Siege Titan sounds an awful lot like a Warmaster to me…
“What? Oh, that old thing? It’s… a… siege titan, yes. No it has no other class name, don’t be so organic, meatbag. You’ve never seen or heard about them before because they are both very rare and very specialised, and completely incapable of mounting pairs of plasma cannon that make the Warlord class’ own look like toys.”

 Mr_Rose wrote:
That Siege Titan sounds an awful lot like a Warmaster to me…
“What? Oh, that old thing? It’s… a… siege titan, yes. No it has no other class name, don’t be so organic, meatbag. You’ve never seen or heard about them before because they are both very rare and very specialised, and completely incapable of mounting pairs of plasma cannon that make the Warlord class’ own look like toys.”

lol

Reading the iconoclast's fluff in the traitors book is painful.

It would be neat to have some of those quad-walkers from Saturnine.

 Nurglitch wrote:
It would be neat to have some of those quad-walkers from Saturnine.

What are those quad walkers?

Is that the class where it's like a walking aircraft carrier on warlord legs?

 Crablezworth wrote:


Does the knowledge that every game pic I've posted on dakka depicts a matched play scenario/game take away from the effort put forth? If it doesn't, perhaps consider my point for the entire time I've been playing is the current matched play scenario is bad and needs fixing, I've endeavored to do that myself but I'd very much love if GW did that, it would increase MY enjoyment and my opponents enjoyment of the game. Pearl clutching narrative enthusiasts can be as wounded by that opinion as they feel they need to be, it's a long way from turning AT into 40k bro hammer on planet L. Again, if they re-released the open engine war cards it'd do a lot to lift both narrative and matched plays respective boats. A re-release and a booster pack would be good too, or as other has said just a new book with missions for both narrative and critical a very stripped down set of matched play missions or one over arching mission with very limited secondaries. I think 5th ed's 6 missions (40k) but for AT is what I'd like, that's definitely not pushing for what 40k currently is in its 9th iteration, where people like choose a bunch of missions to do or whatever.

It does not (and it is always a pleasure to see your tables), but it doesn't have anything to do with the point either. You have a preference for specific mission types and enjoy playing in that frame, this is fine, but there is no logical bridge from that to the claim that the basic structure of presented Matched play stuff would be broken or unusable. As for the rest, Engine War exists and people can email GW at their Titanicus account to make them aware of the need to get reprints of that.

 Crablezworth wrote:


One of the main video game I play is arma 3, it has the same problem man, there are some popular mods that are "one thing" but endless other servers with any possible combination of downloads (mods) required. They all roughly share the same assets like with AT (the titans) but saying arma is one game just sorta doesn't work. I'm not lamenting freedom and choice, I'm lamenting the lack of pre-arranged consensus. Choice can be daunting, not to mention, clearly political. Gaming together requires some consensus, if we both have to rifle through a dozen books and hundreds of missions to argue over which one should be played this week, it's not exactly something that always inspires a positive experience.

Why would it be beneficial for anyone to have AT be just one thing? Your point would seem worthier in my eyes if I could be persuaded of that, but it ain't happening. Gaming has always required consensus with any non-boardgame setups and this isn't in any way special to AT. I'm sorry but the consensus claim here is bordering on the absurd, as if any wargames would have only one way to ever play them with. AT has a Matched system that works fine (mostly, E&D needs to be used by both or neither if the game size exceeds like 1500 points), so the consensus talk before the game here isn't anything more complicated than "1500 points, normal Matched? Cool." if players don't want to complicate things. You can argue that is not enough or you would like it to be different, maybe like Engine War or the version you devised yourselves, but that does not necessitate any grand overhaul of the system for things to carry on just fine. Better for some, sure, but that's why the options are there already as a toolkit for different people to play as they want to. As for the book rifling, again, that is a pretty bad example of how things work. In my experience with narrative gaming or other forms of off-the-wall missions, it usually isn't a tableside negotiation as much as it is one player seeing something they'd like to try out beforehand, suggesting that to the other party who then goes "nice, let's try that and see how it goes". If there isn't a tournament going on, why would this be a problem that required any action from the developers? If I was running an event, I'd write a mission pack for it in the first place to make it fit the organiser's vision of balance or similarity I'd want to encourage there anyway.

 Crablezworth wrote:


So other than that, we all want new titans ya? It seems like they've reference both light and heavy scout titans a lot in the loyalist and now traitor books, So possibly scale 5 and 7. My two concerns for those potential releases are if they continue the trend of the iconoclast, that is having a narrow defined role with arbitrary limits on weaponry, that and like the warmaster and iconoclast, we haven't seen the thick card board terminals for the newer titan chasis since the warbringer, really hoping they continue to offer those without having to buy 5 of them.

@Sherrypie, what do you think might set a new titan or titans apart from exisiting ones other than new scale and possibly new weapon options?

Now there's the thousand dollar question, as the light / mid / heavy / superheavy categorisation is served pretty well and knights fill the skirmishing roles below those. New weapon options can certainly throw a few spanners in the works on their own (say, by causing movement shenanigans or utilizing underused mechanics like forcing Heat on targets). I could see some more specialized roles for the 'tweeners, something like an actual recon Scout titan at Scale 5 that would give benefits for your heavier engines if it hangs close to the enemy, fires target locks at them or something along those lines expanding the tools of pure legios. Between Reavers and Warhounds it could be interesting to see maybe something that could natively squadron in pairs, like a machine that was closer to the Reaver in sturdiness but Warhound in armaments. The Warbringer is pretty awkward in its armaments, but the role of an artillery titan could be extended downwards as well into a machine that was more like a mobile missile platform like the old Reaver with triple missiles, able to relocate quickly and keep up a barrage of shield stripping. Support engines in general would be interesting, boosting ammunition, shields or heat management by hanging in base contact with their fellows. Melee legios could also be interested in up-armoured variants in the original AT88 style, exchanging their carapace weapons away for more protective plating. Repair mechanics or otherwise differentiated reliability in subsystems would also offer some levers to pull, like maybe starting with one 2+ shield that drops directly to 4+ or even pushing weird tech into special rules (imagine Ardexes that spew out low Strength Concussive hits).

So off the top of my head recon, support, indirect fire, variations in the number of weapon systems and special rules would offer something we haven't yet really seen. There are some pretty cool ideas in legio upgrades and mutations that we've seen thus far, here's hoping they'll bring some of that into the chassis designs as well.

 Sherrypie wrote:


Now there's the thousand dollar question, as the light / mid / heavy / superheavy categorisation is served pretty well and knights fill the skirmishing roles below those. New weapon options can certainly throw a few spanners in the works on their own (say, by causing movement shenanigans or utilizing underused mechanics like forcing Heat on targets). I could see some more specialized roles for the 'tweeners, something like an actual recon Scout titan at Scale 5 that would give benefits for your heavier engines if it hangs close to the enemy, fires target locks at them or something along those lines expanding the tools of pure legios. Between Reavers and Warhounds it could be interesting to see maybe something that could natively squadron in pairs, like a machine that was closer to the Reaver in sturdiness but Warhound in armaments. The Warbringer is pretty awkward in its armaments, but the role of an artillery titan could be extended downwards as well into a machine that was more like a mobile missile platform like the old Reaver with triple missiles, able to relocate quickly and keep up a barrage of shield stripping. Support engines in general would be interesting, boosting ammunition, shields or heat management by hanging in base contact with their fellows. Melee legios could also be interested in up-armoured variants in the original AT88 style, exchanging their carapace weapons away for more protective plating. Repair mechanics or otherwise differentiated reliability in subsystems would also offer some levers to pull, like maybe starting with one 2+ shield that drops directly to 4+ or even pushing weird tech into special rules (imagine Ardexes that spew out low Strength Concussive hits).

So off the top of my head recon, support, indirect fire, variations in the number of weapon systems and special rules would offer something we haven't yet really seen. There are some pretty cool ideas in legio upgrades and mutations that we've seen thus far, here's hoping they'll bring some of that into the chassis designs as well.

I do like the idea of maybe the one between hound and reaver being more like the reaver missile boat, that'd be cool. For scale 5 scout titan, maybe the ability to outflank as a built in option or ability it can pay for. I like the support idea, like tagging targets for the bigger titans.

I'd be fine with new titans being mostly on the aux side too, with maybe some legios have more access than others. But the fear is just over specializing them at the cost of weapon loadout options, it be nice to think a scale 7 like the warbringer could maybe swap some weapon with a reaver while having a few unique options of its own. I just fear the insane pigeon holing if gw decides "this is a close combat titan and only ever that" like with the iconoclast. Really hoping they move back to letting the loadout players choose dictate its role on the field.

I like the idea of the recon one having a hull mounted weapon that with corridor arc, but perhaps decent to long range and possibly even a +1 at long range, like a little sniper.

Support is also a cool idea, could see it almost like a beefed up battlefield asset with proximity benefits, like +1 clade when within 2inches or base to base.




In 3rd party AT news, vanguard just released some new stuff and this one caught my eye. Could be a cool traitor battlefield asset for strafing run, also has landing gears like the thunderhawk so good for terrain/titan bases.

It seems Vanguard and Battlebling have our backs these days. Bless'em.

There are many indie companies out there doing really cool stuff in Titanicus scale. I'm still waiting for the nutter who will make an entire city using GW, Grimdark Terrain, The Lazy Forger, Troublemaker Games, and Bits Blitz parts!

Oh Malika...how could I have forgotten you in that mix.

SamusDrake wrote:
It seems Vanguard and Battlebling have our backs these days. Bless'em.

They really do


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Malika2 wrote:
There are many indie companies out there doing really cool stuff in Titanicus scale. I'm still waiting for the nutter who will make an entire city using GW, Grimdark Terrain, The Lazy Forger, Troublemaker Games, and Bits Blitz parts!

Slowly getting there

Iconoclaust with weapon swap in Traitor book

Yeah, saw that, ground my teeth. I’m going to mix up the weapons when it comes to it. Started my second legio recently and when it comes to my next Warmaster I’ll be swapping weapons between them. Krytos will be getting the plasma and chainsword arm along with the Gatling array. The other legio will be getting plasma, the siege drill and the missile launcher.

I take it thats weapon swaps for the secondary weapons, because I'm just seeing an Iconoclast titan with large chainsword and fist?

SamusDrake wrote:
I take it thats weapon swaps for the secondary weapons, because I'm just seeing an Iconoclast titan with large chainsword and fist?

The missile launcher above the head is from the regular Warmaster.

Ooooh I see. Cool beans.

 Malika2 wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:
It would be neat to have some of those quad-walkers from Saturnine.

What are those quad walkers?

They're named 'Donjons' in that novel.

Got my armiger order in the US. Predictably the QA on all 4 boxes is garbage. Mold slips down the back of the torso, weapons barely identifiable. It's absurd. If I hadn't got into pressure casting recently I'd be waiting weeks to get them all to a reasonable state. Still disappointing as a hobbiest first. Cute though!

I just had a look through the Traitor legios book and for some reason there's only two Warhounds in it, both for Audax. The Loyalist book has at least five.

JWBS wrote:
I just had a look through the Traitor legios book and for some reason there's only two Warhounds in it, both for Audax. The Loyalist book has at least five.

Did you notice the weird colour difference with the legio fureans warmaster and the rest of their titans?

 Crablezworth wrote:

JWBS wrote:
I just had a look through the Traitor legios book and for some reason there's only two Warhounds in it, both for Audax. The Loyalist book has at least five.

Did you notice the weird colour difference with the legio fureans warmaster and the rest of their titans?

Isn’t that mentioned in the little fluff blurb underneath it?

Edit: it is.

Dire Wolf Heavy Scout Titan!



When Warhounds Won’t Cut It – It’s the All-new, All-smashing Dire Wolf Heavy Scout Titan - WarCom

Looks terrible.

It’s a Chickenhawk. It eats Chickens.

I don’t hate it, but it does seem blocky.

I think it's chunky and excellent

Kinda weird. I don't initially hate it, but yeah, it's...idk.

Okay upon further inspection the pose is awful and the proportions aren't good in some places (notably the arms), but it can be salvaged with an arm weapon swap and a leg adjustment. I do dig the main gun mount. Overall nowhere near as good as the standard hound but it's something I can work with.

I actually kind of like it.

I do appreciate that the non-core chassis are more limited in load out though.

Well at least we can check that one off the list of "name-dropped but yet unseen" titans...

The fabled "Warhound Nemesis"

I like it but 3 of these will cost as much as a 3d printer, so I'll just wait for the STL

Anyone else getting Space Crusade Dreadnought vibes from that guy?

Yes, I like it. Clearly Legio Xestobiax needs a pair of them.

 Nazrak wrote:
Anyone else getting Space Crusade Dreadnought vibes from that guy?

Yeah it's got that pose down, and the vertical symmetry too. Really needs a walking pose to break up the shape, and some underslung weapons like the standard warhound / Asterius, imo.

I freaking love that!

It's really really fat

I have a love/hate relationship with that design lol. Its goofy and weirdly proportioned and that makes it wonderful... but its still goofy and weird lol.

Good to see Titanicus is still getting new stuff, don't love the model though. I hope the kit allows more flexibility as even heavy scout titans should look less static and more mobile. That space crusade comparison is spot on.

Going with £50-55 as the price, based on the Asterius costing £40.

No way this costs more than a Reaver surely, unless it's sold in pairs.

I think I'm gonna stick some Armiger legs on mine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh damn, I just had a thought - plastic or resin? :(

JWBS wrote:
No way this costs more than a Reaver surely, unless it's sold in pairs.

Reaver is plastic, so I'd guess it'll be about £45 for one.

Seems to be inspired by this conversion.

Looks like he scavenged up a large AT ST direct from the eighties for that one huh.

Nice! About time we got a new Titan. Good to see neutron lasers make an appearance as well

NOOOOOOOOO it's from Forge World based on the last bit in the article. Not more resin. So spoiled by those beautiful Titanicus plastic sprues. Praying it's a plastic box, but I don't think they ever have said "from forgeworld" without it meaning resin (as opposed to specialist games or what not).

At the same time, I'm NOT seeing the usual print lines and artifacts from the for sure Resin kits, which transfer over to the model - I was SHOCKED to start discovering my FW Titanicus Knights and Armigers all have bits of 3d print support that hadn't been properly cleaned and patched prior to making the Forge World Master Mold. They're really phoning in the quality on the FW parts, vs say Aeronautica which somehow get much higher quality casts. I've bought 1 of every forge world release for AT and AI, and the difference is stark.


Edit - well this is for sure a resin cast in the article. You can see the casting line screw up on bottom of the radiator of the neutron laser behind the top armor panel. And a 3d print line. Hope that's not the master...

Eh. My favorite look for the Warhound is still this one:

It’s weird. I don’t love it, but I’m sure it’ll grow on me. Resin is a shame.

OMG that looks bloody awful!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stormonu wrote:
Eh. My favorite look for the Warhound is still this one:

Now that would be bringing back sexy!

There's good 3d prints available in that iteration (updated looks) if you're really that keen.

JWBS wrote:
Looks like he scavenged up a large AT ST direct from the eighties for that one huh.

Yep, it's the old Kenner\Palitoy AT-ST legs, with part of a Zoid stuck on top. I remember it from WD back in the day.

I do like the Dire Wolf, a bit odd looking, but I like my Titans a bit odd looking, shame it's FW rather than plastic, don't mind working with resin but generally find that vehicles in particular work better in plastic.

Wonder if we'll see this one in 28mm scale, the old Warhound is starting to show its age a bit.

 Stormonu wrote:
Eh. My favorite look for the Warhound is still this one:

100% AGREED!

This pretty much proves what I said before, GW screwed up weapon progression in AT (yes, for legacy reasons, but still). Let's see, seeing titan guns can be roughly divided into small, medium and large:

Warhound: 2x S
Direwolf: 2x S, 1x M
Reaver: 2x M, 1x S
Nemesis: 2x M, 1x L
Warlord: 2x L, 2x M
Warmaster: 2x XL, 2x S

It's clear Reaver is too weakly armed (barely 1 step up from glorified scout titan) and Warlord is too heavily gunned (it's backup guns are heavier than frakking Warmaster ones and basically equal to whole mainline battle titan in weight). I'd move Reaver to 3x M to make it what it's supposed in fluff (versatile all rounder and mainline titan) and reduce Warlord to 2x L, 2x S to make it more realistic (and give Nemesis a niche).

Of course, better solution (perhaps in AT 2.0?) would be to give each titan number of reactor points to symbolize energy it can direct to guns and limit loadout by giving each gun energy draw number (would also rein in things all turbolaser spam which we don't see in fluff). Perchaps modified by Legio specific gear or pushing reactor. Then you could mount superheavy minmaxed loadout but there would be a chance one of the guns will fizzle. It would also give things like megabolters and missile launchers upside by giving them little energy draw and allowing you to reliably fire whatever other heavy cannons you have. Etc, etc...

JWBS wrote:
There's good 3d prints available in that iteration (updated looks) if you're really that keen.

The ones for Battlebling are very tempting, indeed!

 Irbis wrote:
This pretty much proves what I said before, GW screwed up weapon progression in AT (yes, for legacy reasons, but still). Let's see, seeing titan guns can be roughly divided into small, medium and large:

Warhound: 2x S
Direwolf: 2x S, 1x M
Reaver: 2x M, 1x S
Nemesis: 2x M, 1x L
Warlord: 2x L, 2x M
Warmaster: 2x XL, 2x S

It's clear Reaver is too weakly armed (barely 1 step up from glorified scout titan) and Warlord is too heavily gunned (it's backup guns are heavier than frakking Warmaster ones and basically equal to whole mainline battle titan in weight). I'd move Reaver to 3x M to make it what it's supposed in fluff (versatile all rounder and mainline titan) and reduce Warlord to 2x L, 2x S to make it more realistic (and give Nemesis a niche).

Of course, better solution (perhaps in AT 2.0?) would be to give each titan number of reactor points to symbolize energy it can direct to guns and limit loadout by giving each gun energy draw number (would also rein in things all turbolaser spam which we don't see in fluff). Perchaps modified by Legio specific gear or pushing reactor. Then you could mount superheavy minmaxed loadout but there would be a chance one of the guns will fizzle. It would also give things like megabolters and missile launchers upside by giving them little energy draw and allowing you to reliably fire whatever other heavy cannons you have. Etc, etc...

Direwolf isn’t 2 x S though. Looking at the weapon card, it’s a paired system, so only one. And thus far, no mention of them being swappable. So we’re left with a slightly upgunned Warhound at the price of tactical flexibility.

Yea, the Dire Wolf effectively has 1 vulcan mega-bolter and a neutron cannon/volcano cannon.

And that mega-bolter can lose half of it's shots if there's something in the way of one arm!

...well, that kinda looks like a crappy conversion, TBH.

 Albertorius wrote:
...well, that kinda looks like a crappy conversion, TBH.

Exactly that, looks like someone's tried to make the old Armourcast Warhounds and just thrown a load of parts together.

Really shocked by the quality control someone mentioned. The fact that it made it onto the official photos makes it even worse, and to be honest they don't have an excuse for this.

So as one of the Audax players in the room...



Sure it's resin, but I probably wouldn't spam them anyway. The Dire Wolf has been showing up a lot in fluff lately, so if this saves the plastic capacity for the Rapier....it's like a double win. And hell, maybe I'll get BOTH this year. So yeah...I'm good with this!

Ruleswise, I'm still chewing on it. S7 Shock is kinda interesting in certain scenarios, provided the chassis gets an extra pip on the reactor. I'm more interested to learn exactly how it's classified. It's *probably* an Auxiliary Titan, but you never know if it might come with a rule that allows it to replace a Warhound in an existing maniple or something.

Ruleswise, I'm still chewing on it. S7 Shock is kinda interesting in certain scenarios,

Don't forget that it's also Bypass, so it ignores shields entirely. So if that S7 beats armor of anything, it's shut down, and everything else gets to pound at it while it's defenseless.

This thing is going to be very scary if it can get a flank shot on something.

I quite like the dire wolf, not a bad design.

Although has anyone commented yet how similar it looks to the Dire Wolf in Battletech/Mech Warrior?

 Stormonu wrote:
Eh. My favorite look for the Warhound is still this one:

Spoiler:

There is a really cool resin parts maker (sadly, I forget the name) who does a conversion kit for the new plastic warhound, so you can have that domed body, or even the weapons angled at 90 degrees. Looks very cool, I shall try and fish out the name.

 Pacific wrote:
I quite like the dire wolf, not a bad design.

Although has anyone commented yet how similar it looks to the Dire Wolf in Battletech/Mech Warrior?

 Stormonu wrote:
Eh. My favorite look for the Warhound is still this one:

Spoiler:

There is a really cool resin parts maker (sadly, I forget the name) who does a conversion kit for the new plastic warhound, so you can have that domed body, or even the weapons angled at 90 degrees. Looks very cool, I shall try and fish out the name.

It's Adeptus Dad. I think he may have sold the design to BB. There's other none BB stuff on his site though https://adeptus-dad.github.io/

Ughhh Dire is certainly the word - thats a terrible looking model :(

A must not buy IMO its as bad as some of the awful tau suits - some arms with built in defense bolters would have been much better - hopefully someone will make some

Unfortuantely I think the actual BattleTech Dire Wolf model is a bit small

...do we have different grades of volcano cannon these days, and I've just missed it?

Could've sworn it was a Warlord-scale weapon normally, though I guess there's the Shadowsword version as well.

 Dysartes wrote:
...do we have different grades of volcano cannon these days, and I've just missed it?

Could've sworn it was a Warlord-scale weapon normally, though I guess there's the Shadowsword version as well.

There are volcano cannons (reaver, Shadowsword, Dire Wolf now) and Bellicosa Volcano cannon (Nemesis Warbringer, Warlord).

Rihgu wrote:

Ruleswise, I'm still chewing on it. S7 Shock is kinda interesting in certain scenarios,

Don't forget that it's also Bypass, so it ignores shields entirely. So if that S7 beats armor of anything, it's shut down, and everything else gets to pound at it while it's defenseless.

This thing is going to be very scary if it can get a flank shot on something.

I think flank/rear plus coordinated strike is what you want with this. Really gotta boost that shot as high as possible since the shutdown roll is still only a 3+. I don't know if it comes with squadroning, but I don't care either since Audax can do that and other stuff anyway. Thing is, I don't like perma-squadroning when I can do all those shenanigans with Lupercal maniples. If it comes with some kind of rule where it can replace a WH in existing maniples, that would be awesome. If not, I'll have to chew on it. Maybe one of them as a reinforcement Titan and squadroned with a reinforcement WH will be a way to go.

Edit: Squadroning it with a Rapier (when that's released) might make even more sense. Presumably cheaper. Outflanking the Dire Wolf also makes sense so they have a harder time keeping it in their front arc. Very theoryhammer without the full rules, but seems worth a try.

axotl wrote:

Spoiler:

NOOOOOOOOO it's from Forge World based on the last bit in the article. Not more resin. So spoiled by those beautiful Titanicus plastic sprues. Praying it's a plastic box, but I don't think they ever have said "from forgeworld" without it meaning resin (as opposed to specialist games or what not).

At the same time, I'm NOT seeing the usual print lines and artifacts from the for sure Resin kits, which transfer over to the model - I was SHOCKED to start discovering my FW Titanicus Knights and Armigers all have bits of 3d print support that hadn't been properly cleaned and patched prior to making the Forge World Master Mold. They're really phoning in the quality on the FW parts, vs say Aeronautica which somehow get much higher quality casts. I've bought 1 of every forge world release for AT and AI, and the difference is stark.

Edit - well this is for sure a resin cast in the article. You can see the casting line screw up on bottom of the radiator of the neutron laser behind the top armor panel. And a 3d print line. Hope that's not the master...

It could also be a hybrid kit.

This popped up on one of my socials just now



It solves my issue with the symmetrical legs, I would only need to swap out the arm weapons on this.

well, dont know how it will fit in the game, but from a pure visual point, i`ll take it.

JWBS wrote:
This popped up on one of my socials just now



It solves my issue with the symmetrical legs, I would only need to swap out the arm weapons on this.

Ha, that’s a rejected design I’ve done for Vanguard Miniatures. There is some concept art out there of an Mk2 version of that design.

 Malika2 wrote:


Ha, that’s a rejected design I’ve done for Vanguard Miniatures. There is some concept art out there of an Mk2 version of that design.

Ah! Very good, I commend you on your work here Sir.

It looks awful. I could forgive sticking with the warhound theme if there was some meaningful cross-pollination like being able to take warhound arm weapons. But no, it's got a single paired megabolter and the ardax name thing is just confusing. The other problem is based on the weapons cards the carapace weapons aren't even corridor arc, that sorta bugs me conceptually seeing as the vibe is like heavy scout sniper, especially with the +1 to hit. Unless there's a swap for the bolters, it will basically have 2 options, 1 of which seems like an auto take given the bypass. Really hoping these are aux and not in squadrons tbh. If it had its own unique head at least the design wouldn't look like a weird kitbash. What bugs me the most about it being so ugly is, in a time with rapidly expanding 3d design and printing, you'd think with so few released fw and gw would take their time and make something really iconic when they get a chance to add something truly new into the world. Instead we get something that, honest to god looks like they bought a file on cults and slapped gw marketing on it. Just it being resin basically guarantees its easier to convert one from a plastic hound an and extra reaver weapon.


The upside is there are already some great 3rd party options that could work. Coincidentally this thing is 50% off currently and all it needs is some vulcan megabolter arms. I'd probably give it a head swap too.

I like that this design minus the claws actually looks like a scout sniper titan, the weird body makes sense when you think of keeping the head out of los and lifting the tale up over cover to sneak shots in without presenting much to shoot back it or much to give ones position away of auspex, I can really buy this thing sneaking around like a warhound. The fw dire wolf, less so.



https://www.cgtrader.com/3d-print-models/miniatures/sci-fi/close-combat-scout-titan?fbclid=IwAR0hNzWTheyXehxePHTRAPxTdppCoRjmXMamNeUnDnCXiXA-jpEERYk538Q


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Malika2 wrote:

JWBS wrote:
This popped up on one of my socials just now

Spoiler:

It solves my issue with the symmetrical legs, I would only need to swap out the arm weapons on this.

Ha, that’s a rejected design I’ve done for Vanguard Miniatures. There is some concept art out there of an Mk2 version of that design.

That thing is way better than the GW Malika, any chance you can release stl's of that thing?

There’s two reasons I won’t release the STLs for it: (1) the design contains a few elements which are remixed from existing Vanguard Miniatures components (meaning I don’t own the rights to those) and (2) it was designed in scale with old forumware Titan models which scale is slightly bigger than the old Epic Titans, but still tiny compared to the current Titanicus stuff. This means that if you’d print it, you’d have to upscale it, meaning many details and other aspects will look odd compared to the rest of the range.

 Malika2 wrote:
There’s two reasons I won’t release the STLs for it: (1) the design contains a few elements which are remixed from existing Vanguard Miniatures components (meaning I don’t own the rights to those) and (2) it was designed in scale with old forumware Titan models which scale is slightly bigger than the old Epic Titans, but still tiny compared to the current Titanicus stuff. This means that if you’d print it, you’d have to upscale it, meaning many details and other aspects will look odd compared to the rest of the range.

Makes sense, I'm seeing an opportunity for some enterprising desginer to whip up a conversion kit for existing plastic warhounds. Wouldn't need to do too much, something to cradle the carapace gun that fits, bolter arms and maybe a better head.

Forgeworld eeew, wallet is saved.

"And there was this Titan there all along you've only just found out about! The reason being, it was so ugly no commander dared field one."

 Crablezworth wrote:
I like that this design minus the claws actually looks like a scout sniper titan, the weird body makes sense when you think of keeping the head out of los and lifting the tale up over cover to sneak shots in without presenting much to shoot back it or much to give ones position away of auspex, I can really buy this thing sneaking around like a warhound. The fw dire wolf, less so.

Cool design, but it just looks like a modernization of the old Slaaneshi Subjugator Titan. It doesn't look like a heavier WH titan (it looks lighter), and doesn't really even look Imperial. I'd like to see some of those design notes make it into the Rapier kit, where they'd make more sense.

I think it a bit much for the neutron laser to have both Bypass and Shock. No skill involved and just point and poke at the biggest enemy to shut them down. I would drop the Bypass so that it would still require dropping target shields first.

 gorgon wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
I like that this design minus the claws actually looks like a scout sniper titan, the weird body makes sense when you think of keeping the head out of los and lifting the tale up over cover to sneak shots in without presenting much to shoot back it or much to give ones position away of auspex, I can really buy this thing sneaking around like a warhound. The fw dire wolf, less so.

Cool design, but it just looks like a modernization of the old Slaaneshi Subjugator Titan. It doesn't look like a heavier WH titan (it looks lighter), and doesn't really even look Imperial. I'd like to see some of those design notes make it into the Rapier kit, where they'd make more sense.

It looks like a JadTitan destroyer conversion, like the tank destroyer versions of various panzers.

 gorgon wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
I like that this design minus the claws actually looks like a scout sniper titan, the weird body makes sense when you think of keeping the head out of los and lifting the tale up over cover to sneak shots in without presenting much to shoot back it or much to give ones position away of auspex, I can really buy this thing sneaking around like a warhound. The fw dire wolf, less so.

Cool design, but it just looks like a modernization of the old Slaaneshi Subjugator Titan. It doesn't look like a heavier WH titan (it looks lighter), and doesn't really even look Imperial. I'd like to see some of those design notes make it into the Rapier kit, where they'd make more sense.

I know, my point is without the claws and a different head ist already better in terms of design. I agree the plating looks more chaos but even a less rounded more boxy version would still be better imo.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 gorgon wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
I like that this design minus the claws actually looks like a scout sniper titan, the weird body makes sense when you think of keeping the head out of los and lifting the tale up over cover to sneak shots in without presenting much to shoot back it or much to give ones position away of auspex, I can really buy this thing sneaking around like a warhound. The fw dire wolf, less so.

Cool design, but it just looks like a modernization of the old Slaaneshi Subjugator Titan. It doesn't look like a heavier WH titan (it looks lighter), and doesn't really even look Imperial. I'd like to see some of those design notes make it into the Rapier kit, where they'd make more sense.

It looks like a JadTitan destroyer conversion, like the tank destroyer versions of various panzers.

I just like that looks believably like a hunter of sorts, the kind of titan that would shoot and re-locate quickly.

Trivia: molecular anaylsis show that dire wolves never had genetic flow with actual wolves, instead, the closest animal to them are north African jackals.

GW/FW have not done themselves any favors with the static pose on this.

IMO, this union of Warhound and Warbringer needs some better feet, slightly longer neck, and some arms that have a little more oomph.

That Neutron Laser sounds like a "Duh!" pick - perhaps a little over powered.

 schoon wrote:
GW/FW have not done themselves any favors with the static pose on this.

IMO, this union of Warhound and Warbringer needs some better feet, slightly longer neck, and some arms that have a little more oomph.

That Neutron Laser sounds like a "Duh!" pick - perhaps a little over powered.

Ya, this is again why the game is going downhill for me, we went from platforms and systems where we define the role based on weapons loadouts to like models with 2 options and 1 is the auto take... great. A game with the promise of endless modularity and customization and we get a new titan with 2 weapon options, and one is like you're saying, the obvious duh pick me one.

I don't really understand either why it's "heavier" if it's basically a sniper/hunter. You'd think it'd be more towards lighter and scale 5. It's also odd how it's still scale 6, you'd think it'd be scale to at least fill that gap. I just don't really want more titans if they're all going to be skirting the conventions of earlier titans and no longer being plastic kits. It really does seem like the rumours of them ending AT this year are more and more likely if they're just going to phone it in like this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Iracundus wrote:
I think it a bit much for the neutron laser to have both Bypass and Shock. No skill involved and just point and poke at the biggest enemy to shut them down. I would drop the Bypass so that it would still require dropping target shields first.

Well at least it has to push the reactor, but I agree with you it's a bit too much like the acastus/asterius level point and click. Add to the fact that they didn't make it corridor arc even though it's clearly quite hull mounted. Really hoping it's an aux titan and they don't do a bunch of silly maniples with it.

 Albertorius wrote:
...well, that kinda looks like a crappy conversion, TBH.

My first thought was it was a kitbash.

Honestly for me the whole idea of 10 story tall "scout" titan (especially when skimmers and fliers and orbital auguries exist) is already a bit wonky, and a heavy scout is just weird. I know that in this context it just means fast, a destroyer or torpedo boat vs a battleship, but still.

And the Tonka truck head is not helping.

The neutron laser at least is a single shot without blast.

I quite like the look. The head and neck are basically stock warhound, just the carapace plating is more cut back. The arms are lighter, and the two rear reactor/shield blocks are oriented more vertically that horizontally on the warhound to give space for the carapace mount without making the main hull much wider.

The legs trade away the agile warhound style, losing the extra joint and widespread and flexible ankles and toes for a more robust layout to better brace the oversized carapace mount.

I hope fw makes this in 40k scale as well as for AT. They have been really neglecting the full size titan range for a while now since the belicosa for the warbringer.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
The legs trade away the agile warhound style, losing the extra joint and widespread and flexible ankles and toes for a more robust layout to better brace the oversized carapace mount.

Funnily enough, in the pic the feet being parallel to the recoil of the carapace gun makes it like it will topple over whenever it shoots ^^

The neutron laser makes me wish it was an option for Reavers.
But yeah a one-shot draining weapon with relatively low strength that needs to punch through armour for the best chance of activating its true utility? For 45 points? Not actually that egregious. Maybe it could stand to be Specialist too? The fire arc is definitely a bit off, though I guess it could represent torso twisting as the battlemech people call it?

My brain is struggling to figure out how this thing balances and walks. Isn't it missing a joint? It's got bird-like legs, but with the femur/thigh missing. It probably works and my brain is just too feeble, lol, but it looks weird, like if it became unbalanced it wouldn't be able to right itself.

I think it kind of has a shuffling motion; though I think also its upper joints are partly hidden. It's kind of in a "pause, lower down, fire" kind of position.

I do agree the long shins do make you wonder how effective and mobile it is.

roll 3 or 4 for frontal direct hit on Warhound and reaver, on Warlord and warmaster they have to flank. There're also way to boost strength of attack like Experimental weapon, or Legio Audax .....

I don't like the direwolf. As others have pointed out the parallel feet make it look like it will topple from recoil and the overall design looks much more squat than the warhound.

To my mind a good GW alternative would be the Mechanicum vorax. They've got the right type of weapons and placement (chaingun arms and energy weapon in a dorsal mount), they appear to be the right size bracket, you'd just need to give them appropriate iconography and re-scale some of the details. I'm sure they'll be cheaper too.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
The neutron laser makes me wish it was an option for Reavers.
But yeah a one-shot draining weapon with relatively low strength that needs to punch through armour for the best chance of activating its true utility? For 45 points? Not actually that egregious. Maybe it could stand to be Specialist too? The fire arc is definitely a bit off, though I guess it could represent torso twisting as the battlemech people call it?

The +1 to hit at under 30 inches is big, bypass is huge given the range. Arc is silly good for first fire.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

The Black Adder wrote:
I don't like the direwolf. As others have pointed out the parallel feet make it look like it will topple from recoil and the overall design looks much more squat than the warhound.

To my mind a good GW alternative would be the Mechanicum vorax. They've got the right type of weapons and placement (chaingun arms and energy weapon in a dorsal mount), they appear to be the right size bracket, you'd just need to give them appropriate iconography and re-scale some of the details. I'm sure they'll be cheaper too.

Vorax is much smaller, would have to use a lot terrain on the base to get the height right. Wysiwyg is good, just might looks a big scrawny on an 80mm next to a warhound.

luckily the main weapon is a laser so no need to worry about recoil

depends on how strong the laser is

The Black Adder wrote:
I don't like the direwolf. As others have pointed out the parallel feet make it look like it will topple from recoil and the overall design looks much more squat than the warhound.

To my mind a good GW alternative would be the Mechanicum vorax. They've got the right type of weapons and placement (chaingun arms and energy weapon in a dorsal mount), they appear to be the right size bracket, you'd just need to give them appropriate iconography and re-scale some of the details. I'm sure they'll be cheaper too.

I think it’s just the feets putting me off. And possibly the static leg positioning.

However, as a mobile artillery platform (that’s how I see it) the static pose does make sense, as it’s locked for firing.

The feets just look too skinny from the angle we’ve seen.

OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:luckily the main weapon is a laser so no need to worry about recoil

kodos wrote:depends on how strong the laser is

The problem with the Neutron Laser is that neutrons are particles with rest mass and way more momentum than a photon. On the face of it a laser made of neutrons is a contradiction in terms but I guess the laser could be the carrier/accelerator (chargeless particles are difficult to move with magnets) but either way you’re going to get substantially more recoil unless you aren’t really using enough neutrons to do damage, in which case what was the point of adding them?

 Crablezworth wrote:
I don't really understand either why it's "heavier" if it's basically a sniper/hunter. You'd think it'd be more towards lighter and scale 5. It's also odd how it's still scale 6, you'd think it'd be scale to at least fill that gap. I just don't really want more titans if they're all going to be skirting the conventions of earlier titans and no longer being plastic kits. It really does seem like the rumours of them ending AT this year are more and more likely if they're just going to phone it in like this.

So we've gotten plastic kits for the main 3, plus all the 'tweener Titans released so far. I think we can expect that to continue, it's just that this one was viewed as more of a variant than a core Titan kit. We know that SG gets a limited amount of plastics capacity, so I think this bodes well for a new plastic kit for one of the remaining tweeners sometime this year. I suspect they just didn't want to spend those chips on *this* kit. As we've seen with Knights, resin is something they do for low-hanging fruit opportunities and a quick turnaround.

FYI, I recently got a Psi-Titan after they finally came back in stock. Here's the kicker though...the slip in the FW box containing the resin parts was dated May 2021. So *apparently* it wasn't the resin parts they were waiting for...those had been completed for months. Either they were waiting to be allocated more WL kits, or they were waiting on the card components. Could go either way, although I thought the point of the thinner terminals was because they can source them locally. The point is that resin lets them be nimble. Although they can't knock out the same volume with resin as with plastic, they can be cranking it out while the machines are busy on whatever the big kits are for 40K and AoS.

Regarding roles and scales, it seems very obvious that the Rapier will fill the scale 5 slot and role, and making this one scale 7 makes no sense because then it's denied to Legio Audax. And I think the designers very clearly had Audax in mind for this one, although obviously not exclusively so.

I've either loved or been indifferent to pretty much anything and everything GW has done for the past half decade.

But that heavy Warhound is hot garbage. It just looks out of place, clunky and awful. I thought the Warbringer had slightly odd looking proportions, but I didn't mind because the point of that titan was to sort of fill a gap between your sort of mid-level to heavy titan, designed as a way of getting a bigger weapon on a slightly smaller carapace; that's fine, and while I wasn't a fan of it personally, it at least fit aesthetically. This, though... What were they thinking?

Indifference is the worst thing a company can do. If you love it or hate it at least you still have a opinion on it and will discuss it. But indifference is just meh and this is Meh.

I am a titan nut. I've loved titans since OG Adeptus Titanticus and Codex Titanticus days, but this is meh.

Can't wait until GW goes after Catalyst and Topps for IP infringing, that's going to be a funny case. Just like when they thought they could copyright Arrows pointing up and roman numerals. Never change GW Legal, never change.

The Psi titan delay was due to the warlord kit.

My first one had the OG warlord which was annoying but they didnt have the plasma / claw version.

Hopefully sorted now in terms of kit supply

I doubt it's going to be too much of a game changer in the bigger picture, given you must hit, ought to pierce armour and manage to roll to activate the Shock, so for a single shot weapon you are looking at chances somewhat below 50 % per activation to actually do your thing. For a machine that will probably end up at like ~250 points, that is useful and interesting in a synergistic setup but not something you can always rely on to wreck shop like you'd do with existing superweapons like the Sinistramanus Tenebrae. As for its longevity, Draining on a most likely Warhoundish reactor will be a wild ride.

I wait for further information with curious optimism.

 Sherrypie wrote:
I doubt it's going to be too much of a game changer in the bigger picture, given you must hit, ought to pierce armour and manage to roll to activate the Shock, so for a single shot weapon you are looking at chances somewhat below 50 % per activation to actually do your thing. For a machine that will probably end up at like ~250 points, that is useful and interesting in a synergistic setup but not something you can always rely on to wreck shop like you'd do with existing superweapons like the Sinistramanus Tenebrae. As for its longevity, Draining on a most likely Warhoundish reactor will be a wild ride.

Those are my feelings as well. There are controls built in. And I feel like this Titan may be less compelling for those with access to larger Titans than Audax players like me. Players with Warlords and Reavers don't lack access to volcano cannons, and the neutron laser is very specialized and not point and click like the ST as you said. If the neutron laser lost Bypass, I don't know that it'd be viable.

It’s the fear of it though.

Imagine your Warlord on shutdown orders turn 1. Sure, it’s far from a guaranteed situation for your opponent - but it’s also not a long shot in terms of odds.

If my opponent has one of these, that’s going to affect my movement and even deployment. That in itself has a value unto itself.

Sure, it's a distraction Carnifex of sorts. Which is why you outflank it, I think.

Not a fan at all; nothing I really like about the model unfortunately.

The more I look at it, and think about the work required to fix it, the less I like it (and I never really liked it liked it). I won't be buying it to convert it up, just gonna wait for whatever is next , assuming that resin Dominus from FW is next, so whatever comes after that is my next opportunity to get excited about AT.

 Crablezworth wrote:

The Black Adder wrote:
I don't like the direwolf. As others have pointed out the parallel feet make it look like it will topple from recoil and the overall design looks much more squat than the warhound.

To my mind a good GW alternative would be the Mechanicum vorax. They've got the right type of weapons and placement (chaingun arms and energy weapon in a dorsal mount), they appear to be the right size bracket, you'd just need to give them appropriate iconography and re-scale some of the details. I'm sure they'll be cheaper too.

Vorax is much smaller, would have to use a lot terrain on the base to get the height right. Wysiwyg is good, just might looks a big scrawny on an 80mm next to a warhound.

Ah that's a shame if there's a big size issue. I tried looking for some comparison shots but I couldn't find one. Does anybody have any measurements for the vorax or a side by side with a warhound that they could post?

The Black Adder wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

The Black Adder wrote:
I don't like the direwolf. As others have pointed out the parallel feet make it look like it will topple from recoil and the overall design looks much more squat than the warhound.

To my mind a good GW alternative would be the Mechanicum vorax. They've got the right type of weapons and placement (chaingun arms and energy weapon in a dorsal mount), they appear to be the right size bracket, you'd just need to give them appropriate iconography and re-scale some of the details. I'm sure they'll be cheaper too.

Vorax is much smaller, would have to use a lot terrain on the base to get the height right. Wysiwyg is good, just might looks a big scrawny on an 80mm next to a warhound.

Ah that's a shame if there's a big size issue. I tried looking for some comparison shots but I couldn't find one. Does anybody have any measurements for the vorax or a side by side with a warhound that they could post?

It's about 20% smaller than the hound in terms of height, they're usually on 50-60mm sized bases, they look a bit small on an 80mm BUT I think if you do some cork or a big base topper/lots of terrain to give it height it should be ok, just skinny ish.

JWBS wrote:
assuming that resin Dominus from FW is next

I know my hope is misplaced, but god I hope it's plastic...

Nobody want to pay 60$ for a bent resin volcano lance.

So it's basically 2 kits, 1 with volcano and 1 with neutron, there's maybe a hope in hell the arm weapons will be different in each. Past that though, it being forgeworld, very little chance of optional weapons.

The other issue is, it being the first resin titan, are they at least going to come with some loyalist/traitor specific bits? (dare I get my hopes up) My guess is no, I want to be wrong though. Either way I don't know if some second head option we haven't seen or some bits would fix the ugly duckling,




I decided to make my own count as "dire wolf", here's hoping it's actually on an 80mm

That looks really great, think better than the official mini. Love the crew on board as well!

JWBS wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
I quite like the dire wolf, not a bad design.

Although has anyone commented yet how similar it looks to the Dire Wolf in Battletech/Mech Warrior?

 Stormonu wrote:
Eh. My favorite look for the Warhound is still this one:

Spoiler:

There is a really cool resin parts maker (sadly, I forget the name) who does a conversion kit for the new plastic warhound, so you can have that domed body, or even the weapons angled at 90 degrees. Looks very cool, I shall try and fish out the name.

It's Adeptus Dad. I think he may have sold the design to BB. There's other none BB stuff on his site though https://adeptus-dad.github.io/

Thanks - yes that's the one, Battle Bling - it's still available there, along with really cool looking other bits

https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/BattleBlingStore?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Search_UK_DSA_GGL_ENG_General-Nonbrand_Catch-All_New&utm_ag=UK-EN_DSA-General&utm_custom1=_k_EAIaIQobChMI2pKtupHP9QIVg4xRCh2KaQS9EAAYASAAEgJ5g_D_BwE_k_&utm_content=go_11120727342_112118310227_544453317595_dsa-19959388920_c_&utm_custom2=11120727342&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI2pKtupHP9QIVg4xRCh2KaQS9EAAYASAAEgJ5g_D_BwE§ion_id=35463321

 Crablezworth wrote:
So it's basically 2 kits, 1 with volcano and 1 with neutron, there's maybe a hope in hell the arm weapons will be different in each. Past that though, it being forgeworld, very little chance of optional weapons.

The other issue is, it being the first resin titan, are they at least going to come with some loyalist/traitor specific bits? (dare I get my hopes up) My guess is no, I want to be wrong though. Either way I don't know if some second head option we haven't seen or some bits would fix the ugly duckling,




I decided to make my own count as "dire wolf", here's hoping it's actually on an 80mm

Spoiler:

That looks bloody awesome bro. Please keep up the awesome work! I love the base detail, the base usually makes or breaks a model for me.

Thanks dude, I'd have it primed already but it's like -20 sadly and I'm too lazy to prime it by hand. I'm stoked to get more pics of it up, really hoping we see the rules/terminal soon. I'm worried it's going to be higher armour based on the rumours and this one might need more armour.

Well, that's a tease and no mistake:

Someone tell that one that Plastic Thunderhawks are already a thing.
Just tiny.

Well, either something will be announced this weekend, or that's a bit of a troll job. I don't think the social media team is clued into or allowed to even hint about longer-range releases. My bet is that they're having some fun with people, but we'll see.

Thing is “something epic” doesn’t necessarily mean “something Epic” if you get my meaning… they have regularly declared various things to be epic battles/kits/events before.

Imperator Titan?

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Thing is “something epic” doesn’t necessarily mean “something Epic” if you get my meaning… they have regularly declared various things to be epic battles/kits/events before.

The quip pretty clearly references Epic, the game.

However, I would chalk it up to just trolling. I can't imagine the community them even knowing if such a project existed, let alone having the green light to tease it in random social media comments.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Someone tell that one that Plastic Thunderhawks are already a thing.
Just tiny.

I'm a little bored today, so... "done".

That's an "epic" tease...

If it is Epic, then lets hope GW and it's designers are on the same page this time...

Whatever happen, that "epic" comment by warhammerofficial is mean.

I'm hoping by epic size they mean a 40k scale Dire Wolf

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
I'm hoping by epic size they mean a 40k scale Dire Wolf

Me too...think it would have some potential in 28mm scale.

SamusDrake wrote:
If it is Epic, then lets hope GW and it's designers are on the same page this time...

Oh my sweet summer child

 Crablezworth wrote:


Oh my sweet summer child

Because I tell ya, Crablezworth, they had one job - ONE JOB - and that was giant robots and both sides using the same frackin' model range!

SamusDrake wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:


Oh my sweet summer child

Because I tell ya, Crablezworth, they had one job - ONE JOB - and that was giant robots and both sides using the same frackin' model range!

That's that is also annoying, forgeworld doesn't really speak to "options or extra bits" which is already isn't a great fit for AT, exemplified by the issues with the armigers, having to buy 3 sets just to get the weapons loadouts you want for a legal unit. But the first issue I'm assuming is it being fw, it won't be able to explicitly traitor or loyalist. Meaning no optional bit like, literally all the other titans come with on sprue. Add to that, no thick card option for it, like with the psi titan and also both warmasters. It just feels like AT is the game GW forgot in the car on a hot day.

For all we know, Epic could truly just be an adjective to describe the next wave of Primaris releases.

A single word shouldn't generate this much hype, no matter how tongue-in-cheek it appears.

 Crablezworth wrote:


That's that is also annoying, forgeworld doesn't really speak to "options or extra bits" which is already isn't a great fit for AT, exemplified by the issues with the armigers, having to buy 3 sets just to get the weapons loadouts you want for a legal unit. But the first issue I'm assuming is it being fw, it won't be able to explicitly traitor or loyalist. Meaning no optional bit like, literally all the other titans come with on sprue. Add to that, no thick card option for it, like with the psi titan and also both warmasters. It just feels like AT is the game GW forgot in the car on a hot day.

Those armigers were the final nail in the titanicus coffin and GW needs to pull their finger out if they want my continued custom. Same goes for Kill Team, which I started playing alongside Titanicus back in late 2018 and had a high opinion of back then...

Plenty of indie parties doing interesting stuff in that scale. No need to stay fully dependent on GW when it comes to that…

 Malika2 wrote:
Plenty of indie parties doing interesting stuff in that scale. No need to stay fully dependent on GW when it comes to that…

Why, Malika, wotcha peddling today then?

drbored wrote:
For all we know, Epic could truly just be an adjective to describe the next wave of Primaris releases.

A single word shouldn't generate this much hype, no matter how tongue-in-cheek it appears.

They capitalized the E in Epic, which to me means they're using it as a proper noun rather than an adjective. However I will admit that GWs understanding of English hasn't always matched mine

Epic would be nice...

But GW dissapointed so many times...

SamusDrake wrote:

 Malika2 wrote:
Plenty of indie parties doing interesting stuff in that scale. No need to stay fully dependent on GW when it comes to that…

Why, Malika, wotcha peddling today then?

Just combine the stuff from Battlebling with the existing hulls. Terrain from Grimdark Terrain. Practically done then!

 Malika2 wrote:

Just combine the stuff from Battlebling with the existing hulls. Terrain from Grimdark Terrain. Practically done then!

To make Armigers?

I know that Vanguard was working on something for that…

I've always thought GW wouldn't revisit Epic, just because I can't imagine them handling the sheer number of SKUs that it could generate (or at least to be able to be able to cover the game properly).

But, maybe a small Horus Heresy themed boxset or something like that? Just marines, rhinos, land raiders - that might be achievable, and could probably be done on a sprue.

The next question is whether they would produce a new ruleset, use one of the existing ones, or use them as some sort of addition to AT (although not sure how well that would fit).

Alternatively, it might be nothing at all to do with any of those things!

Infantry fit just fine into AT. They’re just size 0, armour 0 and die by the score any time a Titan looks at them, as is right and proper.
Really you just need to introduce infantry rules like moving through terrain titans can’t cross, massive cover bonuses, and boarding/sabotage attacks. Plus a bunch of strength 5/6 heavy weapons to keep the big lads honest.

RazorEdge wrote:
Epic would be nice...

But GW dissapointed so many times...

Yeah, it would be so cool to field a proper Tyranid swarm but as you said the possibility for Epic is next to non existent.

 Pacific wrote:
I've always thought GW wouldn't revisit Epic, just because I can't imagine them handling the sheer number of SKUs that it could generate (or at least to be able to be able to cover the game properly).

But, maybe a small Horus Heresy themed boxset or something like that? Just marines, rhinos, land raiders - that might be achievable, and could probably be done on a sprue.

While achievable, I don't think see that as satisfying...anyone.

The next question is whether they would produce a new ruleset, use one of the existing ones, or use them as some sort of addition to AT (although not sure how well that would fit).

AT does a great job of representing Titan battles and Titan management. I'm pretty sure GW is wise enough not to cram more non-Titan stuff into it and bork it up. Just because you can represent something within the AT system doesn't mean that it doesn't distort gameplay. Look at Knight Households...even those are kind of an odd fit. I would think that any future Epic release would be its own system and one that pulls from past editions of Epic. While it was decades ago, I'm sure the ghost of Epic 40K still haunts their halls as a cautionary tale...

Titanicus is a great game for Titans.

It would be a lousy game for Epic.

If they were to bring it back, it would need to be separate (rules-wise).

The old Epic was a great game, but it collapsed under the weight of its own product line, which is likely why we see only one line of Titanicus models.

 gorgon wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
I've always thought GW wouldn't revisit Epic, just because I can't imagine them handling the sheer number of SKUs that it could generate (or at least to be able to be able to cover the game properly).

But, maybe a small Horus Heresy themed boxset or something like that? Just marines, rhinos, land raiders - that might be achievable, and could probably be done on a sprue.

While achievable, I don't think see that as satisfying...anyone.

The next question is whether they would produce a new ruleset, use one of the existing ones, or use them as some sort of addition to AT (although not sure how well that would fit).

AT does a great job of representing Titan battles and Titan management. I'm pretty sure GW is wise enough not to cram more non-Titan stuff into it and bork it up. Just because you can represent something within the AT system doesn't mean that it doesn't distort gameplay. Look at Knight Households...even those are kind of an odd fit. I would think that any future Epic release would be its own system and one that pulls from past editions of Epic. While it was decades ago, I'm sure the ghost of Epic 40K still haunts their halls as a cautionary tale...

The sprue containing marines plus Rhinos and Land Raiders is how the original Epic range started, so could work again, though these days you would hope they could make a slightly more exciting sprue. If it focused on the Horus Heresy initially I imagine you could create a massive range of vehicles and infantry using the same sort of sprue space as a single titan.

Definitely agree that it should be a separate system from AT, much like Space Marine 2nd Edition, that is focused on infantry and tanks, with rules designed to allow a titan or two but not focused on them.

 gorgon wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
I've always thought GW wouldn't revisit Epic, just because I can't imagine them handling the sheer number of SKUs that it could generate (or at least to be able to be able to cover the game properly).

But, maybe a small Horus Heresy themed boxset or something like that? Just marines, rhinos, land raiders - that might be achievable, and could probably be done on a sprue.

While achievable, I don't think see that as satisfying...anyone.

The next question is whether they would produce a new ruleset, use one of the existing ones, or use them as some sort of addition to AT (although not sure how well that would fit).

AT does a great job of representing Titan battles and Titan management. I'm pretty sure GW is wise enough not to cram more non-Titan stuff into it and bork it up. Just because you can represent something within the AT system doesn't mean that it doesn't distort gameplay. Look at Knight Households...even those are kind of an odd fit. I would think that any future Epic release would be its own system and one that pulls from past editions of Epic. While it was decades ago, I'm sure the ghost of Epic 40K still haunts their halls as a cautionary tale...

I agree completely, knights are already sorta meh, it's nice to have the models but the core of the game's mechanic's really are the titans.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Infantry fit just fine into AT. They’re just size 0, armour 0 and die by the score any time a Titan looks at them, as is right and proper.
Really you just need to introduce infantry rules like moving through terrain titans can’t cross, massive cover bonuses, and boarding/sabotage attacks. Plus a bunch of strength 5/6 heavy weapons to keep the big lads honest.

Titan hunter infantry are a cool statagem, the problem is the activation creep. They activate in the combat phase and can sorta throw things out of whack. Alternating activation works pretty well with titans, it still doesn't make much sense that a warhound and a warmaster are basically the same in terms of activation, and some lists just don't balance too well in the activation department, titan hunter infantry and smaller units don't really help that. I feel the game would be more flexible for epic style gaming if it were turn based, much easier to play in groups and scale up. Alternating activation is the opposite, its great up to a certain point level but becomes cumbersome quickly.

Yeah I'm not convinced the 'one sprue' would be that beneficial for AT, other than it scratching an itch for some players and be a nice, easily available plastic kit for people already into Epic. But I just thought it is something that could realistically happen; an entire range of SKUs to match Epic 2nd or even Epic Armageddon is not really realistic, given the design and production resources it would require.

For anyone thinking and reminiscing fondly about Epic, there is no need to wait "will they, won't they" for GW to release something - the Epic community is going strong, and in fact has probably never been stronger since the actual game was released, and there is a growing 3rd party support (as well as 3D printing).
For a few FB groups I would recommend: EPIC SPACE MARINE 40K MIDDLEHAMMER and Epic 30k & Titanicus for starters.
Hopefully this thread/post will also help: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Infantry fit just fine into AT. They’re just size 0, armour 0 and die by the score any time a Titan looks at them, as is right and proper.
Really you just need to introduce infantry rules like moving through terrain titans can’t cross, massive cover bonuses, and boarding/sabotage attacks. Plus a bunch of strength 5/6 heavy weapons to keep the big lads honest.

Titan hunter infantry are a cool statagem, the problem is the activation creep. They activate in the combat phase and can sorta throw things out of whack. Alternating activation works pretty well with titans, it still doesn't make much sense that a warhound and a warmaster are basically the same in terms of activation, and some lists just don't balance too well in the activation department, titan hunter infantry and smaller units don't really help that. I feel the game would be more flexible for epic style gaming if it were turn based, much easier to play in groups and scale up. Alternating activation is the opposite, its great up to a certain point level but becomes cumbersome quickly.

I was thinking more that a company of dudes/tanks would be a single activation, or at least enough points to be roughly equivalent to a Warhound.
My half-formed crazy plan also involves things like shadow swords on oval bases and using a manoeuvre gauge like titans, but facing the short edge, i.e. perpendicular to a Titan. And just to be weird, they lose turns when they boost speed.
“Normal” tanks can just have a 25mm base and manoeuvre freely like knights.

 Pacific wrote:
Yeah I'm not convinced the 'one sprue' would be that beneficial for AT, other than it scratching an itch for some players and be a nice, easily available plastic kit for people already into Epic. But I just thought it is something that could realistically happen; an entire range of SKUs to match Epic 2nd or even Epic Armageddon is not really realistic, given the design and production resources it would require.

Yeah, I remember the old blister pack racks in stores...the Epic rack was just as big as the one for 40K! The scope of Epic done satisfactorily is larger than some think.

For anyone thinking and reminiscing fondly about Epic, there is no need to wait "will they, won't they" for GW to release something - the Epic community is going strong, and in fact has probably never been stronger since the actual game was released, and there is a growing 3rd party support (as well as 3D printing).
For a few FB groups I would recommend: EPIC SPACE MARINE 40K MIDDLEHAMMER and Epic 30k & Titanicus for starters.
Hopefully this thread/post will also help: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page

I tell people this all the time when the "Epic when?" starts up in AT conversations. Epic is still out there!

I just wish someone other than Marines and IG tank companies had any STL coverage to speak of.

I honestly would prefer GW to leave Epic alone, given their track record with... almost everything, maybe AT notwithstanding.

I'd rather them not to DLC me to death, and the community is thriving, in the rules side and in the minis side, both physical and digital.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I just wish someone other than Marines and IG tank companies had any STL coverage to speak of.

There is stuff, but yeah, most of eveything out there is imperial heavy.

And yet...

There are some really nice Eldar equivalents out there now. Are those Vanguard Miniatures Albertorius, or a 3D print? (I know I saw them in your thread before).

I know what you mean - my fear would be that GW would release a really poor rules version, or one that was very badly balanced with lots of special rules, and then that would fragment the community - as has happened with Necromunda. As much as I would like to go into a GW and pick up a plastic Marine Tactical Company in a small box off the shelf..

 gorgon wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Yeah I'm not convinced the 'one sprue' would be that beneficial for AT, other than it scratching an itch for some players and be a nice, easily available plastic kit for people already into Epic. But I just thought it is something that could realistically happen; an entire range of SKUs to match Epic 2nd or even Epic Armageddon is not really realistic, given the design and production resources it would require.

Yeah, I remember the old blister pack racks in stores...the Epic rack was just as big as the one for 40K! The scope of Epic done satisfactorily is larger than some think.

For anyone thinking and reminiscing fondly about Epic, there is no need to wait "will they, won't they" for GW to release something - the Epic community is going strong, and in fact has probably never been stronger since the actual game was released, and there is a growing 3rd party support (as well as 3D printing).
For a few FB groups I would recommend: EPIC SPACE MARINE 40K MIDDLEHAMMER and Epic 30k & Titanicus for starters.
Hopefully this thread/post will also help: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page

I tell people this all the time when the "Epic when?" starts up in AT conversations. Epic is still out there!

Yes right! I still miss being able to pick up blister packs of Vindicators, squig catapults and things like that.

 gorgon wrote:


I tell people this all the time when the "Epic when?" starts up in AT conversations. Epic is still out there!

Where? I've lived in 4 states and gone to about 20 FLGS and Warhammer stores, never seen it being played or even heard of anyone playing it. I've seen one Epic model, a landraider that was on the base of an AT titan. It's the same with BFG, Necromunda until we started a campaign recently, basically all the specialist games. I know UK has a decent playerbase for the old games and Aussies love 30k but here in the states, it's 75% 40k, 25% AoS, and good luck finding an opponent for anything else.

 Pacific wrote:
There are some really nice Eldar equivalents out there now. Are those Vanguard Miniatures Albertorius, or a 3D print? (I know I saw them in your thread before).

3d printed, designs by lord chronos, and absolutely gorgeous.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Toofast wrote:

 gorgon wrote:


I tell people this all the time when the "Epic when?" starts up in AT conversations. Epic is still out there!

Where? I've lived in 4 states and gone to about 20 FLGS and Warhammer stores, never seen it being played or even heard of anyone playing it. I've seen one Epic model, a landraider that was on the base of an AT titan. It's the same with BFG, Necromunda until we started a campaign recently, basically all the specialist games. I know UK has a decent playerbase for the old games and Aussies love 30k but here in the states, it's 75% 40k, 25% AoS, and good luck finding an opponent for anything else.

Honestly, I can't say that I know. Have you tried the facebook/telegram Epic groups? There's a lot of them and I'm sure there are americans there.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I just wish someone other than Marines and IG tank companies had any STL coverage to speak of.

Wakes Emporium (also check his Patreon) has various stuff other than Marines or IG tanks: Orks, Tau, Kroot, Orks, various IG infantry regiments, Adeptus Mechanicus...

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Infantry fit just fine into AT. They’re just size 0, armour 0 and die by the score any time a Titan looks at them, as is right and proper.
Really you just need to introduce infantry rules like moving through terrain titans can’t cross, massive cover bonuses, and boarding/sabotage attacks. Plus a bunch of strength 5/6 heavy weapons to keep the big lads honest.

Titan hunter infantry are a cool statagem, the problem is the activation creep. They activate in the combat phase and can sorta throw things out of whack. Alternating activation works pretty well with titans, it still doesn't make much sense that a warhound and a warmaster are basically the same in terms of activation, and some lists just don't balance too well in the activation department, titan hunter infantry and smaller units don't really help that. I feel the game would be more flexible for epic style gaming if it were turn based, much easier to play in groups and scale up. Alternating activation is the opposite, its great up to a certain point level but becomes cumbersome quickly.

I was thinking more that a company of dudes/tanks would be a single activation, or at least enough points to be roughly equivalent to a Warhound.
My half-formed crazy plan also involves things like shadow swords on oval bases and using a manoeuvre gauge like titans, but facing the short edge, i.e. perpendicular to a Titan. And just to be weird, they lose turns when they boost speed.
“Normal” tanks can just have a 25mm base and manoeuvre freely like knights.

You could use some models and just do count as knights/armigers

That gives you 25mm 40mm 50mm 60mm to work with in terms of what fits on a base/represents what.

Like toss a super heavy on a 60mm base and say its an acastus.

 Crablezworth wrote:

Titan hunter infantry are a cool statagem, the problem is the activation creep. They activate in the combat phase and can sorta throw things out of whack. Alternating activation works pretty well with titans, it still doesn't make much sense that a warhound and a warmaster are basically the same in terms of activation, and some lists just don't balance too well in the activation department, titan hunter infantry and smaller units don't really help that. I feel the game would be more flexible for epic style gaming if it were turn based, much easier to play in groups and scale up. Alternating activation is the opposite, its great up to a certain point level but becomes cumbersome quickly.

You could get around the activation creep by separating Titan activations from those of vehicles/infantry/etc.

All titans activate as normal until all titans have activated. Only then do the minnows get to have their activations. That way you cant use chaff units to game the activation system. If you have 5 titans each (plus chaff) the chaff won't make any difference and can't be used to play for time.

Patriarch wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

Titan hunter infantry are a cool statagem, the problem is the activation creep. They activate in the combat phase and can sorta throw things out of whack. Alternating activation works pretty well with titans, it still doesn't make much sense that a warhound and a warmaster are basically the same in terms of activation, and some lists just don't balance too well in the activation department, titan hunter infantry and smaller units don't really help that. I feel the game would be more flexible for epic style gaming if it were turn based, much easier to play in groups and scale up. Alternating activation is the opposite, its great up to a certain point level but becomes cumbersome quickly.

You could get around the activation creep by separating Titan activations from those of vehicles/infantry/etc.

All titans activate as normal until all titans have activated. Only then do the minnows get to have their activations. That way you cant use chaff units to game the activation system. If you have 5 titans each (plus chaff) the chaff won't make any difference and can't be used to play for time.

The problem is more, if you're going the route of combined arms, turn based is a much better and more flexible system. Like titanicus is not flexible even without knights/tanks/infantry. After about 5-6 titans it's just too many terminals. There's the added problem too that you need ever more extra space for terminals the more you scale up the size of the points.

How about a limited action thing where you get x activations per turn depending on the game size by default and you can try to activate more bumpy rolling against their command value or something? And/or have squadrons activate as a single unit to save actions etc.

Patriarch wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

Titan hunter infantry are a cool statagem, the problem is the activation creep. They activate in the combat phase and can sorta throw things out of whack. Alternating activation works pretty well with titans, it still doesn't make much sense that a warhound and a warmaster are basically the same in terms of activation, and some lists just don't balance too well in the activation department, titan hunter infantry and smaller units don't really help that. I feel the game would be more flexible for epic style gaming if it were turn based, much easier to play in groups and scale up. Alternating activation is the opposite, its great up to a certain point level but becomes cumbersome quickly.

You could get around the activation creep by separating Titan activations from those of vehicles/infantry/etc.

All titans activate as normal until all titans have activated. Only then do the minnows get to have their activations. That way you cant use chaff units to game the activation system. If you have 5 titans each (plus chaff) the chaff won't make any difference and can't be used to play for time.

Or perhaps the minnow activation could be built into titan activations. Warlords are activated individually; Reavers + 1 minnow activation; Warhound + 2 minnow activation/1 knight activation. Or something similar.

Maybe take it to another thread?

Excuse me, good Sir! Have you heard anything regarding the future of Adeptus Titanicus? Rumours are suggesting a revamp or even GW scrapping the game altogether...



...oh, I'm awfully sorry...have a nice day, Sir!

Sigh...I think we've upset the poor fellow....

 Stormonu wrote:

Patriarch wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

Titan hunter infantry are a cool statagem, the problem is the activation creep. They activate in the combat phase and can sorta throw things out of whack. Alternating activation works pretty well with titans, it still doesn't make much sense that a warhound and a warmaster are basically the same in terms of activation, and some lists just don't balance too well in the activation department, titan hunter infantry and smaller units don't really help that. I feel the game would be more flexible for epic style gaming if it were turn based, much easier to play in groups and scale up. Alternating activation is the opposite, its great up to a certain point level but becomes cumbersome quickly.

You could get around the activation creep by separating Titan activations from those of vehicles/infantry/etc.

All titans activate as normal until all titans have activated. Only then do the minnows get to have their activations. That way you cant use chaff units to game the activation system. If you have 5 titans each (plus chaff) the chaff won't make any difference and can't be used to play for time.

Or perhaps the minnow activation could be built into titan activations. Warlords are activated individually; Reavers + 1 minnow activation; Warhound + 2 minnow activation/1 knight activation. Or something similar.

Well, activation is sorta the problem. Like with the forthcoming dire wolf heavy scout titan for example (winks at zedmeister) it's main gun is basically going to be 1 dice like the other big boppers. That's pretty much it's activation, maybe it will have split fire up and can throw rounds at shield with its bolters, but really, all that activation is likely to be 1 dice. A warlord with miniguns and plasma can throw like 15 times the dice, 1 activation. It's ok for balancing a common strategy in turn based gaming, that being mass fire on single target/unit. I feel like people want epic but also want the micro managing/terminal stuff, i don't think they can have both, and epic is way more flexible.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

SamusDrake wrote:
Excuse me, good Sir! Have you heard anything regarding the future of Adeptus Titanicus? Rumours are suggesting a revamp or even GW scrapping the game altogether...

Spoiler:

...oh, I'm awfully sorry...have a nice day, Sir!

Sigh...I think we've upset the poor fellow....

I honestly think it's true, endings are also beginnings, people act like they're going to throw the molds into the sea or something. I think GW just realizes they can move AT forward in time to 40k, and possibly make it more accessible. As mentioned earlier, they could probably re-work it to be turn based, which would allow for larger battle and a more epic scope without as much drag. They could also as speculated be working on a re-release of epic and giving everyone what they want by rolling it all into one thing. Doubt it but who knows.

Either way AT is running out steam, if they try and push a new book over a resin titan release, maybe it will be good, maybe it will feel like more of the same. I was sorta expecting the new titan to drop without much fanfare.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 zedmeister wrote:
Maybe take it to another thread?

No




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
How about a limited action thing where you get x activations per turn depending on the game size by default and you can try to activate more bumpy rolling against their command value or something? And/or have squadrons activate as a single unit to save actions etc.

Activations are the problem really, it's just a deeply inflexible system. Turn based would just be better overall if it's combined arms.

Turn based, sometimes the temporal order of what you do/move/shoot with first is of dire importance, but generally speaking a lot of things just flow easier, movement phase for example. Shooting can get a bit silly in turn based, but hopefully like any game the terrain helps balance that out to the point where overwhelming fire or massed fire can be mitigated.

AT is great, but it is not flexible, it was basically conceived for like 3-5 titans, and honestly plays best sorta in that realm. Once ur pushing 7-8 activations it bogs down.