Warlord ought to be a doddle. Good definition between the panels, largely standard gun metal below.
And I’m not sure anyone else has shared, but here’s an ‘old and new’ comparison.
Brilliant - thanks for that!
Really, really intrigued about the rules, they sound really characterful and hopefully have enough depth for a cool skirmish game. (Although it seems wrong to be using the word 'skirmish' considering the concept of the game!)
I'm quite looking forward to whether it will be possible to adapt some of the more in-depth rules for Epic Armageddon. As much as I like that game, and understand the need for streamlining, I always thought it missed something compared to the original AT game and Space Marine (now NetEpic Gold) in terms of how damage to the vehicles and things like that were handled.
Warlord ought to be a doddle. Good definition between the panels, largely standard gun metal below.
And I’m not sure anyone else has shared, but here’s an ‘old and new’ comparison.
I could be mistaken but I think I detect a slight upsizing from the previous edition to the new one. I'll have to have the model in my hand to really tell.
One thing that my group discussed - given they now have a plastic sprue for a warlord..... scale it up. .
It doesn't work like that. Scaling an 8mm sprue up to 28mm gets you a 28mm model that is really lacking in detail. Armorcast got away with it back in the '90s, because the original Epic titans didn't have that much detail to begin with... but reproducing these sculpts in 28mm would require completely resculpting them.
Which would be a backwards way of going about it anyway, since these were most likely made from scaled down versions of the Forgeworld sculpts. Resculpting those to be compatible with plastic tooling would be more sensible than trying to do it from 8mm models.
Plus even then it wouldn't really mean plastic 28mm warlord release even if magically scale up would result in more details. Sprue costs would be horrendous for model of that size. Would it really sell that much? Who plays regularly 10k+ games to field one? (especially as they suck so are basically "I give up"). Would sales from pure collectors really compensate...
(especially as not every collector can fit model into home! As much as I would love to own I think practical issue of storing it prevents it)
Size, cost, transporting and playing games big enough - those are all things that would make a plastic titan almost an impossibility for a Warlord.
At a practical level I think that Knights are as big as GW can really push things model wise for massmarket sales. Even they are very bulky to transport, but they can at least make it onto standard tables more or less.
New technology and such has made models much bigger; early carnifx and tyranids are tiny compared to their modern counterparts (heck the old hive-tyrant isn't much bigger than a modern day warrior). But the actual mechanics of transporting models from home to club/shop to play is always going to be a hard upper barrier.
I suspect that is why the plastic Thunderhawk is still a pipe-dream of many - its getting into the realms where size become a practical issue.
The more barriers there are the less buyers there are which makes plastic less and less attractive as a material to work with from a cost of producing the moulds. Of course a Thunderhawk has more potential to sell at least in a decent volume and owuld probably be the biggest plastic we'd ever see if it were made.
But a Warlord I just don't see happening unless the cost for plastic mould production takes a nosedive. The only other option would be 3D printing, but high definition 3D printing currently seems impractical for miniature production (it seems to work for masters, but at the same time I'm aware those masters take considerable time to clean up the layer lines on them even now; which makes them ideal for masters to then make mould casts from, but not for actual production and sale)
Warlord ought to be a doddle. Good definition between the panels, largely standard gun metal below.
And I’m not sure anyone else has shared, but here’s an ‘old and new’ comparison.
So am I right in thinking that the Reaver is on the small oval base used by Skitarii Ironstriders, while the Warlord is on the large oval used by most Tyranid monsters? That would put the Warhound on a 50/60mm round base.
One post I saw of FB said that the Reaver is on the 90 x 52 mm oval base, while the Warlord is on the 120 x 92 mm oval (which is the same one that the Valkyrie and most other flyers are on). Saving the big 170 x 105 mm base the 40k-scale Imperial Knight uses for the Imperator? (or other yet-to-be revealed larger battle or emperor titans).
the new AT boards that are being released by Forge World are deliberately designed so that they can be set up with roads that can not be traversed by larger engines to give some tactical advantages to smaller engines.
Here we got an overview of army composition, the roles of the different titans that will be available soon after launch and how they can be armed.
In terms of maniple composition (which is the key thing here), this is what the command terminal packs provide. The command terminal packs provide you with a maniple composition amongst other things - for example, the Axiom Command Terminal pack provides you with everything (apart from models and weapons cards) to field a pre-selected maniple consisting of 1 warlord, 1-2 reavers and 1-2 warhounds. If you build a maniple that is compatible with the terminal pack you can get extra rules such as improved command rolls - so think of them like formations but not as game breaking as some of the ones in 7th.
The titan roles should be pretty self explanatory really - Warlord is a slow but resilient heavy hitter, Reaver is a middle of the road kind of titan, Warhound is a fast glass cannon, Knights are flank protectors and irritants - don't ignore them though as they can take down an injured titan caught off guard!
Weapons are important here as you need to have a balance between shield breakers and engine killers, too much of a focus either way may result in you not being able to quickly take down enemy titans.
Mr_Rose wrote: Did anyone in attendance ask if they were looking beyond the “classic three” plus knights for the game?
I don't think we've heard anything beyond the knights, warhounds, reavers and warlords. In fact I'd expect an upgrade/weapon pack to come after/during those releases to give more variety to those mechs.
However beyond that I don't think we know anything for certain and it might even hinge on how well this kit is received. My guess would be that they will follow the other mechs that FW produces for the Imperials for a while so there's a couple of more choices before they branch out and add a new faction like chaos - which could even be done in an upgrade kit rather than a full kit.
the new AT boards that are being released by Forge World are deliberately designed so that they can be set up with roads that can not be traversed by larger engines to give some tactical advantages to smaller engines.
Here we got an overview of army composition, the roles of the different titans that will be available soon after launch and how they can be armed.
In terms of maniple composition (which is the key thing here), this is what the command terminal packs provide. The command terminal packs provide you with a maniple composition amongst other things - for example, the Axiom Command Terminal pack provides you with everything (apart from models and weapons cards) to field a pre-selected maniple consisting of 1 warlord, 1-2 reavers and 1-2 warhounds. If you build a maniple that is compatible with the terminal pack you can get extra rules such as improved command rolls - so think of them like formations but not as game breaking as some of the ones in 7th.
The titan roles should be pretty self explanatory really - Warlord is a slow but resilient heavy hitter, Reaver is a middle of the road kind of titan, Warhound is a fast glass cannon, Knights are flank protectors and irritants - don't ignore them though as they can take down an injured titan caught off guard!
Weapons are important here as you need to have a balance between shield breakers and engine killers, too much of a focus either way may result in you not being able to quickly take down enemy titans.
Nice. And as the Sad Old Git Society can attest....
De Bellis Titanicus wrote:The arming of Titans must, by necessity, always be a compromise. To gain long range you must sacrifice firepower, and vice versa. You must approach this decision at two levels.
Firstly the level of the individual Titan. Consider carefully what it must achieve and how its armament will affect its ability to fulfil its objective.
Secondly, the level of the force itself: this may be the Legion as a whole or a battle group on a particular mission. Never forget that a Titan force is a team - a single body, and may have specialised members designed for specific tasks.
Meditate on the subject if you feel the need, or consult the Imperial Tarot. The decision is important, so do not take it lightly.
At last year's Forge World seminar at Warhammer Fest, Tony did day that they were looking at adding new classes of titan. If you think back to the classic Warlord configurations- Nemesis, Eclipse, Deathbringer, Nightgaunt - some of those have already ben mentioned in a few of the Horus Heresy books as being different classes to the Warlord.
So, just going by names from 1988, you could have:
Nemesis, Eclipse, Deathbringer, Nightgaunt, Hun and Goth battle titans, and Wolf and Mastiff scout titans.
Things should get a bit easier once we get Warhounds under our belts. With any luck, they'll have the firepower to deal with Knights (and have to, as I imagine Knights post a HTH threat to Warhounds), and to strip shields.
Hunting pair zipping about for shield stripping duty means your main Battle Titans can focus on packing the greater punch.
Oh Holy Emperor I want this game and I want it now!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Things should get a bit easier once we get Warhounds under our belts. With any luck, they'll have the firepower to deal with Knights (and have to, as I imagine Knights post a HTH threat to Warhounds), and to strip shields.
Hunting pair zipping about for shield stripping duty means your main Battle Titans can focus on packing the greater punch.
Oh Holy Emperor I want this game and I want it now!
Not just shield stripping. Warhounds will have the maneuverability to get behind lumbering Warlords. A well aimed turbolaser blast into the rear reactor housing of an unshielded Warlord will see that Titan in serious trouble.
Mr_Rose wrote: Did anyone in attendance ask if they were looking beyond the “classic three” plus knights for the game?
This was posted on my local club page by someone who attended: "Space marine test models have been done, however no units other than titans and knights are planned right now".
Based on the current rate of new Necromunda releases they can easily spend the next couple of years shrinking the current 28mm FW range of Knights & alternate Titan weapons. Not to mention things like legion-specific armour plates conversion kits, banners, scenery, etc. Personally I think we'll see Cerastus & Porphyrion Knights in resin as the only 'new' units within 12 months. If we ever do see 'full' Epic return with tanks & infantry, it will be years away.
Honestly I'd expect them to add other races titans only long before going for tanks. Part of me would actually welcome no tanks or infantry appearing; keeping the game purely titans with bunkers/towers/static defences. Beyond the Imperials most other factions don't have many titan class models (orks and chaos have a respectful number even if most of chaos is just Imperial with more spikes) - so it would be a great chance to flesh out that area of combat.Seeing three of four or more titan class tyranids!
If I recall, in the Beast Must Die, there is a briefly shown and mentioned Titan that takes part in the Ullanor Assault. It was three-legged and was referred to as "Punisher Class." I think it had a massive chaingun or something like that.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: If I recall, in the Beast Must Die, there is a briefly shown and mentioned Titan that takes part in the Ullanor Assault. It was three-legged and was referred to as "Punisher Class." I think it had a massive chaingun or something like that.
Overread wrote: Honestly I'd expect them to add other races titans only long before going for tanks. Part of me would actually welcome no tanks or infantry appearing; keeping the game purely titans with bunkers/towers/static defences. Beyond the Imperials most other factions don't have many titan class models (orks and chaos have a respectful number even if most of chaos is just Imperial with more spikes) - so it would be a great chance to flesh out that area of combat.Seeing three of four or more titan class tyranids!
Eldar have lots and would look great in contrast
Orks are the same - Godbreaker in mini form might be a bit epic - especially if they made Stormherald and rules for the Crone Tyrandis are the same
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Things should get a bit easier once we get Warhounds under our belts. With any luck, they'll have the firepower to deal with Knights (and have to, as I imagine Knights post a HTH threat to Warhounds), and to strip shields.
Hunting pair zipping about for shield stripping duty means your main Battle Titans can focus on packing the greater punch.
Oh Holy Emperor I want this game and I want it now!
Not just shield stripping. Warhounds will have the maneuverability to get behind lumbering Warlords. A well aimed turbolaser blast into the rear reactor housing of an unshielded Warlord will see that Titan in serious trouble.
And therein lies the compromise for Warhounds Vulcan Megabolters are fantastic for rapidly shredding shields, and a pair will do that in double quick time. But of course, that leaves the Titan more or less incapable of doing anything else. So if your opponent has only brought a single Battle Titan, instead favouring smaller Titans, much of that firepower is wasted.
So I dug out my 1996 Catalogue! It's so strange! It's got Necromunda, Warhammer 40K and Epic and the other HALF of the book is Warhammer Classic. Gods how the games have changed since those days (although I'd say visually Warhammer to Sigma is the greatest visual change in style). This is also when the book has "Do not put them in your mouth or lick them" on the cover and the starting age was 14 (lead based metals).
Anyway I had a look at what would likely count as Titans and Knights in Imperial and other factions and from that era there's:
Knights - Baron/Castellon/Paladin/Lancer/Errant/Crusader and then commander editions of most of those (basically its a knight model with a banner pole).
Warlord
Reaver
Chaos:
Khorne Lord of Battle
Plague Tower of Nurgle
Tzeentch Fire Lord
Banelord (basically chaos warlord)
Slannesh Hell Knight - Questor/Subjugator/Hell Scourge/Hell Strider
Chaos Lords (Change, Keeper of Secrets, Unclean One, Bloodthirster)
Characters - Magnus, Fulgrim, Mortarion, Angron
Tyranids:
Trygon - Malefactor - Dactylis - Haruspex - Exocrine
(these are kind of between tanks and knights in size. Tricky to tell if they'd count as knights or if GW would introduce some in-between big bugs for the Titan game)
Stopmas are actually on a sprue with a selection of other walkers and are, I think, much smaller than they appear today where they'd class as Knight sized. Interestingly this is in the day when Chaos had the old dreadnoughts that looked like the walkers out of Robocop original)
Mekboy Gargant
Slasher Gargant
Great Gargant
This is after the Titan Legions game and into the Epic era (but before Epic 40K which had way more tanks/troops and less knights/titans).
So there's no quad legged eldar in here and the Imperator and Mega Gargant are also missing. There might be others as I don't have catalogue from before in the Titan Legion ear. Neat to see that in Chaos is Slannesh who actually rules the roost in regard to Knights!
This looks fantastic! the Titans look amazing and the scale is spot on! now all I need is someone to buy it and get me to paint it for them! :-) god, if only I knew someone!
Overread wrote: Honestly I'd expect them to add other races titans only long before going for tanks. Part of me would actually welcome no tanks or infantry appearing; keeping the game purely titans with bunkers/towers/static defences. Beyond the Imperials most other factions don't have many titan class models (orks and chaos have a respectful number even if most of chaos is just Imperial with more spikes) - so it would be a great chance to flesh out that area of combat.Seeing three of four or more titan class tyranids!
If you were making Ork units for this game, would you go as small as a Gorka/Morkanaught and Meka-dread? Or stick with the Stompa as the bottom end? Because traditional Ork gear kinda has a Knight-sized gap.
Eldar on the other hand are already established to have Knight-scale combatants and would probably consider anything bigger than the Phantom to be wasteful… but maybe there’s room to expand on their light Titan range, like scaling up the old Bright Stallion Knight to Revenant size to joust with Warhounds?
T’au are the tricky ones, really; their entire style of warfare should make them incompatible with this game since all their big stuff is flyers and dropships. The Ta’unar as a mobile artillery piece is already kinda stretching it as far as resources vs. return according to Forge World themselves.
The Necrons on the other hand have an unlimited quantity of “mysterious ancient magitech” to pull giant stompy robots out of, not to mention the pylons.
Who else would want to end up in a Titan brawl out of the remaining factions?
Tau would probably do well since FW love Tau (seriously they've gota huge roster of choices considering how new they are compared to other factions). They've already got at least one giant mecha and if anything Tau would fit in really really well with several huge mecha units!
Honestly the only faction that might get left behind is Dark Eldar, though if this titan game takes off I'm sure they'd re-purpose a few Eldar Titans and build some of their own adaptations!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: In those days, Stompas were roughly Land Raider equivalent in terms of role and power.
Yeah GW in their stupidity forgot entirely their naming/size policies and did totally unneeded change with stompa. Why on earth name something stompa that's not stompa when they had already existing name for what the 40k stompa is?
Probably because players kept asking for a Stompa but GW didn't want to make it an ungainly dreadnought design. Seriously compare a stompa in shape and body to a dreadnought and the Stompa just seems silly if scaled the same. It worked in Epic because everything was so much smaller; but in 40K I think the Stompa fits well in the size its got now.
Just like how right above there's a user asking for the Eldar centaur units to be scaled up to knight size
You have the Wraithknight, Revnant and Phantom pretty much ready to go for Eldar. They would be the obvious first Xenos release (and my they'd be beautiful!)
Kyoto Secunda was looking at my Apocalypse book (now on sale in my garage sale!) and said there were Daddy Robots, Mommy Robots, Twin Robots and Baby Robots.
Overread wrote: Probably because players kept asking for a Stompa but GW didn't want to make it an ungainly dreadnought design. Seriously compare a stompa in shape and body to a dreadnought and the Stompa just seems silly if scaled the same. It worked in Epic because everything was so much smaller; but in 40K I think the Stompa fits well in the size its got now.
Just like how right above there's a user asking for the Eldar centaur units to be scaled up to knight size
People either were asking for incorrect thing or GW gave them what players did NOT want.
Funny thing is model that's pretty much spot on for real stompa HAS ALREADY BEEN RELEASED. It's simply GW screwing up names. Size is of no concern. IF they could provide good real stompa now there was no reason they couldn't do it then because real stompa is smaller than current fake stompa.
Looking at the pictures of the buildings, they remind me alot of the card and plastic buildings from Space Marines, all the buildings have flat square roofs, to the point that I think they are designed to put square bases on top, square bases of infantry for example.... (I estimate 30-400mm square bases?)
I think this hints that they are thinking of future expansions, and if AT is successful, we'll see it expanded to include tanks, infantry and all the other epic goodness released in time. (and hopefully Ork Gargants, I want a gargant bigmob dammit!)
Overread wrote: Honestly I'd expect them to add other races titans only long before going for tanks. Part of me would actually welcome no tanks or infantry appearing; keeping the game purely titans with bunkers/towers/static defences. Beyond the Imperials most other factions don't have many titan class models (orks and chaos have a respectful number even if most of chaos is just Imperial with more spikes) - so it would be a great chance to flesh out that area of combat.Seeing three of four or more titan class tyranids!
While that does sound good to a degree and I always like to see the setting fleshed out...it can be taken too far. Not every faction needs to have giant walking species-effigies, or the same amount of them. Eldar(who probably originated the concept), the Imperium(who probably copied the Eldar back in the Golden Age of Technology), the Orks(who probably copied both of them), and a few big Tyranid critters, sure, lets have them, but if they don't eventually either set the game aside or expand it into a nuEpic, we're going to get the same nonsense as 40K where everybody has to have almost the same lineup of models even if that means fluff retcons and aesthetic shoehorning.
I have zero interest in seeing Tau get Titans-but-better-than-everyone-else's-for-some-reason or giant Necron Warriors etc. Some races should have entirely different methods of warfare on the Titanic scale that aren't actual Titans at all, if nothing else just for some variety.
Stompa used to be land raider scaled thing. NOT super heavy machine.
Current gorkanaut/morkanaut is MUCH better representation of stompa. Current 40k stompa is more like walkers between stompa and gargant.
Before 40k stompa came stompa was basically walking land raider that had guns not that much different in scale to land raider and rather than transport it had often(but not always) big h2h weapon. Not mini titan.
You could field SQUADRONS of stompas. Not that feasible with what amounts to mini-titan.
If you want to see REAL stompa look no further than gorkanaut/morkanaut.
If Necrons get Titan scale vehicles, I too would like to avoid “giant Necron warrior” as a design, but there’s no reason they can’t have an enormous version of the centipede-construct they have for 40k or something of that order.
Just gotta think outside the ‘humanoid walking tank’ box.
Stompa used to be land raider scaled thing. NOT super heavy machine.
Current gorkanaut/morkanaut is MUCH better representation of stompa. Current 40k stompa is more like walkers between stompa and gargant.
Before 40k stompa came stompa was basically walking land raider. Not mini titan.
It was always the same approximate size as an Imperial Knight though. And served much the same function. If anything, the Landraider should've become a Super Heavy as well.
So I'm still not quite sure what your overall point is here?
Stompa used to be land raider scaled thing. NOT super heavy machine.
Current gorkanaut/morkanaut is MUCH better representation of stompa. Current 40k stompa is more like walkers between stompa and gargant.
Before 40k stompa came stompa was basically walking land raider. Not mini titan.
It was always the same approximate size as an Imperial Knight though. And served much the same function. If anything, the Landraider should've become a Super Heavy as well.
So I'm still not quite sure what your overall point is here?
His point is the usual obnoxious one, that he's annoyed it's not 1992 still and that GW had the gall and temerity to dare flesh out their own setting and the expected minor alterations that can come with that.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: It was always the same approximate size as an Imperial Knight though.
Do you own any Space Marine 2nd Ed Stompas? I do. They were not as big as Knights, which were as big as Marines. An old Stompa mini came up to maybe a Marine's hips.
They were Land Raider equivalents, not Knight equivalents.
Debating scale in Epic is a pointless exercise. Many of the design decisions were more a result of the miniature design/production technology available at the time than any attempt at accurate replication of the fluff.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: It was always the same approximate size as an Imperial Knight though.
Do you own any Space Marine 2nd Ed Stompas? I do. They were not as big as Knights, which were as big as Marines. An old Stompa mini came up to maybe a Marine's hips.
They were Land Raider equivalents, not Knight equivalents.
I've not seen mine for a while, but they were bigger than a Marine's hips.
Vorian wrote: You have the Wraithknight, Revnant and Phantom pretty much ready to go for Eldar. They would be the obvious first Xenos release (and my they'd be beautiful!)
Yes, they probably would be!
The Warlock Titan was a thing of beauty!
BUT...remember this thing?
Let's hope that one remains a lesson learned - and avoided!
xttz wrote: Debating scale in Epic is a pointless exercise. Many of the design decisions were more a result of the miniature design/production technology available at the time than any attempt at accurate replication of the fluff.
I've got an old stompa and knight right infront of me. The stompa and knight are basically the same size, the Knight appears a bit taller because it was sold on a base whilst the stompa free stood without a base.
The knight is a little bit taller, but really not by very much, certainly the Stompa can be a knight-sized unit without much trouble.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I thought we all agreed we would never bring up the Epic 40K Titans.
*shudder*
The Warlord from Epic was a big improvement over the original I thought. Especially the top guns; they were made far more like a battery of shoulder mounted weapons rather than the original where they stuck out a bit.
ModernAngel wrote: Looking at the pictures of the buildings, they remind me alot of the card and plastic buildings from Space Marines, all the buildings have flat square roofs, to the point that I think they are designed to put square bases on top, square bases of infantry for example.... (I estimate 30-400mm square bases?)
I think this hints that they are thinking of future expansions, and if AT is successful, we'll see it expanded to include tanks, infantry and all the other epic goodness released in time. (and hopefully Ork Gargants, I want a gargant bigmob dammit!)
Both Battle Bunnies and Penddraig from the Heresy 30K forum shared that FW said there are no plans for infantry and vehicles. The game is titan focused, and might include xenos titans eventually.
If you look at the gameplay, I think it's pretty clear that infantry and such would be an odd fit. What could happen later is a new version of Epic that could use these same titan models.
FYI, Penddraig has one of his typically awesome writeups of AT on the Heresy 30K forum.
I love tanks and big battles with loads of troops 0 but I also love big mech stomping games and I'd rather GW did one or the other not both. Plus they've scaled the titans up so they are much larger, so you'd not even get the same number of tanks and troops on the table to get that massive battle feeling.
I think keeping them separate lets GW explore the whole world of titans and knight scaled units in its own battlefield setting. It creates that idea that they are so far above regular troops that they don't even worry about them battling along.
I like the new scale - I think my old 6mm Space Marine stuff is going to work fine with this. In my mind's eye (and matched by some of the old art work), Marines are like ants compared to a Warlord titan.
I liked the aesthetic of the original designs and am glad they have kept that and not the horrible boxy 40K titans.
And that Epic 40K Phantom Titan... omg, how to kill something utterly beautiful
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: It was always the same approximate size as an Imperial Knight though.
Do you own any Space Marine 2nd Ed Stompas? I do. They were not as big as Knights, which were as big as Marines. An old Stompa mini came up to maybe a Marine's hips.
They were Land Raider equivalents, not Knight equivalents.
I've not seen mine for a while, but they were bigger than a Marine's hips.
Yeah, I think some people are getting Tinboyz and Stompas confused. Tinboyz were the little ones but got sorta dropped from the line between Space Marine 1st edition and Epic: Space Marine to be replaced by the much bigger plastic Stompas which may have retained the Tinboyz stats until Epic: 40,000 when they became Baneblade/Knight equivalents.
If they do release xenos titans, especially Eldar ones, I’d instantly start playing this. I probably will still look at getting into it early on, if I am convinced that there will be enough variety in available setups and armies to make for an interesting and diverse game play.
According to the designers of the terrain, this is only the very first wave of it. I actually asked about terrain options and the guy told me that they have designs for steeples, proper roofs, and other stuff too. But getting stuff tooled for plastic is always about priorities. And first priority was the three main Titans, and the knights.
As for the guns on the Warlord, sprue constraints meant that they had to choose between two more guns or four extra shoulder plates for different designs.
Most of the remaining weapons, as well as some new ones, are apparently already tooled. They will be out at a later date, either as a clampack or (more likely) in resin upgrade sets.
I couldn't get a straight answer out of them, when it got to whether the cerastus types or the porphyrion would be plastic or if they would remain in the realm of resin.
They did say that they are aware that many people won't get the resin stuff, whether from difficulty of buying or working with it, so they want to make as much as they can from plastic.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and interestingly, the two smaller Titans were merry hell to convert into CG designs, since they were originally handmade, with the minimal casting and mastering faults that this brings. So the designer set about the job with callipers and measuring tape, and slowly but surely converted everything into CG.
The difficulty of this task, is also why the Warhound is last in line, and wasn't ready to show off at the event.
One guy did all the designs for the Titans and Knights. I remembered to congratulate him on a bl**dy good job at the event! ;-)
That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.
Yodhrin wrote: That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.
Might be that the designer doesn't have photogrammetry skills or software (I've no idea if that would be standard software with 3D design or an extra). Sometimes its easier to go with what you know than reskill. Photographically GW wouldn't be limited in the least (they've even got at least one medium format camera so photography quality wouldn't be a problem).
Xanthos wrote: According to the designers of the terrain, this is only the very first wave of it. I actually asked about terrain options and the guy told me that they have designs for steeples, proper roofs, and other stuff too. But getting stuff tooled for plastic is always about priorities. And first priority was the three main Titans, and the knights.
As for the guns on the Warlord, sprue constraints meant that they had to choose between two more guns or four extra shoulder plates for different designs.
Most of the remaining weapons, as well as some new ones, are apparently already tooled. They will be out at a later date, either as a clampack or (more likely) in resin upgrade sets.
I couldn't get a straight answer out of them, when it got to whether the cerastus types or the porphyrion would be plastic or if they would remain in the realm of resin.
They did say that they are aware that many people won't get the resin stuff, whether from difficulty of buying or working with it, so they want to make as much as they can from plastic.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and interestingly, the two smaller Titans were merry hell to convert into CG designs, since they were originally handmade, with the minimal casting and mastering faults that this brings. So the designer set about the job with callipers and measuring tape, and slowly but surely converted everything into CG.
The difficulty of this task, is also why the Warhound is last in line, and wasn't ready to show off at the event.
One guy did all the designs for the Titans and Knights. I remembered to congratulate him on a bl**dy good job at the event! ;-)
Psi-Titans? Was there anything on those coming to the game?
Yodhrin wrote: That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.
Might be that the designer doesn't have photogrammetry skills or software (I've no idea if that would be standard software with 3D design or an extra). Sometimes its easier to go with what you know than reskill. Photographically GW wouldn't be limited in the least (they've even got at least one medium format camera so photography quality wouldn't be a problem).
But even if they had to bring someone in for the job, it would have taken like, a day or two and cost a lot less.
But even if they had to bring someone in for the job, it would have taken like, a day or two and cost a lot less.
Can I ask what experience you have with the process? GW seems to be a fairly tight ship when it comes to spending it's dough on frivolous things, a dude taking months to meticulously measure a titan vs a day with a camera does seem odd if it's as simple as you say.
xttz wrote: Debating scale in Epic is a pointless exercise. Many of the design decisions were more a result of the miniature design/production technology available at the time than any attempt at accurate replication of the fluff.
I don't think that proves what you think it does. That model isn't "inaccurately describing the fluff", because it was the only depiction of a Trygon for a decade - there wasn't something else you could point to and say "actually, it should be like this"; if anything, the plastic kit for 40k is the inaccurate one.
As for stompas, in 1st edition they mounted two battlecannon, an autocannon and two power fields. They may have been shorter than an Imperial Knight Paladin, but they were equal to two of them in a fight. in 2nd edition they were downgraded to vehicles and didn't get the ability to ignore being pinned in combat like Knights and super-heavy tanks. Still, they're borderline, so making them Ork Knight-equivalents seems about right.
But even if they had to bring someone in for the job, it would have taken like, a day or two and cost a lot less.
Can I ask what experience you have with the process? GW seems to be a fairly tight ship when it comes to spending it's dough on frivolous things, a dude taking months to meticulously measure a titan vs a day with a camera does seem odd if it's as simple as you say.
Just what I've learned while researching 3D printing to see if it was feasible - for me it isn't since I don't have an appropriate camera, the right software, and a proper photo studio setup, but for GW or a professional? It's a pretty straightforward process, the software does the heavy lifting so long as you have adequate images. What you get isn't a perfect scan of course, but if they ran all the parts through it in sub-assemblies it should result in a broadly accurate(ie, shapes would all be correct, detailing might need tweaked, there might be an occasional artifact caused by a rogue shadow on a pic or the like to fix) CG model with most of the proportional work already done. That's why the "bloke with calipers" remark struck me as so weird.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Hey, at least you weren't planning to build a Knight Household, I'll probably have dentures by the time they have the classes needed to be capable of taking on Titans alone.
Yodhrin wrote: That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.
IMO, it's because that method produces a really messy mesh result which would more than likely prove to create more work in the long-run. You wouldn't want to produce tooled molds off that kind of model, and cleaning up all the bad geometry would then take more time than if you'd started from scratch to begin with. It's one of those situations where the "shortcut" turns out to be a bigger headache than if you'd just done it properly the first time.
EDIT: I'd also be quite surprised if all of the proportions are 100% accurate to the 28mm scale models anyway. Usually small-scale detail gets "enhanced" to aid visiability and production reasons—you're modifying detail in order for hard plastic model production methods to function properly with it. Again, all of that means that a scan is less helpful.
Yodhrin wrote: That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.
IMO, it's because that method produces a really messy mesh result which would more than likely prove to create more work in the long-run. You wouldn't want to produce tooled molds off that kind of model, and cleaning up all the bad geometry would then take more time than if you'd started from scratch to begin with. It's one of those situations where the "shortcut" turns out to be a bigger headache than if you'd just done it properly the first time.
EDIT: I'd also be quite surprised if all of the proportions are 100% accurate to the 28mm scale models anyway. Usually small-scale detail gets "enhanced" to aid visiability and production reasons—you're modifying detail in order for hard plastic model production methods to function properly with it. Again, all of that means that a scan is less helpful.
Not these days. If you can grab a 3D asset from a videogame and run it through software to "solidify" it sufficiently that with a couple of tweaks it can be 3D printed, I don't see why the same process couldn't apply to a model sourced through photogrammetry. I really do struggle to see how fixing any small errors on the result of that would be more work than painstakingly hand-measuring every part and how every part relates to every other part in order to construct a 3D model from scratch.
I mean, we're at the stage now where you can stick a device on your iPad and use an app to create perfectly serviceable 3D copies of real world objects, so surely a proper professional setup can manage better results than that?
Stereolithography doesn't have the lines like traditional 3d printing. also metrology is very nifty tech, but the scanners are very expensive and usually if you're not in a very high tech area finding someone to do the actual scan can prove difficult. one thing that does surprise me is that they wouldn't have already invested in one. last time I looked the least expensive one was $20k and true professional level somewhere in the $100k ish range.
I just can't wait till we have the game in hand and actually playing it.
Grand Master Edition and a couple more warhounds & knights shall be mine.
I do hope that they'll expand into 40k and xenos. epic should stay separate, but be able to use titanic stuff.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I thought we all agreed we would never bring up the Epic 40K Titans.
*shudder*
Nah, the Eldar Phantom titan was a really good model to use as a 40k-scale Necron dread-construct. I bought three of them for just that! You just have to completely ignore that they are in any way intended to represent the beautiful titans that predated them by several years. Doubly so for the Revenants and their feet that looked like they were roller skating on Rhinos.
Bummed to see that the Warhound sculpt wasn't there, despite it apparently releasing later. It would be good to know what weapons they had settled on including on the sprue.
The display tables have me worried that the game will feature too many Warlords. Unless they are going to go bigger with an Imperator, it is a little weird to see the biggest boy around in so many numbers. Hopefully proper games will see more Reavers/Warhounds.
I am pretty shocked I've never seen that before. I wish I could go back, what a complete and total design and brand abomination. The fact it got greenlit is actually genuinely shocking to me, Jes Goodwyn must have been in a coma or locked in a dungeon that year... no way he lets that pass.
I am pretty shocked I've never seen that before. I wish I could go back, what a complete and total design and brand abomination. The fact it got greenlit is actually genuinely shocking to me, Jes Goodwyn must have been in a coma or locked in a dungeon that year... no way he lets that pass.
The interesting (?) thing is that pretty much all the vehicles/tanks from that period are gorgeous. Arguably the best Epic has ever seen. For instance, the Eldar got their trademark curvy-winged Falcons, Scorpions, etc. in that release. (Previously they were wedge-shaped.) The modern-day Land Raider appeared for the first time, more or less. And everyone got multiple track and turret variants. Even Tyranids received variant sculpts for their slug-tanks. There have been a few improvements since then (the Epic Armageddon Eldar superheavy tanks were spectacular), but mostly, 3rd ed was the gold standard for Epic minis.
Yet most of the Titans were odd design choices that got a mixed reception as far as I know. The 'Battletech' Warlord, the boxier Gargants, and most of all those hideous Eldar Titans. (Which actually aren't bad models--they just don't look Eldarish.)
Getting back to the new AT: I'm really glad to see that they're doing a separate rules/templates pack for those of us who already have old minis. Good on them.
You haven't seen it before because it was likely partly to do with the last death throes of Epic as a selling game. They hired someone to do Eldar...a sculptor who apparently only knew how to use straight lines - like sketches from a 3025 Technical readout or something.
Really atrocious and short lived. As mentioned above the Revenant was far worse.
The Eldar aesthetic had already been established and it was beautiful (and would go on to be "their" aesthetic in the future)
Spoiler:
Then someone turned the damn car around...and drove it recklessly up the wrong side of the highway.
Spoiler:
Even some of the small units got the random cyber-grid detailing (look at the poor Wraithlords)
Spoiler:
As shown above...what the actual feth:
Spoiler:
All...the damn...straight lines. This sculptor never met a curve he didn't hate (I don't think the Imperator was real?)
Yodhrin wrote: That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.
IMO, it's because that method produces a really messy mesh result which would more than likely prove to create more work in the long-run. You wouldn't want to produce tooled molds off that kind of model, and cleaning up all the bad geometry would then take more time than if you'd started from scratch to begin with. It's one of those situations where the "shortcut" turns out to be a bigger headache than if you'd just done it properly the first time.
EDIT: I'd also be quite surprised if all of the proportions are 100% accurate to the 28mm scale models anyway. Usually small-scale detail gets "enhanced" to aid visiability and production reasons—you're modifying detail in order for hard plastic model production methods to function properly with it. Again, all of that means that a scan is less helpful.
Not these days. If you can grab a 3D asset from a videogame and run it through software to "solidify" it sufficiently that with a couple of tweaks it can be 3D printed, I don't see why the same process couldn't apply to a model sourced through photogrammetry. I really do struggle to see how fixing any small errors on the result of that would be more work than painstakingly hand-measuring every part and how every part relates to every other part in order to construct a 3D model from scratch.
I mean, we're at the stage now where you can stick a device on your iPad and use an app to create perfectly serviceable 3D copies of real world objects, so surely a proper professional setup can manage better results than that?
Not being in 3D design myself, I can't say for sure. The explanation I was given, was that the parts were badly misaligned on the big model, which became exxagerated on the smaller one, so they needed to essentially draw everything again, using the general measurements of the old masters instead of complete measurements or 3D scanning.
I did not ask him whether they had tried 3D scanning, so I have no idea if they did.
But it did sound as if several options had at least been considered.
Having built a few of the smaller titans, I can certainly agree that the dimensions are off. The Warhound is particularly badly misaligned, and they know it.
I did poke at them avout using the work that has already been done to redo the old 28mm titans, but couldn't get any kind of answer out of them...
Two years ago I asked Tony Cotrell the same question and was given a "well, the Warhound is old at this point...."
We'll just have to wait and see about the 28mm titans I guess. :-p
Overread wrote: I love tanks and big battles with loads of troops 0 but I also love big mech stomping games and I'd rather GW did one or the other not both. Plus they've scaled the titans up so they are much larger, so you'd not even get the same number of tanks and troops on the table to get that massive battle feeling.
I think keeping them separate lets GW explore the whole world of titans and knight scaled units in its own battlefield setting. It creates that idea that they are so far above regular troops that they don't even worry about them battling along.
Except with just them their awesomeness is lost. If everybody's special nobody's special. And fluff besides shows plenty of cases where they have to worry about them. They aren't invincible things.
Getting back to the new AT: I'm really glad to see that they're doing a separate rules/templates pack for those of us who already have old minis. Good on them.
I guess that could work as long as you don't intend to mix in any of the new models.
Getting back to the new AT: I'm really glad to see that they're doing a separate rules/templates pack for those of us who already have old minis. Good on them.
I guess that could work as long as you don't intend to mix in any of the new models.
And assuming you can resist the urge to replace/update your old collection with the new minis.
Still, people with tight hobby budgets (like me) might just buy the rule pack first, to try out the game, and then invest in the new Titans one at a time. Probably more expensive in the long run, but at least you avoid a big outlay at the start.
To me it's a big improvement on the current Necromunda release model... not to mention the new edition of X-Wing from FFG, which apparently requires you to buy a new starter box just to get one or two vital decks of cards (e.g. the damage deck). I hope FW/GW don't pull any shenanigans like that here.
Not these days. If you can grab a 3D asset from a videogame and run it through software to "solidify" it sufficiently that with a couple of tweaks it can be 3D printed, I don't see why the same process couldn't apply to a model sourced through photogrammetry. I really do struggle to see how fixing any small errors on the result of that would be more work than painstakingly hand-measuring every part and how every part relates to every other part in order to construct a 3D model from scratch.
Not being in 3D design myself, I can't say for sure. The explanation I was given, was that the parts were badly misaligned on the big model, which became exxagerated on the smaller one, so they needed to essentially draw everything again, using the general measurements of the old masters instead of complete measurements or 3D scanning. I did not ask him whether they had tried 3D scanning, so I have no idea if they did.
Don't know about what kind of technology GW had achieved today, but an Imported model is never the same as the one you made. They are 1 piece, and lack the customisation with the only adjust that they can do is vector/surface editiing, let alone turn them into assembled piece, and then turn that into the mold.
Elbows wrote: All...the damn...straight lines. This sculptor never met a curve he didn't hate (I don't think the Imperator was real?)
Spoiler:
That version of the Imperator was real. And yes, there's nothing wrong with this iteration of Titans. Forge World was already selling them as full scale 40k models before they were incorporated into the Epic Armageddon line.
Elbows wrote: All...the damn...straight lines. This sculptor never met a curve he didn't hate (I don't think the Imperator was real?)
Spoiler:
That version of the Imperator was real. And yes, there's nothing wrong with this iteration of Titans. Forge World was already selling them as full scale 40k models before they were incorporated into the Epic Armageddon line.
That Imperator must have been a pre-release leak because I never remember that going on sale, nor the Warhounds or Reavers - I think only the Warlord from that photo made it on sale. I guess it was released just before GW killed off the range
Overread wrote: That Imperator must have been a pre-release leak because I never remember that going on sale, nor the Warhounds or Reavers - I think only the Warlord from that photo made it on sale. I guess it was released just before GW killed off the range
SonicPara wrote: Bummed to see that the Warhound sculpt wasn't there, despite it apparently releasing later. It would be good to know what weapons they had settled on including on the sprue.
The display tables have me worried that the game will feature too many Warlords. Unless they are going to go bigger with an Imperator, it is a little weird to see the biggest boy around in so many numbers. Hopefully proper games will see more Reavers/Warhounds.
The Warlord's always been the poster boy of the Titan Legions, so I don't mind them being front and centre. Warhounds are more specialised, and Reavers are rarer background-wise (though I suspect that particular bit of background reflected the real world situation!)
Really, really excited about this game. I love the concept of land-battleships, resource management and the cinematic qualities that'll come up. While I'm excited for the prospect of xenos Titans, I'm perfectly content to start with classic mirror match-ups of loyalists/traitors for a year or two.
Having built a few of the smaller titans, I can certainly agree that the dimensions are off. The Warhound is particularly badly misaligned, and they know it.
I did poke at them avout using the work that has already been done to redo the old 28mm titans, but couldn't get any kind of answer out of them...
Two years ago I asked Tony Cotrell the same question and was given a "well, the Warhound is old at this point...."
We'll just have to wait and see about the 28mm titans I guess. :-p
This plus the absence of the model that they confirmed is complete makes me think the 28mm version may be getting replaced soon. If the AT version is a CAD redesign and they showed it last weekend, it would be obvious in the same way people spotted the Thunderhawk update in artwork.
Yodhrin wrote: That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.
IMO, it's because that method produces a really messy mesh result which would more than likely prove to create more work in the long-run. You wouldn't want to produce tooled molds off that kind of model, and cleaning up all the bad geometry would then take more time than if you'd started from scratch to begin with. It's one of those situations where the "shortcut" turns out to be a bigger headache than if you'd just done it properly the first time.
EDIT: I'd also be quite surprised if all of the proportions are 100% accurate to the 28mm scale models anyway. Usually small-scale detail gets "enhanced" to aid visiability and production reasons—you're modifying detail in order for hard plastic model production methods to function properly with it. Again, all of that means that a scan is less helpful.
Not these days. If you can grab a 3D asset from a videogame and run it through software to "solidify" it sufficiently that with a couple of tweaks it can be 3D printed, I don't see why the same process couldn't apply to a model sourced through photogrammetry. I really do struggle to see how fixing any small errors on the result of that would be more work than painstakingly hand-measuring every part and how every part relates to every other part in order to construct a 3D model from scratch.
I mean, we're at the stage now where you can stick a device on your iPad and use an app to create perfectly serviceable 3D copies of real world objects, so surely a proper professional setup can manage better results than that?
Hmm, not meaning to pick on Yodhrin here, but I seem to run into a lot of posts like the above since dipping my toe in the digital sculpting pool. They remind me of my time as a graphic designer, when ignorant art directors insisted that artwork was 'all done by the computer' and their hours of changes and revisions 'could be done with the push of a button'. (Then you sit here and work on it for six hours, fathead...)
But no, I'm not calling anyone here an ignorant fathead... perhaps merely misinformed. You cannot obtain a workable digital sculpt, suitable for mass production, from any current scanning technology without spending days - literally - cleaning and fixing the geometry, because 3D scanners cannot understand what they are scanning. They have no way of assigning tolerances to connecting surfaces, or recognising where the model can have a low polycount (like internal surfaces on a multi-part, hollow plastic kit) and where they need a high count. (visible areas). That kind of understanding is still firmly in the realm of the human mind.
Yes, from a scanned object you can eventually obtain a 'watertight' model, suitable for 3D printing in most cases, but there is a multiverse of differences between a file that'll print from liquid resin, giving you an okay miniature, and one that'll print with the high precision needed for a plastic kit master.
Speaking from personal experience, I have always found it faster and easier to take callipers in hand, measure what I'm reproducing, and sculpt my digital model from raw polygons, rather than start with a messy, over-rendered file, that needs multiple repairs and fixes.
Think of it like this - which would you rather build and paint: A new kit that's fresh off the sprue, all clean and ready to go - or - a kit that someone else built, with glue everywhere, bad greenstuff conversions to remove, battle damage that looks like their new puppy chewed it, and undercoated with house paint? That's what it is like working with a scanned file or (God forbid) someone else's sculpt that you've been asked to "just tweak a bit, so we can use it."
As for 3D models from computer games - these are almost always unusable. The scale is totally wrong for shrinking to 28mm (or whatever) panel lines might be non-existent, etc, etc. You might use one to check you've copied the proportions of a tank, starship, etc accurately, but never as a production sculpt.
Whoever is sculpting the Warhound (and other Titans) is going about it in exactly the right way, and I am really happy they are being this demanding and careful.
My wallet does not share my feeling in this matter. But it won't be getting a vote...!
Yodhrin wrote: That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.
IMO, it's because that method produces a really messy mesh result which would more than likely prove to create more work in the long-run. You wouldn't want to produce tooled molds off that kind of model, and cleaning up all the bad geometry would then take more time than if you'd started from scratch to begin with. It's one of those situations where the "shortcut" turns out to be a bigger headache than if you'd just done it properly the first time.
EDIT: I'd also be quite surprised if all of the proportions are 100% accurate to the 28mm scale models anyway. Usually small-scale detail gets "enhanced" to aid visiability and production reasons—you're modifying detail in order for hard plastic model production methods to function properly with it. Again, all of that means that a scan is less helpful.
Not these days. If you can grab a 3D asset from a videogame and run it through software to "solidify" it sufficiently that with a couple of tweaks it can be 3D printed, I don't see why the same process couldn't apply to a model sourced through photogrammetry. I really do struggle to see how fixing any small errors on the result of that would be more work than painstakingly hand-measuring every part and how every part relates to every other part in order to construct a 3D model from scratch.
I mean, we're at the stage now where you can stick a device on your iPad and use an app to create perfectly serviceable 3D copies of real world objects, so surely a proper professional setup can manage better results than that?
Hmm, not meaning to pick on Yodhrin here, but I seem to run into a lot of posts like the above since dipping my toe in the digital sculpting pool. They remind me of my time as a graphic designer, when ignorant art directors insisted that artwork was 'all done by the computer' and their hours of changes and revisions 'could be done with the push of a button'. (Then you sit here and work on it for six hours, fathead...)
But no, I'm not calling anyone here an ignorant fathead... perhaps merely misinformed. You cannot obtain a workable digital sculpt, suitable for mass production, from any current scanning technology without spending days - literally - cleaning and fixing the geometry, because 3D scanners cannot understand what they are scanning. They have no way of assigning tolerances to connecting surfaces, or recognising where the model can have a low polycount (like internal surfaces on a multi-part, hollow plastic kit) and where they need a high count. (visible areas). That kind of understanding is still firmly in the realm of the human mind.
Yes, from a scanned object you can eventually obtain a 'watertight' model, suitable for 3D printing in most cases, but there is a multiverse of differences between a file that'll print from liquid resin, giving you an okay miniature, and one that'll print with the high precision needed for a plastic kit master.
Speaking from personal experience, I have always found it faster and easier to take callipers in hand, measure what I'm reproducing, and sculpt my digital model from raw polygons, rather than start with a messy, over-rendered file, that needs multiple repairs and fixes.
Think of it like this - which would you rather build and paint: A new kit that's fresh off the sprue, all clean and ready to go - or - a kit that someone else built, with glue everywhere, bad greenstuff conversions to remove, battle damage that looks like their new puppy chewed it, and undercoated with house paint? That's what it is like working with a scanned file or (God forbid) someone else's sculpt that you've been asked to "just tweak a bit, so we can use it."
As for 3D models from computer games - these are almost always unusable. The scale is totally wrong for shrinking to 28mm (or whatever) panel lines might be non-existent, etc, etc. You might use one to check you've copied the proportions of a tank, starship, etc accurately, but never as a production sculpt.
Whoever is sculpting the Warhound (and other Titans) is going about it in exactly the right way, and I am really happy they are being this demanding and careful.
My wallet does not share my feeling in this matter. But it won't be getting a vote...!
And had I suggested that you could scan the model and go right to engraving the molds, you might have a point. I merely suggested that taking a scan as the baseline to work from would surely be less work - or at least less cost - than having a guy on a salary spend ages painstaking hand-measuring every part of the physical model and then CAD'ing each part from scratch based on those measurements.
I would hope that the first xenon addition would be Eldar because they have a similar spread of existing titan, knight and superheavy tanks. I note the list a few pages ago missed off the cobra and scorpion super heavies as well as the bright stallion, fire game and towering destroyer class knights. Adding in the 40k wraithknight, with some weapon variants, and they about match the imperial counterparts.
Yodhrin wrote: And had I suggested that you could scan the model and go right to engraving the molds, you might have a point. I merely suggested that taking a scan as the baseline to work from would surely be less work - or at least less cost - than having a guy on a salary spend ages painstaking hand-measuring every part of the physical model and then CAD'ing each part from scratch based on those measurements.
Either way, the calipers are coming out. I'd rather do it for clean topography rather some rat's nest tangle of tris and quads.
orkswubwub wrote: Sorry I didn't read the entire thread - just OP and some posts. Is there any chaos in this codex or is it solely for the emperor?
Confusing question hence the confusing reply.
This is a new game, not a codex for 40k. It allows you to play battles between the Imperium and Traitor titan legions during the Horus Heresy.
You are likely to have maybe 3 - 8 models total per game - perhaps 1 warlord titan, a 1 or 2 smaller (but still huge!) titans and maybe 3+ of the imperial knights that you see in 40k, but teeny-weeny.
I expect you might also see games where fewer, smaller titans go up against a greater number of faster but weaker ones.
It could be an honest mistake; considering that pretty much all other GW games have a codex/battletome etc... book for each faction then it stands to reason to think this game might have one too at launch.
Probably a mix up between Titanicus and the 40k Knights. And to be fair without a scale indicator the models are easy to mistake for there 40k counterparts at first glance.
Yodhrin wrote: I have zero interest in seeing Tau get Titans-but-better-than-everyone-else's-for-some-reason or giant Necron Warriors etc. Some races should have entirely different methods of warfare on the Titanic scale that aren't actual Titans at all, if nothing else just for some variety.
Of course, this was the original plan for the Tau - no suit bigger than a Broadside, as it was an inefficient waste of resources, with a variety of flyers to cover the SH side of combat.
Then some fething idiot in the studio went "But mechas are cool!!1!!11elevenl!!1" and now look what's happened...
H.B.M.C. wrote: I thought we all agreed we would never bring up the Epic 40K Titans.
*shudder*
As pointed out by Overread, there was nowt wrong with the Epic 40k Warlord - apart, I guess, from the lack of variant weapons.
Elbows wrote: All...the damn...straight lines. This sculptor never met a curve he didn't hate (I don't think the Imperator was real?)
Spoiler:
Yeah, that's a converted Imperator - and they've done a nice job with getting it to fit with that aesthetic. I believe the Reavers and Warhounds were from FW - I've got one of those Reavers part-painted somewhere...
Well, this morning when I wanted to read up on Adeptus Titanicus, I opened the 40k Knights codex thread by mistake. Knight and Titan basically parse as the same thing in my brain.
Understand they want to merge epic and Titanicus but hopefully when epic is released the models will cross pollinate and we can use them for massive Armageddon type games. Hopefully we will see super heavy tanks though.
The scenery they have shown is absolutely amazing, those FW tiles will be mine!
Knockagh wrote: Understand they want to merge epic and Titanicus but hopefully when epic is released the models will cross pollinate and we can use them for massive Armageddon type games. Hopefully we will see super heavy tanks though.
The scenery they have shown is absolutely amazing, those FW tiles will be mine!
Gotta be clear, there is no "When" Epic is released. It "might" be released. It's not a guarantee or even likely. Any other expectations are premature.
At last year's Warhammer Fest, Tony Cottrell described Epic - all editions, from Space Marine in 1989 to Epic 40,000 twenty years later as "a distraction" from the core concept of Adeptus Titanicus; giant robots smacking each other in the face. He was being light-hearted, but I think it's clear that his interest is in the titans, and primarily Imperial titans, and anything smaller is a sideshow at best.
AT is about how well you use limited resources. Epic is about grand scale conflicts.
Aren't all games about how you use limited resources? Even in Epic with whole Chapters of Space Marines charging Titan Battlegroups, you only have so much to go around.
I think Mad Doc means more about how you balance the resources within the Titan - ergo do you push reactor power to the weapons or to a shield or repair etc... As opposed to moving companies and troops and tanks around on the battlefield.
It's a bit like comparing the gameplay of Faster than Light and Homeworld. Both are strategy games, but the way you interact is very different on a visual and mechanics level (even if the underlaying concept of limited resources is the same).
Personally I can understand how troops and infantry can be a distraction from the titans - I also recall that in Epic most of the titan complex controls went away; for the ease of the gameplay and flow the titans were simplified a lot. On that score alone Epic and Titanicus won't be compatible.
Personally I'd rather they brought Warmaster back before Epic; whilst I love large comapnies of tanks the whole scale really appeals to rank and file infantry and fantasy armies.
The other bonus if they keep it to titans only is seeing other factions (xenos) fleshing out their titan lore and ranges. With 40K And plastics we've got a huge range of larger monsters and vehicles; but the knights to titans are very limited.
It would be fantastic to see a range of Tyranid beasts; or Tau's mechanised solution or slender graceful armies of Eldar or Wickied evil twisted Dark Eldar. Seeing Necrons deploy strange towers and fortresses; a huge Ctan god and then some huge Canoptek walker
Overread wrote: I think Mad Doc means more about how you balance the resources within the Titan - ergo do you push reactor power to the weapons or to a shield or repair etc... As opposed to moving companies and troops and tanks around on the battlefield.
It's a bit like comparing the gameplay of Faster than Light and Homeworld. Both are strategy games, but the way you interact is very different on a visual and mechanics level (even if the underlaying concept of limited resources is the same).
I see what you mean (I also love FTL). I've noticed that's a theme with giant robot games in that they tend to feature a dashboard for managing on-board resources as well as a board for managing the Titan's interactions with its environment. Giga-Robo does it, GKR: Heavy Hitters does it, Pacific Rim: Extinction does it, and so does my game. The funny thing is that I locked that in as a design feature before I'd heard about those games, but it was because of the Imperator Titan sheet from Epic: Titan Legions. To see it brought back in this way is really neat.
Mysterio:
I think I have some of the old aiming dice around here somewhere. That was super-annoying. If I can plug at the moment, I went with a similar hit-grid for Titanomachina except I laid it on its side and you roll a D3 to see which of three squares you hit. Combo'ing Weapons with Crew means you can roll extra dice and pick one. I'm really interested to see what GW did, since the intermediate Adeptus Titanicus rules that came out some years ago from Specialist Games involved rolling on a table.
Prometheum5 wrote: I'm extremely excited for Adeptus Titanicus. I want to smash big robots together. I don't want to play Epic and paint armies.
Same!
And I feel like things will be much better without worrying about balancing other non-Titan units. We won't see a game that slowly devolves into something potentially not Titan-centric, either.
The scale is great. These will be very fun to paint and model. Also very curious to see the secondary parts market explode with options.
That's the cool thing about it right, that there's so many options for giant-robot gaming, and so many flavours! It bodes well for everyone, fans and producers alike, I think (a rising tide lifting all boats).
While a fully realized Epic is what I really want, it would make sense for AT2018 to include super heavies... after all a number of them are designed to kill titans, and it would be interesting to see how you deal with the "little guys" in ambush (plus give more of a reason for knights to exist)
Overread wrote: I think Mad Doc means more about how you balance the resources within the Titan - ergo do you push reactor power to the weapons or to a shield or repair etc... As opposed to moving companies and troops and tanks around on the battlefield.
It's a bit like comparing the gameplay of Faster than Light and Homeworld. Both are strategy games, but the way you interact is very different on a visual and mechanics level (even if the underlaying concept of limited resources is the same).
Personally I can understand how troops and infantry can be a distraction from the titans - I also recall that in Epic most of the titan complex controls went away; for the ease of the gameplay and flow the titans were simplified a lot. On that score alone Epic and Titanicus won't be compatible.
Personally I'd rather they brought Warmaster back before Epic; whilst I love large comapnies of tanks the whole scale really appeals to rank and file infantry and fantasy armies.
Bit of both.
Titans work well in Epic. Of course they do. But a dedicated Titan game should be about replicating the Princeps experience. Where do I assign my Plasma? Do I try to patch up the Volcano Cannon for a killshot next turn, or get my Void Shields back online so I can survive another turn?
There’s space for both experiences - but not really in the same game. Too detailed on the Titans, and your infantry and tank battalions lose significance. Not enough detail on the Titans and how they work, and they just become very tough tanks.
Man, just seeing the official pics for the first time. Those Warlords are just way too big. So basically scaling these to real life, they have to walk up to each other and fire point blank range in order to hit each other, cause based on the size of those terrain boards, I am guessing they are 2 feet by 2 feet, so those massive Warlords are either going to be able to fire across a 4 ft table no problem, of they will have to move within a certain distance. I am guess the later. And at that scale, is ridiculous. They should have made them half the size.
I was afraid I would be disappointed and I still am. Will still buy the box, because I love the old AT. But I really think this limits the game.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: But a dedicated Titan game should be about replicating the Princeps experience. Where do I assign my Plasma? Do I try to patch up the Volcano Cannon for a killshot next turn, or get my Void Shields back online so I can survive another turn?.
What choice? What you on about? There's only one thing to do: ALL POWER TO GUNS. OPEN FIRE!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: But a dedicated Titan game should be about replicating the Princeps experience. Where do I assign my Plasma? Do I try to patch up the Volcano Cannon for a killshot next turn, or get my Void Shields back online so I can survive another turn?.
What choice? What you on about? There's only one thing to do: ALL POWER TO GUNS. OPEN FIRE!
August can't come soon enough...
That might sound cool for a small game, but I am sure more players will want to play big games with lots of titans and managing all those things will slow a game down. If you don't know what I mean, you should check out the Imperator from Titan Legions.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: But a dedicated Titan game should be about replicating the Princeps experience. Where do I assign my Plasma? Do I try to patch up the Volcano Cannon for a killshot next turn, or get my Void Shields back online so I can survive another turn?.
What choice? What you on about? There's only one thing to do: ALL POWER TO GUNS. OPEN FIRE!
August can't come soon enough...
That might sound cool for a small game, but I am sure more players will want to play big games with lots of titans and managing all those things will slow a game down. If you don't know what I mean, you should check out the Imperator from Titan Legions.
Titanicus might feature massive war machines with enough firepower to level city blocks, but its more of a skirmish game than a mass battle one. Any ruleset designed for that sort play is going to be slow if you try to use it for larger scale battles.
It's kind of tricky though, given how many different takes there are on the Princeps experience. Particularly when it comes to interesting Titan-on-Titan combat. I like how Abnett, for example, made it about auspex and information in Titanicus; power-management never gets raised. Likewise in Titan it was about crew relationships.
Knockagh wrote: Understand they want to merge epic and Titanicus but hopefully when epic is released the models will cross pollinate and we can use them for massive Armageddon type games. Hopefully we will see super heavy tanks though.
The scenery they have shown is absolutely amazing, those FW tiles will be mine!
Gotta be clear, there is no "When" Epic is released. It "might" be released. It's not a guarantee or even likely. Any other expectations are premature.
Really? I thought Epic had been mentioned but perhaps not. Still I found a bunch of Epic stuff in a cupboard, along with some other old stuff last week. So I’m going to use them as scenery on the Titanicus board I’m planning, if nothing else!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: But a dedicated Titan game should be about replicating the Princeps experience. Where do I assign my Plasma? Do I try to patch up the Volcano Cannon for a killshot next turn, or get my Void Shields back online so I can survive another turn?.
What choice? What you on about? There's only one thing to do: ALL POWER TO GUNS. OPEN FIRE!
August can't come soon enough...
That might sound cool for a small game, but I am sure more players will want to play big games with lots of titans and managing all those things will slow a game down. If you don't know what I mean, you should check out the Imperator from Titan Legions.
No, I think you don't understand what Zeds talking about. Zed definitely wants lots of fiddly little option just like you do. He's just using his Ork Military Academy degree, which states "Get close! Shoot lots!". Subtlety is for noobs, Eldar and Cadets. Sound off!
KTG17 wrote: Man, just seeing the official pics for the first time. Those Warlords are just way too big. So basically scaling these to real life, they have to walk up to each other and fire point blank range in order to hit each other, cause based on the size of those terrain boards, I am guessing they are 2 feet by 2 feet, so those massive Warlords are either going to be able to fire across a 4 ft table no problem, of they will have to move within a certain distance. I am guess the later. And at that scale, is ridiculous. They should have made them half the size.
I was afraid I would be disappointed and I still am. Will still buy the box, because I love the old AT. But I really think this limits the game.
Adeptus Titanicus never was a game about a straight up fight, but one of cunning manoeuvres.
Done right, it’s arguably closer to a Naval Game than an infantry skirmish. Bigger Titans can soak up and dish out punishment - but are slow and cumbersome. So the onus is on using your lighter Titans to harry the shepherd the foe right into your guns - ideally whilst keeping as many of there’s out of arc.
So the relative range of the guns doesn’t matter. You can have a 180” range on a 4’x4’ board, and it won’t matter one jot if I can keep terrain between thee and me. Can’t shoot what you can’t see....
And that’s where I feel their modular terrain may make or break the game. For instance, if I go Warhound heavy, it’s easy peasy for me to keep out of sight, if all the buildings have been constructed to hide Warlord class Titans behind.
Overread wrote: The other bonus if they keep it to titans only is seeing other factions (xenos) fleshing out their titan lore and ranges. With 40K And plastics we've got a huge range of larger monsters and vehicles; but the knights to titans are very limited.
It would be fantastic to see a range of Tyranid beasts; or Tau's mechanised solution or slender graceful armies of Eldar or Wickied evil twisted Dark Eldar. Seeing Necrons deploy strange towers and fortresses; a huge Ctan god and then some huge Canoptek walker
I'm actually hoping they don't move AT into 40K specifically for the Tau. Some of us actually like that the Tau didn't use impractical giant robots but relied on aerospace fighters and spacecraft as "Titans". But that wasn't cool enough so battle suits had to get even bigger and bigger because Giant Robots!!! So if it does move to 40K Tau will likely end up like everyone else rather than having a unique force.
Nurglitch wrote: That's the cool thing about it right, that there's so many options for giant-robot gaming, and so many flavours! It bodes well for everyone, fans and producers alike, I think (a rising tide lifting all boats).
Yes, of course!
I think this game is going to be a huge success - so we're almost certainly going to get Xenos (Eldar and Orks) Titans evnetually.
It would be 'easy' to add in super-heavy tanks and such after that - they fulfill similar roles that the Knights are now, I guess? But offer more variety and options.
It might be enough to get 'close' to EPIC while still being its own thing.
That might sound cool for a small game, but I am sure more players will want to play big games with lots of titans and managing all those things will slow a game down. If you don't know what I mean, you should check out the Imperator from Titan Legions.
Oh, I know about those. Played the hell out of mine. Great Gargants were my favourite. See, with this, I can't see you ever going beyond two warlords. Besides, the datsheet doesn't look particularly onerous for games
Overread wrote: The other bonus if they keep it to titans only is seeing other factions (xenos) fleshing out their titan lore and ranges. With 40K And plastics we've got a huge range of larger monsters and vehicles; but the knights to titans are very limited.
It would be fantastic to see a range of Tyranid beasts; or Tau's mechanised solution or slender graceful armies of Eldar or Wickied evil twisted Dark Eldar. Seeing Necrons deploy strange towers and fortresses; a huge Ctan god and then some huge Canoptek walker
I'm actually hoping they don't move AT into 40K specifically for the Tau. Some of us actually like that the Tau didn't use impractical giant robots but relied on aerospace fighters and spacecraft as "Titans". But that wasn't cool enough so battle suits had to get even bigger and bigger because Giant Robots!!! So if it does move to 40K Tau will likely end up like everyone else rather than having a unique force.
I'm gonna guess that any future xenos expansion would involve Orks or Eldar. They have classic Titan designs to pull from, and are entities operating in the early '30Ks', unlike Tau, Necrons, and Tyranids. I'm also going to guess that Orks and Eldar would be years down the road.
Trouble with introducing Tau is that they’d likely end up in the same niche as Eldar - relying on speed and sneakiness, rather than sheer firepower.
They’d either have nothing to distinguish from each other, or one will end up just doing it better, rendering the other race somewhat moot.
In Epic, as in 40k, Tau would work best using overlapping fields of fire, and strict coordination between different units. I wouldn’t want to see a Tau vehicle able to simply go toe-to-toe with a Warlord - or even a Reaver. The onus should be on keeping out of the way of real danger units until you’ve got the right stuff in the right place to give it a multi angled kicking. I’d prefer them to excel at seizing objectives, but be ill disposed to holding them for more than a couple of turns. Keep them fluid, but not necessarily fast.
Automatically Appended Next Post: As for Necrons....I’ve reevaluated an earlier statement that Eldar Titans were a response to Necron equivalents.
Instead, I’d prefer an army where you get serious firepower from relatively small units. The inference being Eldar Titans were developed to be able to absorb that sort of firepower.
No, I think you don't understand what Zeds talking about. Zed definitely wants lots of fiddly little option just like you do. He's just using his Ork Military Academy degree, which states "Get close! Shoot lots!". Subtlety is for noobs, Eldar and Cadets. Sound off!
Did I mention I like Gargants? The fact that you just unload on them, they're blazing away, the Kaptain in the head has been blown of but they keep coming! "Get 'im, ladz!"
I'm actually hoping they don't move AT into 40K specifically for the Tau.
Well, according to the slides, this will based during the heresy "initially". I'm hoping for a future expansion into the 40k universe myself...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Trouble with introducing Tau is that they’d likely end up in the same niche as Eldar - relying on speed and sneakiness, rather than sheer firepower.
Tau could go one of two ways - smaller swarm of machines or a bit inbetween. Not as quick as Eldar but heavier firepower than the imperials. Of course, the other option for them is to keep the engines small and introduce aircraft...
How bad will the 6mm Epic stuff look along side these new 8mm titans and scenery? I'm just curious as I have tons of epic stuff still and would love to be able to use these titans with it...
I think right off the bat, we are going to see some fans making 3d prints of 40K vehicles and infantry to fit with these amazing new plastic titan models.
As far as GW/Specialist Studios expanding on this (should there be enough demand and suitable sales numbers on the initial release)...I see Forgeworld making:
1. Damaged/destroyed buildings based on the new building sprues and other weapon emplacements/scenery elements to go along with their 2x2 3d board sections.
2. Upgrade kits for the various imperial titan variants.
3. Some actual Chaos conversion bits.
Then, we'll either see Eldar and Ork titans, or Imperial Horus Heresy era Super Heavy tanks/vehicles added to the mix...
I agree that the core mechanics of this game wont mesh well with an Epic scale battle game with infantry and tank units....and I hope they don't try.
If they do go back to Epic, I hope it is a different ruleset, with the same scale, and the ability to use the titans as just large walking tanks with shields....maybe taking a page from the NET Epic playbook where they've kept some of the cool aspects of titan battles, while keeping it simple enough to not bog down a massive army battle game.
Even if this game falls flat and just isn't very fun, I'm still stoked to get my hands on these beautiful titan models. I've been pining over the 40K 28mm resin ones from Forgeworld, but could never justify spending that much on a model I'd never use regularly in a game....These 8mm models will sate my apetite without completely obliterating my wallet...and they will take up much less space as well!
I suspect this game will do well, and I look forward to buying up a bunch of Eldar titans, but I'm really looking forward to the next edition of Epic. To me, that's how 40K should be played (on a grand scale)
The scale is great. These will be very fun to paint and model. Also very curious to see the secondary parts market explode with options.
I'm hugely looking forward to the secondary parts market, those stompy bots are looking just great for aftermarket parts. I know I've had my crayons out to mash up ideas and I'm gnashing at the bit to get my hands on the models measure/scan up!
Fango wrote: How bad will the 6mm Epic stuff look along side these new 8mm titans and scenery? I'm just curious as I have tons of epic stuff still and would love to be able to use these titans with it...
It will probably look fine. Heck the titans are possibly better now that they are significantly larger.
There will be a few oddities like the doors on the backs of stompas being way too big appearing; and most troops will appear somewhat oversized; but you can't go much smaller before you basically just have to use tokens for troops instead of a model.
Mysterio wrote:EPIC is the scale that 40K games *should* be fought at - so here's to hoping it does eventually make a triumphant comeback!
Apologies for this as I think some people probably think I am sounding like a stuck record on this issue, but there is already readily available resources available for playing Epic (great rules, miniatures) and a thriving community. Not on the scale of BB before that was re-launched but it's all there if you want it!
Please check out some of the links in my sig
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Overread wrote: I think Mad Doc means more about how you balance the resources within the Titan - ergo do you push reactor power to the weapons or to a shield or repair etc... As opposed to moving companies and troops and tanks around on the battlefield.
It's a bit like comparing the gameplay of Faster than Light and Homeworld. Both are strategy games, but the way you interact is very different on a visual and mechanics level (even if the underlaying concept of limited resources is the same).
Personally I can understand how troops and infantry can be a distraction from the titans - I also recall that in Epic most of the titan complex controls went away; for the ease of the gameplay and flow the titans were simplified a lot. On that score alone Epic and Titanicus won't be compatible.
Personally I'd rather they brought Warmaster back before Epic; whilst I love large comapnies of tanks the whole scale really appeals to rank and file infantry and fantasy armies.
Bit of both.
Titans work well in Epic. Of course they do. But a dedicated Titan game should be about replicating the Princeps experience. Where do I assign my Plasma? Do I try to patch up the Volcano Cannon for a killshot next turn, or get my Void Shields back online so I can survive another turn?
There’s space for both experiences - but not really in the same game. Too detailed on the Titans, and your infantry and tank battalions lose significance. Not enough detail on the Titans and how they work, and they just become very tough tanks.
Agree completely - and think this is one of the problems with the current Epic Armageddon rules - they're definitely very streamlined and fast to play, but you've lost some of that detail of earlier editions where you had Titans running around with both arms blown off, trying to stop reactor meltdowns or conversely going down to a very lucky headshot.
But it's balancing that level of detail with a mass-battle game, and without it slowing down too much.
I'm hoping with AT (and it's certainly sounding this way) that the small model count will have allowed the developers to go full-skirmish and come up with some really cool and characterful rules.
Yodhrin wrote: I have zero interest in seeing Tau get Titans-but-better-than-everyone-else's-for-some-reason or giant Necron Warriors etc. Some races should have entirely different methods of warfare on the Titanic scale that aren't actual Titans at all, if nothing else just for some variety.
Of course, this was the original plan for the Tau - no suit bigger than a Broadside, as it was an inefficient waste of resources, with a variety of flyers to cover the SH side of combat.
Then some fething idiot in the studio went "But mechas are cool!!1!!11elevenl!!1" and now look what's happened...
There was an interview with Rick Priestly a few years back where he was talking about his time at GW and what stuck in my head was when he said they came up with Terminators. Termies are cool, we all accept that, btu they sold so well that the accountants demanded equivalents for all races. he tried to push back saying "No, one thing that makes them so cool and popular is because they're unique to one race". Sales drives will always win out in the end, especially in public companies.
Nostromodamus wrote: Daemonic heads, tail weapons and other spiky bits definitely need to be made available for Siege of Terra games
A chaos conversion sprue with warped armor plates for various titans would be cool, and not too difficult. It's just a matter of whether or not it would sell enough to justify producing it. Though to be honest, at least initially i'd rather see them put any extra resources into plastic weapons, as i'd prefer to avoid resin if possible.
Would titans even be warped by the Siege of Terra? Other than Death Guard and some ritualistic stuff by the Word Bearers, seems like traitors would still be relatively mundane by that point?
AegisGrimm wrote: Would titans even be warped by the Siege of Terra? Other than Death Guard and some ritualistic stuff by the Word Bearers, seems like traitors would still be relatively mundane by that point?
Most likely -to my knowledge at least- there should only be Maybe a handful of proper demon engines by the time of the ’Siege of Terra’, although it would still be good to get some demonic upgrade sets for use in the 40k era.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Trouble with introducing Tau is that they’d likely end up in the same niche as Eldar - relying on speed and sneakiness, rather than sheer firepower.
Don't know about epic but the largest Tau war machine atm is literally sheer firepower : The Taunar and the Stormsurge. Unless you also count the Tiger Shark, which is a Fighter Jet.
AegisGrimm wrote: Would titans even be warped by the Siege of Terra? Other than Death Guard and some ritualistic stuff by the Word Bearers, seems like traitors would still be relatively mundane by that point?
The 40k wiki for what its worth, more or less says the majority, or at least a significant number of Legio Mortis was warped beyond recognition by the time they attacked Terra. As for the other Legio they might just have more chaos stars, and subtle iconography. But depending on the Legio yeah you would see minimal to no changes to extreme changes like what was seen in Legio Mortis.
I think it's something they could bother with later down the line if the game is successful. I think most of what the specialist games team had in mind was pre siege of terra HH battles. Seeing as how popular Legio Mortis seems to be...it would suck to see so many samey battles with black/red titans shooting each other, like mirror battles. I'm hoping the mechanics of the game are so fun that it doesn't matter. I'd rather not see this game become a bloated convoluted mess. It already seems complicated enough without adding in space marines and numerous other things you have to micro manage on top of all the effects/status/orders of the titans.
AegisGrimm wrote: Would titans even be warped by the Siege of Terra? Other than Death Guard and some ritualistic stuff by the Word Bearers, seems like traitors would still be relatively mundane by that point?
There's references to warped titans in the old fluff regarding siege of terra so barring gw retconning it yes.
AegisGrimm wrote: Would titans even be warped by the Siege of Terra? Other than Death Guard and some ritualistic stuff by the Word Bearers, seems like traitors would still be relatively mundane by that point?
There's references to warped titans in the old fluff regarding siege of terra so barring gw retconning it yes.
It could make for a good expansion down the line, Siege of Terra, introduce Daemon Titans and maybe an Imperiator.
gorgon wrote: I'm gonna guess that any future xenos expansion would involve Orks or Eldar. They have classic Titan designs to pull from, and are entities operating in the early '30Ks', unlike Tau, Necrons, and Tyranids. I'm also going to guess that Orks and Eldar would be years down the road.
Honestly the only reason this game is set in the 30k era is the same as the original; to have an explanation for the same models fighting on both sides. There's nothing to stop them releasing later campaign books that are set 10,000 years later. I wouldn't expect any Xenos to show up in the 30k setting.
If Epic ever does get redone, I’d really appreciate it if the Imperial Guard were the first plastics released and the Space Marines were the resin masterworks that hardly anyone bought.
AndrewGPaul wrote: At last year's Warhammer Fest, Tony Cottrell described Epic - all editions, from Space Marine in 1989 to Epic 40,000 twenty years later as "a distraction" from the core concept of Adeptus Titanicus; giant robots smacking each other in the face. He was being light-hearted, but I think it's clear that his interest is in the titans, and primarily Imperial titans, and anything smaller is a sideshow at best.
While I'm hoping for all the tanks and infantry to eventually be reintroduced to the game as much as the next guy, I have to admit that Titanicus is all about the Titans at its core. That's how it stated way back, and it makes sense to start it again that way now.
Adeptus Titanicus should remain a game about Titans, and only Titans. It should be about replicating the decisions a Princeps has to make when facing other God-Engines - not tap dancing on infantry.
But we'll also be needing Epic, to replicate colossal, world shattering battles, from the perspective of a War Leader in orbit, beholding the battle on the Hololith.
If I'm understanding this right, this new game is starting out as a new version of Titan Legions but without all the supporting units. I remember something about the FW guys eventually wanting to expand it to the full Epic line but I may just have misread something.
Breotan wrote: If I'm understanding this right, this new game is starting out as a new version of Titan Legions but without all the supporting units. I remember something about the FW guys eventually wanting to expand it to the full Epic line but I may just have misread something.
Well no, it's a reimagining of the 1988 game Adeptus Titanicus, which had only titans and no supporting units.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Adeptus Titanicus should remain a game about Titans, and only Titans. It should be about replicating the decisions a Princeps has to make when facing other God-Engines - not tap dancing on infantry.
That's missing the most important part of titan combat: when an IG Shadowsword company hidden in some ruins opens fire and one-shots a titan, because tanks always beat walkers. Until Epic is released and adds proper tanks to the game it will always be a disappointment.
AegisGrimm wrote: Would titans even be warped by the Siege of Terra? Other than Death Guard and some ritualistic stuff by the Word Bearers, seems like traitors would still be relatively mundane by that point?
There's references to warped titans in the old fluff regarding siege of terra so barring gw retconning it yes.
Yeah the older stories, such as The Siege of the Imperial Palace short story from White Dwarf has everything pretty damn warped and chaotic. The primarchs had become daemon princes, Titan Landers with glowing chaotic symbols are mentioned, daemon hoardes along with cultists and mutants, cult marines, etc being brought against the palace. The Vengeful Spirit is described as having decks of living tissue, veins and a beating heart, walls made from tongues as well when the Empy teleported onboard so yeah... warped. That story was almost word for word Incorporated into the text last book in the Horus Heresy art books which came out in 2006ish IIRC. Unless I am mistaken that's about the newest detailed accounting of the Siege. So yes barring a major retcon it seems appropriate to expect some major chaos action and add-on parts/opportunities in this game to come along.
Breotan wrote: If I'm understanding this right, this new game is starting out as a new version of Titan Legions but without all the supporting units. I remember something about the FW guys eventually wanting to expand it to the full Epic line but I may just have misread something.
As much as designers (perhaps) would like the game to be focused sorely on Titans without other elements from Epic line lets be clear on something - if the game will sale beyond their expectations we will most likely see an expansion with tanks/soldiers eventually.
If the game sales really well it would be really weird not to do so.
P.S. After afcouse releasing all the Xenos races Titans.
Breotan wrote: If I'm understanding this right, this new game is starting out as a new version of Titan Legions but without all the supporting units. I remember something about the FW guys eventually wanting to expand it to the full Epic line but I may just have misread something.
As much as designers (perhaps) would like the game to be focused sorely on Titans without other elements from Epic line lets be clear on something - if the game will sale beyond their expectations we will most likely see an expansion with tanks/soldiers eventually.
If the game sales really well it would be really weird not to do so.
P.S. After afcouse releasing all the Xenos races Titans.
Lets be clear. If they want to go down that rout it will effectively be a new, separate, game requireing an all new rule set as the detail and minutia of the rules of AT wont remotely suit a large scale battle game like Epic.
The original Titan Legions sort of nibbled its way into Epic.
That is, when they started it was all Imperial titans in the Heresy. Then they introduced Eldar and Ork titans. Then, at last, they rolled out Land Raiders, and that started the ball rolling.
To that end, I think Leman Russ tank companies or Land Raider tank companies would be great fun to add to a titan game. But for now, I'm more than delighted just to have these plastic imperial titans.
Oggthrok wrote: The original Titan Legions sort of nibbled its way into Epic.
That is, when they started it was all Imperial titans in the Heresy. Then they introduced Eldar and Ork titans. Then, at last, they rolled out Land Raiders, and that started the ball rolling.
To that end, I think Leman Russ tank companies or Land Raider tank companies would be great fun to add to a titan game. But for now, I'm more than delighted just to have these plastic imperial titans.
That was Adeptus Titanicus and Space Marine, not Titan Legions.
As a data point re: whether or not the AT and Epic rulesets should be kept separate...
(insert wibbly wobbly timey wimey special effect here)
Back in the doldrum days of Epic 40,000--after it had crashed, burned and ended up on life support for a few years under the care of Fanatic, later renamed Specialist Games--Jervis Johnson and co decided to shake things up a little by refocusing the game on Titan vs Titan combat.
At the time, Titans behaved like capital ships in Battlefleet Gothic. In fact, that's where the BFG rules came from. They had damage tables and fire arcs and so on, but lacked the detailed control boards and reactor rules from earlier editions of Epic.
In Epic Magazine #1, Fanatic released new rules--announced as official changes, so everybody 'had' to use them--that reintroduced complex Adeptus Titanicus-style combat into the Epic game. Going by the reaction in the letters pages, the player base was unhappy with the change. It just didn't work in the context of a game chockers with infantry and tanks. It was too complex and cumbersome for a ruleset previously renowned (and often reviled) for streamlined elegance. The new rules interacted with the rank-and-file troops and with blast markers in wonky ways. It was all a bit of a shemozzle.
Jervis and co took note of the feedback and decided that the new 'ATII' rules were better off as a separate game featuring only Titans and superheavies. They reversed their earlier 'official revision' declaration, split ATII off from Epic, and continued adding to it in later issues of the Epic mag, concurrent with the development of Epic Armageddon. (They did point out that at least the controversy had sparked renewed interest in Epic.)
Personally, I think the way Epic 40,000 handles the Titans works well for a game that includes tanks and infantry. They still feel ponderous, weighty and powerful on the table without slowing things down. Epic Armageddon simplifies them a bit too much for my taste. (Ironic, given that E:A reintroduced complexity and detail to the tanks and infantry that had been stripped out in Epic 40K...)
I'd love to see superheavy tanks in the new AT, though. And I'd happily scatter infantry and tanks around purely as decoration, or maybe objectives. From a purely visual standpoint they help to show just how big the Titans are.
Leviathans! Colossi! Goliath Mega Cannons! Land Trains! Overlord Gunships!
GW make it happen!
Having played a few games against Epic Squats this year (using the 3rd ed / Epic 40,000 rules), I can confirm that Land Trains and Overlords are sweet as. Also scary when pointing their guns at your Gargant. I always found Squats a bit silly in 40K, but at Epic scale they seem to fit.
Albertorius wrote: So... those Warlords aren't much smaller than a 40k knight, are they. Well, feth.
I thought they were around the same height as the Redemptor.
If this is any indication of size...
...I'd say they are significantly bigger than that.
So the Knights are on ....32mm? Or 40mm?
And that Warlord is on a flyer oval while the Reaver is on a medium oval? That right?
AFAIK, the knights are about terminator-sized, so 40mm would be my guess. The Reaver seems to be on the same base as the Tau ghostkeel armor.
40mm for Knights, 105mm oval for Reaver, meaning the Warlord is on the 120mm oval.
Pretty good size for painting and modelling. Hopefully they do some more scenery options that include like wrecked tanks and stuff. Would add the battlefield ambiance of vehicles without having them as units.
I dont know what they are expecting when it comes to sales.
From what i know they wanted resin models but changed them to plastic after releasing new Blood Bowl when it sold more than they presumed.
I presume (blindly) Adeptus Titanicus will also sell really well. Enough to make Orks and Eldar titans. I dunno if enough to make another Epic but its a possibility.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Trouble with introducing Tau is that they’d likely end up in the same niche as Eldar - relying on speed and sneakiness, rather than sheer firepower.
Don't know about epic but the largest Tau war machine atm is literally sheer firepower : The Taunar and the Stormsurge. Unless you also count the Tiger Shark, which is a Fighter Jet.
The Manta destroyer was the largest thing in Epic for the Tau. It was pretty nifty and could drop a whole hunter cadre somewhere useful.
40mm for Knights, 105mm oval for Reaver, meaning the Warlord is on the 120mm oval.
Pretty good size for painting and modelling. Hopefully they do some more scenery options that include like wrecked tanks and stuff. Would add the battlefield ambiance of vehicles without having them as units.
40mm for Knights, 105mm oval for Reaver, meaning the Warlord is on the 120mm oval.
Pretty good size for painting and modelling. Hopefully they do some more scenery options that include like wrecked tanks and stuff. Would add the battlefield ambiance of vehicles without having them as units.
Base appears to be round, not oval:
Is there a round 120mm base?
I stared at that picture until my eyes crossed thinking it was the big round but for some reason I thought it was maybe just a weird angle or something and thought it had to be the large flying oval. Huh. So it is the 130mm round then?
Adeptus Titanicus should remain a game about Titans, and only Titans. It should be about replicating the decisions a Princeps has to make when facing other God-Engines - not tap dancing on infantry.
But we'll also be needing Epic, to replicate colossal, world shattering battles, from the perspective of a War Leader in orbit, beholding the battle on the Hololith.
How many of you bought 40k Knight vs Knight game? Where those two knights were included in a game? Did that product fly off the shelves? How different is that game from this version of AT if you are only going to have limited units that are so large that many of the weapon ranges look ridiculous? And if you think the games should only involve Titans? Why be excited about the Knights? They are really just more mobile tanks. If you can have Knights, you can certainly have Shadow Swords and Baneblades. And if you can have those, why stop there? Why would you limit a scale that so many people what to see to a system that is only playable with a few units?
I know this version is a nod to the original AT, but don't forget that rules for tanks and infantry for AT came out almost immediately after AT came out in White Dwarf. Just because they weren't in the box set doesn't mean that didn't have a plan for them. And considering what I have seen from GW newer White Dwarf model, I don't see that happening this time around.
Look, I love the original AT, but it isn't what blew the doors open for Epic. It was the introduction of infantry and vehicles. If GW DOESN'T come up with a plan to introduce infantry and vehicles to this scale, no one is going to be playing this game in a year. It will just join the shelves with the other one-off box sets.
And also about ATII. No one cared about ATII. I was heavy into Epic at the time and even playing Epic40k and on the EpicA playtesting team. No one cared about that system. Everyone's focus was on the combined arms of infantry, vehicles, and Titans, which is where it should be.
And the larger the model, and it looks like the new Warlord is more than twice the size of the original (even bigger than the Imperator), the more space it takes up on the board. This means either its going to be really slow, or to keep the game interesting, have a pretty liberal movement rate that I am sure is going to be combined with short weapon ranges, because few people are going to want a game where each side can pelt each other from across the table in the opening round. But at that size and scale, these models should. So they will be given really ridiculously short weapon ranges to encourage movement and flanking attacks. Its just going to be silly.
Its amazing that the original AT came with 6 warlords, so 3 models per side right out of the box, with a variety or ways to arm them. This one comes with two, and a few cannon fodder. I would rather have smaller models and more of them in the set. But I expect I will be the only one to feel this way, so everyone chime in and tell me I am wrong....
I stared at that picture until my eyes crossed thinking it was the big round but for some reason I thought it was maybe just a weird angle or something and thought it had to be the large flying oval. Huh. So it is the 130mm round then?
Ghostkeel's base is 105 oval, so at this moment I'd say it's quite possible it is a round 130, unless there's any other bigger oval base.
Size/shape of base: Base is likely 120mm x 90mm oval (same as the Dreadknight, Valkyrie etc.) It's definitely oval, as can be seen in the pictures in the opening post:
Apologist wrote: Size/shape of base: Base is likely 120mm x 90mm oval (same as the Dreadknight, Valkyrie etc.) It's definitely oval, as can be seen in the pictures in the opening post:
Spoiler:
Er, that pic makes them clearly look round? At least to me.
EDIT: ...or is it a very slight oval? I don't know anymore >_> Anyway, if it's not a 170mm round is good news for me
How many of you bought 40k Knight vs Knight game? Where those two knights were included in a game? Did that product fly off the shelves? How different is that game from this version of AT if you are only going to have limited units that are so large that many of the weapon ranges look ridiculous? And if you think the games should only involve Titans? Why be excited about the Knights? They are really just more mobile tanks. If you can have Knights, you can certainly have Shadow Swords and Baneblades. And if you can have those, why stop there? Why would you limit a scale that so many people what to see to a system that is only playable with a few units?
I know this version is a nod to the original AT, but don't forget that rules for tanks and infantry for AT came out almost immediately after AT came out in White Dwarf. Just because they weren't in the box set doesn't mean that didn't have a plan for them. And considering what I have seen from GW newer White Dwarf model, I don't see that happening this time around.
Look, I love the original AT, but it isn't what blew the doors open for Epic. It was the introduction of infantry and vehicles. If GW DOESN'T come up with a plan to introduce infantry and vehicles to this scale, no one is going to be playing this game in a year. It will just join the shelves with the other one-off box sets.
And also about ATII. No one cared about ATII. I was heavy into Epic at the time and even playing Epic40k and on the EpicA playtesting team. No one cared about that system. Everyone's focus was on the combined arms of infantry, vehicles, and Titans, which is where it should be.
And the larger the model, and it looks like the new Warlord is more than twice the size of the original (even bigger than the Imperator), the more space it takes up on the board. This means either its going to be really slow, or to keep the game interesting, have a pretty liberal movement rate that I am sure is going to be combined with short weapon ranges, because few people are going to want a game where each side can pelt each other from across the table in the opening round. But at that size and scale, these models should. So they will be given really ridiculously short weapon ranges to encourage movement and flanking attacks. Its just going to be silly.
Its amazing that the original AT came with 6 warlords, so 3 models per side right out of the box, with a variety or ways to arm them. This one comes with two, and a few cannon fodder. I would rather have smaller models and more of them in the set. But I expect I will be the only one to feel this way, so everyone chime in and tell me I am wrong....
I fully agree with your post and sadly I think this will not be the return of Epic. One of the things that made Epic great was the tactical possibilities that you had especially in regards to movement. I don't know how this could work in any similar way with this new scale unless we now play on 12 feet by 6 feet boards. This hugely sized models generate exactly the problems you describe and while it may look good on pictures it is not sensible for gameplay. True, the original epic models where too small but there are fan-made true-scale versions for epic and they are way smaller than what we get here. I'm not sure they will ever come up with infantry etc. as it would basically create a competitor to 40k (which possibly should not have gotten all those over-sized tanks / knights / whatever in the first place) at a smaller scale. I fully expect that we will see some more titans and several sets of upgrade kits from FW but then the game goes the way of the dodo...
I am intrigued by them not showing off anything related to the Warhounds, it really does make me think that maybe there will be a new 28mm (plastic?) one, and they don't want to "spoil" the design until they are ready to release that.
Slinky wrote: I am intrigued by them not showing off anything related to the Warhounds, it really does make me think that maybe there will be a new 28mm (plastic?) one, and they don't want to "spoil" the design until they are ready to release that.
Or is that the worst kind of wishful thinking?
I read somewhere that they had to decide what to tool first and this was the reason why Warhounds will come later. Nothing about a new design, sorry.
Slinky wrote: I am intrigued by them not showing off anything related to the Warhounds, it really does make me think that maybe there will be a new 28mm (plastic?) one, and they don't want to "spoil" the design until they are ready to release that.
Or is that the worst kind of wishful thinking?
I read somewhere that they had to decide what to tool first and this was the reason why Warhounds will come later. Nothing about a new design, sorry.
This - during the Saturday of Warhammerfest someone (Battlebunnies?) indicated that Warhounds were the last to be prepared.
My guess is they also are the oldest and probably had less digital files prepared in advance.
Slinky wrote: I am intrigued by them not showing off anything related to the Warhounds, it really does make me think that maybe there will be a new 28mm (plastic?) one, and they don't want to "spoil" the design until they are ready to release that.
Or is that the worst kind of wishful thinking?
apparently they needed to manually input the details of the resin sculpt as there was no 3D model for it as it was hand sculpted, so it's going to be (largely) the same it's just taken a lot longer to do than the ones they could fiddle with digitally so it's going to be the last of the initial release plan to be finished, so I don't think there will be any major design changes
There should be no major changes from the original designs. The reaver and warhound both went through the same process since neither was available as CG before this project.
I spoke with the designer saturday morning and specifically fished for any connection to a new 28mm Warhound but (understandably) could not get a straight answer.
They did agree that both of the "smaller" titan classes needed replacement sooner rather than later, since they are far from the Warlords level of size, but arguably more difficult toassemble since the pieces are all slightly off.
So it seems this is something the studio would like to do, but we won't get to see it until they are ready to show us....
Slinky wrote: I am intrigued by them not showing off anything related to the Warhounds, it really does make me think that maybe there will be a new 28mm (plastic?) one, and they don't want to "spoil" the design until they are ready to release that.
Or is that the worst kind of wishful thinking?
I read somewhere that they had to decide what to tool first and this was the reason why Warhounds will come later. Nothing about a new design, sorry.
This - during the Saturday of Warhammerfest someone (Battlebunnies?) indicated that Warhounds were the last to be prepared.
My guess is they also are the oldest and probably had less digital files prepared in advance.
According to a few attendees, the reason for the Warhound's absence is because the event fell outside that release's publicity window (think the release is supposed to be October?). They did have to put them through the process, but they're apparently done now. They just can't show them quite yet. I imagine they'll be on display at the July event.
Grimzim wrote: I fully agree with your post and sadly I think this will not be the return of Epic. One of the things that made Epic great was the tactical possibilities that you had especially in regards to movement. I don't know how this could work in any similar way with this new scale unless we now play on 12 feet by 6 feet boards. This hugely sized models generate exactly the problems you describe and while it may look good on pictures it is not sensible for gameplay. True, the original epic models where too small but there are fan-made true-scale versions for epic and they are way smaller than what we get here. I'm not sure they will ever come up with infantry etc. as it would basically create a competitor to 40k (which possibly should not have gotten all those over-sized tanks / knights / whatever in the first place) at a smaller scale. I fully expect that we will see some more titans and several sets of upgrade kits from FW but then the game goes the way of the dodo...
Wow, wasn't expecting to read this, but thanks.
It really surprises me that even though we have an exact point in history when Epic was extremely popular, GW continues to pursue designs that are not popular with the gaming community or aren't going to be anywhere near as successful. The answers are right there in front of their noses, yet they just see to be ignorant of it or just don't care.
Crikey McJesus. I didn't realise the new models were that big.
So much for my plans to use them for Epic. They won't fit with my terrain. Dammit. Enthusiasm levels just fell off a cliff.
(Well, maybe the new Warlord could make a solid basis for an old Imperator...)
EDIT: And perhaps the new Knights could proxy as old Warlords. Hmm...
KTG17 wrote:
And also about ATII. No one cared about ATII. I was heavy into Epic at the time and even playing Epic40k and on the EpicA playtesting team. No one cared about that system. Everyone's focus was on the combined arms of infantry, vehicles, and Titans, which is where it should be.
Not sure whether this comment is directed at me, but for what it's worth... I can't judge the relative merits of the actual games because I wasn't into Epic back then. I only collected the magazines a few years ago.*
I can't help noticing, though, that the ATII rules featured in pretty much every issue of the old Epic mag. Someone must have cared about it. The designer(s), if not the Epic player base. Presumably it was somebody's pet project after it split off from combined-arms Epic. Not Jervis's, I suppose, since he was concentrating on Epic Armageddon's development. If there's some juicy behind-the-scenes gossip to be had, I'd love to hear it.
But then and now, there seem to be at least a few people out there who want to get back to basics (i.e. hot robot-on-robot action), and who see all the tanks and little men and so on as needless clutter. I'm not one of them, but I've seen the viewpoint expressed more than once.
Admittedly they tried to re-Titanicus-ify the Titans when Epic was the most streamlined and abstract it's ever been, so the whole attempt represented a serious clash of game design philosophies and it's no wonder they changed their minds. Reintroducing a version of Epic with a more detailed ruleset (E:A or whatever) might well mesh more easily with the new AT rules.
*I should add that I play Epic 40,000 these days and tracked down the old magazines for that reason... so I wasn't too impressed that half the content was about ATII (and the other half soon turned into E:A work in progress).
KTG17 wrote:
And the larger the model, and it looks like the new Warlord is more than twice the size of the original (even bigger than the Imperator), the more space it takes up on the board. This means either its going to be really slow, or to keep the game interesting, have a pretty liberal movement rate that I am sure is going to be combined with short weapon ranges, because few people are going to want a game where each side can pelt each other from across the table in the opening round. But at that size and scale, these models should. So they will be given really ridiculously short weapon ranges to encourage movement and flanking attacks. Its just going to be silly.
Well... I dunno. Battlefleet Gothic manages to have decent games with just two capital ships per side and no terrain whatsoever... and in rules terms they're basically Titans floating through space. Simplified Epic 40K-era Titans, at that. Obviously the game improves with more ships (the base game came with four per side), but if the new AT is 'naval engagements on land' and the Titans can't easily turn or reverse, I can see it working just fine.
I'd also be quite surprised if the game is meant to be played on a 2' by 2' board--I'd assume those boards were made unusually small because they're for display purposes--but please correct me on that if necessary.
And (to bring it up again) Epic 40K had artificially short weapons ranges in order to promote a game of movement and redeployment on a 6' x 4' table. Unrealistic, but it worked well in play. I understand this was changed in Epic Armageddon, though.
However... now that I've seen the sheer size of the models, I'm much more inclined to agree with your concerns about weapons ranges. There comes a point at which it does get silly.
Or they might just expect you to play with loads of terrain. And therefore sell loads of the spiffy new modular building kits.
KTG17 wrote:
Its amazing that the original AT came with 6 warlords, so 3 models per side right out of the box, with a variety or ways to arm them. This one comes with two, and a few cannon fodder. I would rather have smaller models and more of them in the set. But I expect I will be the only one to feel this way, so everyone chime in and tell me I am wrong....
100% agree with you on this point. I'm getting a strong impressive-display-model vibe at the expense of practical gaming. I guess GW is going for that 'luxury collector market' again...
It really surprises me that even though we have an exact point in history when Epic was extremely popular, GW continues to pursue designs that are not popular with the gaming community or aren't going to be anywhere near as successful. The answers are right there in front of their noses, yet they just see to be ignorant of it or just don't care.
I‘m not sure how well Epic really sold back at the time so I‘m unsure if it really was as successful as we think (or wish). I‘m also not sure who is still at the GW studio from back then or remembers (or researched) the reasons why old games like Epic are still played today and have a small community of dedicated followers and even some small companies doing new 6mm stuff. Personally I think that titans look much more impressive if you have infantry next to them as otherwise you have no good scale reference except maybe the buildings. Not to talk about the better gameplay of combined arms instead of a simple version of battletech.
And while I think GW improved quite a lot during the last years they definitely do not think about their old customers. For example, I own several Blood Bowl teams and would have bought the new edition would they not have changed the scale. Same with Necromunda and now the titans here. They revived beloved games of old but deliberately (or accidentally) made them so that old customers like me would not buy any of these games. All that said I‘m still curious how the new Adeptus Titanicus will turn out and how successful it will be.
I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?
I don't see it. I think gw like any company (and especially companies that have to please share holders) dislikes risk. And to release something like Epic without testing the waters is a very big risk! Its a commitment of cash and production time and resources that hinge on the hope that there is a sufficient fanbase to make it profitable. There's no external hype like with Lord of the Rings or the Hobbit (and remember even with those they started as stand alone scenarios from the film and could be left unsupported at any time) to support the release of a 3rd main game except the pc version and from what I hear GWpc games have never had much of an effect on sales.
I see Titanicus as GW's way of testing the waters, If they it does well I expect it to be slowly expanded, and if it does really well we might get Epic. If not it functions fine as a stand alone game and with luck at least covers its production costs.
Sasquatch wrote: I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?
I don't see it. I think gw like any company (and especially companies that have to please share holders) dislikes risk. And to release something like Epic without testing the waters is a very big risk! Its a commitment of cash and production time and resources that hinge on the hope that there is a sufficient fanbase to make it profitable. There's no external hype like with Lord of the Rings or the Hobbit (and remember even with those they started as stand alone scenarios from the film and could be left unsupported at any time) to support the release of a 3rd main game except the pc version and from what I hear GWpc games have never had much of an effect on sales.
I see Titanicus as GW's way of testing the waters, If they it does well I expect it to be slowly expanded, and if it does really well we might get Epic. If not it functions fine as a stand alone game and with luck at least covers its production costs.
This was just loud thinking from my side and based on the fact that back then lots of models would be available both for 40k as well as epic. You could (almost) have played 40k with the small scale figures. Of course with 6mm models this was no real valid option (even though there have been fan made versions for e.g. Space Hulk in 6mm) but with this new scale? Not so sure. If the infantry models are now more like 10mm or even 15mm it would be very valid to play 40k with the smaller scale. Why buy an expensive Knight or even Titan in 28mm scale when you can get them much cheaper in this smaller scale? Of course this could be total nonsense what I‘m talking so don’t take it to serious.
@Grimzim: I also dislike the scale. Because with it and a 4x4 table, you wont have real tactical manoeuvrability. It is just walk/hide and engage/don´t engage. You can already have this with 40k. It isn´t like naval or space combat, more like boxing in a ring. Also I see no destroyed building kits, so you propably won´t be able to rampage through a city.
But the reason for the scale is of caused by the prime motivation of GW: sell plastic and a lot of it. Gamewise a smaller scale would maybe be better, but bigger models bring bigger revenue.
Guys, the scale hasn't actually changed much, if at all, they just made the Titans the correct size for the scale this time.
And saying this is like buying Knights for 40K is just...odd. I mean, sure, big walking thingies, but they're entirely different games, the experience isn't even remotely similar.
Not sure whether this comment is directed at me, but for what it's worth... I can't judge the relative merits of the actual games because I wasn't into Epic back then. I only collected the magazines a few years ago.*
I can't help noticing, though, that the ATII rules featured in pretty much every issue of the old Epic mag. Someone must have cared about it. The designer(s), if not the Epic player base. Presumably it was somebody's pet project after it split off from combined-arms Epic. Not Jervis's, I suppose, since he was concentrating on Epic Armageddon's development. If there's some juicy behind-the-scenes gossip to be had, I'd love to hear it.
Well, Epic 40,000 magazine is funny because little of it is about Epic 40,000. It kind of went through an identity crisis. A lot of space was dedicated to not only ATII, but the on-going development of EpicA, neither of which, improved my Epic 40k experience. The funny part was that EpicA was being developed in real time online in the official Specialist Games forum for EpicA, so by the time most of those EpicA articles were in print, many of the printed rules were no longer in effect. Rules changes were being debated and changed daily.
Epic 40k was not popular among most veteran players. Despite being an interesting game itself (and it does have its faults), players loved SM2/TL, despite all of its faults. Epic 40k stuff was dirt cheap on ebay at the time (I picked up the core box set, unopened for $17 once), and I bought a lot of it. But Jervis believed in it and continued to try and push it when Fanatic/Specialist Games was formed, even releasing a rules only set called the Players Edition or something. But it still didn't pick up enough attention, so ATII was one of those things used to try and get players interested in the scale again. But even when the excitement rose when the development of EpicA was announced, people were split on the direction of it. Many of the veteran players didn't like it, while typically newer players did. Myself, I wasn't crazy about it, I had issues with not only the game itself but also things like the release schedule as so on, and I knew the game would not return Epic back to its glory. And the Specialist Games team just couldn't bring in the money to justify their existence so GW cut them. Epic 40,000 magazine was really an Epic magazine without a clear direction on what it exactly was supposed to be. It should have been about Epic 40,000, but just became a mess. In all honesty, the Firepower magazines are far better.
Grimzim wrote: I‘m not sure how well Epic really sold back at the time so I‘m unsure if it really was as successful as we think (or wish).
Well, being one of the old guard myself, I remember those days. SM2/TL was hugely popular. And it wasn't just the number of players, but the scale of which games were played. I remember watching a game being played at a brick and mortar what had 6 gargants on one side, nevermind all the boyz and battlewagons around it. And the variety of minis that were produced is really impressive, even by today's standards. Most of my friends preferred Epic over 40k (2nd edition at the time).
Not saying you could just re-print Space Marine 2nd Edition as it was and expect it to fly off the shelves... it would need some updates, newer models. But the system was simple and very easy to introduce new players to. But it sets the goal post because AT/ SM1, Epic40k, nor EpicA weren't anywhere near as popular. There is something to be learned from that. They keep going in a new direction without seeming to understand what made Epic so exciting to begin with.
Sasquatch wrote: I see Titanicus as GW's way of testing the waters, If they it does well I expect it to be slowly expanded, and if it does really well we might get Epic.
Before today I would have agreed with you, and would have hoped that would be the case, but those Titans are just way too big. Where do you go from here? Your Land Raiders, Rhinos, Marines, etc will have to be bigger too, and that means all this will take up more board space and you will lack the room to maneuver (and probably therefore have really limited weapon ranges).
And as mentioned above about movement and weapon ranges in Epic40k and EpicA. I think those two systems have ridiculous movement ranges in comparison to their weapon ranges as well, and its something I always disliked. How in the same turn a unit can move further than it can shoot a weapon like a lascannon is beyond my comprehension. It would be like only getting a single shot off from an M4 while someone else is running across a football field. But those where the rules that were developed to allow for players to move around the board rather than just push both sides to the center. I don't really agree with that. Its like teleporting. The first few rounds should be the battle plan developing, with a few rounds of adjustments to that outcome to follow. In some cases you could see a unit move in a transport, disembark, and later assault an enemy unit in the FIRST TURN. Come on.
Anyway, I guess I am just old school. But Epic is what got me into gaming way back with the original AT and its sister game, SM1. That system too, does have its faults. Its a really long game to play. But the scale enables you to play what feels like a massive battle over a huge area. The larger the model, the farther it can move, dramatically shrinks that play area. And I see the same happening here. I have lived and breathed Epic for most of my life now, and I just feel like I keep getting disappointed. Well... due to sales apparently I am not the only one.
Albertorius wrote: Well, right now I only think that if I had wanted to play with knights (or knight sized stuff)... I would have bought knights.
And that's at least part of my issue as well. I've never found a wargame with 4/5 figures a side that I enjoyed*, Inquisitor, old versions of Epic played with Titans only - it's the formation-driven versions of Epic I have been wanting.
That said - the figures do look awesome, and if the game has nuance I could still see myself getting a force.
Yodhrin wrote: Guys, the scale hasn't actually changed much, if at all, they just made the Titans the correct size for the scale this time.
And saying this is like buying Knights for 40K is just...odd. I mean, sure, big walking thingies, but they're entirely different games, the experience isn't even remotely similar.
What does it matter if the scale has changed or not if the, you know, actual size of the "minis" have, and wildly so at that? If I wanted to play with stuff that big, I could do that already. That's not what I expect to do when playing AT/Epic/microarmor/whatever. It is, as you put it, an experience that is not even remotely similar to what I expect to have.
And the minis is the only thing I can comment about right now, because we don't know if the rules will be any good.
Albertorius wrote: Well, right now I only think that if I had wanted to play with knights (or knight sized stuff)... I would have bought knights.
And that's at least part of my issue as well. I've never found a wargame with 4/5 figures a side that I enjoyed*, Inquisitor, old versions of Epic played with Titans only - it's the formation-driven versions of Epic I have been wanting.
I have Battletech for all my "giant stompy robot, small number of minis" needs. And I can play it even inside a car.
Papa-Schlumpf wrote: @Grimzim: I also dislike the scale. Because with it and a 4x4 table, you wont have real tactical manoeuvrability. It is just walk/hide and engage/don´t engage. You can already have this with 40k. It isn´t like naval or space combat, more like boxing in a ring. Also I see no destroyed building kits, so you propably won´t be able to rampage through a city.
But the reason for the scale is of caused by the prime motivation of GW: sell plastic and a lot of it. Gamewise a smaller scale would maybe be better, but bigger models bring bigger revenue.
Not to mention that bigger models just look a whole lot better and are more fun to paint.
Yodhrin wrote: Guys, the scale hasn't actually changed much, if at all, they just made the Titans the correct size for the scale this time.
When you put several of those bigger titans on the table, it'll be as crowded as a 40k table, leaving little tactical movement - much like a lot of GW offerings.
And saying this is like buying Knights for 40K is just...odd. I mean, sure, big walking thingies, but they're entirely different games, the experience isn't even remotely similar.
I expect the buying experience and the price will be quite similar.
Personally I think all the models look great, my biggest worry is that the gameplay will become the usual, push them all to the middle and roll as many dice as possible - probably with the new 'in thing' of having combo cards to play too.
Epic fans are certainly allowed to stay well clear of AT if it doesn't float their boats.
But it's going to be a big hit for GW. The buzz was loud more than a year ago, which is what made them decide to delay the game to release the titans in plastic instead of resin. It's even louder now.
gorgon wrote: Epic fans are certainly allowed to stay well clear of AT if it doesn't float their boats.
But it's going to be a big hit for GW. The buzz was loud more than a year ago, which is what made them decide to delay the game to release the titans in plastic instead of resin. It's even louder now.
gorgon wrote: Epic fans are certainly allowed to stay well clear of AT if it doesn't float their boats.
But it's going to be a big hit for GW. The buzz was loud more than a year ago, which is what made them decide to delay the game to release the titans in plastic instead of resin. It's even louder now.
Well, that was also before these pics came out.
I am not saying there wont be some initial excitement, but its not going to be the game most who are familiar with epic are hoping for.
gorgon wrote: Epic fans are certainly allowed to stay well clear of AT if it doesn't float their boats.
But it's going to be a big hit for GW. The buzz was loud more than a year ago, which is what made them decide to delay the game to release the titans in plastic instead of resin. It's even louder now.
And that's perfectly OK in my book. Just because it is not my thing doesn't mean I wouldn't want it to exist.
If AT was going to lead into some of what is above, I would be really stoked. I just don't see how that's going to happen. And if it isn't, no one is going to be playing AT a year from now.
Look at this beauty! And this is for a game scale using Warlords more than HALF the size of the new ones. . . (new warlords look to be about as tall as that large double building towards the back of the table)
I am not saying there wont be some initial excitement, but its not going to be the game most who are familiar with epic are hoping for.
But what about those familiar with Adeptus Titanicus? Because Epic =\= AT. Or about all those people, and there must be a lot of them, too young to remember?
It's like GW said they were going to release a titan game, designed a titan game, and you're annoyed that it's a titan game?
As with all things GW, they have infinite capacity to cock things up, but you seem to have condemned things to failure, if only personally, very early, even for a N+R thread, where the sky falls on a daily basis.
*yawn* And this is a thread about Adaptus Titanicus. Might as well start posting in Necromunda, Shadow war Armageddon and Kill Team threads about how those games are not 40k.
*yawn* And this is a thread about Adaptus Titanicus. Might as well start posting in Necromunda, Shadow war Armageddon and Kill Team threads about how those games are not 40k.
And here I thought we were talking about Adeptus Titanicus. But ok, like I said. Some of you are really excited about moving 10 inch warlords 2 feet and blowing each other up at point blank range. Should be exciting.
*yawn* And this is a thread about Adaptus Titanicus. Might as well start posting in Necromunda, Shadow war Armageddon and Kill Team threads about how those games are not 40k.
And here I thought we were talking about Adeptus Titanicus.
We are, you are talking about a thing this isn't.
Also the whole "range isn't realistic" argument is going to crumble quickly in a discussion of almost every game this board might have an interest in, a degree of abstraction is needed in almost every instance, and as long as it plays well, verisimilitude can take a back seat AFAIC.
*yawn* And this is a thread about Adaptus Titanicus. Might as well start posting in Necromunda, Shadow war Armageddon and Kill Team threads about how those games are not 40k.
“Wow this game looks terrible, there’s no submarines at all!”
Automatically Appended Next Post:
gorgon wrote: Well, we just have to hope that AT can somehow become as enormous as Epic is right now.
Well, I just want to conform to what the vocal masses want. So do the masses want the Zoats? I've always been a fan. But if Nostromodamus says we should move on that will probably make the Rogue Trader thread even better.
If epic does make a come back I would imagine they will move the scale to 8mm at least. The 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint. These Titan models look a joy to paint. Also moving both games to 8mm kills off people reusing models from the old versions of the game. Something that I’m sure GW will be keen to combat.
Knockagh wrote: If epic does make a come back I would imagine they will move the scale to 8mm at least. The 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint. These Titan models look a joy to paint. Also moving both games to 8mm kills off people reusing models from the old versions of the game. Something that I’m sure GW will be keen to combat.
Seriously, that particular point has not been valid for years and years, now:
Knockagh wrote: If epic does make a come back I would imagine they will move the scale to 8mm at least. The 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint. These Titan models look a joy to paint. Also moving both games to 8mm kills off people reusing models from the old versions of the game. Something that I’m sure GW will be keen to combat.
Seriously, that particular point has not been valid for years and years, now:
Those are not official models though. Old GW Epic infantry looked awful.
Those are not official models though. Old GW Epic infantry looked awful.
Yes. Same as the original Warlord models were awful. Neither should be used to decide wether you need to move to change scale or not, because GW's plastic manufacturing ability is magnitudes better. But here we are, and people always say that the move is because 6mm infantry miniatures can't be done to look good.
VictorVonTzeentch wrote: Yeah but the person wasn't saying that they couldn't be done right, they were saying that the ones that DID exist looked awful.
He was saying that he would imagine that if Gw moved on with epic the scale would be 8mm or bigger because "the 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint". I certainly read it as cause effect. But ok.
KTG17 wrote: Some random grabs from the internets:
Spoiler:
If AT was going to lead into some of what is above, I would be really stoked. I just don't see how that's going to happen. And if it isn't, no one is going to be playing AT a year from now.
Look at this beauty! And this is for a game scale using Warlords more than HALF the size of the new ones. . . (new warlords look to be about as tall as that large double building towards the back of the table)
THAT IS EPIC.
And true EPIC fans will just use the new Titan models with their old armies and get new players to buy models made by third party manufacturers. The game has continued to exist and be played without support, just like BloodBowl, Necromunda, Mordheim and others. This is meant to be a titan fight, if they can develop EPIC to match with it I’m sure they will, but that will be a massive undertaking and they want to get all the specialist games out. EPIC being the biggest (sku wise) will take longer to developer, but they can do it slowly while still getting other games going.
VictorVonTzeentch wrote: Yeah but the person wasn't saying that they couldn't be done right, they were saying that the ones that DID exist looked awful.
He was saying that he would imagine that if Gw moved on with epic the scale would be 8mm or bigger because "the 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint". I certainly read it as cause effect. But ok.
He also pointed out that it would be a way to drive more sales and be a way to have GW keep older models out and sell new ones.
The photos that KTG17 shared showed exactly why they decided to do adeptus Titanicus. With Necromunda and Bloodbowl a major complaint has been the slow release rate of the teams. Looking at bloodbowl they are struggling to balance the desire for new teams with people's needs for boosters.
Epic even if it was Horus Heresy focused would be a much bigger problem.
To have a functional game that can justifiably be called Epic, they would need titans, Knights, super heavies, regular tanks, and at least 3 infantry types. We are talking at least a dozen box sets to play the kind of game people would want.
It would be a massive investment by the studio and a huge risk.
By doing Adeptus Titanicus they have ave had just one man do the sculpting duties while letting the rest of the team work on their commitments to bloodbowl and Necromunda.
If the game blows up it, there is plenty of opportunities for expansion, whether by adding different races or by expanding into super heavies and flyers.
By explicitly not promising epic they will not buckle under the expectation of people KtG17.
Ps. I love epic and literally have 80% of the models in the pictures KtG17 shared but that does not stop me from being very very excited for this game.
Breotan wrote: If I'm understanding this right, this new game is starting out as a new version of Titan Legions but without all the supporting units. I remember something about the FW guys eventually wanting to expand it to the full Epic line but I may just have misread something.
Well no, it's a reimagining of the 1988 game Adeptus Titanicus, which had only titans and no supporting units.
Actually, we're both a little off on this (although you're closer). Adeptus Titanicus had a dozen "beetleback" Warlords and some terrain while Titan Legions had the Knights. Man, I can't wait to see what Forge World does with the Imperator design whenever they decide to get around to it.
To be honest I don't care at all about epic, never did. This game was never going to be like epic. It's Titanicus, a different new game inspired by the original AT. The focus of this game is around titans and immense war machines. I'm sorry if folks wanted epic instead, but i'd rather see new titan types than tanks/ flyers etc. This game was designed around titans fighting, not to be a titan game they could gradually phase into a new larger version of epic.
Also if I bought this game and they gradually bloated it and turned it into something like that, i'd be pretty annoyed.
I played a lot of Space Marine and Epic 40K back in the day, although AT was a little before my time. I have to say that, looking back, I think those games would have been more interesting if the focus was more on the Titans.
With Epic 40K, the troops and vehicles just felt like a bunch of numbers that you could make a large blob out of and the titans were pretty simplistic with how they worked. The game just didn't really have many amazing moments and felt a little hollow. You could of course play very large games in a fairly short amount of time.
Space Marine was perhaps more fun in retrospect because some units had their own special rules, although it was the titians that really made the game for us.
I'm not saying they shouldn't make a full Epic remake down the road, but I think it would be cool to keep the focus on the titans this time. Having lots of funky roll-tables for machine spirits going on the rampage or lucky shots exploding the magazine will make for some memorable moments.
Thargrim wrote: To be honest I don't care at all about epic, never did. This game was never going to be like epic. It's Titanicus, a different new game inspired by the original AT. The focus of this game is around titans and immense war machines. I'm sorry if folks wanted epic instead, but i'd rather see new titan types than tanks/ flyers etc. This game was designed around titans fighting, not to be a titan game they could gradually phase into a new larger version of epic.
Also if I bought this game and they gradually bloated it and turned it into something like that, i'd be pretty annoyed.
For what it's worth, I completely agree. And I also love the choice of 8mm scale. I don't think I've been this excited for a new release since...well, probably since they launched the Primaris Marines, honestly.
It's unfortunate that they changed the scale. Doesn't effect me since I never played Epic, but always wanted to.
Anyway still really looking forward to this, have been for a while. Models look really great, they oughta be a lot of fun to build and paint. Hopefully they are easy to magnetize so you can swap weapons around easily, or better yet they took that into account and will make them plug & play.
Necros wrote: It's unfortunate that they changed the scale.
I'm going to disagree. 8mm instead of 6mm doesn't seem like much of a difference but you can easily see the size difference and the amount of detail the larger models are capable of. These things are going to be pure joy to paint and play.
As for Epic, the current range still exists and there's plenty out there for fairly cheap. As long as you like the Lucius pattern that is.
I am excited to see this finally coming out. I had a lot of fun with epic space marine/titan legions many years ago (though AT was before my start).
I am curious to see how the necro/BB release model is adapted for AT. I am glad to see terrain as part of the initial release as well. I would love to see the return of epic if it captured the feel of the older versions, but that would be a challenging endeavor. I think the best route would be to continue the heresy theme and start with just marines, but there would be so many frustrated people it is possibly a bridge too far.
VictorVonTzeentch wrote: Yeah but the person wasn't saying that they couldn't be done right, they were saying that the ones that DID exist looked awful.
He was saying that he would imagine that if Gw moved on with epic the scale would be 8mm or bigger because "the 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint". I certainly read it as cause effect. But ok.
You can make mkiv marines in 6mm. Models that distinctly look like mk4 armour. It's been done.
Sasquatch wrote: I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?
Actually competing with itself is valid concern. Money going from 40k to epic is USELESS and actually BAD. If all epic would manage is shift money from 40k to titan game that would be less profit for GW. More expenses, same sales. Not good.
What GW is interested in if it brings in NEW money. Any 40k money shifted to this game is pointless and won't help make money back. It's only if it increases amount of cash existing player spends or brings new players it profits GW.
A chap posted an interesting point about what sort of game Epic should be.
What Epic 40,000 and Epic Armageddon got Right was the blast markers and unit suppression rules.
Those helped turn a ‘mere’ large scale engagement game into one that replicated the command experience.
Not saying it did so perfectly, but it played very differently to 40k. Yes, you could just shoehorn in the biggest of big guns. But reliable success came from knowing when and how to best suppress enemy formations.
Get something like that back for a hypothetical Epic scale game, and it’ll offer a different gaming experience to 40k.
Chikout wrote: The photos that KTG17 shared showed exactly why they decided to do adeptus Titanicus. With Necromunda and Bloodbowl a major complaint has been the slow release rate of the teams. Looking at bloodbowl they are struggling to balance the desire for new teams with people's needs for boosters.
Epic even if it was Horus Heresy focused would be a much bigger problem.
To have a functional game that can justifiably be called Epic, they would need titans, Knights, super heavies, regular tanks, and at least 3 infantry types. We are talking at least a dozen box sets to play the kind of game people would want.
It would be a massive investment by the studio and a huge risk.
By doing Adeptus Titanicus they have ave had just one man do the sculpting duties while letting the rest of the team work on their commitments to bloodbowl and Necromunda.
If the game blows up it, there is plenty of opportunities for expansion, whether by adding different races or by expanding into super heavies and flyers.
By explicitly not promising epic they will not buckle under the expectation of people KtG17.
Ps. I love epic and literally have 80% of the models in the pictures KtG17 shared but that does not stop me from being very very excited for this game.
Great explanation as to why Epic won't be for years (if at all).
They are soon going to be maintaining releases for Blood Bowl, Necromunda, AT and Battlefleet Gothic Heresy.
Even those games with their limited scope are seeing them bulge at the seams of their capabilities.
VictorVonTzeentch wrote: Yeah but the person wasn't saying that they couldn't be done right, they were saying that the ones that DID exist looked awful.
He was saying that he would imagine that if Gw moved on with epic the scale would be 8mm or bigger because "the 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint". I certainly read it as cause effect. But ok.
You can make mkiv marines in 6mm. Models that distinctly look like mk4 armour. It's been done.
How many of you bought 40k Knight vs Knight game? Where those two knights were included in a game? Did that product fly off the shelves? How different is that game from this version of AT if you are only going to have limited units that are so large that many of the weapon ranges look ridiculous? And if you think the games should only involve Titans? Why be excited about the Knights? They are really just more mobile tanks. If you can have Knights, you can certainly have Shadow Swords and Baneblades. And if you can have those, why stop there? Why would you limit a scale that so many people what to see to a system that is only playable with a few units?
I know this version is a nod to the original AT, but don't forget that rules for tanks and infantry for AT came out almost immediately after AT came out in White Dwarf. Just because they weren't in the box set doesn't mean that didn't have a plan for them. And considering what I have seen from GW newer White Dwarf model, I don't see that happening this time around.
Look, I love the original AT, but it isn't what blew the doors open for Epic. It was the introduction of infantry and vehicles. If GW DOESN'T come up with a plan to introduce infantry and vehicles to this scale, no one is going to be playing this game in a year. It will just join the shelves with the other one-off box sets.
And also about ATII. No one cared about ATII. I was heavy into Epic at the time and even playing Epic40k and on the EpicA playtesting team. No one cared about that system. Everyone's focus was on the combined arms of infantry, vehicles, and Titans, which is where it should be.
And the larger the model, and it looks like the new Warlord is more than twice the size of the original (even bigger than the Imperator), the more space it takes up on the board. This means either its going to be really slow, or to keep the game interesting, have a pretty liberal movement rate that I am sure is going to be combined with short weapon ranges, because few people are going to want a game where each side can pelt each other from across the table in the opening round. But at that size and scale, these models should. So they will be given really ridiculously short weapon ranges to encourage movement and flanking attacks. Its just going to be silly.
Its amazing that the original AT came with 6 warlords, so 3 models per side right out of the box, with a variety or ways to arm them. This one comes with two, and a few cannon fodder. I would rather have smaller models and more of them in the set. But I expect I will be the only one to feel this way, so everyone chime in and tell me I am wrong....
I fully agree with your post and sadly I think this will not be the return of Epic. One of the things that made Epic great was the tactical possibilities that you had especially in regards to movement. I don't know how this could work in any similar way with this new scale unless we now play on 12 feet by 6 feet boards. This hugely sized models generate exactly the problems you describe and while it may look good on pictures it is not sensible for gameplay. True, the original epic models where too small but there are fan-made true-scale versions for epic and they are way smaller than what we get here. I'm not sure they will ever come up with infantry etc. as it would basically create a competitor to 40k (which possibly should not have gotten all those over-sized tanks / knights / whatever in the first place) at a smaller scale. I fully expect that we will see some more titans and several sets of upgrade kits from FW but then the game goes the way of the dodo...
The fan-made Warlords are only a few mm smaller than this one, so there's very little practical difference.
This was just loud thinking from my side and based on the fact that back then lots of models would be available both for 40k as well as epic. You could (almost) have played 40k with the small scale figures. Of course with 6mm models this was no real valid option (even though there have been fan made versions for e.g. Space Hulk in 6mm) but with this new scale? Not so sure. If the infantry models are now more like 10mm or even 15mm it would be very valid to play 40k with the smaller scale. Why buy an expensive Knight or even Titan in 28mm scale when you can get them much cheaper in this smaller scale? Of course this could be total nonsense what I‘m talking so don’t take it to serious.
New scale is actually 8mm, old scale was 6mm for infantry and about half that for Titans. So any new infantry and/or tanks won't be much bigger than the old stuff.
Though this post betrays my age, the reason that the original Adeptus Titanicus became (eventually) Epic 40K with all the other units was that it was popular.
So, here we are again, and I'm sure the eventual expansion of this game (or not) over time will hinge on the same thing.
schoon wrote: Though this post betrays my age, the reason that the original Adeptus Titanicus became (eventually) Epic 40K with all the other units was that it was popular.
So, here we are again, and I'm sure the eventual expansion of this game (or not) over time will hinge on the same thing.
Plus a mass battle game means needs (and thus buying) more stuff.
AT needed 3 titans, Epic needed dozens of tanks, hundreds of troops AND 3 titans.
Sasquatch wrote: I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?
Actually competing with itself is valid concern. Money going from 40k to epic is USELESS and actually BAD. If all epic would manage is shift money from 40k to titan game that would be less profit for GW. More expenses, same sales. Not good.
What GW is interested in if it brings in NEW money. Any 40k money shifted to this game is pointless and won't help make money back. It's only if it increases amount of cash existing player spends or brings new players it profits GW.
Money going to epic is useless? Is the scale of the money wrong? maybe they should make the money 6mm again.
Sasquatch wrote: I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?
Actually competing with itself is valid concern. Money going from 40k to epic is USELESS and actually BAD. If all epic would manage is shift money from 40k to titan game that would be less profit for GW. More expenses, same sales. Not good.
What GW is interested in if it brings in NEW money. Any 40k money shifted to this game is pointless and won't help make money back. It's only if it increases amount of cash existing player spends or brings new players it profits GW.
Money going to epic is useless? Is the scale of the money wrong? maybe they should make the money 6mm again.
Customer spends 100$ on 40k.
Epic comes. Customer spends 50$ to 40k, 50$ to epic.
Where's the profit for GW? He would have got 100$ anyway. Now GW just needs to pay resources for TWO games.
Maximize sales, minimize expenses. That's how companies make money. If all you do is increasing expenses and just shifting same money into multiple things your sales stay same while expenses go up.
Thus GW has to figure do they think they get NEW money sufficiently. Either same customer going "oh I'll spend 100$ for 40k and 50$ for epic" or entirely new players who wouldn't have bought 40k stuff anyway but instead now buys epic. If they can get that(and in sufficient numbers to make it worthwhile. 1$ profit a year isn't likely going to interest GW) and they deem resources spent elsewhere wouldn't give even more profit they go ahead.
Seems they think they can get more out of this than just shuffling money from customers from 40k to epic.
Some people's (most people's) disposable budget is finite. So they have to prioritize what to buy. that is a valid concern.
Of course, for GW it would still be better if their customers split their budget among GW games than if they do it among GW and other companies' games.
Knockagh wrote: If epic does make a come back I would imagine they will move the scale to 8mm at least. The 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint. These Titan models look a joy to paint. Also moving both games to 8mm kills off people reusing models from the old versions of the game. Something that I’m sure GW will be keen to combat.
Seriously, that particular point has not been valid for years and years, now:
Those are not official models though. Old GW Epic infantry looked awful.
Where are those models from?
I'm not interested in the Epic debate, but I am interested in decorating the bases of my future titans with fleeing/stomped on/marching alongside marines. And even if the Warhound and Cerastus are out-of-scale with the new titans their wreckage might make interesting terrain features.
Necros wrote: It's unfortunate that they changed the scale.
I'm going to disagree. 8mm instead of 6mm doesn't seem like much of a difference but you can easily see the size difference and the amount of detail the larger models are capable of. These things are going to be pure joy to paint and play.
As for Epic, the current range still exists and there's plenty out there for fairly cheap. As long as you like the Lucius pattern that is.
I remain unconvinced they have "changed" the scale so much as fixed it. People keep saying "8mm scale", but have FW actually confirmed that's the scale they're using or are we still just going on the remark that they printed off an 8mm Space Marine figure to check what sort of detail they could achieve? Because if the latter, a lot hinges on whether they meant "an 8mm scale Space Marine" or "a Space Marine that is 8mm tall". Again, if the latter, that suggests normal human infantry would be about...6mm.
Sasquatch wrote: I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?
Actually competing with itself is valid concern. Money going from 40k to epic is USELESS and actually BAD. If all epic would manage is shift money from 40k to titan game that would be less profit for GW. More expenses, same sales. Not good.
What GW is interested in if it brings in NEW money. Any 40k money shifted to this game is pointless and won't help make money back. It's only if it increases amount of cash existing player spends or brings new players it profits GW.
The other bit of the calculus, and the one that GW forgot last time around as well, is KEEPING money that would otherwise be lost.
Is it a "good" thing if someone who was an enthusiastic 40K buyer(because lets be real, they don't care if you play, we're still just walking wallets in the end) diverts a portion or all of their spend to AT(or N17, or whatever else comes along from SGS) in a zero-sum fashion? On the face of it, no, but a business the size and scope of GW can't afford to have thinking that superficial. The value of the Specialist brands isn't just in their earning potential, it's also in their retention potential - people get bored, or frustrated, or burnt out with the main GW games, it's an inevitability that it will happen to most folk at some stage, but it's rare that they get entirely burnt out with GW's IPs. Give them another way to interact with those IPs that feels different, and while that may look like "cannibalising sales", in reality it's retaining sales that would otherwise have gone to other wargaming companies, or other hobbies entirely.
Some cannibalising is inevitable, there are going to be people who's main desire was always for whatever experience a new SG game offers but who "settled" for 40K or AoS, and who will merely transition their existing hobby spend from one to the other, but I'd argue that's almost certainly a price worth paying for GW to ensure all the folk who're trying out SG stuff for the novelty because they're bored with the main games remain firmly within the GW ecosystem, rather than wandering off to try Malifaux, or Infinity, or Dropfleet, or going all-in on a CMoN or Mierce or Mantic KS.
I remain unconvinced they have "changed" the scale so much as fixed it. People keep saying "8mm scale", but have FW actually confirmed that's the scale they're using or are we still just going on the remark that they printed off an 8mm Space Marine figure to check what sort of detail they could achieve?
I understand AT's scale is a 1:4 ratio reduction from 40k.
Taking 40k as 30mm scale, that means AT is 7.5mm scale.
schoon wrote: Though this post betrays my age, the reason that the original Adeptus Titanicus became (eventually) Epic 40K with all the other units was that it was popular.
So, here we are again, and I'm sure the eventual expansion of this game (or not) over time will hinge on the same thing.
Yes, exactly - or...that's the hope!
That way we can have Adeptus Titanicus AND a new version of EPIC, and then everyone (OK, mostly everyone) will be happy!
Those are not official models though. Old GW Epic infantry looked awful.
Yes. Same as the original Warlord models were awful. Neither should be used to decide wether you need to move to change scale or not, because GW's plastic manufacturing ability is magnitudes better. But here we are, and people always say that the move is because 6mm infantry miniatures can't be done to look good.
Nevermind that this game won't have infantry.
Most of those old Epic infantry were made prior to 40k 2nd edition! We've come a long way since then. This would be like saying GW shouldn't bother with another version of 28mm 40k since the old Space Marines from the 2nd Edition box set sucked.
The fan-made Warlords are only a few mm smaller than this one, so there's very little practical difference...
The old Warlords were like 3mm scale, so actually this new one is more in scale with your old Epic stuff ...
New scale is actually 8mm, old scale was 6mm for infantry and about half that for Titans. So any new infantry and/or tanks won't be much bigger than the old stuff...
I think you are missing the point. I am not so concerned with the exact representation of the scale of the miniature. I mean, I hardly think 10 Space Marines can fit in a Rhino in 40k. But the actual size of the model is a problem to me. It just takes up too much room on a gaming table, let alone several. Aside from some novel ideas about what a titan can do, you are still suck with limited movement. You might as well just move all of your titans to the middle of the board and start rolling dice.
As far as all the anti-Epic talk, if GW releases some expansion of Horus era Marines to compliment this set as a start (and all they would need to do is include generic marines, land raiders, and rhinos) are you really telling me that is going to turn some of you guys off? 8mm Titans are ok, 8mm tanks and infantry are rubbish? Come on.
You would think that if you really liked a game, you would want to see GW give extended support for it. Isn't that a regular complaint on dakka? Are you hoping for years of new Titan classes and that's it? Is that going to keep the game fresh? If AT does prove to be popular, yet GW stops supporting it, are you going to be posting on here 'Well I am glad they stopped supporting this game because I didn't want to see infantry and tanks anyway!' Give me a break.
But we'll have to check back here after its released to get past the models and evaluate the game play. If the game play is unimpressive, interest in this game will die pretty quickly.
the 40K vs epic money debate is not really accurate though. There are many gamers who have most of what they need for 40K (not starting new armies etc) so their investment into 40K is considerably reduced even if they have the income to support it. A brand new game that still has the feel that is familiar may well bump up that expenditure once again.
I would be all over an epic version of 40K, it was my gateway drug into GW in the first place.
AT needed 3 titans, Epic needed dozens of tanks, hundreds of troops AND 3 titans.
What? No it didn't. Some games had no titans at all and in some cases might have only one on each side. Then in others you could field an entire army of just titans.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: the 40K vs epic money debate is not really accurate though. There are many gamers who have most of what they need for 40K (not starting new armies etc) so their investment into 40K is considerably reduced even if they have the income to support it. A brand new game that still has the feel that is familiar may well bump up that expenditure once again.
I would be all over an epic version of 40K, it was my gateway drug into GW in the first place.
I'll say this: GW has already all the money I will spend on 40k. So the only way they will get money directly from me is doing something else.
KTG17 wrote: I think you are missing the point. I am not so concerned with the exact representation of the scale of the miniature. [...]But the actual size of the model is a problem to me. It just takes up too much room on a gaming table, let alone several. Aside from some novel ideas about what a titan can do, you are still suck with limited movement. You might as well just move all of your titans to the middle of the board and start rolling dice.
While they are considerably larger models, the footprint of the base is little more than twice the size of the original beetleback Titans. The additional bulk comes mainly from height. I see where you're coming from, but having used all eras of Titans, the fan-made 'true-6mm scale' ones (i.e. those that are the same size as the upcoming plastics) don't affect the game beyond benefitting from taller buildings.
As far as all the anti-Epic talk, if GW releases some expansion of Horus era Marines to compliment this set as a start (and all they would need to do is include generic marines, land raiders, and rhinos) are you really telling me that is going to turn some of you guys off? 8mm Titans are ok, 8mm tanks and infantry are rubbish? Come on.
No, I think that's a false equivalence. I'm a huge fan of Epic, but Adeptus Titanicus has a different appeal for me – that of granularity and detail – than Epic, which I like smooth and streamlined. Metaphorically speaking, I like a cup of tea, and I like a pint of beer; but I wouldn't want to drink a mix of them. Now, that's being a little facetious, but the point stands.
You would think that if you really liked a game, you would want to see GW give extended support for it. [...]Are you hoping for years of new Titan classes and that's it? Is that going to keep the game fresh? If AT does prove to be popular, yet GW stops supporting it, are you going to be posting on here 'Well I am glad they stopped supporting this game because I didn't want to see infantry and tanks anyway!' Give me a break.
I think it's more a case of wanting Specialist Games to avoid over-reaching. To extend the metaphor above, I'd rather they used their limited resources to make a nice cup of tea than to try diversifying too early.
Eventually? Certainly I'd love to see Epic return. Immediately? I'd like a really good Titan game.
The titan dice showed up for the first time in Space Marine v2/Titan Legions. That was the only system that used them.
Personally, I think they are rather silly and a little time-consuming at times. I think the best rules for war engines as in Epic 40k. You has some variety in arming them and how they took damage but not too much. As a matter of fact, all the info fit on a single side of paper. I think that's the right balance. Gives them just enough flavor yet you don't get bogged down looking up rules or stats.
I think EpicA went too extreme in simplifying them.
This will likely be the first GW game I have purchased in over 20 years.
Good on them for managing to squeeze even money from me, considering I don't much care for their aesthetic.
For Adeptus Titanicus? All right GW, take my money......
Sasquatch wrote: I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?
Actually competing with itself is valid concern. Money going from 40k to epic is USELESS and actually BAD. If all epic would manage is shift money from 40k to titan game that would be less profit for GW. More expenses, same sales. Not good.
What GW is interested in if it brings in NEW money. Any 40k money shifted to this game is pointless and won't help make money back. It's only if it increases amount of cash existing player spends or brings new players it profits GW.
#
Wrong........
Does everyone buy every 40k release? Do they collect every army? Some people only collect one army, others collect a few, it is very rare for people to collect every single thing put out for 40k. So, with this logical reasoning in place,. if some 40k players (or even a lot) put money into AT where for example, they wouldn't be buying new orks or whatever it means theyre making,...wait for it,.......more sales.
gorgon wrote: Epic fans are certainly allowed to stay well clear of AT if it doesn't float their boats.
But it's going to be a big hit for GW. The buzz was loud more than a year ago, which is what made them decide to delay the game to release the titans in plastic instead of resin. It's even louder now.
I think the vast majority of Epic fans are super-excited about this release. Wonderful new miniatures (that you can use for ATand Epic) it will help bring attention back to small scale 30/40k, which will mean more people learn about the existing Epic communities and will want to take part in those events.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: A chap posted an interesting point about what sort of game Epic should be.
What Epic 40,000 and Epic Armageddon got Right was the blast markers and unit suppression rules.
Those helped turn a ‘mere’ large scale engagement game into one that replicated the command experience.
Not saying it did so perfectly, but it played very differently to 40k. Yes, you could just shoehorn in the biggest of big guns. But reliable success came from knowing when and how to best suppress enemy formations.
Get something like that back for a hypothetical Epic scale game, and it’ll offer a different gaming experience to 40k.
I think even when it was first released Epic played very differently to 40k. The difference will be even more pronounced now.
The great thing here is that AT/Epic will give people who don't like the 40k ruleset (or perhaps those who prefer the smaller scale, and the different concept that brings) a way to still play games within the 40k universe.
schoon wrote: Though this post betrays my age, the reason that the original Adeptus Titanicus became (eventually) Epic 40K with all the other units was that it was popular.
So, here we are again, and I'm sure the eventual expansion of this game (or not) over time will hinge on the same thing.
Plus a mass battle game means needs (and thus buying) more stuff.
AT needed 3 titans, Epic needed dozens of tanks, hundreds of troops AND 3 titans.
My thoughts are, will FW have the capacity to produce all of those miniature lines?
I think that's the main thing stopping a big re-release of Epic to follow AT.
Remember the last Epic releases (Armageddon and Epic 40,000) used lots of the existing miniature ranges to prop up the new releases. Do the casts for those still even exist, and if they do does that mean Squats will be making a comeback?
/pic52671.jpg)
