I was wondering if there will be a campaign book - the new box set is tempting, but as I jumped on the Rynn’s World box set, and then ended up getting the campaign book anyway, I’m thinking it would be better to go for campaign book/area of engagement/separate plane boxes.
Got an itchy trigger finger for the ground assets set, missed that first time round and have been regretting it ever since. Good to see it coming back.
Ground asset return is nice, hopefully not with a price hike, and I hope other factions get plastic assets too. Those are great bits for kitbashing ork stuff.
Baltika wrote: I was wondering if there will be a campaign book - the new box set is tempting, but as I jumped on the Rynn’s World box set, and then ended up getting the campaign book anyway, I’m thinking it would be better to go for campaign book/area of engagement/separate plane boxes.
Got an itchy trigger finger for the ground assets set, missed that first time round and have been regretting it ever since. Good to see it coming back.
If it's like the previous sets, the starter set is good if you want both forces or have a friend who wants to take one of them.
If not, just get the campaign book + separate aircraft. An annoying thing with the starter sets has been that a good number of planes is roughly what you get in 1 box, since the starter set only has half a box you end up buying the separate aircraft set anyway.
Admittedly I'm an AI nerd, so I've just bought 2x of the previous starter sets to get a nice healthy sized squadron of every faction so far, and given I like Eldar (it was one of the factions I had back when FW was selling it) I'll probably do the same here.
You usually get 5-10$ discount for getting the starter set, but the downside is you won't get enough of the cheap fighters for specific mission/points list.
Given that both "big" plane this time aren't actually bomber but "bigger" fighter and if the article wasn't lying, the Storm Eagle have good maneuverability, so all planes will be viable in most mission, except maybe "the chase"
My theory: If theres no campaign book announced or released within the next ~6 weeks (allowing for some degree of screwery due to covid and shipping crises, etc.), then I'm taking that to indicate that AI is done and no further support is coming.
Minis have a really long lead time, these minis would have already been some part of the way into tooling by the time it might have become apparent that the game might not be financially wortwhile to continue producing. Books have a much shorter turnaround and much lower design and production costs and usually don't go into production until a narrow window prior to minis going production - in other words the book is easy to cancel, the minis are not. If the book doesn't appear, then it was probably canceled, and with it any further game development work.
I love my tiny planes, but other than the first couple of weeks where it seemed a few people were getting into it, it's really failed to take off around these parts and certainly on this forum it doesn't seem that popular.
I blame the lacklustre rules, they should have aimed for something tight that could be played competitively instead of the shallow ill thought through rules we got.
I love my tiny planes, but other than the first couple of weeks where it seemed a few people were getting into it, it's really failed to take off around these parts and certainly on this forum it doesn't seem that popular.
I blame the lacklustre rules, they should have aimed for something tight that could be played competitively instead of the shallow ill thought through rules we got.
It's a game that really suffered from being released right before Covid iirc... plus if you want to fight with starfighters, there's X-Wing and Armada and a few other plane games out there already. The value of the box set also wasn't as clear compared to buying things separately, and at the end of the day, 70% of this game is the cardboard and books, rather than the models.
The models are fantastic, but that's all I can really say about the game. The rules aren't bad, but they're not memorable either. It feels more like chess than a dice game. All the same parts and maneuvers, which isn't bad if that's what you're looking for.
It's possible with the addition of 2 new factions, the game might start taking off, much like Titanicus did after more models were added to it. There's definitely a community memory of GW releasing specialist games and then dropping them shortly after, so many people don't want to touch a GW game unless they see that it's going to get continued support.
Actually the maneuver, attitude, and firepower system of tthe new game are pretty bad and completely missing the core heart and soul of the original game. Aircrafts are quite unwieldy beasts to control and the original game capture that pretty well, it's very hard to turn and get other target in sight, because of the 9 attitude instead of 5. And ammo is limited so people can't just dakka away every turn.
Don't think there will be any revamp in rule, I just hope for some actual new, original stuff being made for the game, like new fighter Maybe something mind blowing like...naval combat.
Chopstick wrote: Actually the maneuver, attitude, and firepower system of tthe new game are pretty bad and completely missing the core heart and soul of the original game. Aircrafts are quite unwieldy beasts to control and the original game capture that pretty well, it's very hard to turn and get other target in sight, because of the 9 attitude instead of 5. And ammo is limited so people can't just dakka away every turn.
Don't think there will be any revamp in rule, I just hope for some actual new, stuff being made for the game, like new fighter Maybe something mind blowing like...naval combat.
Or better yet, BFG.
I was talking with a friend about rumors dealing with Titanicus and Aeronautica. There was a rumor dump a while ago that said that Titanicus was going to stop being supported by the end of 2022 and Aeronautica might be getting the same treatment.
However, if both those games go the way of the dodo, I feel like it'd be an awful waste for GW to just let the models and all those gorgeous epic-scale molds go to the trash. But what if this is a longer-term plan to eventually release Epic 40k?
By selling titans and airplanes as their own separate games, they pay for the molds to be made ahead of time, which gives them more capital to make the tanks, the troops, and other xenos or chaos titans. By the time Epic would come out, let's say in 2023, they'd have a bunch of factions planes already in their warehouse. A lot of the planes also come with bases that say they are made in china (due to the dials and such). Thanks to a lot of the shipping issues, I wouldn't be surprised if this is part of why we have had such a delay of Aeronautica stuff. But, they could simply rebox the planes to have different bases to prepare them for Epic.
Likely just wishful thinking, but we'll see how far they take this little plane game.
^The latest big rumour drop batch (add salt as desired) stated that GW did have plans to combine Aeronautica & Titanicus into a form of Epic, but that now they don't. Apparently the interest & testing the idea out (thru sales etc) was not deemed worthwhile.
I'm wondering why there isn't a book at launch with Wrath of Angels also. Maybe it's simply because over this year GW have been changing their printers or printing location.
Maybe the Thunderhawk will be long in a couple of weeks or maybe it's being saved for a Xmas release. Either way it's going to be pretty popular for a number of reasons.
Well all 5 factions are revealed/available soon now. In terms of launch boxes that was it.
It's great the ground assets are available again. Odd to re-release this if the game is done & dusted or maybe one last cash grab? Either way it's good news.
There was one of those interview things this year where Andy Hoare let slip there was to be another Ork Bomber even bigger than the Mega Bommer. I think it was called a Supa Mega Bomber or something.
lost_lilliputian wrote: ^The latest big rumour drop batch (add salt as desired) stated that GW did have plans to combine Aeronautica & Titanicus into a form of Epic, but that now they don't. Apparently the interest & testing the idea out (thru sales etc) was not deemed worthwhile.
They pretty much will have to rewrite a new rule for AI and even so it'll be mostly 2 separated games being played with the bombers attack the ground force while the fighters try to intercept the bombers/other fighter from destroying their bombers and titan. That'd be a very long game.
Btw when Aeronautica launched there were lots of people saying they were interested in the game but not the factions available. They kept asking for Space Marines. Now those will be available it will be interesting to see if there's an increase in players or even if sales spike etc. I think GW were pretty smart to make Astartes flyers from the Heresy era too.
Btw when Aeronautica launched there were lots of people saying they were interested in the game but not the factions available. They kept asking for Space Marines. Now those will be available it will be interesting to see if there's an increase in players or even if sales spike etc. I think GW were pretty smart to make Astartes flyers from the Heresy era too.
With how far ahead GW has to look, I wouldn't be surprised if future plans have already been scrapped.
Well, what I will say is if you want any of these for your own games of epic or dioramas, get them now. I'm not even going to be using a Thunderhawk for aeronautica, but for Titanicus terrain and dioramas instead.
For myself I feel really conflicted about this game release.I love the planes. I don't even mind the game itself but agree some rules changes could go a long way to adding more depth. I wasn't around for the previous version do I can't compare the two.
What I do know is that where I live & play, this game is dead. The only hobby related store in town still has the original box game on its shelf (imperial navy & orks)
I even painted the Tau half of the Taros set up and gave them to a friend just so I'd have someone to play with. I painted them in 2 of his favourite colours and while he loves the planes his heart is just not in the game.
What did happen this year though was Blood Bowl Sevens took off in a huge way. Every man and his dog have been playing it.
I've been waiting so long for more tiny planes I've watched others move onto games they really really enjoy lol.
The 6-8 of us that locally that were interested in AI already play AT & have previously played smaller scale. But out of that only 3 of us bought in. All due to factions available, when tau released 2 more joined and the remainder will as well once this hits.
I really don't want AI to die until there are chaos & nids stuff out.
I just notice that the phoenix is 3 planes on 1 sprue, and they will sell you 3 in a box for the same price as the other kit which have double sprue (or at least come with an extra "ordnance" sprue). Same for storm eagle,
Racerguy180 wrote: The 6-8 of us that locally that were interested in AI already play AT & have previously played smaller scale. But out of that only 3 of us bought in. All due to factions available, when tau released 2 more joined and the remainder will as well once this hits.
I really don't want AI to die until there are chaos & nids stuff out.
Don't hold your breath.
In the 1st version of AI they said they would never do Tyranids "because Tyranids don't have planes".
I disagreed with that idea then and still do given all the descriptions of Tyranids dealing with planes in their own ways with their winged creatures and floating spore mines, though admittedly I think the 1st AI was before Hive Crones and Tentaclid living missiles were introduced by GW.
Well, here's hoping that with Eldar and Space Marines, the game gets a new breath. If they can turn it around, then AI 2.0 could be in the cards in the future, or maybe if enough of this sells, they'll put Epic back on the table.
drbored wrote: Well, here's hoping that with Eldar and Space Marines, the game gets a new breath. If they can turn it around, then AI 2.0 could be in the cards in the future, or maybe if enough of this sells, they'll put Epic back on the table.
I think AT should stop dragging their feet about their refusal to release xenos TItans. Getting bored of their nth iteration of another Imperial/Chaos Titan with only minor changes or weapon variations.
Seriously, AI and AT both seem to be willingly leaving money on the table by refusing to release anything for xenos players or doing so at a snail's pace.
drbored wrote: Well, here's hoping that with Eldar and Space Marines, the game gets a new breath. If they can turn it around, then AI 2.0 could be in the cards in the future, or maybe if enough of this sells, they'll put Epic back on the table.
I think AT should stop dragging their feet about their refusal to release xenos TItans. Getting bored of their nth iteration of another Imperial/Chaos Titan with only minor changes or weapon variations.
Seriously, AI and AT both seem to be willingly leaving money on the table by refusing to release anything for xenos players or doing so at a snail's pace.
Games Workshop is terrified of Chaos in 40k. They went half in on Death Guard and Thousand Sons and have been dragging their feet on Emperor's Children and World Eaters ever since. The Chaos Marine faction is a hodge-podge and Chaos Daemons fit excellently into AoS but are a mess in 40k.
Racerguy180 wrote: The 6-8 of us that locally that were interested in AI already play AT & have previously played smaller scale. But out of that only 3 of us bought in. All due to factions available, when tau released 2 more joined and the remainder will as well once this hits.
I really don't want AI to die until there are chaos & nids stuff out.
Don't hold your breath.
In the 1st version of AI they said they would never do Tyranids "because Tyranids don't have planes".
I disagreed with that idea then and still do given all the descriptions of Tyranids dealing with planes in their own ways with their winged creatures and floating spore mines, though admittedly I think the 1st AI was before Hive Crones and Tentaclid living missiles were introduced by GW.
Even before Hive Crones there were Harridans and Gargoyles. I'm not really familiar with the fluff of Tentaclids but I imagine they're low speed missiles grown for dealing with enemy aircraft that are offering close air support to ground units, rather than going after supersonic fighter jets.
I dunno, it still doesn't seem right to me to have flapping wing flyers going toe to toe with high speed military jets in any context other than low speed close air support. The old fluff of Tyranids just filling the skies with critters making flight impossible made more sense, but doesn't really fit into how AI works.
Another thought occurs to me in that they maybe holding the campaign book back as it "spoils" a few future releases with pictures in the book. So, this is Wave 1. Wave 2 could have the book with the Thunderhawk, and Fire Raptor for the Marines and then Vampire Hunter, Vampire Raider, maybe even the Lynx for the Eldar. The book may even have the profile for the Stormbird, who knows.
I don't have any plans to play AI at this point, but depending on the price, I could see myself getting a Thunderhawk when it is released - if only because of all the plastic Thunderhawk memes...
You've also got the Harbinger. You could also reference some of the old Dæmon Engines like the Doomwing and Firelord. Maybe the Silver Tower. Also, you've got the Blight Drone perhaps?
zedmeister wrote: You've also got the Harbinger. You could also reference some of the old Dæmon Engines like the Doomwing and Firelord. Maybe the Silver Tower. Also, you've got the Blight Drone perhaps?
Blight Drones would be Grot Bomb-sized in Aeronautica, so probably not a distinct unit by themselves.
The Harbinger was huge, wasn't it bigger than the Manta? I doubt GW would release one for the larger scale AI, FW might though.
I am kind of glad they've stuck to the old FW flyers that felt more realistically scaled than introducing the GW flyers that look super chibi-like by comparison.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: The Harbinger was huge, wasn't it bigger than the Manta? I doubt GW would release one for the larger scale AI, FW might though.
I am kind of glad they've stuck to the old FW flyers that felt more realistically scaled than introducing the GW flyers that look super chibi-like by comparison.
Yeah, I reckon the Harbinger will be resin as will the Manta and probably the Stormbird
As for the GW designs, they don't seem like they're really for aerial combat. Don't think you can do much with hurricane bolters. Plus, a lot of them look crap
Racerguy180 wrote: The 6-8 of us that locally that were interested in AI already play AT & have previously played smaller scale. But out of that only 3 of us bought in. All due to factions available, when tau released 2 more joined and the remainder will as well once this hits.
I really don't want AI to die until there are chaos & nids stuff out.
Don't hold your breath.
In the 1st version of AI they said they would never do Tyranids "because Tyranids don't have planes".
I disagreed with that idea then and still do given all the descriptions of Tyranids dealing with planes in their own ways with their winged creatures and floating spore mines, though admittedly I think the 1st AI was before Hive Crones and Tentaclid living missiles were introduced by GW.
Even before Hive Crones there were Harridans and Gargoyles. I'm not really familiar with the fluff of Tentaclids but I imagine they're low speed missiles grown for dealing with enemy aircraft that are offering close air support to ground units, rather than going after supersonic fighter jets.
I dunno, it still doesn't seem right to me to have flapping wing flyers going toe to toe with high speed military jets in any context other than low speed close air support. The old fluff of Tyranids just filling the skies with critters making flight impossible made more sense, but doesn't really fit into how AI works.
I'd argue that right now most of the Tyranids we've seen air-force wise are closer to attack helicopters in role than fighter-craft. The idea that they just use a massive amount of floating spores to prevent air combat taking place makes perfect sense, but its really not much for the tyranid player to do in an air combat game.
That said there's no reason that the Hive Mind couldn't work on some kind of bio-fuel approach to developing a niche of tyranids. Perhaps with vents along wing-arms so that they basically "fly" but are pushing out enough force that they can approach jet aircraft speeds. It just takes a bit of new fluff; some invasion perhaps where the Hive Ship crashed or otherwise was unable to fill the air with spores (perhaps a world with very strong wind); so they evolve faster and faster organic flying creatures.
I dunno, maybe I'm just small minded but I think anything they do to make Tyranids compete with jet fighters is going to feel very shoehorned in and take away from the biological aspect of them.
It'd be like if they started releasing literal tanks with tracks and all for Tyranids.
Maybe it's because I have an engineering background, but it feels to me biological stuff shouldn't be competing with engineered stuff on *every* front, and the idea of just throwing a bunch of critters in the air to clog up engines is probably the best biological solution to fighter jets anyway.
And I say that as a tyranid player who enjoys both aircraft and real natural flyers, it just doesn't feel right to me.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I dunno, maybe I'm just small minded but I think anything they do to make Tyranids compete with jet fighters is going to feel very shoehorned in and take away from the biological aspect of them.
It'd be like if they started releasing literal tanks with tracks and all for Tyranids.
Maybe it's because I have an engineering background, but it feels to me biological stuff shouldn't be competing with engineered stuff on *every* front, and the idea of just throwing a bunch of critters in the air to clog up engines is probably the best biological solution to fighter jets anyway.
And I say that as a tyranid player who enjoys both aircraft and real natural flyers, it just doesn't feel right to me.
Dunno, we already have Valkyries, which fill the helicopter niche instead of the jet fighter one, so...
I mean, I get what you're saying but there's already a lot of very ponderous planes out there already (bombers, landers, dropships) that the fighters should fly circles around, so I'm not sure if that would be reason enough.
There is a contradiction between the main GW background which says Harridans and Hive Crones etc... are clearly effective against enemy aircraft (including fast craft such as fighters) and the original AI writers who claimed no the Tyranids have nothing effective. However depictions in Black Library background have examples where flying Tyranid organisms clearly can bring down aircraft, including heavily armored Thunderhawks, whether from a combination of organic weapons fire, spore mine explosion, melee (which implies catching them) or Gargoyles clogging up the engines (possibly on purpose). The Tentaclid missiles have no description of their speed so we cannot really conclude they are "slow". About the only thing we do know is they do damage from a combination of impact and a massive electrical burst that knocks out electronics and engines.
Ultimately it comes down to the fact that aside from the original AI writers, all the other major GW sources say Tyranids do have effective flying Tyranid forms. So then the question would be how to translate what is depicted in the background into something AI ruleswise that would still be effective.
For the first AI, I proposed slow moving but very maneuverable Harridans that had some ranged fire with their bio-cannons, a little transport capability (as they carry Gargoyles attached to their belly), and scything talons (as they are described as tearing apart aircraft or even kamikaze style ramming into them). The compensation for the major disadvantage of slow speed was being dirt cheap so that Tyranids would field many Harridans. The other major unit at the time was FW's Meiotic Spores which were described as being used as a form of AA mine. Again the idea I had was something slow moving, powerful one time explosion, and dirt cheap. The idea was the Tyranid could fill the board with many cheap units so that even though enemy flyers could avoid or outmaneuver any one individual Tyranid creature, they might just be moving into the range of another. Harpies and Crones would now probably be smaller faster fighter equivalents compared to the bomber/dropship of the Harridan, though still slower than the flyers of other races. The Tentaclid missiles would be a way to offer limited longer range firepower so Tyranid players have stuff to do and are not just moving a bunch of slow turrets.
Did the nids have fighter/assault craft equivalents in BFG? Because one would think that if they can make them able to be used in space, a regular atmosphere should not be an insurmontable problem.
Albertorius wrote: Did the nids have fighter/assault craft equivalents in BFG? Because one would think that if they can make them able to be used in space, a regular atmosphere should not be an insurmontable problem.
Not really, they had spore clouds that surrounded their ships which made them near sucicidal to attempt to fly attack craft through let alone attempt boarding actions
Albertorius wrote: Dunno, we already have Valkyries, which fill the helicopter niche instead of the jet fighter one, so...
I mean, I get what you're saying but there's already a lot of very ponderous planes out there already (bombers, landers, dropships) that the fighters should fly circles around, so I'm not sure if that would be reason enough.
If we're talking about rules, that's a major gripe for me in terms of bombers. It's pretty absurd that a Marauder Destroyer is able to get guns on target against a fighter aircraft. I'd like to see to-hit bonuses and penalties based on the agility of the plane firing vs the agility of the one being fired upon.
I think all these things can coexist in a game, troops fighting on the ground, gunships providing close air support to them, while high speed fighters vie for air superiority. When the fighters can win air superiority, the natural progression is the enemy gunships can no longer operate, which leads to the troops on the ground losing out.
The problem with Tyranids in a game structured thusly is that while they do the close air support thing, they don't vie for air superiority against high speed fighters.
Albertorius wrote: Did the nids have fighter/assault craft equivalents in BFG? Because one would think that if they can make them able to be used in space, a regular atmosphere should not be an insurmontable problem.
Not really, they had spore clouds that surrounded their ships which made them near sucicidal to attempt to fly attack craft through let alone attempt boarding actions
Yes Tyranids did have small craft equivalent.
The spore clouds represented actual spores and smaller organisms that acted as ablative shields against enemy anti-ship fire (basically acting as void shields in rule terms) and they could do damage to an enemy ship if the enemy ship's shields were down.
Tyranids did have assault boats and boarding torpedoes, again both representing various smaller organisms that could smash into enemy ships and release Tyranids into the enemy ship.
The newer GW background from the Tyranid Codices has both Harpies and Crones in space as attack craft (quite how they fly is not said, but perhaps it does indicate ability for some sort of thrust propulsion). In BFG terms they might be the equivalent of those BFG "spores" and smaller attack craft.
Iracundus wrote: There is a contradiction between the main GW background which says Harridans and Hive Crones etc... are clearly effective against enemy aircraft (including fast craft such as fighters) and the original AI writers who claimed no the Tyranids have nothing effective.
<snip>
Ultimately it comes down to the fact that aside from the original AI writers, all the other major GW sources say Tyranids do have effective flying Tyranid forms.
I'd argue that's because the writers of AI are (or at least were) probably more grounded in reality
But in terms of AI, the question is kind of whether they have something that can compete with fighters, not just compete in the close air support role. If they can't compete with the fighters, then they'll just be target practice unless they have rules where they're sending off gargoyles and farting out spores to clog the engines of the enemy fighters.
However depictions in Black Library background have examples where flying Tyranid organisms clearly can bring down aircraft, including heavily armored Thunderhawks, whether from a combination of organic weapons fire, spore mine explosion, melee (which implies catching them) or Gargoyles clogging up the engines (possibly on purpose). The Tentaclid missiles have no description of their speed so we cannot really conclude they are "slow". About the only thing we do know is they do damage from a combination of impact and a massive electrical burst that knocks out electronics and engines.
I think again this is a case of close air support vs air superiority. While Tyranids should be able to perform well in the former, swarming over enemy landing craft and gunships on approach, AI is more about the latter, dominating the skies through WW2 style dogfighting.
So then the question would be how to translate what is depicted in the background into something AI ruleswise that would still be effective.
In my mind, Tyranid flyers would just move so slow that they might as well be ground targets that camp out around the objective to pick off slow moving aircraft. Then they could have spore / gargoyle swarms that could move slowly around the map to block enemy flight paths.
Arguments of realism only go so far in a universe where ships travel FTL through being hurled through a hell dimension, walking fungus/animal hybrids act like football hooligans, and where people are flinging magic spells around. By the realism argument, no Space Marine should be able to breathe. Are we then to say no, sorry you can't field Space Marines because they can't breathe so cannot work?
Ultimately it comes down to what is shown by the vast majority of other GW background, such as their Codices, which shows Tyranid flying forms as capable of bringing down Imperial fighter craft, including example given in one Codex of a Crone ambushing and taking out fighters in melee in mid-air. Other races clearly do not have unchallenged air superiority in just about every depiction of a Tyranid attack. Tyranids clearly can contest air superiority and are not restricted to just ground support.
I don't see why it's that hard to suspend disbelief for Tyranid flying creatures given that Tyranids are already depicted in BFG background and rules as being capable of facing off against starships, something no known creature on Earth can do. That means being able to travel much faster than any atmospheric craft and being able to hurl organic munitions at those much higher velocities.
Actually this almost sounds like a variation of how in the original Necron Codex, Imperial Tech-Priests "prove" Necron gauss weapons are impossible and should not work...yet clearly they do work within the 40K universe as attested to by all those flayed by them.
Heck GW aren't the only ones. Starcraft has the Zerg who have winged air units that fight with fightercraft and work in both atmosphere and outer space.
I supposed one way of working them would be similar to how they were done in BFG: slow moving but dangerous to approach. Their spore clouds make long range shooting less effective meaning you have to get close to take them out. Combine them with Spore Mines and getting swarmed with Gargoyles, I reckon you could do something.
Iracundus wrote: I don't see why it's that hard to suspend disbelief....
At the end of the day, to me it just doesn't feel right and takes away from the organic nature of Tyranids if you make them capable of atmospheric flight at speeds of fighter aircraft, and if they aren't going the speeds of fighter aircraft they aren't dogfighting which is the general premise of how AI currently functions (albeit not brilliantly ).
The space stuff to me is a completely different kettle of fish because Tyranids need to function in space to function in 40k as a whole, so I guess space magic or whatever
At the end of the day we could have a psyker who super saiyans his way around to dogfight against the Imperial Navy, but it's not so much "suspension of disbelief" as it is "yeah this just doesn't feel right".
But whatever, if Tyranids happen and it gets more players into the game, cool, just IMO I'm happy not having Tyranids in the game even though I have a 40k Tyranid army.
zedmeister wrote: I supposed one way of working them would be similar to how they were done in BFG: slow moving but dangerous to approach. Their spore clouds make long range shooting less effective meaning you have to get close to take them out. Combine them with Spore Mines and getting swarmed with Gargoyles, I reckon you could do something.
Besides, I'd like to see the Epic Harridan return
That was sort of my proposal as detailed above and which was based on ideas I had with the first version of AI. Swarms of slower moving creatures like Harridans, and smaller faster creatures like Harpies and Crones, supplemented by barrage balloon Meiotic Spore mines that effectively create areas of danger through their blasts. Present the enemy with choices. Avoid the spore mine blast radius even though that might mean moving into the range of the guns or talons of the Harridan? And just when you think you might be out of bio-cannon range and safe, suddenly a Tentaclid missile shoots out and turns your aircraft into a plummeting brick.
Iracundus wrote: I don't see why it's that hard to suspend disbelief....
At the end of the day, to me it just doesn't feel right and takes away from the organic nature of Tyranids if you make them capable of atmospheric flight at speeds of fighter aircraft, and if they aren't going the speeds of fighter aircraft they aren't dogfighting which is the general premise of how AI currently functions (albeit not brilliantly ).
The space stuff to me is a completely different kettle of fish because Tyranids need to function in space to function in 40k as a whole, so I guess space magic or whatever
At the end of the day we could have a psyker who super saiyans his way around to dogfight against the Imperial Navy, but it's not so much "suspension of disbelief" as it is "yeah this just doesn't feel right".
One could make the same argument that Orks making rustbucket aircraft that can perform comparably to the fighter craft of other factions doesn't "feel right".
That's the thing though. I don't see it as any different kettle of fish. It's the same reasoning: Tyranids need to function in the air to function in 40K as a whole just as in the same way they need to be able to function in space to function in the 40K universe.
Chopstick wrote: Actually the maneuver, attitude, and firepower system of tthe new game are pretty bad and completely missing the core heart and soul of the original game. Aircrafts are quite unwieldy beasts to control and the original game capture that pretty well, it's very hard to turn and get other target in sight, because of the 9 attitude instead of 5. And ammo is limited so people can't just dakka away every turn.
Don't think there will be any revamp in rule, I just hope for some actual new, original stuff being made for the game, like new fighter Maybe something mind blowing like...naval combat.
Mostly agreed. The 9 altitudes and limited ammo aren't a huge issue though they do create some challenges, but the ridiculous amount of flexibility you have in maneuvering make any comparison to "chess" invalid (unless what drbored meant to say is "its like playing chess but all of your pawns are queens").
I was talking with a friend about rumors dealing with Titanicus and Aeronautica. There was a rumor dump a while ago that said that Titanicus was going to stop being supported by the end of 2022 and Aeronautica might be getting the same treatment.
^The latest big rumour drop batch (add salt as desired) stated that GW did have plans to combine Aeronautica & Titanicus into a form of Epic, but that now they don't. Apparently the interest & testing the idea out (thru sales etc) was not deemed worthwhile.
These rumors have been more or less all but confirmed to be entirely false based on another set of rumors that released around the same time which have been essentially all but confirmed to be true (at least based on whats happened thus far). The accurate set of rumors provided no details about AT/AI, but were very detailed about 40k and all those details thus far have been accurate. Those accurate rumors conflict in several places with the 40k rumors contained in the false rumor dump that included AT and AI having been planned to be combined but now being discontinued, etc.
I.E. both rumor dumps cannot be true, and the one that seems to be true based on actual proven validity have nothing to say about AT/AI. The safe bet is that if the false dumps 40k rumors are bad, then so is its AT/AI rumors.
drbored wrote: Well, here's hoping that with Eldar and Space Marines, the game gets a new breath. If they can turn it around, then AI 2.0 could be in the cards in the future, or maybe if enough of this sells, they'll put Epic back on the table.
I think AT should stop dragging their feet about their refusal to release xenos TItans. Getting bored of their nth iteration of another Imperial/Chaos Titan with only minor changes or weapon variations.
Seriously, AI and AT both seem to be willingly leaving money on the table by refusing to release anything for xenos players or doing so at a snail's pace.
GW is doing the opposite of leaving money on the table by not releasing xenos Titans. As all Imperial and Chaos titans are essentially the same (throw some resin upgrade bits out for corrupted titans and psi-titans) they maximize their cost efficiency as everyone playing the game is buying the same kits (and evidently doing so in fairly large numbers). Adding xenos titans might bring an expansion of the player/customer base, but it also means a decrease in the games cost efficiency, as you are adding separate product lines that will only be purchased by a smaller share of the market.
If we believe longstanding past rumors that Aeronautica hasn't been financially successful (note that doesn't mean its unprofitable, just that it doesn't make as much money vs the cost of producing it compared to other games), then we can see how the different approaches between the two games might have resulted in that situation. AT with only one set of models has reportedly been one of GWs best product lines (supposedly in the first week of release it outsold GWs demand forecast for what should have been the entire first year of its existence 4-5x over - obviously its tapered off somewhat since then but its sales strength is apparently still evident from what grumblings I've been able to pull from insiders). AI with now-5 different factions is supposedly regarded as being questionable as to whether its worth continuing to invest in it by GW mgmt.
There're no bonus rule for flying at supersonic (speed 6+) so Tyranid wouldn't a problem, but it would be quite hillarious if they use the exact same rule as aircraft.
That said there're still Necron and Dark Eldar and other Eldar cousin before they had to touch Tyranid if the rule writer'd know better.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: If we're talking about rules, that's a major gripe for me in terms of bombers. It's pretty absurd that a Marauder Destroyer is able to get guns on target against a fighter aircraft. I'd like to see to-hit bonuses and penalties based on the agility of the plane firing vs the agility of the one being fired upon.
That's mainly what I was getting at, yes: we're already there with all sorts of stuff, there's not really a need to single out nids.
I was talking with a friend about rumors dealing with Titanicus and Aeronautica. There was a rumor dump a while ago that said that Titanicus was going to stop being supported by the end of 2022 and Aeronautica might be getting the same treatment.
^The latest big rumour drop batch (add salt as desired) stated that GW did have plans to combine Aeronautica & Titanicus into a form of Epic, but that now they don't. Apparently the interest & testing the idea out (thru sales etc) was not deemed worthwhile.
These rumors have been more or less all but confirmed to be entirely false based on another set of rumors that released around the same time which have been essentially all but confirmed to be true (at least based on whats happened thus far). The accurate set of rumors provided no details about AT/AI, but were very detailed about 40k and all those details thus far have been accurate. Those accurate rumors conflict in several places with the 40k rumors contained in the false rumor dump that included AT and AI having been planned to be combined but now being discontinued, etc.
I.E. both rumor dumps cannot be true, and the one that seems to be true based on actual proven validity have nothing to say about AT/AI. The safe bet is that if the false dumps 40k rumors are bad, then so is its AT/AI rumors.
If we believe longstanding past rumors that Aeronautica hasn't been financially successful (note that doesn't mean its unprofitable, just that it doesn't make as much money vs the cost of producing it compared to other games), then we can see how the different approaches between the two games might have resulted in that situation. AT with only one set of models has reportedly been one of GWs best product lines (supposedly in the first week of release it outsold GWs demand forecast for what should have been the entire first year of its existence 4-5x over - obviously its tapered off somewhat since then but its sales strength is apparently still evident from what grumblings I've been able to pull from insiders). AI with now-5 different factions is supposedly regarded as being questionable as to whether its worth continuing to invest in it by GW mgmt.
See, I've been wondering about these rumours. Seems incredible as Titanicus has always been, at least anecdotally, a solid seller. All battleforces released for it sold out rapidly as do new releases. FW upgrades sell out fast on release and the aformentioned comments on it's status as a solid seller. As for AI, I believe someone earlier in this thread mentioned rumours that AI is a solid seller giving a decent return, but not to the scale of Titanicus or Necromunda.
Iracundus wrote: One could make the same argument that Orks making rustbucket aircraft that can perform comparably to the fighter craft of other factions doesn't "feel right".
One could, but one wouldn't, that's the difference
That's the thing though. I don't see it as any different kettle of fish.
I do, I think we all have our lines that we would rather not have crossed.
There's going to be a point for anyone where you go "nah, I just don't like that idea, it's too stupid".
I'm sure my background with engineering and aircraft is colouring my opinions, which is why I tend to think the AI rules writers back when FW wrote it were more grounded when they said Tyranids wouldn't be in AI because Tyranids don't have flyers that would compete on a level that is relevant to how AI functions.
It's the same reasoning: Tyranids need to function in the air to function in 40K as a whole just as in the same way they need to be able to function in space to function in the 40K universe.
All of the factions need to be able to do so.
I mostly disagree, Tyranids don't need air superiority in the sense of being able to out-dogfight Imperial fighters, they can just swarm the skies with critters so the enemy aircraft are no longer able to support their troops on the ground.
But anyway, I think we're just going around in circles at this point. As I said in my previous post, if we get Tyranids I'm not going to be crying, I just don't particularly want them. Especially when we still have Necrons, Dark Eldar and Chaos which could be added.
Thinking about Drew Carey and the Necrons for a moment...
Dark Eldar have the Voidraven Bomber and Razorwing Jetfighter from current 40k - I'm fairly sure they used to have a flyer from FW, but I can't remember what it was. Either way, that would put them on par with Eldar, with a fighter and a bomber, though without a Vampire-equivalent should GW produce that for the Eldar. Is there any mention in the DE background stuff of a flyer larger than the Voidraven?
Necrons have the Night Scythe - but that seems to be it, though an emplacements pack of Monoliths would be cool. Again, I'm less familiar with Necron lore - if we're brainstorming, are there any mentions of other Necron flyers that'd be available, or would something need to be invented whole cloth?
AllSeeingSkink wrote: If we're talking about rules, that's a major gripe for me in terms of bombers. It's pretty absurd that a Marauder Destroyer is able to get guns on target against a fighter aircraft. I'd like to see to-hit bonuses and penalties based on the agility of the plane firing vs the agility of the one being fired upon.
That's mainly what I was getting at, yes: we're already there with all sorts of stuff, there's not really a need to single out nids.
But those sorts of things can exist in AI, it's just how they function now is absurd and ideally should be changed.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dysartes wrote: Thinking about Drew Carey and the Necrons for a moment...
Dark Eldar have the Voidraven Bomber and Razorwing Jetfighter from current 40k - I'm fairly sure they used to have a flyer from FW, but I can't remember what it was. Either way, that would put them on par with Eldar, with a fighter and a bomber, though without a Vampire-equivalent should GW produce that for the Eldar. Is there any mention in the DE background stuff of a flyer larger than the Voidraven?
Necrons have the Night Scythe - but that seems to be it, though an emplacements pack of Monoliths would be cool. Again, I'm less familiar with Necron lore - if we're brainstorming, are there any mentions of other Necron flyers that'd be available, or would something need to be invented whole cloth?
So far I *think* GW have limited themselves to Forge World aircraft.
It'll be interesting to see if they branch out away from the original FW aircraft.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: If we're talking about rules, that's a major gripe for me in terms of bombers. It's pretty absurd that a Marauder Destroyer is able to get guns on target against a fighter aircraft. I'd like to see to-hit bonuses and penalties based on the agility of the plane firing vs the agility of the one being fired upon.
That's mainly what I was getting at, yes: we're already there with all sorts of stuff, there's not really a need to single out nids.
But those sorts of things can exist in AI, it's just how they function now is absurd and ideally should be changed.
Yes, I agree, and by that same rule, if Valkyries exist in the game, and they're basically helicopters with wings, big flying tyranid creatures shouldn't be hard to do right too.
Dysartes wrote: Dark Eldar have the Voidraven Bomber and Razorwing Jetfighter from current 40k - I'm fairly sure they used to have a flyer from FW, but I can't remember what it was. Either way, that would put them on par with Eldar, with a fighter and a bomber, though without a Vampire-equivalent should GW produce that for the Eldar. Is there any mention in the DE background stuff of a flyer larger than the Voidraven?
Necrons have the Night Scythe - but that seems to be it, though an emplacements pack of Monoliths would be cool. Again, I'm less familiar with Necron lore - if we're brainstorming, are there any mentions of other Necron flyers that'd be available, or would something need to be invented whole cloth?
You may be thinking of the original Dark Eldar Razorwing:
They also had the old Raven Figher:
Necrons also got the Night Shroud Bomber from Forgeworld as well.
Thanks for the recap, zed - I think I prefer the modern Drew Carey flyers, but that even-bigger-croissant fills a necessary gap for the Necrons, at least.
I'm not sure what your malfunction is when it comes to the Valkyrie (and presumably the Vendetta), Albertorius - they're VTOL aircraft, not helicopters. You wouldn't describe a Harrier Jump Jet as a helicopter, would you? Even the text blurb for them on the GW site describes them as taking on enemy aircraft.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: If we're talking about rules, that's a major gripe for me in terms of bombers. It's pretty absurd that a Marauder Destroyer is able to get guns on target against a fighter aircraft. I'd like to see to-hit bonuses and penalties based on the agility of the plane firing vs the agility of the one being fired upon.
That's mainly what I was getting at, yes: we're already there with all sorts of stuff, there's not really a need to single out nids.
But those sorts of things can exist in AI, it's just how they function now is absurd and ideally should be changed.
Yes, I agree, and by that same rule, if Valkyries exist in the game, and they're basically helicopters with wings, big flying tyranid creatures shouldn't be hard to do right too.
I guess I agree with that also, but where my mind falls short is AI being a dogfighting game, slow helicopter-like flyers shouldn't be able to function as a force in and of themselves.
Like, currently, yeah, a squadron of solely Valkyries is a viable force (in fact I'd argue an overpowered one!), but I think the way AI should function is a squadron solely of Valkyries wouldn't be a viable force, they'd need fighter support or get rapidly blown out of the sky.
I mostly disagree, Tyranids don't need air superiority in the sense of being able to out-dogfight Imperial fighters, they can just swarm the skies with critters so the enemy aircraft are no longer able to support their troops on the ground.
I have heard similar arguments of "they don't need them" for things the Eldar now have and which are in no way controversial.
For example, way back in 2nd edition, I recall someone asking about Eldar tanks and APCs (this was before any Eldar vehicle models other than the jetbike existed, though the wedge Falcon and old Wave Serpent did exist in Epic) and one person said "Eldar wouldn't use anything as crude as tanks to take out enemy armored vehicles." Then <insert some rationale for why they could get by without> (I forget what it was but I am guessing it probably involved invoking swarms of jetbikes armed with heavy weapons).
Similarly I recall someone ask about Eldar battleships in BFG (before the Void Stalker battleship was released) and again the response was along the lines of "battleships are too big and clumsy for the Eldar so they don't use them and get by with lots of smaller more maneuverable ships."
In both those cases, as soon as the Falcon tank and Void Stalker battleship respectively were released, all such lines of reasoning ceased and were never heard from again.
Even in the 1st AI, I think that same line of argument was used when all the Tyranids had for models was the Harridan and the Meiotic spore. Since then there has been the Harpy and Crone released which are more ground attack and anti-air creatures respectively.
You're right in that I agree wings are not the best way to portray air superiority organisms. I would have preferred something like Wayne Barlowe's Skewer (just google it). However GW has done what it has done because they clearly don't agree with that claim of the Tyranids not needing air superiority organisms as that is the role the Crone is explicitly described as filling, and they have chosen wings, perhaps because that is more simply visually organic to a random viewer than having some sleek aerodynamic organic jet organism. Since the Tyranids have now been shown to have such organisms, the task is to make them work rather than try to pretend they don't exist.
In 3rd/4th edition - "Tau don't use superheavy walkers or tanks because they are too static for the Tau style of warfare which emphasizes mobility and fluidity, thats why all the Taus superheavy weaponry are mounted on aircraft".
Today - "This KV128 Stormsurge is the Tau equivalent of a Knight Paladin, and the KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour is somewhere between an Acastus Knight Poryphrion and a Warhound Titan."
In 3rd/4th edition - "Tau don't use superheavy walkers or tanks because they are too static for the Tau style of warfare which emphasizes mobility and fluidity, thats why all the Taus superheavy weaponry are mounted on aircraft".
To be fair, that was always not really true in practice, as their armies pretty quickly degenerated into a giant static gunline.
In 3rd/4th edition - "Tau don't use superheavy walkers or tanks because they are too static for the Tau style of warfare which emphasizes mobility and fluidity, thats why all the Taus superheavy weaponry are mounted on aircraft".
Today - "This KV128 Stormsurge is the Tau equivalent of a Knight Paladin, and the KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour is somewhere between an Acastus Knight Poryphrion and a Warhound Titan."
Fluff always comes after models. The original fluff was that way because they didn't had those models.
In 3rd/4th edition - "Tau don't use superheavy walkers or tanks because they are too static for the Tau style of warfare which emphasizes mobility and fluidity, thats why all the Taus superheavy weaponry are mounted on aircraft".
To be fair, that was always not really true in practice, as their armies pretty quickly degenerated into a giant static gunline.
Yes, but that argument is more subjective and would derail us into a separate discussion about how 3rd/4th ed Tau armies played correctly weren't static gunlines and how the Fish of Fury maneuver which was popular at the time was a masterstroke of fluid and mobile maneuver-based warfare strategy.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: So far I *think* GW have limited themselves to Forge World aircraft.
It'll be interesting to see if they branch out away from the original FW aircraft.
I doubt they will. The "specialist games" stuff is made by the FW team and so far very little, aside from Imperial Knights and Dakkajet variants, have been ported over from the main 40k product line.
Personally, I'd rather FW designs new stuff like they're doing for Necromunda.
Tyranids with flappy wings in AI could be … interesting.
Some thoughts: Movement 0-3, no need to choose maneuvers, a bunch of autonomous weapons, maybe the only faction (apart from chaos heldrake) with some form of flying close combat attack?
Speed 3 is pretty terrible even for bomber/ground attack unit, pretty much a sitting duck and easily outranged by any aircraft, in bombing mission they'll be too slow to reach the goal, and in "The Chase" that's a 100% unwinable.
A non-mechanical unit might not function exactly like a machine but basic physics still apply to maneuverability like speed and momentum
I checked the Harridan's rule and it is in fact can move at supersonic speed, so 6+
Chopstick wrote: Speed 3 is pretty terrible even for bomber/ground attack unit, pretty much a sitting duck and easily outranged by any aircraft, in bombing mission they'll be too slow to reach the goal, and in "The Chase" that's a 100% unwinable.
A non-mechanical unit might not function exactly like a machine but basic physics still apply to maneuverability like speed and momentum
Speed 3 would probably be appropriate for flappy type flyers, perhaps even a bit too fast. Speed 5 is Valkyrie speed, and those things supposedly go transonic speeds in the fluff, so Speed 3 would probably still be more than a few hundred km/h, probably faster than your average modern general aviation prop aircraft.
Maybe if we still had the rules where you'd gain trade speed for altitude there could be rules which would allow flapping flyers to tuck their wings in and dive at higher speeds, like Peregrine Falcons do.
I could see something akin to a flying squid for Tyranids. they move surprisingly fast in water and using the Hive Mind to manipulate gravity (Float like the zoanthropes), could easily create propulsion for short distances. Plus tentacles that hit close combat opponents would make sense.
Chopstick wrote: Speed 3 is pretty terrible even for bomber/ground attack unit, pretty much a sitting duck and easily outranged by any aircraft,
That is the point, sort of. Obviously there would need to be other rules to compensate for this (like a ‚shield‘ cloud?). Also they could have a whole lot of floating mines for area control, maybe using them to tighten a net around their opponents, or screen their larger flyers.
in bombing mission they'll be too slow to reach the goal, and in "The Chase" that's a 100% unwinable.
Well, yeah. Chase with slow flyers might be difficult.
A non-mechanical unit might not function exactly like a machine but basic physics still apply to maneuverability like speed and momentum
I checked the Harridan's rule and it is in fact can move at supersonic speed, so 6+
Slow flying flappy beasts should be maneuvrable in a way that does not bind them to the numbered maneuvers, imho. But another way to show this could be that they don‘t have to choose in advance, so they can react more flexibly.
I also liked the other idea about a high-speed dive.
There are 2 ways I can think of that would reflect the speed limitations on Tyranids.
1 dive bombing ala peregrine falcon the gain altitude and drop down gaining more speed
2 highly reactive and melee capable. They can react to the movement of other aircraft as they move close by and attack them. Or stop in mid air and let an enemy catch up so they can fight them.
Chopstick wrote: I checked the Harridan's rule and it is in fact can move at supersonic speed, so 6+
In the fluff it looks like Harridans maybe have an estimated top speed of 200km/h? Which is still faster than any bird can fly through flapping.
200kph is less than speed 1, the valkyrie has a maximum speed of 1100 km/h and cruising speed at 800, and it is the slowest aircraft.
Doesn't the Eavy Bommer have a speed of 4? I think that's the slowest. I don't know if the Eavy Bommer has a fluff speed, would have to dig up my old Aeronautica books to see.
But yeah, I dunno what would be an appropriate speed for a Tyranid flyer. My gut feeling is simply they shouldn't fly fast, lol. Moving at speeds of 600+km/h takes huge amounts of power sustained for long periods, especially if the flyer isn't aerodynamically clean. Spitfires needed in the realm of 2000hp to reach speeds of 700km/h. Is that a power a Tyranid flyer could output while still being light enough to be manoeuvrable and as aerodynamically clean as a Spitfire? Maybe.
Eh, dunno... after all there's animals on Earth's waters that actually use biological jet propulsion, so... I don't think it would be out of the realm of possibility for them to actually have jet fighter equivalents.
Albertorius wrote: Eh, dunno... after all there's animals on Earth's waters that actually use biological jet propulsion, so... I don't think it would be out of the realm of possibility for them to actually have jet fighter equivalents.
I think it's more the power requirements thing. My Spitfire example was a plane that is pushing beyond the efficiency curve of a piston engine driving a prop, but even a jet, say the Me262, needed 2200hp output to go 900km/h.
I'm not saying you can't invent fluff to make it happen, but in my mind I prefer the idea of Tyranids, being biological, not even trying to compete on a 1:1 basis with the machines of other races. Rather they come up with novel ways to exploit the advantages of being biological while minimising the effects of the downsides. Like, a Tyranid's gun doesn't need to much the muzzle energy of a high calibre rifle round because the Tyranid's ammo is literally alive, and maybe acidic, or maybe alive and acidic. The same way, Tyranids don't need supersonic jet bioforms, it's far more efficient for the hive mind to turn the biomass into a swarm of spores and gargoyles that render enemy planes useless rather than coming up with biological ways of trying to produce sustained levels of thousands of horsepower like is simple for a combustion style engine.
It just takes a huge amount of power to move at those speeds. The Imperial aircraft may have the aerodynamics of bricks but the assumption there is future humans have developed sufficiently powerful engines compared to what is available now to make the brickness irrelevant.
Uh, GW already fudged Tyranids into having a biological version of literally every relevant 40k technology up to and including air superiority fighters. You can like it or not but there's no question whether they could, they have.
Agreed with skink - the idea that the hive mind just figured out bio-solutions to produce 1:1 biological versions of tech is lame. The idea of a tyranid bio-form that has a weird bio-turbojet engine built into it is just dumb, etc. etc. etc.
Innovating to create novel bio-based solutions to challenges posed by technology on the other hand is cool.
chaos0xomega wrote: Agreed with skink - the idea that the hive mind just figured out bio-solutions to produce 1:1 biological versions of tech is lame. The idea of a tyranid bio-form that has a weird bio-turbojet engine built into it is just dumb, etc. etc. etc.
Innovating to create novel bio-based solutions to challenges posed by technology on the other hand is cool.
Agree. Every faction should feel unique, and if Tyranids arrive in AI, and embrace their biological quirks, could be the most unique of them all.
But first I will have to paint some Eldar and lose against Marines.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: It just takes a huge amount of power to move at those speeds. The Imperial aircraft may have the aerodynamics of bricks but the assumption there is future humans have developed sufficiently powerful engines compared to what is available now to make the brickness irrelevant.
Of course, then you get again to the "power requirements" issue, which is basically shared by everyone.
TheGoodGerman wrote: But first I will have to paint some Eldar and lose against Marines.
I hope not, but I fear so
Did I see that right? All Space Marines flyers have quad lascannons? That means firepower 0-4-2, dmg 2+, extra damage 6+, correct?
Yep, unless they change the rules for lascannons that's likely what we'll see.
I don't know how they're going to balance them, it sounds like they'll have heaps of firepower, heaps of durability, and also heaps of agility. The only way they could be balanced is if they're so expensive that the squadron as a whole isn't outputting huge amounts of damage. But my hopes aren't high because the rules writers consistently undervalue firepower and durability.
that didn't look very scary, Eldar have 4 different gun options making them more flexible than marine, assuming the non-brightlance option aren't overpriced like T'au.
chaos0xomega wrote: Agreed with skink - the idea that the hive mind just figured out bio-solutions to produce 1:1 biological versions of tech is lame. The idea of a tyranid bio-form that has a weird bio-turbojet engine built into it is just dumb, etc. etc. etc.
Innovating to create novel bio-based solutions to challenges posed by technology on the other hand is cool.
Tyranids can already create bioplasma, so using it for power-assisted flight isn't so far-fetched.
This is already a race that has biomechanical space flight - which requires a helluva lot power even to achieve escape velocity. Not being able to produce some form of powered flight makes little sense. Sure, make them distinctive, but an outright "no" is just bad form.
Personally, I'd go with some sort of armored bioplasma vehicle, like the UFO fighters from Independence Day.
Stormonu wrote: Personally, I'd go with some sort of armored bioplasma vehicle, like the UFO fighters from Independence Day.
I think that would be exactly an example of what I don't want to see for Tyranids.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chopstick wrote: that didn't look very scary, Eldar have 4 different gun options making them more flexible than marine, assuming the non-brightlance option aren't overpriced like T'au.
I'm thinking back to the first AI and I seem to recall the Eldar firepower was pretty weedy?
The Marines needing to keep enemies beyond short range is a bit of a weakness, but I don't think it's much of a weakness because if you spread your squadron out most planes will be able to shoot most turns.
Not a problem in empty field dogfight, but in chase or low level terrain hell close and mid range rule. That's why having close and mid range T'au craft so expensive kinda suck.
Bright Lance : the best lascannon type weapon in the game, can shoot at all range.
Nightwing Missile launcher : a main guns with 2 ammo and ground attack? oof, and they said Eldar master the technology for compact missile allowing them to carry more than other race.
For some reason the phoenix bright lance is aerial only while the night wing bright lance isn't, most weapon also have that rule, making ground attack mission on attacker side a straight up least favorite for Eldar, Ground asset will also be strong vs Eldar.
Bright Lance : the best lascannon type weapon in the game, can shoot at all range.
Nightwing Missile launcher : a main guns with 2 ammo and ground attack? oof, and they said Eldar master the technology for compact missile allowing them to carry more than other race.
For some reason the phoenix bright lance is aerial only while the night wing bright lance isn't, most weapon also have that rule, making ground attack mission a straight up nope for Eldar, Ground asset will also be strong vs Eldar.
Strange considering I think the background for the Phoenix from Forge World was that it used its laser weapons for tank hunting.
I do note the plasma missile array seems straight out better than the SM hunter killer missiles aside for ammo, which is as noted strange considering the Eldar supposedly were the ones that had missile pods whereas the Imperium was still firing missiles directly off hardpoints.
The bright lance being aerial might be a typo in the WarCom list?
With the extra weapons probably put on those little cards again, they would otherwise have to specify ‚Nightwing bright lance‘ and ‚Phoenix bright lance‘ on those cards. Or they go the route of the Tau and put options on the flyer cards.
Chopstick wrote: Bright Lance : the best lascannon type weapon in the game, can shoot at all range.
Individually, yeah, but the Marine aircraft all have quad-linked lascannons and I'd rather have 0-4-2 on the lascannons than 1-2-2 twin lances. Having 4 shots instead of 2 takes the average damage output from 0.67 to 1.3, that's pretty significant in a game like this.
The games I've played have been pretty biased to doing as much damage as early as possible, so while it's nice to have some short ranged shots for when you get stuck at those ranges I reckon it's almost always better to have the extra 2 shots at medium range.
I must have missed that? Where did those rules get released? (EDIT: Sorry, I see it now, I only skimmed the article on a break at work and must have missed that bit).
In the old edition they were 6-3-0 5+, which isn't all that spectacular. All the Ork stuff is 8-4-0 5+ and the Orks mostly suck on the table because of poor damage output relative to points and structure.
I guess it'll largely come down to points. The Eldar stuff is still only 2HP, so if they're remotely expensive they'll get dominated by both cheaper aircraft (from getting outnumbered) and by high HP aircraft (Thunderbolts, Tiger Sharks, I assume all of the Space Marines) as they'll struggle to compete on raw damage output vs durability.
In the old rules Vampires had 4HP and were still reasonably manoeuvrable, I'm going to guess that in the new edition of AI the Vampires are going to be the best overall option for Eldar (unless they don't get released or get overpriced).
I’m all for Tyranids being able to magic their way past biological limitations. I mean, going back to space hulk and the Genestealers claws cutting through super advanced armor…that’s just as ridiculous as Tyranids flying supersonic. The only explanation has always been the hive mind channeling warp energy into them, which is how almost anything Tyranid actually works up to and including their massive hive ships. If the hive mind is juicing harridan wings like it juices Genestealers claws, then it doesn’t matter that no biological creature can fly that fast.
That said, I’d prefer to see Tyranid “fighters” as specially evolved zoanthropes who use the warp for flight, propulsion and various offensive effects.
lost_lilliputian wrote: Hmm ok. Just thought as it was the release month for the new box set there might of been something related about it.
I know in the past there have been Aero ace cards like the Ghost Avenger and also Blood Bowl specialist extras like referee rules etc. Oh well.
Not necessarily in the same month as the releases.
Plus, as much as people want to keep pretending it ain't a thing...Covid still has made a mess of supply chains. AI might have been moved up because something else got moved back.
Received an email from Forgeworld this morning saying that Astra Militarum ground assets were back in stock. Clicked the link to order but it still says "out of stock".
gruebot wrote: Received an email from Forgeworld this morning saying that Astra Militarum ground assets were back in stock. Clicked the link to order but it still says "out of stock".
Definitely doesn't look like it now with the forth coming planes getting cards.
Also on the bottom of the separate plane kits: 'The rules for using these miniatures in games of Aeronautica Imperialis can be found in the Wrath of Angels boxed game.'
Feel like the Asuryani cards seem to imply no future flyers for them.
So what are the odds ground assets for both these factions will be FW...
Hmm maybe they'll give the Phoenix a transport of 2 like the Tau Tigershark. Which is kind of a token transport option for missions but better than 1! Actually the Tau still don't have a dedicated transport.
Least we know the Eldar are getting air to ground attack weapon options.
If this box does sell well I foresee a lot of Astartes vs Imperial Navy
Hmm Thunderhawk Air Force of One missions anyone? I kind of like the idea of a single TH Heresy era vs a few light aircraft
I've played a lot of X-Wing and Wings of War/Glory (WoW/G got me started) and really like those type of systems - how does this game stack up against them? I'm curious because I'd like to grab the Tau and maybe Eldar forces to play.
Stormonu wrote: I've played a lot of X-Wing and Wings of War/Glory (WoW/G got me started) and really like those type of systems - how does this game stack up against them? I'm curious because I'd like to grab the Tau and maybe Eldar forces to play.
It's a fairly simple game, the Taros campaign book have Rolling Area of Engagement and Low level flying which are nice addition to the game and should add some more interesting element into it. If AI has to go up against XWing, it didn't have the level of customization and distinction between the faction. There're stuff like 1 or 2 extra pilots, unique planes and crew in A/I but it adds very little to the game you can pretty much ignore it altogether. Maneuvers are also universal instead of being unique to the craft like X-Wing. Factions in A/I also feel more like different stat block with lack of unique mechanic that'd make them standout, maybe you can say that the new Eldar faction probably has the most "personality" into them.
Overall I'd advice you get the model, which is the best I've ever seen in these kind of "aircraft" game, and track down the original 2 rulebooks, and play a hybrid version of both original and new A/I, or just play the original. It'd still be fairly simple and not as customizable as X-Wing, but the original game have better core mechanic that'd require more thought and strategic planning:
-It's much harder to turn and control the planes in original A/I, game is played on normal board using cm measurement to move instead of hex board like new A/I.
-There are 9 attitude level instead of 5, it meant more difficulty to get target to shot at. Some plane cannot reach the highest attitude, making it difficult or impossible for it to shot at plane that can.
- Maneuver in original A/I are either dive, climb or none with strict attitude and speed changing element attached to them, in new A/I you can have all maneuver be dive or climb and adjust speed/attitude accordingly.
-Most guns in new A/I have unlimited ammo and many can shoot at both ground/aerial target, most gun in original A/I have very limited ammo and many of them have ground attack only rule, there're also extra rule to "help" you burn through ammo quicker in original A/I if you choose to.
-Upgrades in original A/I are more unique and lore accurate to the factions.
-The Lightning fighter have autocannon in original A/I, it didn't in the new one, due to it using the new, crappier pattern
Well obviously the most drastic change from old to new version is the guns that is "ground attack" in the original can shoot at air target, allow you to have more choice in your dogfighting squad (while also make no sense if you're into more lore accurate sim of the 40k setting).
Decided to follow my heart and ordered the box set. Even if the game doesn't receive much more support I'm fine with that I love these flyers.
A couple of stores in Aus sold out of all the individual kits within a fraction of a second of going up for sale. I think they actually sold thru their allocation before even going live. I watched a couple sites that showed quantities left dwindle every time I refreshed.
So best of luck folks wherever you are for ordering, hope you get what you want. May your flyers stay true and hold fast.
Stormonu wrote: I've played a lot of X-Wing and Wings of War/Glory (WoW/G got me started) and really like those type of systems - how does this game stack up against them? I'm curious because I'd like to grab the Tau and maybe Eldar forces to play.
Like Snakes and Ladders stacks up to Go.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AllSeeingSkink wrote: So the Phoenix and Storm Eagles are pretty poor value, only 1 sprue and 3 or 2 models but they charge the same as the two sprue kits.
I'm a bit surprised how quick it's sold out at independents and the official NZ store (still on the Oz official store though).
I wonder if it's sold well, or they simply didn't make many of them.
If it exceeded expectations hopefully it prompts them to keep making stuff for it.
I imagine plastic Eldar flyers are a Big Deal for Epic players.
I can get the models selling out as they can be used for Epic, but cards selling out seems to imply someone is playing this version of AI, which is bizarre.
lord_blackfang wrote: I can get the models selling out as they can be used for Epic, but cards selling out seems to imply someone is playing this version of AI, which is bizarre.
Or simply for collection.
Joke aside, there are people playing the game.
I'm a bit sad there is no campaign book, this time. It was always nice to read the background.
I still get the feeling we'll get the campaign book in a few weeks when the Thunderhawk comes out. The main thing that makes we think we might not is that the blurb for the Eldar cards only mentions the Nightwing and Phoenix, so maybe that'll be all we get for Eldar. But Space Marines still look to be getting the Thunderhawk and a Fire Raptor, and I think those will likely come in the campaign book.
EDIT: It looks like the rules for using different models comes in the boxes for this release, so maybe that's further evidence that we aren't getting a campaign book.
In the US rumor is stores were allocated 1 copy of each product (I shouldn't say this is a rumor, as I was straight up told this by 3 different store managers in the past few days). If thats also true in other regions, then the sell-outs are because there isn't much stock rather than rabid demand for the game.
As for the cards - I preordered them. There are in fact people who play the game, not many of us it seems, but we exist damnit.
chaos0xomega wrote: In the US rumor is stores were allocated 1 copy of each product (I shouldn't say this is a rumor, as I was straight up told this by 3 different store managers in the past few days). If thats also true in other regions, then the sell-outs are because there isn't much stock rather than rabid demand for the game.
As for the cards - I preordered them. There are in fact people who play the game, not many of us it seems, but we exist damnit.
Looking at online stores here, one I checked had 12 copies in stock when I checked this evening (about 6 hours after release).
I wasn't really paying attention at the start of the day to know how many they had in stock when they first dropped.
I ordered 2 starter boxes from one online store, so hopefully they can fulfil that order otherwise I'll be a bit annoyed.
I can imagine that Rolling area of engagement and Low level flying is the peak of creativity of this game since it's so simple. If i have to be optimistic about the whole no book thing I'd say a rule revamp is on the way next year. But I'd still try to hoard stuffs now regardless.
Chopstick wrote: I can imagine that Rolling area of engagement and Low level flying is the peak of creativity of this game since it's so simple. If i have to be optimistic about the whole no book thing I'd say a rule revamp is on the way next year. But I'd still try to hoard stuffs now regardless.
I like the rolling area of engagement, but the low level flying to me needs to be fleshed out more, it's currently horribly unbalanced and the amount of terrain shown in the images is terrible if you're playing something like Orks.
It feels a bit like they invented the handling characteristic before deciding what they were going to use it for.
As for a revamp, I'd love to see one, but I'm not hopeful. Given they now have 5 factions they could conceivably write an all encompassing rulebook rather than the piecemeal campaign books we have now, it'd be nice if they did that, but I doubt they will.
It's a fairly simple game, the Taros campaign book have Rolling Area of Engagement and Low level flying which are nice addition to the game and should add some more interesting element into it. If AI has to go up against XWing, it didn't have the level of customization and distinction between the faction. There're stuff like 1 or 2 extra pilots, unique planes and crew in A/I but it adds very little to the game you can pretty much ignore it altogether. Maneuvers are also universal instead of being unique to the craft like X-Wing. Factions in A/I also feel more like different stat block with lack of unique mechanic that'd make them standout, maybe you can say that the new Eldar faction probably has the most "personality" into them.
Overall I'd advice you get the model, which is the best I've ever seen in these kind of "aircraft" game, and track down the original 2 rulebooks, and play a hybrid version of both original and new A/I, or just play the original. It'd still be fairly simple and not as customizable as X-Wing, but the original game have better core mechanic that'd require more thought and strategic planning:
This post is so wrong, so obviously made by someone who has not played either version, that I had to make an account just to point out how wong it is.
-It's much harder to turn and control the planes in original A/I, game is played on normal board using cm measurement to move instead of hex board like new A/I.
It uses inches, and every single aircraft desinged for air-to-air has either "high" or "very high" maneuverability, which include 180 flips and 90 degree turns. You could also play the maneuever card at any point during your move, giving you a high amount of control as to the final position of the aircraft at pretty much any speed.
-There are 9 attitude level instead of 5, it meant more difficulty to get target to shot at. Some plane cannot reach the highest attitude, making it difficult or impossible for it to shot at plane that can.
This is true in the new version of the AI too, some aircraft cannot reach altitude 5. If you've ever actually played a game of old AI, you'd realize the 9 levels of altitude don't really come into play as much as you'd think they do, especially not during dogfights, which basically end up using 3-4 levels of altitude as aircraft without a clean shot try to avoid fire by ducking up or down one level.
- Maneuver in original A/I are either dive, climb or none with strict attitude and speed changing element attached to them, in new A/I you can have all maneuver be dive or climb and adjust speed/attitude accordingly.
Yes, strict altitude and speed changing elements like "you may climb to gain one altitude and lose one speed, or you may dive to lose one altitude and gain one speed, choose after performing the maneuever". Which is the same as the new system. Barring a few special maneuevers in the old system designed specifically to interact with altitude, like Power Dive or splitting the 180 into two different maneuevers which mandate a climb/dive, most of the maneuever cards in the old system were just as flexible in allowing altiude adjustments. Moreseo in some cases- the new system only lets you trade 2 speed for 2 altitude if you're going speed 6 or above.
-Most guns in new A/I have unlimited ammo and many can shoot at both ground/aerial target, most gun in original A/I have very limited ammo and many of them have ground attack only rule, there're also extra rule to "help" you burn through ammo quicker in original A/I if you choose to.
A lot of people who have skimmed the old rules but never played any games with it bring this up a lot as if the old system had you carefully deciding if you should spend ammo shooting or not, but when you actually end up playing the game, you take whatever shots you get handed 99% of the time, because otherwise you die. The designer himself even writes this in the Tactica Aeronautica expansion book. It's certainly a neat thematic touch, but it's hardly adding a deep complex tactical choice to the shooting phase like people who have heard the old system had limited ammo but not actually played with it seem to claim.
-Upgrades in original A/I are more unique and lore accurate to the factions.
This is the most standout baldfaced lie of the bunch. Basically every single upgrade carries over in it's current form! The Imperials can buy an armoured cockpit which grants a single 6+ save against the last point of damage in the old version. The orks get the same, but it also costs a point of speed. Both carry over. The Imperials can take infrared targeting which negates some penalties of night fighting, and the Tau have their version of that too. They both carry over. The Orks can take an upgrade which increases min and max speed by one. That carries over (though it no longer mandates the miniature to be painted red, sadly).
In the cases there aren't 1-1 parallels from the old version (Like the Tau target lock system), there are new upgrades that are just as "unique" to the faction, such as an engine upgrade for the Barracuda, or rear gunner drones for any Tau aircraft.
-The Lightning fighter have autocannon in original A/I, it didn't in the new one, due to it using the new, crappier pattern
This is just stating something that is true without expounding on why it's bad. The new Lightning has more wing hardpoints for missiles, does that somehow make the new AI a better game? It helps that the new one isn't piss ugly and doesn't even look like it fits into the universe like the old model, so it has that going for it, at least.
Well obviously the most drastic change from old to new version is the guns that is "ground attack" in the original can shoot at air target, allow you to have more choice in your dogfighting squad (while also make no sense if you're into more lore accurate sim of the 40k setting).
It would be more accurate to say "Some guns gained or lost the Ground/Aerial attack special rule". The most notable example being the Marauder Destroyer's nose guns, but the rear gun gained Aerial Attack, which it didn't have before. Your complaint about this seems to not be balance (which is a much more fair concern to have) but lore accuracy, which is absurd. The Thunderhawk's Turbolaser was Ground Attack only in the old version, yet you might notice it's mounted on top of the aircraft, with no ability to depress the gun without blowing the cockpit off. The new version seems to have it firing at all targets, so long as they're at or above it's altitude, which is much more lore accurate (unless the lore you've been reading has a lot of descriptions of Thunderhawks plowing into the ground at mach 2 on a ground attack mission). Similarly, the Ground Attack rule makes sense for weapons that are guided, like missiles and bombs, because they have literally no way of hitting air targets. Why should "some guns in the nose" be Ground Attack only for the Marauder Destroyer but not the Thunderbolt? Remember, you can't use balance reasons here (not least because you can just price the aircraft higher if you need to), only Lore ones. Is it because the Marauder is slow and lumbering and will find it very tricky to bring it's guns to bear? That's reflected in it's slow speed and low maneuverability.
What an abysmal post, I rate it 0 stars out of 100, which if my maths is correct, is the lowest possible rating for a post. You should rewrite it and try again.
CptJake wrote: I don't see it on the US store yet. Am I missing something?
Things get put on the Aussie webstorer earlier than anywhere else, so people just switch their region to Australia if they want to look at newest stuff a few hours earlier.
CptJake wrote: I don't see it on the US store yet. Am I missing something?
Things get put on the Aussie webstorer earlier than anywhere else, so people just switch their region to Australia if they want to look at newest stuff a few hours earlier.
NZ is first, Australia is about 3 hours later. It was up on the Oz store about 16 hours ago, so it must be pretty close to going live on the US store I guess.
Bambridge wrote: Why should "some guns in the nose" be Ground Attack only for the Marauder Destroyer but not the Thunderbolt? Remember, you can't use balance reasons here (not least because you can just price the aircraft higher if you need to), only Lore ones. Is it because the Marauder is slow and lumbering and will find it very tricky to bring it's guns to bear? That's reflected in it's slow speed and low maneuverability.
It might be reflected in the low speed and low manoeuvrability, however that's a poor representation. Both because low manoeuvrability in AI is barely a crutch at all, and also because getting an enemy plane within your front 120° arc is only part of the difficulty of getting shots on target. In anything other than a nose to nose game of chicken, the Marauder would struggle to get guns on target against an agile fighter even if the fighter fell within its 120° front arc.
The fixed guns on the Marauder are for precision strafing attacks, not air-to-air dogfighting, hence why it used to be a ground attack weapon.
This is the most standout baldfaced lie of the bunch. Basically every single upgrade carries over in it's current form! The Imperials can buy an armoured cockpit which grants a single 6+ save against the last point of damage in the old version. The orks get the same, but it also costs a point of speed. Both carry over. The Imperials can take infrared targeting which negates some penalties of night fighting, and the Tau have their version of that too. They both carry over. The Orks can take an upgrade which increases min and max speed by one. That carries over (though it no longer mandates the miniature to be painted red, sadly). In the cases there aren't 1-1 parallels from the old version (Like the Tau target lock system), there are new upgrades that are just as "unique" to the faction, such as an engine upgrade for the Barracuda, or rear gunner drones for any Tau aircraft.
I was told not to argue in here, so I just bring up this point here where you contradicting yourself. Every single upgrade does not carry over, Imperial lost their victory paint scheme, Ork no longer have rokkit boosta (which isn't very great, but would be nice if it got its own evolution)
Tau had suffered the most, basically it's "copy Imperial Navy but not too obvious". But writer still made a blunder by having Tau still using infra red (probably stolen tech from Imperium) instead of their own equivalent, now this isn't a big deal but it made me question if whoever wrote this actually care or know the (basic) fluff.
Armored cockpit? Another stolen Imperium tech.
Tail gun drone? invisible upgrade that didn't even exist on the model or any history of it, why is this even here? Tau above all other factions should have the easiest time to make up rule for upgrade with their vehicle battle system and support system, which in the original, rule writer made an effort to present them in the game.
TL;DR : stolen tech, copy paste rule are boring, with wrong name being the cherry on top, the original have copy paste rule between faction too, but it is lore-accurate, and being the original with little competition for comparison or expectation for a better, improve version to be made like the successor, there're also a clear effort of trying to make unique upgrade related to the faction. Oh and the "Rocket booster" rule in the new one is a mess.
Also one impressive thing about the original is how rule writer really understand the aircraft, Tau "seeker missile" seem to have "ground attack" on some aircrafts(barracuda, Tiger Shark, Orca) , and none on the other (AX-1-0, Remora, Manta), this is intentional because the latter carry networked markerlight which allow them to target air unit while the rest had to rely on the ground force (which has no rule, but we can assume there're always pathfinder or stealthsuit hiding somewhere) to mark the target.
And weldome to the forum! it's an honor to be your first post.
zedmeister wrote: Looks like the Cards have already sold out on GWuk!
GW try to meet demand challenge (impossible)
To be fair Aeronautica stuff has taken ages to shift before. You could and probably still can find Navy/Ork Ace cards without much issue. Even with Marines, I do wonder if they just printed far less cards this time around.
Really amazed that GW are still going ahead with an absolute awful release method for this game system.
The core boxes don't contain reference cards, and only has a cheap paper mat. All their other games that are boardgame hybrids contain both reference cards, and a solid mat in the core box set.
That and the slow drip feed of the factions makes their rules scattered over several books.
Shame as AI is a great little game, just sadly in the hands of GW who have allowed greed to cloud their judgment.
I pre-ordered the box and the Eldar dice. What are the cards used for? Simply to keep track of stuff that is contained in the book you get with the box?
Tyranid Horde wrote: I pre-ordered the box and the Eldar dice. What are the cards used for? Simply to keep track of stuff that is contained in the book you get with the box?
You get cards with stats for the planes, so you can have them there as a quick reference. You also get cards with missiles and upgrades and stuff, so if you have a plane with missiles you can keep track of which ones have been fired, or which planes have certain upgrades.
They're a nice idea, but way too expensive for my liking. Instead I've just made a few summary sheets with aircraft stats which I can print out, then use some counters to represent missiles.
It looks like the new aircraft also have their rules in the box on the back of the instruction manual, making cards less useful as a reference.
-none of the SM crafts have Rocket Booster rule despite being known as capable voids combat fighters Easy solution.
- seem like rules for unique crafts, T-hawk, fire raptor etc will be exclusive to the card pack, kinda annoying but not a huge problem.
The Good : -Xiphon, night wing, phoenix are below 25 points, so 50 pts game can still be played with good amount of variety for Eldar.
- Extra main guns for Eldar are fixed at 3 points, so no insane price hike like +8 for weapon replacement like T'au.
-Thunderhawk can hover now, which is a lore accurate improvement over the original. (not in video, but in card preview)
-Phoenix has bombs now, so Ground attack mission no longer a problem, the default missile on the phoenix is also quite strong with UL ammo, still no transport for Eldar.
Not a critique but Xiphon still have Ork-tier handling despite being piloted by humanity finest warrior, recover from spin, falling behind or crashing into terrain will be devastating.
- seem like rules for unique crafts, T-hawk, fire raptor etc will be exclusive to the card pack, kinda annoying but not a huge problem.
The rules for this release of aircraft seem to be attached to the back of the instruction manual, so assuming they continue with that, the Thunderhawk and Fire Raptor rules will be in their boxes.
Is there anything confirming that a campaign book isn't on the way? It seems to me like there will be one coming and they're either stretching out the release or maybe they found that too many people previously bought the boxed set or the campaign book and they're trying to milk more people to buy both.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: The rules for this release of aircraft seem to be attached to the back of the instruction manual, so assuming they continue with that, the Thunderhawk and Fire Raptor rules will be in their boxes.
Is there anything confirming that a campaign book isn't on the way? It seems to me like there will be one coming and they're either stretching out the release or maybe they found that too many people previously bought the boxed set or the campaign book and they're trying to milk more people to buy both.
I do hope a book is coming. They may be doing wave releases and will have the campaign book later with the Thunderhawk. Could be they're holding it back as it'll spoiler a release? I can't believe they just have two Eldar Aircraft in their card deck. No Vampire Hunter, Vampire Raider, Crimson Hunter or even Lynx? Though, saying that, they did say Fire Raptor is included in the Marine deck, so who knows
No confirmation one way or another - I'm very much hoping for the book and future releases (including future factions and an expansion into the non-Forgeworld flyers), but I'm not holding my breath.
The text for the Eldar card pack says that there are 21 aircraft cards in it, including the two traditional named flyers.
21 Asuryani Aircraft cards make ideal references for your Nightwing and Phoenix Bomber aircraft. Also includes the ‘Shadow Reaver’ and ‘Crimson Warrior’ named aircraft
I wouldn’t think that they have 19 cards for just the nightwing and phoenix. But there will be at least 6 nightwing and 3 phoenix cards, which leaves a maximum of 10 cards for any new models. I wouldn’t have high hopes for any 6-strong small aircraft boxes, but vampires would indeed be nice.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Thinking about it, if they go with the absolute minimum numbers of cards (box sizes), we could see:
6 Nightwing,
3 Phoenix,
6 Crimson Hunter, and
2 each of both Vampire variants
Chopstick wrote: 12 Nightwing and 7 Phoenix cards sound about right, that's about 2 boxes of each
I think previously the cards have come with enough for the starter set + 1 box of each. So that’d be 9 Nightwings and 6 Phoenixes.
So probably enough space left for a couple of Vampires.
That’s the most likely, imo. Don‘t have the ork set at hand, but it’s listed:
19 Ork Aircraft cards that are ideal references for use in-game for your Dakka Jets, Fighta Bommers, Eavy Bommers and Grot Bommers. Also includes the 'Vulture' and 'Big Burna' reference cards.
So, two fewer cards but the fighta bommer comes with four per pack (and only half a pack in the starter). It included two each of the bigger bommer variants which I think we‘ll see for eldar as well.
The fixed guns on the Marauder are for precision strafing attacks, not air-to-air dogfighting, hence why it used to be a ground attack weapon.
Clearly not heard of the Warthog stomp! Which while it sounds impressive was just an A-10 hoping an enemy plane would cross in front of its gun...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
stonehorse wrote: Agree, the 40k Eldar fliers look like pants. These are very true to the Eldar fliers released back in Epic 40,000 so they get a massive approval.
Tempted to order both this set and the first one shame the one with Tau is no longer available.
Virtually al the 40k fliers look awful I can only assume it is manufacturing constraints that limit what can be done. (Well I love the Ork one, but that's basically a larger cuter Epic one.) Still some good conversions out there, I like the one that uses Drop Pod parts to make a 'stealth' flyer. Shame GW hates conversions now for fear 3rd parties will sell them.
The fixed guns on the Marauder are for precision strafing attacks, not air-to-air dogfighting, hence why it used to be a ground attack weapon.
Clearly not heard of the Warthog stomp! Which while it sounds impressive was just an A-10 hoping an enemy plane would cross in front of its gun...
I don't think the A10 has ever shot down an enemy fighter? It's only shot down a chopper or two. And as impressive as the A10's gun might be, in an air-to-air fight the Vulcan mounted on fighter jets has a higher rate of fire.
But the A10 is actually a surprisingly agile aircraft. It can't pull the G's of a dedicated fighter jet, but at low speeds it has a good turn rate and agility not dissimilar to WW2 fighters.
The idea of the fixed guns on the Marauder bomber are more reminisce of a B25 or B26, which had cheek mounted guns for strafing attacks (which from my understanding were mostly used to take out AA installations and harass shipping). You certainly wouldn't want to go nose to nose with a B25, but it was sluggish enough in the air that it had no hope of shooting down an enemy fighter even if it could get them in a frontal 120° arc. I don't know if the B25 or B26 ever got air-to-air kills with their fixed guns, there was so many combat situations back then it wouldn't surprise me if it did happen time to time, but I don't think they set out to achieve that.
I think AI would benefit from to-hit modifiers based on the relative manoeuvrability of aircraft, that would really make sense given the real challenge of getting guns on target even after you might have already gotten behind an enemy plane. Failing that, yeah, I think the Marauder Destroyer guns should probably go back to being "ground attack" to stop it acting as a durable heavy fighter instead of a bomber/CAS aircraft.
The main problem with the Warthog is its biggest bonus...GAU-8 30MM.
Yes, it has impressive agility at low speeds and is incredibly resilient, but that cannon can stop the forward momentum in mid air. Which, if you don't understand lift:drag means that the gun can slow the plane down to below its stall speed. Which is why when they fire the main cannon it is done so with a 30-45deg declination.
Yeah, no, that’s a myth; the engines are providing thousands of pounds of thrust, plus the momentum of the aircraft travelling at several hundred miles an hour, the recoil is nowhere near that much, even from that monster cannon.
The origin of the myth is a distortion/misunderstanding of a real issue; firing the cannon produces a large cloud of smoke, which can stall the engines if it gets sucked in. It effectively deprives the engines of oxygen and or mucks up the intake temperatures (gas turbines do not like hot gas).
The dive is just for accurate aiming and not hitting the ground.
Still, ‘hog go BRRRT! Which reminds me, I don’t think I picked up any Avengers for AI yet.
It says on the store desciption : 4 cards for Pulsar platform and Night Spinner platform.
Also the card packs are back for preorder it seems.
Needless to say people should keep their expectation grounded to reality and don't expect a surprised Fire storm or anything other than what said in the store description.
stonehorse wrote: Those Eldar ground units are gorgeous, shame that they'll no doubt sell out fast and be listed on ebay at extortionate prices.
Just noticed that Wrath of Angels rule book has 38 pages, where as the Wings of Vengeance rulebook had 36 pages.
Wonder what they have added?
What was the Skies of Fire one? There were rules added there for low altitude flight and the rolling area of engagement, but I don't remember if that was included in the Skies of Fire book or only the campaign book.
The ground assets look nice, but damned those FW prices are putting me off a bit.
Not sure as I missed out on buying the Skies of Fire box.
I suspect it might be those things you mentioned.
Didn't realise that those are from Forgeworld, yeah those are quite the penny.
Thinking forward to future releases, only Chaos are left from the games first edition, Hell blade and Hell talon if I recall correctly. Wonder what faction will be in the next box set with them?
Once they have released all the factions it would be great if they put everything into one book. I think theyndid that with Necromunder, released small books for the houses as they released the models, then did a full book.
I suspect that GW are reluctant to release rules for models they haven't released yet. So this is why we are getting a Drip feed release schedule. Annoying , but at least AI isn't a game system that is flooded with releases.
stonehorse wrote: I suspect that GW are reluctant to release rules for models they haven't released yet. So this is why we are getting a Drip feed release schedule. Annoying , but at least AI isn't a game system that is flooded with releases.
There does seem to be, well, corporate paranoia (for want of a better word) from GW lately. At least in my view. It's surprising that the Eldar have only got 2 aircraft that we know about. Either they're slowing down AI releases, switching more over to resin with a "surprise!" factor or really tightening things up with releases.
stonehorse wrote: I suspect that GW are reluctant to release rules for models they haven't released yet. So this is why we are getting a Drip feed release schedule. Annoying , but at least AI isn't a game system that is flooded with releases.
There does seem to be, well, corporate paranoia (for want of a better word) from GW lately. At least in my view. It's surprising that the Eldar have only got 2 aircraft that we know about. Either they're slowing down AI releases, switching more over to resin with a "surprise!" factor or really tightening things up with releases.
The problem is likely linked to the increased ability for 3rd parties to not only produce models but also access the market through the growing reliance on internet trade. Especially now with 3D printers that market can produce multiple pre-supported stls in a month and within 2 have them in production through merchants.
In general GW is a BIG target for 3rd parties to make models for, most of the other model markets don't really contend with it to the same degree. Even in 3D printing the vast majority are either DnD or Warhammer style models with a big bias for 40K (some solid fantasy but slightly less emphasis). Heck there are some 3rd party model makers and STL designers who make "alternatives" for GW games and its their sole or majority income.
GW is well aware of this and ever since Chapterhouse have stopped putting stuff into books unless its coming out before/on or soon after the launch (ignoring the last 2 years where Corona broke a lot of that). Of course the flip side is that we no longer have models in books that never come for the tabletop. There's at least 2 whole editions of Tyranid Codex that came out with "new models" and leader models that never got made. That's what 6+ years for two editions without those models appearing. The only way was to convert or buy 3rd parties.
If anything GW's attitude then helped grow the increasing reliance/use of the 3rd party market that they now contend with today.
So there are both good and bad parts for GW's practice. One downside is that they are getting bloat heavy with addons and upgrade books. I think that at some point they are going to "break the camels back" with that approach and it will be interesting to see what they do after. It might be their long term plan is to flip over to having apps take over some of the burden; however they don't seem to have invested the right way into the digital assets to make that work. Plus GW knows that good expansion and codex books on the shelf are things their staff can put directly into customers hands as sales
chaos0xomega wrote: I have the cards in hand, I can confirm they do not contain any unannounced aircraft
What about the ground assets?
Does it look like there are unique ones coming from FW or was GW cryptically referring to our ability to buy more Ork/Guard emplacements...
Well a bit late now as FW announced those this morning, but yes ground assets are there, both factions get unique ground assets - disappointed that the Aeldari didn't get a Firestorm as it was one of my favorite units in 40k proper back in 5th edition.
chaos0xomega wrote: I have the cards in hand, I can confirm they do not contain any unannounced aircraft
I don’t like that. Who needs 12 nightwings in a single list?
Yeah I dunno. TBH I buy these packs more on the off chance that they include something that isn't found in a rulebook somewhere (happens more often than I would like), otherwise I don't really use the cards themselves (certainly not one per plane).
Thinking forward to future releases, only Chaos are left from the games first edition, Hell blade and Hell talon if I recall correctly. Wonder what faction will be in the next box set with them?
None. There were 5 factions planned from the beginning, and we have 5 (technically 6 if you count Imperial Guard as separate from the Imperial Navy), so the game seems to be complete and the rumors are that AI wouldn't be continued further than that due to poor sales... although arguably you could say we only have 4 factions if you say that Guard/Navy and Astartes are all "Imperium".
Thinking forward to future releases, only Chaos are left from the games first edition, Hell blade and Hell talon if I recall correctly. Wonder what faction will be in the next box set with them?
None. There were 5 factions planned from the beginning, and we have 5 (technically 6 if you count Imperial Guard as separate from the Imperial Navy), so the game seems to be complete and the rumors are that AI wouldn't be continued further than that due to poor sales... although arguably you could say we only have 4 factions if you say that Guard/Navy and Astartes are all "Imperium".
While I believe what you say to be true, do you have any confirmation?
I strongly suspect that the poor sales are from how cack handed GW handled the release of the game. That said, this new starter box will be strong seller I imagine. Eldar and Marines are very popular factions.
If the game is left in this state at least it won't feel like chasing a shifting meta, and endless sales cycle. Not sure whether I'll expand my collection beyond the starter box and the board. All depends on how much interest I can drum up in my area.
The 5 factions thing was in writing somewhere, it might have been in a white dwarf article or in a Warcom article, I forget which, but it is known/confirmed.
As for this starter - yes, I have seen more people express interest in these factions than any of the previous releases, so we'll see if more people jump in.
Vorian wrote: The poor sales and AI being scrapped was not particularly reliable as far as I remember.
Its been a long standing and persistent rumor since not long after AI released, I didn't really believe it at first but I've heard it from so many sources, including several I know to be generally reliable and somewhat accurate, that at this point I think its more likely to be true than not.
chaos0xomega wrote: The 5 factions thing was in writing somewhere, it might have been in a white dwarf article or in a Warcom article, I forget which, but it is known/confirmed.
„It is known.“
I think it was in comments from a designer during an event prior to launch of current AI, and it is mentioned on early pages in this thread. But that was years ago and the situation might have changed.
Hopes aren’t too high though, with Eldar now being the only faction that does not have flyers in the card pack beyond their starter box.
Absolutely criminal if they stop at just these 5 factions with no more models, there are so many cool 40k planes to debigulate.
Chaos is a must, the Hell Talon, Hell Blade and Harbringer are so cool.
Several more cool SM flyers that should get a release as well The Storm Raven, Nephilim/Dark Talon for the Dark Angels, the Space Wolf longboat looking flyers, Thunderhawk transport.
If the Vampire Raider is not in the card pack, I can only hope it's an upcoming Forge World model (who tend to have the rules/stat card in the clamshell/blister pack).
chaos0xomega wrote: The 5 factions thing was in writing somewhere, it might have been in a white dwarf article or in a Warcom article, I forget which, but it is known/confirmed.
„It is known.“
I think it was in comments from a designer during an event prior to launch of current AI, and it is mentioned on early pages in this thread. But that was years ago and the situation might have changed.
Hopes aren’t too high though, with Eldar now being the only faction that does not have flyers in the card pack beyond their starter box.
At most it was about 2 years ago (game released in 2019 which was around the time the statement was made). GW works about 3 years in advance on average, so even if plans changed somewhere since then, we're probably at least a year or two away from seeing any additional factions.
Yeah the 5 faction thing I believe was in one of the early warcom articles where they were talking about how it would be a supported game rather than a one and done thing.
GW does supposedly work on a 3 year advance, but I'd be very surprised if they can't change tack in half that time or less if they figure out a product is a waste of time, or they see some low hanging fruit and want to release something quickly.
chaos0xomega wrote: The 5 factions thing was in writing somewhere, it might have been in a white dwarf article or in a Warcom article, I forget which, but it is known/confirmed.
„It is known.“
I think it was in comments from a designer during an event prior to launch of current AI, and it is mentioned on early pages in this thread. But that was years ago and the situation might have changed.
Hopes aren’t too high though, with Eldar now being the only faction that does not have flyers in the card pack beyond their starter box.
At most it was about 2 years ago (game released in 2019 which was around the time the statement was made). GW works about 3 years in advance on average, so even if plans changed somewhere since then, we're probably at least a year or two away from seeing any additional factions.
Yeah. 2 years. Before corona. That feels like ages ago. I really hope for AI to expand (and get a rules update), but I am not too optimistic. My Tau player friend is still hoping for his tiny Manta.
With resin models they could be quicker than plastic. But I feel if they planned more Eldar even recently, they would have included them in the cards. For Tau and Astra Militarum this is what they did with the resin planes (see Remora, Arvus, Vulture).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AllSeeingSkink wrote: Yeah the 5 faction thing I believe was in one of the early warcom articles where they were talking about how it would be a supported game rather than a one and done thing.
GW does supposedly work on a 3 year advance, but I'd be very surprised if they can't change tack in half that time or less if they figure out a product is a waste of time, or they see some low hanging fruit and want to release something quickly.
Also if I remember right, they said that the game was fully developed with 5 factions before launch. Does not mean they stopped at that point. There’s still hope…
Overread wrote: If anything GW's attitude then helped grow the increasing reliance/use of the 3rd party market that they now contend with today.
I'd say that the main reason for 3rd party to be so prevalent when it comes to GW is twofold, the first being their ever increasing prices that have skyrocketed to the point of having small handmade 3rd party bit be cheaper than the "legit ones" (which makes absolutely no sens), and their trend to do less and less subfaction specific bits while making more and more monopose stuff that don't offer any variety to the hobbyist.
Overread wrote: Plus GW knows that good expansion and codex books on the shelf are things their staff can put directly into customers hands as sales
This is very true, but at the same time books are heavy, take shelve space and are the one thing that they can put in the shredder the second the new edition is released, so moving to a free and digital rule system also have a lot of upsides, but probably not enough to offset the massive amount of money they are making with how overpriced these books are.
What they could do tho is still selling books, but purely lore/hobby focused book, like the Army Heraldry books of Warhammer fantasy. I'll buy that in a heartbeat... but then again, I probably wouldn't buy them every 2 or 3 years too... but I may buy books of other factions I dont even play.
As for factions missing, it would be a real shame if they end up canning the game before chaos, necrons and Drukari ever show up.
I just want a Dark Eldar Voidraven and Razorwing fighter. I'd even be perfectly happy to use them as counts-as Eldar from the new set. I don't 3D print, hopefully something will pop up on Etsy now that Eldar are about to release
lord_blackfang wrote: Apart from Dakkajets everything in IA is old Forgeworld designs, no GW plastics, which rules out all the missing factions except Chaos I'd think.
Isn't Valkyrie a GW plastic too? They're also in IA.
lord_blackfang wrote: Apart from Dakkajets everything in IA is old Forgeworld designs, no GW plastics, which rules out all the missing factions except Chaos I'd think.
Isn't Valkyrie a GW plastic too? They're also in IA.
Nope, the Valkyrie was originally a Forgeworld kit that GW plasticized, the GW Valkyrie is very faithful to the design of the FW original, only very slight minor detail changes were made for manufacturability, otherwise its a solidly FW based design.
lord_blackfang wrote: Apart from Dakkajets everything in IA is old Forgeworld designs, no GW plastics, which rules out all the missing factions except Chaos I'd think.
Isn't Valkyrie a GW plastic too? They're also in IA.
Nope, the Valkyrie was originally a Forgeworld kit that GW plasticized, the GW Valkyrie is very faithful to the design of the FW original, only very slight minor detail changes were made for manufacturability, otherwise its a solidly FW based design.
I thought the original rumor was for 6 armies. So Chaos might be the last one as I think the only reason Militarum and Navy where split where so each box would have a Imperial faction in it. This could set up a second wave of Space Marine fliers with Chaos as the opponent.
Mr_Rose wrote: Even the dakkajets were preceded by a couple of Ork fighters made by Forge World, though the resemblance is less strong.
I think they share a lot of design features, but they obviously updated them to match the GW dakkajet rather than the old fighta. This is one of my Fightas from the old AI...
But yeah, AI hasn't done any planes that aren't FW designs or at the very least started as FW designs.
I'd say it's intentional because most of the FW designs look better than GW's efforts, lol.
I reckon GW limits themselves by what is practical in a plastic boxed set and a game of regular 40k, whereas FW had no problem making aircraft that feel more realistically scaled and proportioned even if they were a bit more impractical.
Smaug wrote: I thought the original rumor was for 6 armies. So Chaos might be the last one as I think the only reason Militarum and Navy where split where so each box would have a Imperial faction in it. This could set up a second wave of Space Marine fliers with Chaos as the opponent.
It was 5:
schoon wrote: From the 4pm BST Twitch Stream with Andy Hoare:
* The basic set was designed to allow you to do a basic dogfight
* Designed as a short-play or demo capable set
* The bases are new design for AI - does basically the same thing as the old bases
* Rynn's world book has basic rules; adds background story; more scenarios; and campaign rules
* Campaign rules are fairly simple - meant to link a few games
* 5 factions in development (including the two in the basic game)
* New factions should come pretty fast
* After that will depend on how the games does
* Designed Marauder so it can have variants - Pathfinder and Colossus are possible new variants beyond the two we have now
* Ground assets have anti-air and objectives
* Aces rules were designed to stay simple and balanced
* They want the rules to be precise and balanced for competitive play
* Ork models are designed so bits are interchangeable - to 2 should be alike
* Ork Eavy Bomma is to carry LOTS of ordnance
* Grot Bomz are designed to be fun
* Battle of Calth - will be a new AT book
* Basic map is only designed for small battles
* 2 Rynn's World map sets can be combined to make an even bigger board
* AI and AT are 1/4 scale of Warhammer 40K - the scale is consistent - Space Marine is 8mm and normal human is 6mm
* Bases could be taken apart, but weren't designed for it. CAN be done if you're very careful
* They will be doing resin aircraft upgrade parts
* The current plan is for maps to be in thick card
* The game is ideal for tourneys - they plan to do a matched play supplement in the future
Smaug wrote: I thought the original rumor was for 6 armies. So Chaos might be the last one as I think the only reason Militarum and Navy where split where so each box would have a Imperial faction in it. This could set up a second wave of Space Marine fliers with Chaos as the opponent.
It was 5:
schoon wrote: From the 4pm BST Twitch Stream with Andy Hoare:
* The basic set was designed to allow you to do a basic dogfight
* Designed as a short-play or demo capable set
* The bases are new design for AI - does basically the same thing as the old bases
* Rynn's world book has basic rules; adds background story; more scenarios; and campaign rules
* Campaign rules are fairly simple - meant to link a few games
* 5 factions in development (including the two in the basic game)
* New factions should come pretty fast
* After that will depend on how the games does
* Designed Marauder so it can have variants - Pathfinder and Colossus are possible new variants beyond the two we have now
* Ground assets have anti-air and objectives
* Aces rules were designed to stay simple and balanced
* They want the rules to be precise and balanced for competitive play
* Ork models are designed so bits are interchangeable - to 2 should be alike
* Ork Eavy Bomma is to carry LOTS of ordnance
* Grot Bomz are designed to be fun
* Battle of Calth - will be a new AT book
* Basic map is only designed for small battles
* 2 Rynn's World map sets can be combined to make an even bigger board
* AI and AT are 1/4 scale of Warhammer 40K - the scale is consistent - Space Marine is 8mm and normal human is 6mm
* Bases could be taken apart, but weren't designed for it. CAN be done if you're very careful
* They will be doing resin aircraft upgrade parts
* The current plan is for maps to be in thick card
* The game is ideal for tourneys - they plan to do a matched play supplement in the future
Actually, we have 5 factions in the game : Orks, T'au, Eldars, Space Marines and...well, Aeronautica Imperialis (they just did a small trick by making some aircrafts specific to Astra Militarum, but that's technically the same faction).
Mr_Rose wrote: Even the dakkajets were preceded by a couple of Ork fighters made by Forge World, though the resemblance is less strong.
Do they predate the ones used in the boardgame where you have to bomb bridges and such?
Those would have been the metal Fighta Bommers that GW made in the days of Epic 40k, those horribly scaled ones that were probably closer to 2mm scale than 6mm scale.
I dunno what the timeline was, I know of those metal Epic 40k ones from the 90's, then I believe the FW40k scale one came a few years later, then the resin AI one also from FW a few years later that looked the same as the FW40k model, then the plastic GW one that they sell now for 40k which to me looks like an adaption of the FW one.
But maybe there's some other iterations I don't know about.
Oh yeah, if you go back far enough, all the flyers started out in Epic, though they also looked quite different. Like the Nightwing used to be a tank, then it became the Nightwing Interceptor with fixed half-moon wings, kinda like the Batwing, and all Eldar flyers had a hex grid carved into their armour for some reason.
Speaking of actual tiny planes, was everyone else aware that the plastic Nightwings have functional swing wings? Not just pick a pose and glue it but an actual toothed mechanism to let you change them as you want if you assemble them correctly…
Mr_Rose wrote: Speaking of actual tiny planes, was everyone else aware that the plastic Nightwings have functional swing wings? Not just pick a pose and glue it but an actual toothed mechanism to let you change them as you want if you assemble them correctly…
Yeah, I noticed on the sprue pics they had little gear teeth on them, and one of the warcom articles said "The Nightwings even have wings that can be fitted without glue in order to let you swap them between sub- or supersonic flight positions in real time."
From memory even the resin FW ones had wings like that, though all mine are glued fixed, I think that was an option.
Mr_Rose wrote: Oh yeah, if you go back far enough, all the flyers started out in Epic, though they also looked quite different. Like the Nightwing used to be a tank, then it became the Nightwing Interceptor with fixed half-moon wings, kinda like the Batwing, and all Eldar flyers had a hex grid carved into their armour for some reason.
That was what Nightwings originally looked like at the end of Epic 2nd edition and Epic Titan Legions. They were of the old Eldar look, i.e. more organic and alien, without need to be aerodynamic.
Then Epic 40K edition came and the Nightwings were changed (and the Phoenix introduced).
Just received my 2 boxes of Wrath of Angels. Didn't know they were doing deliveries on Sundays. The models do look pretty nice as usual, though these sets were packaged a lot worse than the previous one and some of the Xiphons got pushed out of their sprues. No major damage other than the sprue attachment point being very rough due to being forced out, but nothing that'll be too hard to fix.
Looks like there's a new scenario, "Death from Above", on the scenario pamphlet in the boxed set.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I dunno if it's an error, but the Twin Bright Lances are listed as Aerial Attack for the Phoenix, but not for the Nightwing.
I dunno if it's an error, but the Twin Bright Lances are listed as Aerial Attack for the Phoenix, but not for the Nightwing.
This has been discussed before in this thread (page 54). Disappointing to hear that it‘s this way in the actual rules as well.
The stats in the rulebook are like that, however the stats on the back of the instructions for both have Aerial Attack.
Which is itself still stupid, as the fluff always had bright lances and pulse lasers used in the ground attack role as well - can't understand all the upgrade weapon options on the phoenix BOMBER being Aerial Attack! Eldar are going to struggle in any mission which requires more than minimal ground attack capabilities and (with no vampire in sight) no transport option also simply can't do a chunk of the scenarios at all.
Have to admit, pretty disappointed with the Eldar part of the release. Will be house-ruling a few modifications for sure.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Wouldn't tyranids and dark eldar be good too?
That would be all major factions from the game?
Wouldn’t dark Eldar be just Eldar but spiky at the level of abstraction in AI? I mean go ahead and release models because they’re cool lookin’ but what meaningful difference is there, mechanically speaking?
Unless they get close combat (as in literal physical contact between aircraft) attacks somehow…?
Tyranids have been discussed and there’s the issue of biological flight tending to be hilariously slow compared to everyone else. But so manoeuvrable… speed 0-2, thrust 3, agility 1-9 and jink on everything? Plus a billion spore mines.
The only other faction with flyers though would be Necrons. Be an interesting one t approach; do they have low HP and self-repair, or just lots of HP? High speeds and thrust but low agility and poor pilots?
Got my box on Saturday, some lovely sculpts and appreciate you can change modes on the Nightwings. Not the best packaging inside the box though, just seemed a bit thrown in rather than what I usually come to expect from GW box sets. The Eldar dice are also lovely, nice weight and texture to them, almost like wraithbone
Tyranids have been discussed and there’s the issue of biological flight tending to be hilariously slow compared to everyone else. But so manoeuvrable… speed 0-2, thrust 3, agility 1-9 and jink on everything? Plus a billion spore mines.
I always thought of Tyranid Harridans as blimps with teeth.
And surrounded by thousands of Gargoyles in a cloud so dense it takes a lot of shooting to get through to the Harridan.
But that's just my mental image of how they would work. Not sure about Aeronautica, but in at least some editions of Epic the Harridans zoomed on and off the board just like other jets. Always thought that was a bit silly--would prefer them to work more like slow-moving Squat airships.
The Crone is an air superiority melee fighter so no matter how your headcannon works, GW clearly thinks they can catch up to jets. I don't know why we have to keep having this discussion.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: ...though these sets were packaged a lot worse than the previous one and some of the Xiphons got pushed out of their sprues. No major damage other than the sprue attachment point being very rough due to being forced out, but nothing that'll be too hard to fix....
Damn it, I was wrong, one of the Phoenix models has some damage on its nose. You'd think for the amount of money GW charges for their models they might be able to package them properly.
Those would have been the metal Fighta Bommers that GW made in the days of Epic 40k, those horribly scaled ones that were probably closer to 2mm scale than 6mm scale..
Well horribly blue or not it was a deliberate decision to scale first Titans and then aircraft at roughly 1/600 with the ground stuff being vaguely 1/300.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Of course GWs currently scale is a bit odd - they insist a normal guy would be 6mm tall (1/285) but the consensus is they are more 8mm (1/200) productions to date…
Those would have been the metal Fighta Bommers that GW made in the days of Epic 40k, those horribly scaled ones that were probably closer to 2mm scale than 6mm scale..
Well horribly blue or not it was a deliberate decision to scale first Titans and then aircraft at roughly 1/600 with the ground stuff being vaguely 1/300.
What some call horribly scaled, I call sensibly sized to fit in a carry case and move around on a table.
My general impression of the new Aeronautica is that the plane models would have been better off scaled smaller relative to the hex map, for more convenient gameplay.
Really small-scale vehicles are cooler anyway. (yes I was into Micro Machines as a kid)
Would it be possible to have a Chaos Vs Necrons, with the lore being one of Abaddon's crusades against the Necron Pylons that Abaddon had to break to cause the whole scar thing?
And to Tyranids, why not have a Daemons vs Tyranids box, where the rules for flying Monstrous Creatures could play out? Put a Bloodthirster or Lord of Changes vs. a Hive Tyrant.
Personally I would like to see a Helldrake for Chaos. Paint him yellow and make it like an evil Woodstock (Snoopy's companion in the Peanut comics/cartoons)
My general impression of the new Aeronautica is that the plane models would have been better off scaled smaller relative to the hex map, for more convenient gameplay.
Really small-scale vehicles are cooler anyway. (yes I was into Micro Machines as a kid)
I have played with my old Epic models, works great
I still dream of rescaling BFG so my cruisers are the length of the base's diameter...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr.Pickels wrote: Would it be possible to have a Chaos Vs Necrons, with the lore being one of Abaddon's crusades against the Necron Pylons that Abaddon had to break to cause the whole scar thing?
And to Tyranids, why not have a Daemons vs Tyranids box, where the rules for flying Monstrous Creatures could play out? Put a Bloodthirster or Lord of Changes vs. a Hive Tyrant.
Personally I would like to see a Helldrake for Chaos. Paint him yellow and make it like an evil Woodstock (Snoopy's companion in the Peanut comics/cartoons)
Would be a good idea, though with all the provisos of non supersonic vs supersonic.
Nids would make a cool campaign where you are doing stuff in clouds of rising bioforms. Kinda like navigating an aggressive maze
Tyranids have been discussed and there’s the issue of biological flight tending to be hilariously slow compared to everyone else. But so manoeuvrable… speed 0-2, thrust 3, agility 1-9 and jink on everything? Plus a billion spore mines.
I always thought of Tyranid Harridans as blimps with teeth.
And surrounded by thousands of Gargoyles in a cloud so dense it takes a lot of shooting to get through to the Harridan.
But that's just my mental image of how they would work. Not sure about Aeronautica, but in at least some editions of Epic the Harridans zoomed on and off the board just like other jets. Always thought that was a bit silly--would prefer them to work more like slow-moving Squat airships.
This, and not just for Squats reasons.
They should be rather slow moving but with a picket of spores, gargoyles, etc surrounding them. We already have grot bomms & tau drones so having a couple small bases to represent them modelwise isn't farfetched.
The_Real_Chris wrote: Of course GWs currently scale is a bit odd - they insist a normal guy would be 6mm tall (1/285) but the consensus is they are more 8mm (1/200) productions to date…
That's marines, bub
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vorian wrote: AT scale is just 40k hit by the shrink ray to somewhere between 3 and 4 times smaller, isn't it?
I know we heard early on that normal guys would be 6mm and Marines at 8mm, but that doesn't seem to make much sense.
It kinda does, TBH. marines are supposed to be massive after all.
Because this is a normal sized human on a 40k scale Warlord and looking at my AT Warlord I can see that door is about 10 or 11mm.
I printed this guy too small (he's about 5mm), but if you take that into account you'll see the size is... pretty on point, I'd say, honestly, at least for me.
Albertorius wrote: For all the rest, the "official" answer was that AT scale is 1/4th 40k scale.
And 40k is probably closest to 32mm***. 32/4 = 8mm.
I don't own any titans for AT, but all the aircraft definitely make the most sense if they're 8mm. You can start with the fluff vales and calculate the scale as a ratio and you end up closest to the equivalent of 8mm scale, and if you compare them to real world aircraft that are 8mm scale they feel about right for 8mm.
***Obviously 40k scale is all over the joint, but regular humans are in the 30-32mm range.
Albertorius wrote: For all the rest, the "official" answer was that AT scale is 1/4th 40k scale.
And 40k is probably closest to 32mm***. 32/4 = 8mm.
I don't own any titans for AT, but all the aircraft definitely make the most sense if they're 8mm. You can start with the fluff vales and calculate the scale as a ratio and you end up closest to the equivalent of 8mm scale, and if you compare them to real world aircraft that are 8mm scale they feel about right for 8mm.
***Obviously 40k scale is all over the joint, but regular humans are in the 30-32mm range.
It would really depend on which humans you're talking about, as the scale there is all over tha place ^^
The_Real_Chris wrote: Of course GWs currently scale is a bit odd - they insist a normal guy would be 6mm tall (1/285) but the consensus is they are more 8mm (1/200) productions to date…
That's marines, bub
Well this is based on the Leman Russ that was on the boards and the Titans as they haven't made any marine figures yet? Those features seem to be scaled at 1/200 / 8mm.
Albertorius wrote: For all the rest, the "official" answer was that AT scale is 1/4th 40k scale.
And 40k is probably closest to 32mm***. 32/4 = 8mm.
I don't own any titans for AT, but all the aircraft definitely make the most sense if they're 8mm. You can start with the fluff vales and calculate the scale as a ratio and you end up closest to the equivalent of 8mm scale, and if you compare them to real world aircraft that are 8mm scale they feel about right for 8mm.
***Obviously 40k scale is all over the joint, but regular humans are in the 30-32mm range.
It would really depend on which humans you're talking about, as the scale there is all over tha place ^^
The new DKOK are maybe 32mm-ish to the top of the head and 28-ish to the eye. One of my old metal Commissars is about 31mm to the eye.
Probably no more variation than real humans I guess, there's roughly 13% variation in height from a 5th percentile male to a 95th percentile male.
It get whacky when we start talking about Space Marines, because they're not consistent with humans compared to the fluff.
Albertorius wrote: For all the rest, the "official" answer was that AT scale is 1/4th 40k scale.
And 40k is probably closest to 32mm***. 32/4 = 8mm.
I don't own any titans for AT, but all the aircraft definitely make the most sense if they're 8mm. You can start with the fluff vales and calculate the scale as a ratio and you end up closest to the equivalent of 8mm scale, and if you compare them to real world aircraft that are 8mm scale they feel about right for 8mm.
***Obviously 40k scale is all over the joint, but regular humans are in the 30-32mm range.
Getting my tape measure out and measuring my Warlord today, it's about 9mm to the top of the circular door on the back from the floor.
I've only got an imperial pilot and DKK command HQ here from Forgeworld, but they are about 36mm to the top of the head (3mm being the base). The plastic female Catachan from GW itself is about the same too.
So that fits with 1/4 size, with a normal human being just over 8mm to the top of the head unbased.
So, are folk trying to assemble their night wings so the wings are free? I've just dry fitted one and I'm not sure I can glue it without accidentally gluing the wings in place, and even if I manage to leave them free I imagine they'll become jammed when I go to paint them.
How are other people tackling it? Maybe paint first and build after?
Albertorius wrote: For all the rest, the "official" answer was that AT scale is 1/4th 40k scale.
And 40k is probably closest to 32mm***. 32/4 = 8mm.
I don't own any titans for AT, but all the aircraft definitely make the most sense if they're 8mm. You can start with the fluff vales and calculate the scale as a ratio and you end up closest to the equivalent of 8mm scale, and if you compare them to real world aircraft that are 8mm scale they feel about right for 8mm.
***Obviously 40k scale is all over the joint, but regular humans are in the 30-32mm range.
Getting my tape measure out and measuring my Warlord today, it's about 9mm to the top of the circular door on the back from the floor.
I've only got an imperial pilot and DKK command HQ here from Forgeworld, but they are about 36mm to the top of the head (3mm being the base). The plastic female Catachan from GW itself is about the same too.
So that fits with 1/4 size, with a normal human being just over 8mm to the top of the head unbased.
My measurements of the DKOK and commissar were unbased.
If it's not too hard to measure on the Warlord, what's the height from the floor to the hand rail? Hand rails tend to be roughly hip height around about 1m off the ground, whereas door heights can vary quite a bit. So the hand rail height multiplied by maybe 1.83-ish would give you the height of a scaled down 6 foot tall person, assuming they put hand rails at highly the same height in a few 10's of thousands of years
I am just about to build my nightwings so I'll let you know how I get on! Edit: it was fine, just be sparing with the glue and glue away from the wings.
Aye, I was meaning to post just agreeing with you basically. 8mm normal people and 1/4 40k is the most accurate description I think.
These things are so bloody small that any measurement is approximate, but the handrail is about 5mm or so.
Vorian wrote: I am just about to build my nightwings so I'll let you know how I get on! Edit: it was fine, just be sparing with the glue and glue away from the wings.
Aye, I was meaning to post just agreeing with you basically. 8mm normal people and 1/4 40k is the most accurate description I think.
These things are so bloody small that any measurement is approximate, but the handrail is about 5mm or so.
Doesn't match what GW said though. Or since when space marine is normal people?
GW specifically said they went for scale that put SPACE MARINE as 8mm.
Funny enough...Actually measuring and basic math also supports that. We have models. We know how big they are supposed to be "real life". Then crunch it up. It's been done. Tad around 1:300 scale. In case 1:XXX isn't familiar 1:285 is what is commonly called 6mm scale.
Vorian wrote: I am just about to build my nightwings so I'll let you know how I get on! Edit: it was fine, just be sparing with the glue and glue away from the wings.
Aye, I was meaning to post just agreeing with you basically. 8mm normal people and 1/4 40k is the most accurate description I think.
These things are so bloody small that any measurement is approximate, but the handrail is about 5mm or so.
Doesn't match what GW said though. Or since when space marine is normal people?
GW specifically said they went for scale that put SPACE MARINE as 8mm.
If it's a 40k Space Marine, then yeah, they aren't much taller than humans.
Funny enough...Actually measuring and basic math also supports that. We have models. We know how big they are supposed to be "real life". Then crunch it up. It's been done. Tad around 1:300 scale. In case 1:XXX isn't familiar 1:285 is what is commonly called 6mm scale.
For AI, that is demonstrably false. Every aircraft I've measured for AI is in the 1/200 to 1/220 range when compared to their fluff values, which puts it at 8mm scale. I also have a bunch of the old FW planes, and they were in the 1/285 to 1/300 range, which is correct for 6mm scale.
Maybe AT is different, but I think Titans in 40k have always had whacky scales, being larger in the fluff than in the flesh.
But for AI, 8mm is a lot closer to being on the money.
If AI were 6mm, then the 'real life' aircraft they represent would be huge.
So plastic THawk and FRaptor, but probably not a plastic Vampire or other Eldar aircraft - and probably also no resin Vampire/aircraft unless GW surprises us (IIRC the forgeworld resin units for the previous wave of releases were included in the Tau and Imperium card packs, though IIRC the first wave of releases did not include cards for the initial set of resin aircraft that GW did for Orks/Imperium
I don't think it was ever in any AI books, maybe a WD?
It came out after the 2nd campaign book, and it wasn't in the 2nd campaign book.
It wasn’t in a campaign book. My friend bought it and all we have rules wise is the WarCom article and the paper datacard that came with the miniature.
The two part-resin Marauder variants weren’t in the books either. I think they and the Mega-Bommer were more of an afterthought.
It’s still strange that the Eldar only get two flyer types in their cards set, plus the resin ground assets, but no vampires.
I tend to think we'll get another book at some point that might include a Vampire (maybe a FW one though, similar to the Drones and Ground Assets), but that's just a wild guess. Another option is FW release the Vampire some time in the future and it doesn't feature in any books. Another option (and the worst option!) is the Eldar release is finished and this is genuinely all we get.
I tend to think we'll get another book at some point that might include a Vampire (maybe a FW one though, similar to the Drones and Ground Assets), but that's just a wild guess. Another option is FW release the Vampire some time in the future and it doesn't feature in any books. Another option (and the worst option!) is the Eldar release is finished and this is genuinely all we get.
Agree. FW resin kits that were ‚previewed‘ in the campaign books and cards: Vulture (incomplete weapon options), Arvus, AM ground assets, Remora, Tau ground assets, Marines ground assets, Eldar ground assets.
Not previewed: part-resin Marauder variants, Mega-Bommer.
We did not have any plastic kits other than the ones visible in the campaign books / card sets.
Marines will get at least two more flyers in plastic (raptor maybe part resin). Would be odd if Eldar are stuck with the initial two, but they are filthy xenos after all. And with the pattern above, any Vampire should not be in plastic.
I have a suspicion that GW doesn't see much return in investing in plastics for the game. They may switch to largely resin releases with the odd plastic campaign set
Doesn't match what GW said though. Or since when space marine is normal people?
GW specifically said they went for scale that put SPACE MARINE as 8mm.
Ah but this is where mm scale gets fun. When we say something is 6mm scale that doesn't mean a tank or space marine is 6mm high, it means an average human is 6mm to the eyes/top of head (depending on who is talking).
As a marine is 8? foot tall in 6mm they should be 7.5mm-8mm tall. So if a chap from GW says 8mm, he might mean the model is 8mm tall, or that the scale is 8mm so a space marine is 10.5-11mm tall...
Crimson wrote: I wouldn't have thought dividing by four is so difficult.
LOL, the problem is 40k has such whacky scales that when you divide by 4 is still gives whacky scales.
But yeah, 40k is very roughly in that 28 to 32mm scale, so divide by 4 and you get 7 to 8mm, which seems pretty consistent with the models we have currently.
If GW ever decide to release infantry I'm sure it'll be clearer to folk who struggle to divide one number by another
zedmeister wrote: I have a suspicion that GW doesn't see much return in investing in plastics for the game. They may switch to largely resin releases with the odd plastic campaign set
This is verifiably true, it's why only Wings of Vengeance was produced in plastic and every other release since has been resin. Clearly producing a 2nd 2-player box in plastic was not worth it due to poor sales, and GW will never do a 3rd box in plastic /s
I mean, the game has done well enough that we now have all the major factions in plastic, even if we don't have all the releases for those in plastic. Hopefully it's done well enough to justify expansions beyond the initial (well the rumored initial) factions we now have. I would LOVE plastic Ramora drones and a plastic Vampire, ideally we get additional faction in plastic like Chaos/Necron/Tyranids. I suspect some of it will come down simply to production issues, since GW is struggling to keep up demand as it is
Kalamadea wrote: I mean, the game has done well enough that we now have all the major factions in plastic
Given all the whining from their fans, I'm hardly the biggest fan of Chaos - but I don't think you can really say you have all the major factions from 40k in a game when they're absent.
zedmeister wrote: I have a suspicion that GW doesn't see much return in investing in plastics for the game. They may switch to largely resin releases with the odd plastic campaign set
This is verifiably true, it's why only Wings of Vengeance was produced in plastic and every other release since has been resin. Clearly producing a 2nd 2-player box in plastic was not worth it due to poor sales, and GW will never do a 3rd box in plastic /s
It depends how much they already sunk into development. The 2nd boxed set didn't come long after the first, perhaps suggesting much of the work had already been done. This set only has 4 sprues and we'll probably get another sprue with the Thunderhawk. That's hardly a big investment for GW these days.
Chopstick wrote: 4 sprues is a whole year of release for blood bowl, probably 2 for Middle Earth.
Apples and oranges though.
4 sprues for blood bowl is 4 whole teams, and their sprues are twice the size with less duplication (I know they duplicate sprues in BB teams, but it’s still 6 unique models compared to Eldar and SM in AI that have 2 planes each just duplicated over and over).
GW pump out lots of sprues these days, I don’t think half a dozen half sized sprues represents a large investment from them these days.
The Blood Bowl sprue are not double the size of an AI sprue, they're the same size. The AI "ordnance-build option" sprue is at half size, but Blood Bowl also have goblin and halfling team come in those same half sprue.
It's 4 sprue for 1 single release, with Fire Raptor and Thunderhawk the cost will undoubtedly much higher than Blood Bowl.
Warlord and Warmaster are what a double size sprue looks like, and Warmaster being on 4 double size sprues with another double size weapon sprue coming, pretty much halted any other release for AT for over a year.
Sorry, I just checked and yeah, I was wrong about the size of the BB sprue, it's the same size as an AI sprue.
But I still say apples to oranges because a BB sprue represents a whole team.
And my point was never "AI gets less investment in sprues than other specialist games", it was "5 sprues is not a large investment for GW these days".
I think it's more telling that AI's release was only on the front page of GW's site for 1 week, and after a brand new release AI still doesn't have a banner ad when you go to "Boxed Games" on their store, and AI has only had 15 WarCom article mentions in the past year.
I reckon AI is still getting releases because it was either part of a long term plan and it hasn't bombed so bad as to change that plan, or modern GW appreciates having a diverse range of products even if all of them don't sell like a house on fire. But most of the indications are that AI isn't a brilliant seller for GW, and 5 sprues is not the investment it was 20 years ago to convince me otherwise.
I don't think this has been announced yet but check the articles on war community under "new fr forge world" or whatever - there's a thumbnail of ground assets for eldar and space Marines I hadn't seen referenced anywhere yet!
axotl wrote: I don't think this has been announced yet but check the articles on war community under "new fr forge world" or whatever - there's a thumbnail of ground assets for eldar and space Marines I hadn't seen referenced anywhere yet!
Then you might have been browsing this place with your eyes closed, because we have already discussed them at length, for they have already been revealed.
axotl wrote: I don't think this has been announced yet but check the articles on war community under "new fr forge world" or whatever - there's a thumbnail of ground assets for eldar and space Marines I hadn't seen referenced anywhere yet!
You mean, apart from page 56 onwards, right? You can go buy them now.
Oh wow that's amazing no idea how I missed that. Didn't see them on the site, nor spotted any article about them. Not to throw shade but maybe it's because this thread has been bickering about scale for days on end. Still any discussion on this game is better than none.
Any word on them bringing the tau/navy ground assets back? Those were out of print within the first month as far as I remember. But then again, I was wrong literally minutes ago..
axotl wrote: Any word on them bringing the tau/navy ground assets back? Those were out of print within the first month as far as I remember. But then again, I was wrong literally minutes ago..
The Tau assets are out of stock on FW, but I imagine they'll come back in stock eventually, everything else has been.
The Imperial resin ones are still available on FW.
The plastic Imperial assets (the ones that came in a pack with the Ork ones) are available again now from GW, but I dunno if they'll continue with them. I think they were Made in China rather than directly by GW in the UK, so I wouldn't expect them to last forever.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
axotl wrote: ...but maybe it's because this thread has been bickering...
Welcome to every news thread on Dakka since forever There's 1 post of news then 5 pages of discussion, most of which is off topic.
If anything this thread is quieter than most GW game news threads.
Automatically Appended Next Post: More thunderhawk previews...
Quick question for IA vets, are magnets recommended for the planes or is it a case of slap whatever is cool on them and play whatever you want?
Probably too small for magnets, I think most people will be okay with you doing the latter (slap whatever you want on there and play it how you will). For the most part the weapon alternates are very small and non-obvious as they are positioned under the wings, etc. The only time you might have to go WYSIWYG is something like a Tau Tigershark where the weapons are large and obvious or where you have things like the Valkyriee/Vendetta or the Marauder Destroyer/Marauder Bomber where they are two similar aircraft with completely different loadouts. As far as the Thunderhawk is concerned however, going through the photos in the Warcom article it doesn't look like theres any alternate weapon loadouts as they all seem to be armed identically.
I have magnetized my tigershark bombers main guns, and the turrets on my Marauders (more so I can pivot them around but still), so you can do some, but just looking at the missile hardpoints says it might be doable, though it'd take smaller magnets than I can generally find, or hoping a magnet to wire grab would work with the magnet in the wing, but it'd be really obnoxious and not worth it.
You can totally magnetise the Nightwings as the actual weapon pod is a single piece that covers both guns and is relatively large compared to the missile hardpoints on the imperial fighters. A single 2×1mm disc in the middle is more than sufficient.
Is that a new base extension to make it stand higher off the base? At first I thought it was a conversion, then I noticed they all had it.
Also, is it just me or do the windows that make up the top of the canopy look a bit "meh" when painted (rather than being transparent like on the 40k scale version). I think the old style canopy that had smaller windows might have looked better.
MajorWesJanson wrote: And the Manta for the tau. Would love to see the updated style for it.
That would be nice to see, also wouldean that every faction (Imperial, Ork, Tau, and Eldar) have a big plane in plastic. Would finish off the system nicely.
I really hope for AI to expand (and get a rules update), but I am not too optimistic. My Tau player friend is still hoping for his tiny Manta.
