Got my copy this morning and i will do a review tonight (UK time). looks very pretty though and the rules for the Krieg engineers rock.
Also got a new catalogue add-on which includes the Red Scorpian's venerable dread and the Ultramarines one (both £24 without weapons but with back-banners), Khorne World Eaters special character Lord Zhufor (£15) whuch looks quite sexy and an OrK flak wagon (£no price yet) and also looks great. The model masterclass vol one is £26 and should be available soon.

More tonight.

Please tell us the revised (I hope) points cost for the Reaver titan. I seriously hope that Forgeworld, who normally overprice stuff, are not going to maintain the farce of a 1250pt pricetag for the titan.

Please also tel us if anything changed from the experimental rules.

In case you didn't know Orlanth, Warrick is a super hero. But super heroes have powers, I hear you cry. This is true Orlanth, and Warrick does have a super power.

What is it?

Why the power of 'Copy/Paste'!!

One only has to look at books like Imperial Armour Apocalypse and IA3 to just feel the radiating power of his Copy/Paste ability.



This is just a longwinded way of saying it's likely he just copy/pasted the text from the PDF into the master file for IA6 and changed very little. I hope I'm wrong, but given Warrick's and FW's track record when it comes to writing rules, I doubt it.


I ordered my copy last week (along with some Nurgle Marine and Terminator bits, three Chaos Dreads and heaps of Mortis pattern arms). I look forward to finishing my Death Guard army and reading IA6 sometime in 2009.

BYE

Crap, still waiting for my copy. I really do hope that those engineers have good rules, They've been collecting dust since February now. Your copy isn't signed by chance now is it?

edit.

Hmmm, I remember getting my Imperial Armour Apocalypse book and finding the massive FAQ on the site later that week. At times even the written work of FW suffers as much as their casting qualities. I like the background of their IA books, but they are typo riddled and sometimes of questionable writ.

well,

I certainly hope that the imperium actually wins this fight...in IA3 and 4 they got thier collective butts kicked...waiting on my copy of IA 6 now...:(

Yeah, aæsp waiting on mine still... And I actually ordered within the first week of it being available for preorder...

Like day three or so. :S

The Imperium will win the fight, of that I am certain. Otherwise they wouldn't include a young commander Culln as a veteran sergeant in the campaign.

He didn't get jobbed in IA:4, so it's entirely possible they all run away like girls in this one as well.

Space marines that actually think and withdraw instead of standing on that convenient hillock and wait for the enemy hordes to approach and swamp them in an unending tide of marine death while their commander raises his weapons in dramatic "yaaaaaargh" moment for one last time? Wow, FW must be breaking GW tradition here.

BrookM wrote:Crap, still waiting for my copy. I really do hope that those engineers have good rules, They've been collecting dust since February now.

Wait, sorry, what are you expecting from FW in an IA? Good rules?

Actually, I collect the books for the background info and the slice of fictional history they present. Once in a while I stumble upon in my opinion great rules. I absolutely love the D99 regimental rules, they got me into Elysians.

But I know how Fw does the rules for their units. Warwick is known for overpricing stuff points-wise just to be on the safe side. Nothing is going to stop you from fielding that cool model. Nothing but the price tag and the point cost.

first 2 easy questions -
yes my book was signed
the reaver is not 1250 - it's 1450!

now to the meat.
there is one squad entry for the red scorpions - i presume there will be more in Vraks part 3
the Hades drill is sweet and delivers the engineers the next turn. they can be equipped with gas grenades - which can be quite rude depending what you roll (i'll let you read the rules in your own book - sorry i don't believe in leaking precise rules from a £40 book!) - and the mole launcher.
As well as the reaver the imperials (& renegades) also get the rules for the Macharius Vulcan (60" str 6 ap 3 heavy stupid), a chaplain dread and a siege dread.

Chaos renegade players get a whole new army list which (strangely) is Khorne-themed (I thought it would be Nurgle as they've released more models for them). It includes Khorne Berserkers and hounds of Xaphan - i think these are chaos warhounds looking from the stats and have an ogryn handler! Now that's cool.
there are also new datafaxes for the dreadclaw, chaos planes, chaos dread and chaos marine standard vehicles.

the odd thing is that a lot of these are not in the army lists, only the scenario lists at the back. Talking of which these include scenarios for Battlefleet Gothic, Apocalypse (spelt Apocalype on one title!) and Aeonautica.

The weird thing about this book is that some of the entries appear to be based on 5th ed rules but the Krieg engineers still have the 'Die Hards' rule (ignore -Ld modifiers for being outnumbered in cc) which is no longer relevant - and cost 5points per squad!

I'm also really disappointed that there is no errata for converting the 1st book to the new rules (including the die-hards rule above and the rule for Arkos the Faithless, a chaos marine captain - as i only have the current chaos marine book i don't know what things like 'spikey bits' does or costs so he is unusable to me)

Overall there is more background and has about 20 more pages (208). the scenarios are too big to tempt me - can't afford that much resin! The pictures, as ever, are beautifully rendered.
to sum up - I like it but they could have done better 3 out of 5.

Right, here's hoping that I get mine tomorrow or my UPS delivery upgrade has been wasted.

So what do the rules for the mole launcher look like? (No specific numbers necessary - just the general description of how it works.)

looking forward to the next one.

This book is Khorne, the next book is Nurgle. They are probably releasing the Nugle minis because they are getting onto the next thing, which seems to be Orks. After that maybe Dark Eldar and Necrons are going to get some cool stuff.

I hope I get my copy soon, although I'm not realistically expecting it until almost 2009 even though I pre-ordered it the day it came out.

Sadly, I don't expect to get any use out of the book with respect to units or lists, it looks like my expectations of FW not bothering to update or adjust the IG list hold true (do we really need Die Hards still, really?) although I still look forward to the fluff and Apoc stuff, so long as its better than IA Apoc was (glad I didn't buy that PoS)

IA Apocalypse is nothing more than a quick cash in and it would have been a good product, if only they had taken the time to proof read it a few times. I've got one of the first copies and it is a typo ridden mess that needed a massive FAQ to correct everything miss-worded, left out or needlessly put in due to copy-pasta.

bubber wrote:The weird thing about this book is that some of the entries appear to be based on 5th ed rules but the Krieg engineers still have the 'Die Hards' rule (ignore -Ld modifiers for being outnumbered in cc) which is no longer relevant - and cost 5points per squad!

What did I just say? Copy/Paste is Warrick's fav thing in the whole world.

BrookM wrote:IA Apocalypse is nothing more than a quick cash in and it would have been a good product, if only they had taken the time to proof read it a few times.

Don't you mean proof-read it at all. I downloaded IA Apoc because, after seeing a friend's copy, I didn't want to waste the money. There are things in that book that Microsoft Word would pick up first time around by itself, without help from a human. Ditto goes for IA3, a book that I love, but it's so terribly written and full of so many obvious mistakes that it's laughable it made it to the printers. FW can hardly be rushed writing 1 book a year.

BYE

BrookM wrote:At times even the written work of FW suffers as much as their casting qualities. I like the background of their IA books, but they are typo riddled and sometimes of questionable writ.

I've personally not had any trouble with FW casting, although I've only bought a handful of things off of them. One or two of the things of the Cadian accessory pack needed a touch-up with Green Stuff, but I was more than happy with the quality of the models themselves to do that. Heh, one of my housemates has had more trouble with the GW plastic kits he's bought - a Chimera hull which the plastic hadn't gone into the mould properly, and then the same problem with a Hammerhead rail gun. Although in the latter case he'd got a Sky Ray sprue in the kit too, so it's not all bad.

The books do seem somewhat full of typos, though.

Don't buy anything thin from them. It'll either be shaped like a banana and/or be snaptastic.

Death By Monkeys wrote:So what do the rules for the mole launcher look like? (No specific numbers necessary - just the general description of how it works.)

you place a marker anywhere on the battle field. then measure. if within 12-24" then the blast happens in your next shooting phase; if within 12" it happens in the current phase; if over 24" the shot is lost. it's a medium strength blast with a mediocre AP. could be used to block off a means of advance, esp now the partial rule is gone.

now i've done further reading, another blip has been found. in the 40K non-apoc scenario, it mentions that all imperials on the field are hit with a chemical blast on a 4+ and is resolved exactly as a normal chemical blast. however i can't find what a normal chemical blast is! unless it's like the Krieg engineer's gas grenades....
this scenario is also virtually all made up from plague marines - go figure!?!

also missed to mention - you can field beastman squads and a mutant rabble (just like a workers rabble from the first book).

H.B.M.C. wrote:

BrookM wrote:IA Apocalypse is nothing more than a quick cash in and it would have been a good product, if only they had taken the time to proof read it a few times.

Don't you mean proof-read it at all. I downloaded IA Apoc because, after seeing a friend's copy, I didn't want to waste the money. There are things in that book that Microsoft Word would pick up first time around by itself, without help from a human. Ditto goes for IA3, a book that I love, but it's so terribly written and full of so many obvious mistakes that it's laughable it made it to the printers. FW can hardly be rushed writing 1 book a year.

When it comes to anything other than sculpting models, Forge World is absolutely hopeless. The text on each and every IA book has more obvious errors than any other gaming product I've ever had the displeasure to read, including small-press stuff. I can only assume it's all a part of the same haphazard and careless attitude Games Workshop as a whole embodies so perfectly.

I hate agreeing with you on anything, H.B.M.C., but frankly, I despise Forge World even more. Their miniatures are expensive, and they're still only the only thing worth crap that they produce.

Maybe they could use some volunteer help with editing and rules development. Someone willing to make a big hours commitment (and how many hours do we waste on stuff like this board anyways?) could make a serious difference there, if the FW guys will accept a bit of free help.

I nominate yakface, whose name recognition for rules fixes might help him get into such a position. Yak, whaddaya think?

Agamemnon2 wrote:I hate agreeing with you on anything, H.B.M.C.

Let's stop and discuss this for a second.

Now, Aga, I don't know you from Adam, so why is it that you 'hate' agreeing with me? What exactly have I ever done to you?

BYE

bubber wrote:
the reaver is not 1250 - it's 1450!

Well thanks for the reply. I suppose even Forgeworld realised that the Reaver was grossly underpriced, and nudged it slightly in the right direction. 1450 is still too cheap, but now the points cost is merely 'thoroughly wrong' rather than 'farcical'.

This is assuming the titan rules are indeed copy pasted. Much of the work is already done for the weapons, though the Reaver was supposed to get a 'downgraded' volcano cannon. The one on the datasheet appeared to be full strength to me, though I dont have an Apocalypse book handy to check.

What Imperial titans need are more snesible rules regarding carapace mounts. unless you take the multi launcher (conveniently the gun provided) the minimum range penalty takes up half the range of the weapon. I agree with a minimum range, but it should be shorter, much shorter, as 40K is not supposed to represent 1:1 ground scale.

I didn't really read the Reaver rules when FW released the first version - what was wrong with it exactly? Why was it underpriced? 1250 is a fair cop, and an extra 200 points on top of that is pretty hefty as well.

Heavy 6 Battlecannons aren't that good and a Warhound can get more Strength D weapons.

So what made it so good?

BYE

H.B.M.C. wrote:I didn't really read the Reaver rules when FW released the first version - what was wrong with it exactly? Why was it underpriced? 1250 is a fair cop, and an extra 200 points on top of that is pretty hefty as well.

Heavy 6 Battlecannons aren't that good and a Warhound can get more Strength D weapons.

So what made it so good?

BYE

Off the top of my head, the fact that it mounted Warlord or only (very) slightly downgraded versions of Warlord weapons.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I didn't really read the Reaver rules when FW released the first version - what was wrong with it exactly? Why was it underpriced? 1250 is a fair cop, and an extra 200 points on top of that is pretty hefty as well.

Heavy 6 Battlecannons aren't that good and a Warhound can get more Strength D weapons.

So what made it so good?

BYE

Is this sarcasm H.B.M.C.?

I will answer at face value.

The Reaver has 6 astructure points and four void shields, this is very reasonably survivable. it would be easy and not unfair to say that resilince and staying power is double that of a Warhound, or two thirds that of a Warlord. This should put the price in the 1500pt mark assuming the guns remained in balance. Mobility not being an issue, as thw Warhound is not significantly faster in terms of in-game use.

However the guns are not in balance. Warhounds have two minor titan guns, admittedly not with minimum range penalties. Warlords get two minor titan guns with minimum range panatlies and two major guns. The reaver only misses on on one minor gun and has the full choice of minor titan weaponry with the inclusion ofthe Apocalypse launcher and the vortex missile, neither of which the Warhound can take.

For the major weapons, some are reserved for the Warlord, namely the Quake cannon, Plasma Destructor and Wrecker Ball. The Pllasma Destructior is nasty, but you can live without it. the wrecker ball is just yet another titan close combat weapin, and the rules for those have been messed up beyond belief. The titan ccws have no anti infantry capability, or even anti (normal sized vehicle). Power first are supposed by be able to rake the ground or scoop up tanks. Neither do the titan ccws get any secondary guns. Some editions of epic had short ranged firepower mounted in the knuckles or similar. Probably approximate to four heavy bolters, by my own guess. a booby prize for when you cannot use the weapon in its primary mode.
Now admittedly the denial of the quake cannon is a disadvantage. Quake cannon are very nasty guns, ultra long range, 10" templates, two shots and S10. the Reaver envies this gun. However let us see what they do get. really there are seven reasonable and semi-reasonable options:

Passable choices:
These weapons will do from time to time.

Carapace mounted Turbo Laser Destructors. In case you want to max out your Strength D attacks. Fully optimsed you can have eight strength D 5" pie plates. Double not 50% more than the maxed out destructive yield of a Warhound. I dont recommend this though, it would be boring as hell, and the minmimum range is a problem, I mentioned this only to compare optimised firepower.

Carapace mounted Vortex Missile. I don't recommend the Vortex missile at all, none of the Imperial titans can afford to miss out on a gun. However a Vortex missile and two volcano cannon will allow your titan to launch a very long range 'alpha strike' on enemy titans or other capital units. This could with a modicum of luck pay back the points value of the titan in a single turn blowing up opposing super heavy or gargantuan gcreatures.

Arm mounted Titan Close combat Weapon. the best way to kill a super heavy with a single weapon on a single turn. Pity that means you have to walk up to it (and run the gauntlet of meltaguns or whatever else the enemy can throw at you). its an attack your enemy can see a mile off and will normally avoid. a titan ccw is an area denial weapon with a short area and limited target parameters. Fun though, but not worth losing a big gun for.

Good options:

Now we are talking about the weapons you should arm your titan with. indidentally the current Forgeowlrd kit is armed with three of the four weapons listed here.

Arm mounted Gatling Blaster: Of the four this is the one you can more easily do without. A heavy 6 battlecannon is very nice, especially as it would cost a lot more to buy six minimum Russ than it would to pay for half the titan. However it lacks the extra of the other choices.

Carapace mounted Apocalypse launcher. A slightly weaker version of the Gatling blaster with one less pie plate. Sounds inferior but it isnt. Because the missile launcher has a very long range and counts as a minor titan weapon, it does have a minimum range penalty, but the carapace mount forces that anyway, so you lose nothing. Also you use the clover template, which has better results than normal scatter, let alone being easier to handle. With this weapon option you have no reason to mount your carapace with anything else. Most Armorcast and all Forgeworld Reavers agree. Ideally with this gun you can also forgo the Gatling Blaster and take more intense guns for the arms.

Arm mounted laser blaster. A turbo laser derstructor with three shots. There isnt much more to say here. always take at least one.

Arm mounted volcano cannon. You forfeit the three shot salvo of the laser blaster but trade that for very long rangfe and a 10" blast. Frankly I think this is worth it.



Now let us look at the three recommended options:

Two laser blasters and apocalypse launcher (minimaxed Forgeworld titan)
laser blaster, gatling blaster and apocalypse launcher (balanced Forgeworld titan)
or
Volcano cannon, laser blaster and Apocalypse launcher (role-optimised titan)

The first two are the Reaver titans as currecntly sold, and are thus not onmly near optimised but most relevant to the Forgeworld price. The Volcano cannon variant is IMHO marginally better but should not effect unit value.

Do these three options mark 'double or more that firepower of a Warhound? I would have to answer with a resounding yes, even if you maxed out a warhound with two turbo lasers. The third optiion, my favourite, offers four Strength D shots, as many as a Warhound could possibly have, but still has an additional five S7 pie platres for anti infantry roles. Furtherrmore two of the three weapons have extraordinary long reach and the total footprint of the weapons fired exheeds that of a Warhound with two plasma blastguns on double fire 7" blast mode. the bonus range is very very important, not only for sniping super heavies before they have a chance to fire themselves, but also to clear away enemy heavy weaponsd infantyry, which are the real threat to a super heavy. While as Warhound will have difficulty clearing out its engagmetn range of enemy lascannon the Reaver will have no problesm, even if the gatling blaster is left off the titan.

Bello f Lost Souls estimated 1500pts for a reaver titan, with three minor titan guns. This price matcvhes the Epic Reavers in comparison to Warlords and Warhounds. Forgeworld broke the background of the titan by allowing heavy titan guns to be used on Reaver arm mounts. This is worth an extra 100pts per gun minimum.

I would estimate the true value of a Reaver at 1600pts-1850pts on the outside ends of an acceptable price, and 1750pts being my estimate of its true value.

Orlanth wrote:Is this sarcasm H.B.M.C.?

No, no. Honest question. I didn't pay much attention to the first release of the rules, so I wasn't sure what the problem was.

I didn't know the Reaver could get a Volcano Cannon.

Generally speaking, twice the toughness of a Warhound isn't that impressive as the Warhound isn't that impressive to begin with. Super-Heavies are generally overcosted and people fear them more than they should (like people fear the Hellhound). The Baneblade is a good example, a 650 point tank that's worth 450.

Now I have no experience using Titans except for Eldar Revenants, so maybe there are other factors I am not aware of, such as their size or movement abilities (and I haven't really considered the Void Shields). I know that the Revenants are overpowered because of their 4+ save, but the part that's 'broken' with them is not the fault of the Titan, but more the fault of the concept of Strength D weapons. Unfortunately, they've set the ceiling for Strength D too low. Volcano Cannons should be Strength D, but not Pulsars or Turbo-Laser Destructors.

If we ignore the triple-barelled thing for a moment, and say it had a Gatling Launcher, Apoc Missile Launcher and Volcano Cannon, would it be such a big deal?

BYE

Actually, as a minor quibble, the Forgeworld Reaver Experimental rules have the volcano as a 7" blast.

I can only assume someone at FW got fed up of their stuff always being called overpriced and worthless crap (135-point Medusas, for example), threw a childish hissy fit and built the Reaver off that. The other possible explanation, that this is the reasoned opinion of a person drawing a salary as a "games designer", is almost too depressing to believe. Pathetic, thoroughly pathetic.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Let's stop and discuss this for a second.

Now, Aga, I don't know you from Adam, so why is it that you 'hate' agreeing with me? What exactly have I ever done to you?

Let's not.

H.B.M.C. wrote:
No, no. Honest question. I didn't pay much attention to the first release of the rules, so I wasn't sure what the problem was.

Well it isnt often used. I am actually suprised you dont have any titans with the volume of Imperial vehicles you have.

H.B.M.C. wrote:
I didn't know the Reaver could get a Volcano Cannon.

Mithrax wrote:Actually, as a minor quibble, the Forgeworld Reaver Experimental rules have the volcano as a 7" blast.

Yes you can take a Volcano Cannon. However they did promise to only let a Reaver take a downgraded version, and yes it is 'only' 7" blast. The nice thing about that gun is the awesome range of 180" and the fact that it is Strength D without a game breaking powerful ROF.

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Generally speaking, twice the toughness of a Warhound isn't that impressive as the Warhound isn't that impressive to begin with. Super-Heavies are generally overcosted and people fear them more than they should (like people fear the Hellhound). The Baneblade is a good example, a 650 point tank that's worth 450.

Well for a start a Warhound is misused. People think scout titan, or just titan and try to use it agressively. This is a relative term, back in 30K when you could afford gear as big as a Warhound for scouting it was scouting for a titan battlegroup, and with help from another of its own kind. Titans are rarer now and are used differently. This aspect is handled well in the 40K rules. A Warhound is now a precious precious heavy assault unit but with more firepower than survivability, an ambush predator. Now if you try to tank with it in an apocalypse game it will get lascannoned to death. It really needs to lurk in a city or broken hills and annihilate sections of the enemy army in isolation.

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Now I have no experience using Titans except for Eldar Revenants, so maybe there are other factors I am not aware of, such as their size or movement abilities (and I haven't really considered the Void Shields). I know that the Revenants are overpowered because of their 4+ save,....

Now Revenants are ... Edit.

Void shields are armour 12, though I do think the armour value should be modified by what is carrying the shield, so Reavers and Warlords with Av13 shields, but enough of wants and wishes. 12 is not high enough to be absorbing similar firepower as you use on the hull. So you can hose down a titan with autocannon before firing lascannon. However if the opponent only takes lascannon to max out firepower they can lose out here.
However something to bring to your attention, four shields is more than twice as good as two, the graph of void shields to effectiveness is not linear. Shields return easily, especially as you roll them on structure points remaining rather than once per downed shield. A Reaver or Warlord is very likely to recover most or all of its shields each turn. So allowing for misses and fails to glance you need to invest a lot of firepower against a void shielded target before you hacve a chance of doing anything. For a Warhound the threshold is not much, six Bs3 autocannon will on average dice clear two shields. But these will likely come back, especially if you fail to take down them all in the previous turn. For a Reaver it gets a lot better. You need twelve autocannon to drop the shields (eighteen for a Warlord), each and every turn you want to take shots at the titan itself. Now when the titan manoeuvers beside buildings or hills and denies a target opportuinity to the whole army the odds start to mount on its side. Now add in the clover template and what it doesnt to heavy weapon teams and Dev squads and you have a serious problem. Now a Warlord is so expensive and so hard to hide (most people buold them way too big) it is too far the other way. Need to fire six fire support squads to clear the shields, short change compared to the 2500pts beast. Reavers are generally a little smaller and a lot cheaper, especially now. Attrition is on their side.

Ultimately the tactics I use for my Imperial battleships works for Imperial titans, if you work out the firepower investment an opponent must use to deal with your void shields and manoeuver, or target selectively to make this increasingly inconvenient the apparently small number of Av12 shields can go a long long way. Frankly its a drain on the opponents firepower statistics and thus if handled well, a drain on the effficiency of their entire army. Never underestimate void shields.

Power fields are a different matter, they are just extra wounds, you hit them they go down. It's a whole different scenario. Orks ignore their shields, like them while they last, but press on the with assault while the going is good. Imperial players must be more cerebral to make best use of their shields.

H.B.M.C. wrote:
but the part that's 'broken' with them is not the fault of the Titan, but more the fault of the concept of Strength D weapons. Unfortunately, they've set the ceiling for Strength D too low. Volcano Cannons should be Strength D, but not Pulsars or Turbo-Laser Destructors.

I agree 90% with you, more if you infer anything negative about the quality of GW designers as a byproduct of this complaint. But it's not the ceiling that is too low, the blast is too high. Turbo lasers deserves Strength D, but they should have two shots not two pie plates. Same with pulsars, though pulsars can fire in area effect mode as a very large scatter laser and deserve their 5" blast that should be at far lower strength, maybe as low as S6 or 7. A volcano cannon alone deseves a reusable Strength D blast and that should be no larger than 5" and really ought to only be small blast (but rolling twice on damage). No Jervis, lasers are not area effect weapons. The vortex missile as a one shot should remain as it is.

H.B.M.C. wrote:
If we ignore the triple-barelled thing for a moment, and say it had a Gatling Launcher, Apoc Missile Launcher and Volcano Cannon, would it be such a big deal?

A Reaver is always a big deal, unless you give it two titan ccw's and a carapace inferno cannon. That is to say cannot target anything smaller than a gargantuan creatures with its arms - and can't catch any of those its finds and has a mega flamer with a minimum range longer than its maximum range. Here you can really go to town criticising Forgeworld for blind copy/pasting rules.

You need to house rule the strength D stuff, I would count the turbo laser or laser blaster as shots not blasts. Another way of playing this, more in keeping with the rules is to say that turbo laser or laser blaster shots all hit the same place. They are after all linked lasers. As not much takes Strength D this cuts back on the de facto killing power of the weapon, so if the initial shot misses, it all misses. Apart from that the weaponry is fair. With the loadout you have you will get eleven pie plates that will waste MEq on 2+, the volcano cannon can put the evil eye on any superheavy vehicle on the opposite side of the table, and anything else that is unfortunate enough to be nearby. Remembering your set up picture posted elsewhere of IG vehicles plus eldar; there were so many nice places to put a Strength D 'dustbin lid of doom'. A volcano cannon could well have clipped three of your super heavies in one shot. As deployment areas are tight in apocalypse games and you really have to put your big stuff where you need in future it most players will just have to run the gauntlet of having a volcano cannon pop their best toys in the early turns. Oh and while the infantry die in droves. Yep that is a nice loadout for a titan, st it up at the back near but not in blocking cover ( for target restriction later in the game - see Void shield tactics above) but with a very good initial field of fire to take advantage of the long range. Shadowswords are not an answer unless backed up with massed baslisks to drop the shields first and you get the first turn. Byb the way this will cost almost as much as a titan in itself. Though it will may force the Reaver to shoot the Shadowsword rather than the bunched spearhead of short range super heavies and tooled up units at the front. The only thing a titan really fears from the basck row are some select fliers and deesptriking suicide infantry. Fire dragons especially. You need to surround it with cheap guard, but give yourself room to move the guard to move the titan for when the range closes and you need to start restricting incoming fire. While a princeps woul not hesitate to just walk over the guardswarm if needed to protect the titan the rules dont allow you to trample your own guys.

Orlanth wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:
If we ignore the triple-barelled thing for a moment, and say it had a Gatling Launcher, Apoc Missile Launcher and Volcano Cannon, would it be such a big deal?

A Reaver is always a big deal, unless you give it two titan ccw's and a carapace inferno cannon. That is to say cannot target anything smaller than a gargantuan creatures with its arms - and cant catch any of those its finds and has a mega flamer with a minimum range longer thna its maximum range. Here you can really go to town on criticising Forgeworld for blind copy pasting rules.

They noticed that bug in the Warlord rules pretty quickly when Apocalypse came out, it's disappointing that it's still there. As it is, I doubt most people are keen on taking inferno cannons on battle titans, so I'd be surprised if this ever came into play.

I hope GW would FAQ the Apocalypse book for this and similar minor quibbles (do flyers get the 4+ cover save like fast-moving skimmers, can Agile units charge on a turn they forego some or all of their shooting to run). These seldom come into play, mostly in situations like Eldar flyers with holofields, shooting at flyers with a Pylon (Strength D weapons ignore cover saves, after all). The designers saying "you decide how 5E impacts Apocalypse games" in Apoc:R was a major disappointment.

Agamemnon2 wrote:I can only assume someone at FW got fed up of their stuff always being called overpriced and worthless crap (135-point Medusas, for example), threw a childish hissy fit and built the Reaver off that. The other possible explanation, that this is the reasoned opinion of a person drawing a salary as a "games designer", is almost too depressing to believe. Pathetic, thoroughly pathetic.

I am with you on this. Fiorgeworld did throw a hissy fit, but the fit was mostly about them not liking poeple with armorcast titans. Thus their attempt to punish Armorcast titan owners by making the new Forgeworld titans incompatible with them. It is ironic that the Forgeworld points cost better fits an rmorcast titan (with three minor guns) than its own.

Besides the second more pressing reason to undercost the unit was to drive sales. the Reaver as armed is incredibly cheesy, especially with two laser blasters. 1250pts was a sucker opunch to get THAT GUY to buy one. I always expected a repointing but I thought Vraks would clear up the price and make it 1750pts-1800pts. This figure was also the staff rumour at GW and makes sense as it mirrors the relative price in Epic closely.

On the other issue I am with H.B.M.C.

Agamemnon2 wrote:
I hope GW would FAQ the Apocalypse book for this and similar minor quibbles (do flyers get the 4+ cover save like fast-moving skimmers, can Agile units charge on a turn they forego some or all of their shooting to run). These seldom come into play, mostly in situations like Eldar flyers with holofields, shooting at flyers with a Pylon (Strength D weapons ignore cover saves, after all). The designers saying "you decide how 5E impacts Apocalypse games" in Apoc:R was a major disappointment.

I think that up to a point Forgeworld cannot tread on the toes of the self proclaimed genii in GW studio, and must follow the pattern of rules laid down by their masters. Dont expect Apocalypse rules to be cleared by Forgeworld if it is Jervis who screws up to begin with. There is no pointing that the Emperor has no clothes allowed, reading one article of "Standard Bearer" should tell you that. Pride is a dangerous thing.

Orlanth wrote:I am with you on this. Fiorgeworld did throw a hissy fit, but the fit was mostly about them not liking poeple with armorcast titans. Thus their attempt to punish Armorcast titan owners by making the new Forgeworld titans incompatible with them. It is ironic that the Forgeworld points cost better fits an rmorcast titan (with three minor guns) than its own.

The Titan missile launcher has always been a battle titan weapon, and is pretty much emblematic Reaver carapace armament from what I can recall. Just a nitpick.

It seems self-defeating that FW would want to drive up sales of the Reaver, one of their most complex kits that, according to rumors, takes 16 man-hours to cast per-unit, with each mould being good for only three attempts. Indeed, the nature of resin casting ought to be that you could afford to have product codes that don't sell because, I'm told, each individual initial investment is, by comparison, smaller, while the ongoing costs are larger. On the scale models market there are resin kit companies out there that cater to tiny markets (WW2 experimental vehicles, rare aircraft, vintage or concept cars, etc), with individual kits having potential sales of only in the low hundreds, perhaps even less.

I don't know about FW production or sales figures (obviously), but I estimate them to be higher than this, which explains some of their delivery and casting problems. To strive for even larger sales figures under the current business model does not seem feasible. An IRC friend recently got a Chaos Warhound, numbered somewhere in the 1100s, does anyone happen to know how long that kit has been out there? It'd be interesting to know how many of those are shifted per-month, say.

To give credit where credit is due, I do approve of FW's production values in terms of their books, my 5E book is already falling apart and for all its flaws, IA:A is a very good looking volume. I feel my earlier comments might have come across as being able to be misconstrued as contemptuous of Forge World, but wherein I only wished to express my disappointment of a continual trend of lacking authorial oversight in their rules writing.

As for the aforementioned rules problems with Apocalypse, I concur that if anyone should fix them, it's the GW design staff responsible for them in the first place. It's a long shot, but it never hurts to hope.

Now Revenants are not tough because of the 4+save, that was never particularly unusual especially now in 5th. It is dangerous because its Eldar and expensive and any decent player therefore attaches a Farseer with Fortune to it, oh and Guide too while he is at it. Then it is very nasty indeed.

Farseer's can't Fortune Titans.

Where does it say that? For both Fortune and Guide the rules say 'Nominate one eldar unit within 6" of the Farseer'. A Revenant titan is an Eldar unit.

Now Revenants are not tough because of the 4+save, that was never particularly unusual especially now in 5th. It is dangerous because its Eldar and expensive and any decent player therefore attaches a Farseer with Fortune to it, oh and Guide too while he is at it. Then it is very nasty indeed.

You can't use psychic powers on Titans unless it is a shooting attack with a strength profile. It's in the APOC rulebook.

Void shields are armour 12, though I do think the armour value should be modified by what is carrying the shield, so Reavers and Warlords with Av13 shields, but enough of wants and wishes. 12 is not high enough to be absorbing similar firepower as you use on the hull. So you can hose down a titan with autocannon before firing lascannon. However if the opponent only takes lascannon to max out firepower they can lose out here.

Void shields are nice, but vs. Str D weapons they don't work. Str D weapons bypass the Void Shields. Once again it's all there in the APOC rulebook.

Capt K

APOC rulebook. The section explaining Titans and Gargantuan creatures.

Capt K

Orlanth wrote:Where does it say that? For both Fortune and Guide the rules say 'Nominate one eldar unit within 6" of the Farseer'. A Revenant titan is an Eldar unit.

CaptKaruthors wrote:
You can't use psychic powers on Titans unless it is a shooting attack with a strength profile. It's in the APOC rulebook.

Yes I will have to be mindful of that next time. The rules was tucked away in a little box as a 'by the way'.

CaptKaruthors wrote:
Void shields are nice, but vs. Str D weapons they don't work. Str D weapons bypass the Void Shields. Once again it's all there in the APOC rulebook.
Capt K

Under the circumstances I am prepared to beleive you enough to look but I had never notice that one either. After a careful reread of the Destroyer weapon rules, the void shield rules and the power field rules from which void shield rules are taken I see nothing that tells me Strength D weapons ignore void shields. Is this tucked away in a little box somewhere?

Sure strength D causes instant penetrating gits, but void shields/power fields negate penetrating hits, one each. You only bypass this in close combat or by getting under its shields (range 12" or less). This second rule should really only apply to infantry held weapons.

Though not an answer in itself because of the amount of butchery of the background material Epic void shields always worke agaisnt big weapons, in fact it was what they were most useful for. You would have to knock down the shields before you turn your big gun on the titan.



While we are discussing this, is there any rule that prevents a Techmarine or Enginseer and servitor retinue from repairing titans. Its a dirty trick I will admit and I am loath to dedicate a Techmarine squad to permenantly follow each titan because its the sort of annoying thing That Guy would do.

Enginseers and Techmarines can repair a Titan's Weapons as they can repair Weapon Destroyed and Immobilized results.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Orlanth wrote:I am with you on this. Fiorgeworld did throw a hissy fit, but the fit was mostly about them not liking poeple with armorcast titans. Thus their attempt to punish Armorcast titan owners by making the new Forgeworld titans incompatible with them. It is ironic that the Forgeworld points cost better fits an rmorcast titan (with three minor guns) than its own.

The Titan missile launcher has always been a battle titan weapon, and is pretty much emblematic Reaver carapace armament from what I can recall. Just a nitpick.

Back to the titan gripes. my posts above indicate that the Reaver 'always' had a titan missile launcher as a carapace mount. Very few Armorcast Reavers I have seen mount anything else, especially now with ther minimum range for carapace weaponry. The difference is with the arm weapons: NONE of the Armorcast arm weapons are now valid except the titan powerfist and the titan chainsword. I really dont think this is accidental.

I have an Armorcast Reaver on the way from the US, I will be scratchbuilding my own arm weapons to go on it.

Well,

Rife with speliing errors, predictable in some places, and once again proving the addage that Imperial Guardsmen are of no use other than bulletstoppers, IA6 was nonetheless an enjoyable read.

My boys the Red Scorpions kicked some major ass, some absolutely GORGEOUS pics of the Reaver titan in action, and lots of really cool fluff. Loved it. I'm a fanboy, what can I say...

And the way they ended IA6 virtually assures them a sale on IA7 when it's offered for pre-order...

the caveman like...

Do you have your copy to hand?

I would be grateful if you compare the listing for the Reaver titan with this document:

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/downloads40k.htm

Select the Reaver titan, fourth one down (direct link to .pdf doesnt work)

While the price is the most important thing, it may well not be the only thing to have changed. I am particularly interested if the arm weapons choices have changed at all.

I'd like a page reference for the "Strength D ignores Void shields" part too. I've looked and looked, and I just can't seem to see it.

And if you want sick, try a Reaver with a Vortex Missile, Melta Cannon and Volcano Cannon. For 1450? Yes, please!

Mithrax wrote:I'd like a page reference for the "Strength D ignores Void shields" part too. I've looked and looked, and I just can't seem to see it.

I dont think it is true, unless it was written in a FAQ. even so thast would go against void shield fluff from Epic.

And if you want sick, try a Reaver with a Vortex Missile, Melta Cannon and Volcano Cannon. For 1450? Yes, please!

Orlanth wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Orlanth wrote:I am with you on this. Fiorgeworld did throw a hissy fit, but the fit was mostly about them not liking poeple with armorcast titans. Thus their attempt to punish Armorcast titan owners by making the new Forgeworld titans incompatible with them. It is ironic that the Forgeworld points cost better fits an rmorcast titan (with three minor guns) than its own.

The Titan missile launcher has always been a battle titan weapon, and is pretty much emblematic Reaver carapace armament from what I can recall. Just a nitpick.

Back to the titan gripes. my posts above indicate that the Reaver 'always' had a titan missile launcher as a carapace mount. Very few Armorcast Reavers I have seen mount anything else, especially now with ther minimum range for carapace weaponry. The difference is with the arm weapons: NONE of the Armorcast arm weapons are now valid except the titan powerfist and the titan chainsword. I really dont think this is accidental.

The Reaver carapace missile launcher is something of a given, yes. I wonder what the original rules for Reaver weapons were, because I don't remember ever seeing even an Epic one with anything other than either that missile pod or a giant banner/shrine in that carapace slot.

The current Adeptus Mechanicus Titan Legions armylist, too, gives Reavers access to both Scout Titan and Battle Titan weaponry (unless I'm missing something, their formatting's gone worse since the 2.0).

I have two signed copies, how much is the signature of Warwick Kinrade worth?

FIVE DOLLAH!

Hey Orlanth, the entry that you posted is 100% spot on accurate, with the exception of the points cost. 1450 in the book. If I only had $1,000USD to spend on a model.... --sigh--

I heard militia squads were dropped to 40 points. Any truth to that? And maybe a sign of things to come?

Page 204, appendix of IA6, Seige of vraks pt 2,

DESTROYER
Also know as titan killers, weapons with this special rule on thier profile deliver an immense amount of damage to thier target. If a weapon has a "D" in it's profile instead of a Strenght value, it is a DESTROYER. If a DESTROYER weapons hits a target, including partial hits from a template, there is no need to roll for penetration, it automatically scores a penetrating hit.

This hit can still be downgraded to a glancing hit by rules that have that effect ( smoke, fast skimmers, etc) with the exception of cover which cannot obscure the vehicle as the destroyer weapon just blasts it's way right thru.

In addition, when rolling to determine the damage result, add+1 to the result

If a destroyer weapon hits a non-vehicle model, there is now roll to wound, it automatically scores a wound. if the target fails its save, ( no cover saves allowed, as above, but invulnerable saves DO apply) the weapon always inflicts instant death, reguardless of the targets toughness if the target is immune to instant death, the target takes a single wound instead, as normal


--there ya go folks...I would still say that void shields work, as they ABSORB damage caused by glancing or penetrating hits...

Raxor,

Militia COMMAND squad is 40pts, Militia squad is 60pts. :(

Thats precisely how I read it.

CapNCaveman! wrote:Hey Orlanth, the entry that you posted is 100% spot on accurate, with the exception of the points cost. 1450 in the book. If I only had $1,000USD to spend on a model.... --sigh--

Ok, that is what I needed to hear, no Armorcast arm weapons confirmed. It looks like a major scratchbuild conversion job on my Reaver when it arrives.

Or you could just keep it as is, for a hefty discount in points. I know I'd be okay with taking 200-250 points off the top if both arms were mounting Scout Titan weapons.

I wish they'd gone for the more traditional chassis+weapons mode of pricing, because that way we'd just need to set points costs for the lighter guns.

Yep, they said, Hey guys, if you're man enough, here's a 1450 pt model, that costs $1,000.00 USD. IF you take it, pick any 3 weapons you like...

my guys at my FLGS just SCREAM when I bring out "Scipio" my FW wolf class Lucious pattern scout titan...got him tricked out with Plasma blastgun, and turbo laser arm. works every time...

There are many levels of conspiracy theory that I'm not willing to believe, and one of them is that FW went out of their way to not include the ArmourCast Reaver weapon options in their Reaver rules.

They probably either didn't know or simply didn't care about the previous Reaver. I don't see anything underhanded happening here.

BYE

In a weird turnaround, my Forge World Order, made only 6 days ago, arrived this morning. I suppose that makes up for spending £40 on express shipping last time and it taking 2 months to arrive.

So now I have IA6. And lots of Chaos Dreads and Death Guard and Mortis Dread arms. I am happy.

BYE

And it appears that the Nurgle Dread DCCW is missing. Oh well... I didn't expect them to get everything right.

BYE

H.B.M.C. wrote:There are many levels of conspiracy theory that I'm not willing to believe, and one of them is that FW went out of their way to not include the ArmourCast Reaver weapon options in their Reaver rules.

They probably either didn't know or simply didn't care about the previous Reaver. I don't see anything underhanded happening here.

It could also be designers' one-upmanship. They wanted to go to eleven on the weapons, because by now, the Warhound has already made an appearance on numerous battlefields. There's perhaps not enough "whoah" in being able to field inferno cannons and vulcan mega-bolters in a larger frame, even with the Apocalypse missile launcher. So instead they went big.

Now comes the horrible part of calling them, telling them what they did wrong and wait two months for the replacement part. Welcome to the rest of the world

It might not be that bad. My friend got his missing toe joint for a Chaos Warhound shipped to him in, I think, a week.

H.B.M.C. wrote:There are many levels of conspiracy theory that I'm not willing to believe, and one of them is that FW went out of their way to not include the ArmourCast Reaver weapon options in their Reaver rules.

They probably either didn't know or simply didn't care about the previous Reaver. I don't see anything underhanded happening here.

BYE

Neg.

1. Forgeworld produce the other type of Reaver in epic scale. In fact the Epic scale Reavers they produce cannot be deployed in Apocalypse. So it is no excuse to say they dont know abour Reavers.

2. Every single one of the editions of epic had the armament of the Armorcast Reaver titans. The current edition of Epic uses this, the default configuation of a Reaver is with two plasma blastguns as arm weapons.

3. The only reason to almost completely erase the existing armament options is to deny Armorcast titan owners. They only keep the missile launcher because 'every' decent looking Reaver should, and the close combat weapons because it would be hard to ignore especially as titan ccws are a one size fits all category.

FW sent me a few miscast pieces, one email later, they sent them out, got a new sprue free of charge in 5 days for my red scorpions...good customer service, hope they work it out for ya...

The resending could be avoided if they had better quality control, but that's just wistful thinking I guess. I had two wait for more than a month for a replacement sprue of shotguns to arrive though I guess that it has to do with the kit in question. The guy who orders a Warhound or Dreadnought is more important than the guy who orders Elysians or a Baneblade.

Orlanth wrote:2. Every single one of the editions of epic had the armament of the Armorcast Reaver titans. The current edition of Epic uses this, the default configuation of a Reaver is with two plasma blastguns as arm weapons.

Nup. Don't buy it.

Aga's explanation is 1000 times more plausible. They needed a new release that had the 'Whoa' factor. A more expensive piece of resin that mounts the same guns as the smaller less expensive resin does not fit that bill. A larger piece of resin with a six-barelled gattling Battle Cannon and a triple barelled laser cannon - that has 'whoa' factor to it.

There's no conspiracy theory to make people who own existing Armourcast ones 'have to buy new ones'.

BYE

A lot of people will disagree most likely, but I really like the rules for both the Krieg engineers and the Hades assault drill. Once I get my hands on a Hades and Mole Mortar it'll be a real blast.

Please note: I play for fun.

Too bad, the Nurgle CC claw is really cool.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Nup. Don't buy it.

Aga's explanation is 1000 times more plausible. They needed a new release that had the 'Whoa' factor. A more expensive piece of resin that mounts the same guns as the smaller less expensive resin does not fit that bill. A larger piece of resin with a six-barelled gattling Battle Cannon and a triple barelled laser cannon - that has 'whoa' factor to it.

There's no conspiracy theory to make people who own existing Armourcast ones 'have to buy new ones'.

BYE

Sorry you make no logical sense.

Sure they could get the Whoa factor and add new weapons. But while doing so keep the existing canon cannon for the Reaver. EVERY Reaver prior to the Forgeworld kit is now outside the official rules for 40K. Every. Single. One. EVERY Epic Reaver is incompatible with the new Reaver rules at 40K scale. Every. Single. One.

It is no less extreme than if a new rulebook said that Leman Russ had no battlecannon and continued as if they never had. It is similar to having a new odex say marine tacticals have autiocannon, but can nio longer have lascannon, and continue as if they never did. Sure far more poeple would be effected, but the principle is the exactly the same.

Besides speaking to some select GW staff members who know Forgeworld this is how they think. In fact the quote I heard is that some at Forgeworld get "pissed off" when they see Armorcast Warhounds. but that to you is hearsay.

I will leave you with two choices, there is no logic for a third.

The 40K Reaver is 100% incompatible with prior Reaver fluff, including all Epic variants since 1st edition and by happenstance Armorcast 40K Reavers because:

1. Incompetence
2. To put the thumb on Armorcast Reavers

Mind you to be this incompetent about the games own fluff Forgeworld must really have to have no real care about the 40K universe its background or its history. with Forgeworld I dont buy that for a second. Also they would have to forget that they themselves produce the Epic reaver titans, and yes they are all incompatible between scales also.

You realize you guys are playing Apoc right? Make up your own rules for the damn thing, you are playing in a B.F.G.!!

Or just count your Armorcast Titan as having the FW armament. Voila, problem solved.

Geez.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Orlanth wrote:2. Every single one of the editions of epic had the armament of the Armorcast Reaver titans. The current edition of Epic uses this, the default configuation of a Reaver is with two plasma blastguns as arm weapons.

Laser blasters, actually (Epic rulebook chapter 5, pg. 103), but don't let a fact check get on the way.

Ozymandias wrote:You realize you guys are playing Apoc right? Make up your own rules for the damn thing, you are playing in a B.F.G.!!

Or just count your Armorcast Titan as having the FW armament. Voila, problem solved.

He's not looking for a solution. Providing one wouldn't take games-designer levels of intelligence. He's looking for a soapbox to shout abuse at Forge World from.

Even if FW had intentionally set out to cut out Armorcast titans from their ruleset, so what? They have a right to do with the rules whatever the heck they want, including overturning 20 years of prior examples if they really want. For all we know, they only wrote rules to the armaments they intend to produce in resin.

The rest of the Armorcast catalogue isn't games-legal either. Their Baneblades and Shadowswords have differing weapons fits from the GW/FW versions. Should we care that the Epicast Stompa isn't compatible with Apocalypse stompa datasheets next? Of course not.

Could we now, please, for the love of Nuffle, Mork and apple pie, return to discussing something else about this book, or should we just continue this fruitless tug of war further? Neither side is likely to change their mind. Orlanth will refuse to give FW any benefit of doubt, and I for my part will refuse to consider them nefarious agents of Satan, so to what end is this endless bickering, really?

On an unrelated note, yes, the Hades really looks to be great fun.

Hey Orlanth, so much for your "Every. Single. One." Statement..... This is an Epic Reaver, with weapons compatible with the new 40K scale one. In fact the exact same weapons as the 40K one.

Not that I disagree on the fact of FW being calculating bastards. Of course they are, have you seen their prices? Without any other eveidence, just looking at their prices shows that much....

Anyways, on to the good stuff. This is straight from FW´s Epic Titans, has been there for ages.

(Found Here)
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/acatalog/QUATERMASTERS_STORE_EPIC_40_000_TITANS_24.html

LUCIUS PATTERN REAVER TITAN 1

(Product Code SG-EPC-E-001) Titans are the supreme fighting machines of the Imperium. They are giants with skins of adamantium, protected by fields of almost impenetrable energy. The Reaver Class is a light Battle Titan, faster than the Warlord but less heavily armed or armoured. This variant is produced on the Lucius forge world and is armed with a Volcano Cannon, Gatling Blaster and Rocket Launcher. Master Model by Brian Fawcett.

Ouch. Hoisted by his own petard, nicely done!

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Laser blasters, actually (Epic rulebook chapter 5, pg. 103), but don't let a fact check get on the way.

When was that from. The Epic Armageddon Eldar expansion book remaining unsold in the GW showed plasma blastguns as default. I smell switcheroo.

Someone should fix that horrid typo in the title of this thread. *tries to keep monocle from popping from glaring eye*

Anyhow, I've read through the "story" part and I've found it most enjoying, especially as the writing was much better than the previous instalments and hark! No typos. It would seem that good old Lindsey has done her job good and proper. Anyway, the ebb and flow of both sides fighting and losing is nicely penned down and thankfully the Red Scorpions do not steal the limelight from the men of Krieg. I also liked the entire chapter devoted to the Krieg engineers and the big wink to WWI mining and sapping. People expecting a lot shouldn't be too surprised as while stuff does happen, it isn't that moist inducing or awing. All it does is end on a half-hearted cliffhanger that won't be answered until next year.

Art-wise: I'm a sucker for the technical drawings and the character art. The character art is as always done by Karl Koppinski and while most of the art is taken from the poster it is still marvellous to look at. Included are: Rogue Psyker, Death Rider of Krieg, Commissar, Death Korps officer and Ensign, Death Korps Engineer, Red Scorpions sergeant and a Vraksian Renegade Enforcer.

Rules: I won't go into the rules as there are other people far better at tearing them apart and criticizing it for whatever ticks them off at the moment. All I will say is that I personally enjoy the rules for the Krieg engineers and the Hades Assault Drill. Other than that a lot of existing vehicles have been given entries for some odd reason and the Renegade Guard list has gotten a slight revamp with the inclusion of World Eaters in the HQ and Elites slots. They also gain the Hounds of Xaphan, a squad of three massive hounds and an Ogryn handler, there a picture of those floating around here somewhere. Worker rabble is being replaced by mutant rabble and the Renegades also gain Bloodgor Beastman attack squads. Renegades can also field the Hell Talon and Hell Blade as heavy support.

Strangely enough Nurgle units and army lists are missing in this instalment, even though they got some exposure in the "story" section of the book.

All in all I like this one and it I rate it as my third most favourite in the six Imperial Armour books released thus far. If I have to give it a stupid rating I'd say out of five silver birdies.

Orlanth wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Laser blasters, actually (Epic rulebook chapter 5, pg. 103), but don't let a fact check get on the way.

When was that from. The Epic Armageddon Eldar expansion book remaining unsold in the GW showed plasma blastguns as default. I smell switcheroo.

A conspiracy no doubt.

Xanthos wrote:Hey Orlanth, so much for your "Every. Single. One." Statement.....
(Found Here)
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/acatalog/QUATERMASTERS_STORE_EPIC_40_000_TITANS_24.html

LUCIUS PATTERN REAVER TITAN 1

Agamemnon2 wrote:Ouch. Hoisted by his own petard, nicely done!

While you gloat, check the one afterwards.....three missile launchers, which of course it cannot have.

Every single one now becomes all but one. still there is still the exception that proves the rule, and of course its a Forgeworld kit and thereforefits in the new swallow out doctrine I am talking about.

I have Epic going back to Codex Titanicus, none of them match the outfitting for the Forgeworld kit, and have options the current Reaver cannot support. Why is that exactly?





EDIT: I gave your arguement more credit than it deserves, I double checked in case I was wrong and I was not. I checked the 1991 Codex Titanicus the 200 internet expansion to Epic armageddon, my 3rd edition epic rulebooks, I cannot check the Eldar suppluement at hand because I do not own it. I just know where there is one I can look at. all the ones I could check are incompatible. The only part where I was even remotely close two wrong was with the Foreworld reasver 1 posted above. It is coveredc in all the rules as i thought, it just happens to also fit the new forgeworld rules, unlike the other.

To make sure we are clear Reavers can take any weapon Except plasma destructor, wrecker ball and in some editions Quake/macro cannon.

The new Forgeworld kit misses out all the ranged arm weapons that just happen to be available on the old epic and therefore Armorcast titans, but leaves the others intact. Armoracst Reavers could technically mount many weapons, but any that happened to have been cast in the resin kits are not available in the fules now. No mega bolter, no turbo laser, no plasma blastgun (the default armament) and no inferno cannon. Those that have not been cast by Armorcast are still available for the titan, gatling blaster, laser blaster melta cannon and volcano cannon, which while available were not IIRC ever cast for the Reaver and therefore were never copied by Armorcast. Its a straight either or, honest cooincidence perhaps? Yeah right.

Orlanth wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:Ouch. Hoisted by his own petard, nicely done!

While you gloat, check the one afterwards.....three missile launchers, which of course it cannot have.

Every single one now becomes all but one. still there is still the exception that proves the rule, and of course its a Forgeworld kit and thereforefits in the new swallow out doctrine I am talking about.

I have Epic going back to Codex Titanicus, none of them match the outfitting for the Forgeworld kit, and have options the current Reaver cannot support. Why is that exactly?

Don't take me for an simpleton. I know perfectly well that there exists only a single model to refute your blanket statement. There's no need to "point that out" for me. As for the rest of it, we're just going around in circles now. No answer we will produce is ever going to satisfy you, it'd just further poison the well of this thread.

Out of curiosity, do you own an Armorcast titan or are you just arguing this thing for principle's sake? Something made me guess the latter, but I'm willing to entertain doubt on the matter.

I made a logical argument and backed it up with facts. I get attacked, I respond with more clear logic.

Frankly I am not attacking you, just stating what I see as a valid case.

If you think you have an answer to satisfy me I would like to hear it. Xanthos found half of one that I had not in all honesty seen, this solitary model titan. Within the new and old rules together.

When did the switch to laser blasters for Reaver standard armament come from? The specialist games website is still on 2005 publications, and I am up to date for there.

It would of course make logical sense for them to retcon Epic now so that only the new titans are valid. This would of course deny the old Epic Reavers that many peole have.

As for my collection. I have had titans in the past a Epic scale, but traded them away for a 40K marine army some years back.
I have no Reaver, but I have one on its way, yes it is an Armorcast. It guns will go on the Warhound and I will scratchbuild others. Personally I will not lose out, I am walig into the trade knowing that I have work to do on the kit. I might counts as for a while, but I want a Volcano cannon on my Reaver, and welcome its inclusion, just not the expulsion of other options.

I will not lose out by the current ruling on reavers, the Missile launcher is still there, and I will have two other guns. My concern is the affrontery of Forgeworld. And the quote I had on their attitude to Armorcast kits is from a very good source.

Their attitude should be that anyone willing to buy a 40K scale titan is a customer well and truly into the hobby. The attitude is close to if you are currently buying from us, you get THE FINGER. Most companies accept enthusiasts with old models of whatever they have sold because an old customer is likely a future customer. GW have had a hostile approach to not-current customers for a very long time, and only on rare occassion step the other way. To be fair two examples do come to mind, the deliberate inclusion of old school Glade Guard (spear and shield) as Eternal Guard. Also old school Razorbacks are now permitted alongside the current plastic kits in the new Marine codex. These are rare execeptions, bad customer support is more normal than good. However in the case of the Armorcast licenced products it is a little more personal than that. IG Griffons were forgotten in IG rule changes, from what I heard Armorcast titans were very much remembered when these rules were written.

Orlanth,

this is not a dig at you, but I would not be surprised to see GW (Of which FW is wholly-owned subsidiary of) to one day require that all customers get kicked squarely in the nutsack with every purchase of 10$ or more. They would still make money.

I dont buy the FW reaver conspiracy thing, but I'm pretty sure that SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE, brought it up during development, and the FW masters probably said "screw THOSE guys" lets do new weapons, and make em look extra blasty!!!111

Honestly...it's GW..the company is being run by Manatees pushing "idea balls" into vacuum tubes for codex and rules design, then slaps a big ole price tag on it and sendt it out the door...and I still buy it, cause my wife lets me play with plastic army men on saturdays

Orlanth wrote:If you think you have an answer to satisfy me I would like to hear it. Xanthos found half of one that I had not in all honesty seen, this solitary model titan. Within the new and old rules together.

When did the switch to laser blasters for Reaver standard armament come from? The specialist games website is still on 2005 publications, and I am up to date for there.

I'm in the wrong there, actually. I checked the PDF on the SG site again, and the standard Mars-pattern armament is two Turbo Laser Destructors, not Laster Blasters. I blame the incredibly convoluted weapons nomenclature of the 40k universe (I still can't remember which is bigger, an inferno gun or an inferno cannon). I didn't mean to imply that the current EA rules had battle titan weapons for the arms, I just managed to trip over the names.

As for what explanation I could offer to the situation as-is, would be the following sequence of events.

1. The plan to build a Reaver is proposed
2. They do preliminary work on it, wanting to go bigger and badder than the Warhound. The size of the finished model is decided upon.
3. They try the Warhound weapons on it (since they've already pretty much locked down what each of those look like), and decide it looks weedy, doesn't really give a new WHOAH experience. They need weapons for it the players haven't seen yet, precedence be damned, FW is all about making models that look cool, not living up to GW fluff.
4. They decide to give the arms Warlord weapons instead. The stats for those are already up in Apocalypse, plus it makes the Reaver look 100% new instead of just a bigger frame for the same guns
5. Someone writes the rules, with an eye out to the model, probably being finalized at this point. There's maybe some talk about making additional arm weapon options, so might as well stat those out as well. Again, they probably figure new things like a volcano cannon and a mega-powerfist sell better than Scout Titan weapons, so those get included, and Warhound weapons get discarded.

That's probably more optimist than anything that's ever taken place, of course. The truth, for what it's worth (absolutely nothing), is more likely to lie somewhere between such extremes. Maybe they gave us the big guns because they know making a Warlord model is impossible and they wanted to have the next best thing, turning the Reaver into Warlord-Lite

This might actually be the silliest argument I've ever seen on Dakka.

We need Triggerbaby to come in here, make fun of everyone and kill the thread. C'mon Triggerbaby, I believe in you!

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Like I said, I'd prefer to talk about the rest of the book. I.e. I hear the Mole Launcher isn't worth spit.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

I'm in the wrong there, actually. I checked the PDF on the SG site again, and the standard Mars-pattern armament is two Turbo Laser Destructors, not Laster Blasters.

Well I was in the wrong too. I remember the picture clearly enough to remember it was an old Epic Reaver (ie Armorcast compatible and currently disavowed), but still got the wrong guns.
At least you also are man enough to come back and say so.
I have got it wrong on this very thread more than once anyway. Fortuned and Guided Revenants, no wonder they were winning, nuff said.

Agamemnon2 wrote:
As for what explanation I could offer to the situation as-is, would be the following sequence of events.

1. The plan to build a Reaver is proposed
2. They do preliminary work on it, wanting to go bigger and badder than the Warhound. The size of the finished model is decided upon.
3. They try the Warhound weapons on it (since they've already pretty much locked down what each of those look like), and decide it looks weedy, doesn't really give a new WHOAH experience. They need weapons for it the players haven't seen yet, precedence be damned, FW is all about making models that look cool, not living up to GW fluff.
4. They decide to give the arms Warlord weapons instead. The stats for those are already up in Apocalypse, plus it makes the Reaver look 100% new instead of just a bigger frame for the same guns
5. Someone writes the rules, with an eye out to the model, probably being finalized at this point. There's maybe some talk about making additional arm weapon options, so might as well stat those out as well. Again, they probably figure new things like a volcano cannon and a mega-powerfist sell better than Scout Titan weapons, so those get included, and Warhound weapons get discarded.

That's probably more optimist than anything that's ever taken place, of course. The truth, for what it's worth (absolutely nothing), is more likely to lie somewhere between such extremes. Maybe they gave us the big guns because they know making a Warlord model is impossible and they wanted to have the next best thing, turning the Reaver into Warlord-Lite

I buy your story that the Reaver was due an upgunning, it could always have those guns and its armament is still legal for old epic. In this way the current Forgeworld loadout is not apocryphal for Epic, and I was misleading on how I represented this earlier in the thread. My complaint is entirely on exclusions not on what you can now take. I am looking forward to my scratchbuilt volcano cannon and laser/gatling blaster (dont know which yet).

I do have a problem with some of the new guns, the strength D multi shot weapons, but that mistake is not Forgeworlds fault, but Jervises. The laser blaster needs fixing, not taking off the titan. Also the rules for carapace weapons are poorly conceived. Big guns like volcano cannon deserve as minimum range penalty, while a mega bolter or inferno cannon needs to be able to shoot infantry attacking the titan. I would have prefered one major and two minor weapons, upgraded to two major weapons and one minor weapon for a point cost upgrade, with the weapons fitting anywhere, within reason. Also close combat weapons should be minor titasn weapons, they are only worth swapping out the lighter guns. But again that is just wishing.




Not being a direct dig at you, but you should (re)read this thread:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/190647.page

We both posted there, and at this point neither of us had seen the Datafax so we were going only on our preconceptions or external sources. I was already suspicious that Forgeworld would hose Armorcast titans if a Reaver of their own was to be made, and strongly suspected that it might be ommitted permenantly. I mention this because my objections to the new datasheet is not out of angry reaction, I already 'knew' beforehand that this would not end up well for Armorcast titan owners. My sources in GW were good.

Agamemnon2 wrote:Like I said, I'd prefer to talk about the rest of the book. I.e. I hear the Mole Launcher isn't worth spit.

Well it's a cheap weapon that has a short range. Personally I like the rules attached to the weapon, but then again I play for fun.

BrookM wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:Like I said, I'd prefer to talk about the rest of the book. I.e. I hear the Mole Launcher isn't worth spit.

Well it's a cheap weapon that has a short range. Personally I like the rules attached to the weapon, but then again I play for fun.

Very well, end of Reaver Titan armament discussion agreed.

Does the mole launcher ignore cover saves, or have extra effect against the cover itself. It seems like a weapon made for siege warfare.

BrookM wrote:...but then again I play for fun.

I'd like you show me someone who doesn't play for fun.

BYE

Orlanth wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:
Not being a direct dig at you, but you should (re)read this thread:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/190647.page

We both posted there, and at this point neither of us had seen the Datafax so we were going only on our preconceptions or external sources. I was already suspicious that Forgeworld would hose Armorcast titans if a Reaver of their own was to be made, and strongly suspected that it might be ommitted permenantly. I mention this because my objections to the new datasheet is not out of angry reaction, I already 'knew' beforehand that this would not end up well for Armorcast titan owners. My sources in GW were good.

Hm, that was a fun trip down memory lane. Looks like a lot of people were doubting we'd even get a Reaver of any sort. Looks like I was snarky back then, too: "After all, they are called Forge World, not Wraithbone Lathe or Mek's Garage. "