My take on when we might see Xenia Titans, and indeed Epic.

I reckon it’s gonna be similar to Necromunda. For now, we’re getting the classic incarnation (6 core Gangs, plus new spangly toys). And provided it continues to sell comfortable levels, they’re looking to expand outside of Hive Primus. As we’ve never really seen that stuff explored (barring Ash Waste Nomads I suppose), we don’t really know what to expect.

Adeptus Titanicus? Well, who knows. Originally there were just the three Imperial Titans, until Codex Titanicus, which introduced Eldar and Ork Titans. Afraid I can’t remember if it also included Warlock Titans or not? That’s not an awful lot of stuff to catch up with, not really. Now we’ve known since I first broke the news under my old BoLS monicker of Mr Mystery (back when even the scale wasn’t fully decided on) that they were looking at adding entirely new classes/sub-classes of Titans. None were mentioned by name then, but may have been since, I’m genuinely unsure.

But even then, Loyalist vs Traitor is only expandable so far in my opinion. Especially when the company themself have said the scale caps out around 7 Titans a side. Here I won’t pull numbers out of my arse, but I’m willing to stick my neck out and say there’ll be a fair few gamers out there who’ll not want, or possibly be able to easily afford, many redundant models in a single force.

Adding Xenos of course expands that. I suspect people would be more willing to increase spending if they end up with a two or even three separate forces - especially given how different Ork and Eldar Titans are from their Imperial Counterparts.

Main question for me is have the creatives behind this been doodling Xenos Titans etc whilst the ‘core three’ were being moved over into plastic?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Adding Xenos of course expands that. I suspect people would be more willing to increase spending if they end up with a two or even three separate forces - especially given how different Ork and Eldar Titans are from their Imperial Counterparts.

Main question for me is have the creatives behind this been doodling Xenos Titans etc whilst the ‘core three’ were being moved over into plastic?

Well Eldar should be relatively quick to develop, saying as the models already exist for their knight and two titans. The former will definitely be a CAD design, and even if the titans need to be reconstructed like the Warhound/Reaver they do have much less complex shapes.

Orks will be much tougher. I'm pretty sure the Stompa kit is old enough to pre-date their current CAD technology, so it means doing a lot from scratch.

Orks would need to be done from scratch.

Given the general dimensions of Gargants, we’d never see them in 40k scale Resin, because the weight would be immense!

However, that may make their design easier. Now I’m no structural engineer, so please ignore my optimistic ignorance here. But most of the model would be hollow, and you basically build off an upside down bucket shape, just adding bits and bobs and odds and sods to the exterior to detail it up from there.

Though thinking about it, I’d love to see new weapons developed for Ork and Eldar Titans. They never did get the extra variety the Warlord did!

Final, new thought on the Orky stuff? Imagine a more-or-less completely plain superstructure sprue. No detailing, just the basic shape, yeah? Then additional plating sprues and resin plating to allow us to properly Kustom them up - even with hand made bits. That’s the Orky way!

 xttz wrote:
Orks will be much tougher. I'm pretty sure the Stompa kit is old enough to pre-date their current CAD technology, so it means doing a lot from scratch.

Or they could just bag up an assortment of plasticard squares, plumbing bits and old buggy parts

The big question with Orks is if we get the old heavy trackd mega gargant or the walker (always felt the early ork walkers looked fine standing but never had any room to actually move their feet)

The psytitan never appeared in model form, though conversions likely did.

I'd agree that there is only so far they can take the Imperial titans, especially as many of them come with multiple weapon choices. It's a bit like Tyranids - the Carny is like the Warlord in that it can do almost whatever you want. Yes there will be room for a few specialist big titans that are pure focused on a single role, but by and large once you've got your generalist you don't need a thousand other models.

Eldar will probably be the first Xenos since they've already got several titans in FW resin to be worked from. Orks next then the Tyranid (the current biotitan might actually work better as a model in smaller plastic than in the huge resin beast it is now)

One advantage titanicus seems to have over Necromunda is units can be just sold as card packs rather than needing new books, so say cerastus knights come out they just need to sell those terminals rather than profiles in books. Or even just include terminals and cards in a box with them.

The one issue that will be annoying is lack of legion rules we only get 2 houses at the moment, I was kinda hoping we would have had 4-6 of them, Though I can see some white dwarf expansions helping that way.

I think for other races all they would need is terminals+weapon packs and a unique warlord traits+strategem pack.

I guess it also depends on just how flexible the rules are.

For instance, putting stress on your reactor becomes boiler for Orks (yup, boiler!) or the pilot’s psychic abilities for Eldar (or none at all I suppose. Could be their ‘thing’?).

Tyranids? Well, they’d need some kind of Synaptic dependency. But my fear is given the low model count, they’d just become the old Warhammer Undead in terms of countering them - pod shot the general, watch their strategy crumble. Potentially a fun twist for a handful of games, but too restrictive for repeat playing. With no knocking of the game’s fans, it’s precisely that which put me off Warmahordes.

But that of course is assuming the game breaks out of the Heresy era - it doesn’t have to for Eldar and Orks. Just, erm....everyone else

The other thing with Xenos is that they never got many titans in the past. Tyranid only had 2, Eldar not many more - so there's a huge wealth of potential there to add a lot to the game in terms of visual variety and models for gamers.

 Thargrim wrote:
In all honesty i'd rather they backtracked the timeline to great crusade. That way the legios could fight xenos as they conquer worlds. That way a legio mortis/krytos or pre warped traitor legio etc army is not invalidated. If they advance the timeline of the game to post HH then for example my legio mortis army in black/red/gold is going to be worthless for narrative games, or any lore accurate conflicts. I hope AH keeps this in mind, cause it could lead to problems later on. Gryphonicus or a loyalist legio might be a safer choice in the long term if they plan on advancing the timeline instead of going pre HH.

I hadn't thought about a pre-prequal, I really like the idea. Though I guess we'd be restricted to Imperial vs Orks, and onther obscure Xenos that they'll never make armies for.

The Eldar has 3 Titans (excluding Knights here): Revenant, Warlock, and Phantom titans.

 Thargrim wrote:
In all honesty i'd rather they backtracked the timeline to great crusade. That way the legios could fight xenos as they conquer worlds. That way a legio mortis/krytos or pre warped traitor legio etc army is not invalidated. If they advance the timeline of the game to post HH then for example my legio mortis army in black/red/gold is going to be worthless for narrative games, or any lore accurate conflicts. I hope AH keeps this in mind, cause it could lead to problems later on. Gryphonicus or a loyalist legio might be a safer choice in the long term if they plan on advancing the timeline instead of going pre HH.

I hadn't thought about a pre-prequel, I like the idea, but I think we'd be restricted to Imperial vs Orks, plus a few obscure Xenos that they wouldn't make models for (or maybe Mechanicus vs other Mars-dwelling humanoids, to which the same applies).

All about how they work in the game.

Traditionally? Eldar have been fast. And indeed, their Holofields depended on keeping on the move. Their guns were never the best, but thanks to being swifter, they typically got in better shots, compensating somewhat. This was all offset by being, Holofields aside, really really easy to smash up. Unlike other Titans, couple of solid hits would do serious damage.

Orks? Polar opposite. They couldn’t really manoeuvre worth a damn, but they were hell to stop. They came with more shields than anyone for a start, but couldn’t reinstate any they lost. Other than that, you just had to keep on hitting them, and hitting them. No Plasma reactor to tonk. Blow its head off and you just made ordering it about a bit harder. Blow off a foot? Didn’t topple over and die.

At the moment, with both sides using the same rules, booms and drawbacks, it’s fairly easy to have a properly functioning game. But start adding in other races? That’s quite the challenge to keep it all even. Though the more potential variety of opponents, the more weapon upgrades they’ll sell. I mean, against Orks? I need every shot to count, so go for punch over rate of fire. Eldar? More or less the opposite. Just pagga them with as many shots as you can, because it doesn’t take many hits getting through to give them a bad day.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Orks would need to be done from scratch.

Given the general dimensions of Gargants, we’d never see them in 40k scale Resin, because the weight would be immense!

However, that may make their design easier. Now I’m no structural engineer, so please ignore my optimistic ignorance here. But most of the model would be hollow, and you basically build off an upside down bucket shape, just adding bits and bobs and odds and sods to the exterior to detail it up from there.

Certainly that's how 40k gargant is. Most of it is simply empty space.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Tyranids? Well, they’d need some kind of Synaptic dependency. But my fear is given the low model count, they’d just become the old Warhammer Undead in terms of countering them - pod shot the general, watch their strategy crumble. Potentially a fun twist for a handful of games, but too restrictive for repeat playing. With no knocking of the game’s fans, it’s precisely that which put me off Warmahordes.

Or not. Pretty sure epic armageddon titans didn't need baby sitter nor 40k. And with small independent critters feel weird for mighty bio titan to need baby sitter.

Was thinking for the order system.

But hey, I’m no games designer. Just expressing my own view.

Synapse shouldn't be needed for the titans as they are huge beasts, but could be a neat mechanic for their knight equivalents. Tyranids able to bring swift death, but not as able to split up their force or to flank with lesser creatures as easily.

Then again GW reworked synapse quite a bit for the new 40K edition and it works better for most. They took away the idea that losing it meant basically losing control over the majority of the army and instead approached it more like having synapse is a buff.

Mechanically in the game it makes it fairer for the Tyranid player and more fun as now they are not as vulnerable to its loss; plus it means that opponents have more tactical choices than just running for the synapse units.

So that thinking could well come over to AT if synapse did. Being able to flank with weaker stats or at least move lesser Tyranid through the flanks to then strike at the same instant the titan does so that they regain synapse at that most critical point etc...

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
My 40k Warhound is painted in the colours of the Death's Heads, to ally with my Emperor's Children, Cyclothraithe dark mechanicum and House Atrax Knights. That won't stop me using it in 40k (alongside said Knights) with my Elysians and Space Wolves; I'll just mumble a bit when someone asks what legion it's from.

Could have sworn that I've read someplace in the fluff from either a rule book or codex over the last 30 years that sometimes things go into the warp and come out thousands of years later. No reason why your titan didn't do the same thing. It was lost in the warp 10K years ago and reappeared unscathed in 40K. The warp is ill defined, so it gives people leeway to come up with their own fluff for some seeming oddities. So you might have to come up with a story of sorts but fluff is fluff. It's not like they have stories and histories for everything. They have barely scratched the surface when you look at the supposed size of the Imperium, etc.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
All about how they work in the game.

Traditionally? Eldar have been fast. And indeed, their Holofields depended on keeping on the move. Their guns were never the best, but thanks to being swifter, they typically got in better shots, compensating somewhat. This was all offset by being, Holofields aside, really really easy to smash up. Unlike other Titans, couple of solid hits would do serious damage.

Orks? Polar opposite. They couldn’t really manoeuvre worth a damn, but they were hell to stop. They came with more shields than anyone for a start, but couldn’t reinstate any they lost. Other than that, you just had to keep on hitting them, and hitting them. No Plasma reactor to tonk. Blow its head off and you just made ordering it about a bit harder. Blow off a foot? Didn’t topple over and die.

At the moment, with both sides using the same rules, booms and drawbacks, it’s fairly easy to have a properly functioning game. But start adding in other races? That’s quite the challenge to keep it all even. Though the more potential variety of opponents, the more weapon upgrades they’ll sell. I mean, against Orks? I need every shot to count, so go for punch over rate of fire. Eldar? More or less the opposite. Just pagga them with as many shots as you can, because it doesn’t take many hits getting through to give them a bad day.

Eldar Titans were the worst because of their Holofields. It did not protect them at all against barrage weapons which were used a lot by the Imperium and the Squats. Another crippling feature was the effect of a Holofield depending on the Order:

First Fire: 4+
Advance: 3+
Charge: 2+

You want to shoot with a Titan so the Charge Order was in most cases a waste. If you picked Advance order then you would be gunned down by all units on First Fire because Advance fire was always resolved later. And if you picked First Fire then you needed the blessing of the dice gods or else you wouldn´t survive the return fire.

Imperial & Squat Void shields were therefore vastly superior and could even regenerate. Hell, I would even prefer orkish Power Fields. So when were Eldar Titans really good? Against a foe with almost zero access to barrage weapons and who would have very short range shooting attacks (Chaos & Orks).

 Malika2 wrote:
The Eldar has 3 Titans (excluding Knights here): Revenant, Warlock, and Phantom titans.

However the Warlock is visually identical to the Phantom, it's only difference is housing the spiritstones of Farseers and Warlocks giving it psychic powers and enabling it to use the Psychic Lance, an internal weapon that generally fired out of a head mounted gemstone.

For that matter the Warlord Psi-titan's only visial difference to a normal Warlord is the left arm's Sinistramanus Tenebrae being a completely different weapon being uniqe to it.

 Strg Alt wrote:

Eldar Titans were the worst because of their Holofields. It did not protect them at all against barrage weapons which were used a lot by the Imperium and the Squats. Another crippling feature was the effect of a Holofield depending on the Order:

First Fire: 4+
Advance: 3+
Charge: 2+

You want to shoot with a Titan so the Charge Order was in most cases a waste. If you picked Advance order then you would be gunned down by all units on First Fire because Advance fire was always resolved later. And if you picked First Fire then you needed the blessing of the dice gods or else you wouldn´t survive the return fire.

Yeah the Eldar Phantoms are tricky to play with. At least in AT/SM1 you could fire on charge orders, but it was in SM2/TL you couldn't at all. I have had my ass handed to me by Eldar Phantoms regardless. They were faster and more maneuverable than most Titans in AT, so they could in theory flank their opponents. But if you are moving everyone to the center of the board, then yeah, they might go quick.

I have no idea where this game will go beyond the release of the Reavers and Warhounds, and I dream of Epic returning to its glory days, but honestly if they just followed the original path of the original AT, then SM1, followed by a Codex introducing Eldar and Orks I would be thrilled. Of course I would want to see all xenos eventually, but at least this way they introduce new units in a gradual manner and still pay respect to the games origins.

And by the way, if you have the time and the interest in how the original system evolved, pick up the White Dwarfs from that era. Some really interesting concepts. The rules for infantry and vehicles appeared in White Dwarf long before SM1 came out, around issue 109, and many of the original concepts didn't make it into the final SM1 rulebook. Not all of it is really practical, but if you want to play a really in-depth game with marines battling it out between levels of a building, there are rules for it. Feels just like Stalingrad.

Personally I prefer the later, more simpler rules, but those early ideas were still interesting.



Man that pic of the diorama gives me goosebumps. It was pics like that back in the day that made me realize this was the game I had been waiting for my entire life but had no idea.

If GW doesn't give us rules for Infantry and Land Raiders, we should just make up our own on Dakka.

Hey guys, can we get spoiler tags on large images from now on please?

 Imateria wrote:

 Malika2 wrote:
The Eldar has 3 Titans (excluding Knights here): Revenant, Warlock, and Phantom titans.

However the Warlock is visually identical to the Phantom, it's only difference is housing the spiritstones of Farseers and Warlocks giving it psychic powers and enabling it to use the Psychic Lance, an internal weapon that generally fired out of a head mounted gemstone.

For that matter the Warlord Psi-titan's only visial difference to a normal Warlord is the left arm's Sinistramanus Tenebrae being a completely different weapon being uniqe to it.

Old Epic player here. I notice a lot of errors in those statements about the Eldar Titans. The Warlock Titan had a different head compared to the Phantom. The Psychic Lance was an arm mounted weapon that resembled a knobbly instrument used by females for self pleasure.

The Eldar TItans suffered from a very limited and poor weapon selection. There was only one really good weapon, the Pulsar since it kicked out the necessary number of shots to reliably strip void shields. That meant competitive Eldar Titans were always armed with dual Pulsars, and this loadout was a terror to Warlord Titans. The other weapons were simply out-classed by the reliable do-everything Pulsars. The Heat Lance was a single shot per turn short range weapon with shots lost power at range, and which was only devastating in damage effects if it hit an unshielded Titan. The Tremor Cannon was a mediocre weapon by itself, and only became halfway decent if dual mounted since it hit Titan legs automatically without scatter. The Psychic Lance hit the heads of enemy Titans but only hit on 5+ (with Warlock Titans hitting on 4+) and it was a single shot per turn weapon.

The Warlock Titan was a straight upgrade to the Phantom since its most valuable psychic power Witch Sight imposed a -1 to hit on enemy shots. The other powers of Doom and War Shout were too situational and left the Titan too vulnerable.

The key weakness of the Eldar Titans was the need to keep moving. Staying still on First Fire was tantamount to suicide. Therefore most of the time it was on Advance, and even then barrage or template weapons straight out ignored the holofields. The old Epic rules had Eldar Titans as heavily armored as Warlords, and one small benefit was their hit template was more spindly, so hits would sometimes scatter off and effectively miss.

Things got slightly better with the expansion Titan Legions and crew skills since the Eldar Titan got a skill that enabled shooting while on Charge orders. This skill was effectively mandatory.

Ultimately the main flaw of the Eldar TItan rules was they were too gimmicky. The holofields translated into big vulnerabilities that the player ended up trying to mitigate, and their weapons suffered from having special gimmicks that were of limited benefit on an otherwise mediocre statline, resulting in the Pulsar being the clear superior no-brainer choice.

Which leads to an interesting Concept.

Revenants are of course somewhere between a Knight and a Warhounds in terms of battlefield role, if not size.

The Phantom/Warlock, arguably Reaver equivalent, though again in battlefield role falling between Warhound and Reaver.

There’s precisely nothing stopping them from creating a new class, one better suited to counter Warlords. Now quite what that might look like, I dunno. I’ll leave that to people more into their Eldar.

But one idea did pop into my head, psychically charged monofilament Cannon. Imagine spraying and enemy Titan with that, and watching the mesh overload shield after shield until it exhausts it’s energies? Void Shields/Power Fields are there to resist large focussed hits. What if the mesh is covering the entirety of the shield, stressing it’s generator for ‘a thousand cuts’. Seems very Eldar to me!

 Overread wrote:
always felt the early ork walkers looked fine standing but never had any room to actually move their feet

I remember reading a small bit of fluff somewhere years ago that explained this. All the old ork walkers moved on tracks and the feet were just rigged up to shuffle back and forth so it looked like they were walking... So classic ork engineering!

Has anyone spend any time looking at the buildings that come in the box? I assume they can only be built one way compared to the newer 40K terrain pieces that have options to built your own designs.

It'd be nice if it's possible to have some level of flexibility...

New thread started for Xenos Weapon speculation and wishlisting.

 Strg Alt wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
All about how they work in the game.

Traditionally? Eldar have been fast. And indeed, their Holofields depended on keeping on the move. Their guns were never the best, but thanks to being swifter, they typically got in better shots, compensating somewhat. This was all offset by being, Holofields aside, really really easy to smash up. Unlike other Titans, couple of solid hits would do serious damage.

Orks? Polar opposite. They couldn’t really manoeuvre worth a damn, but they were hell to stop. They came with more shields than anyone for a start, but couldn’t reinstate any they lost. Other than that, you just had to keep on hitting them, and hitting them. No Plasma reactor to tonk. Blow its head off and you just made ordering it about a bit harder. Blow off a foot? Didn’t topple over and die.

At the moment, with both sides using the same rules, booms and drawbacks, it’s fairly easy to have a properly functioning game. But start adding in other races? That’s quite the challenge to keep it all even. Though the more potential variety of opponents, the more weapon upgrades they’ll sell. I mean, against Orks? I need every shot to count, so go for punch over rate of fire. Eldar? More or less the opposite. Just pagga them with as many shots as you can, because it doesn’t take many hits getting through to give them a bad day.

Eldar Titans were the worst because of their Holofields. It did not protect them at all against barrage weapons which were used a lot by the Imperium and the Squats. Another crippling feature was the effect of a Holofield depending on the Order:

First Fire: 4+
Advance: 3+
Charge: 2+

You want to shoot with a Titan so the Charge Order was in most cases a waste. If you picked Advance order then you would be gunned down by all units on First Fire because Advance fire was always resolved later. And if you picked First Fire then you needed the blessing of the dice gods or else you wouldn´t survive the return fire.

Imperial & Squat Void shields were therefore vastly superior and could even regenerate. Hell, I would even prefer orkish Power Fields. So when were Eldar Titans really good? Against a foe with almost zero access to barrage weapons and who would have very short range shooting attacks (Chaos & Orks).

Are you talking about Epic as a whole, or Adeptus Titanicus here? Restricting things to just titans does mean the number of blasts weapons available might not be as much, and there should be more large structures to block LOS - if a Warlord can hide behind a tower block, a highly manoeuvrable Phantom can too.

As I recall, while you could hit Phantoms fairly easily with barrage weapons (although I didn't have many - just a single detachment of deathstrikes with plasma warheads and a detachment of Whirlwinds), they were still hard to damage due to their silhouette - unlike the Warlord or Great Gargant where a centre mass shot at least guaranteed a hit (at the cost of targeting the heaviest armour), there was nowhere on a Phantom that you couldn't miss it from. And then Titan Legions re-introduced experience advances for titans, and allowed Eldar to get a skill that allowed them to save vs blast weapons, and my regular opponent's Revenants became unkillable.

I hope if they get around to Tyranids we get completely reworked biotitans. I hate the look of the current one from FW. For one, it looks to gangly. I’d prefer one that is closer to a Carnifex/Warrior in appearance, or perhaps a Trigon.
Godzilla & friends really should be the inspiration for the ‘kids, or at least the robeasts of Voltron

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Which leads to an interesting Concept.

Revenants are of course somewhere between a Knight and a Warhounds in terms of battlefield role, if not size.

The Phantom/Warlock, arguably Reaver equivalent, though again in battlefield role falling between Warhound and Reaver.

There’s precisely nothing stopping them from creating a new class, one better suited to counter Warlords. Now quite what that might look like, I dunno. I’ll leave that to people more into their Eldar.

But one idea did pop into my head, psychically charged monofilament Cannon. Imagine spraying and enemy Titan with that, and watching the mesh overload shield after shield until it exhausts it’s energies? Void Shields/Power Fields are there to resist large focussed hits. What if the mesh is covering the entirety of the shield, stressing it’s generator for ‘a thousand cuts’. Seems very Eldar to me!

Phantom/Warlocks were Warlord equivalent back in Epic days. It wasn't until Forge World later seemed to downgrade them to being merely Reaver equivalent. Revenants were Warhound equivalents. Again it seems that it is Forge World that goes around making the Eldar versions inferior to the Imperium ones.

In the old Epic rules, a dual Pulsar armed Phantom or Warlock (with 2 lascannon wing weapon options) was a Warlord killer. It could put out 2d6+4 shots that could strip off the 6 shields of a Warlord easily and then force so many armor saves that some would fail. The Eldar Titans were glass cannons. If they could fire first they could kill Warlords. If not, they were hideously vulnerable to barrage weapons, though their holofields were reasonable against non-barrage weapons. It was still a bit too all or nothing approach in terms of rules, and a bit bland, since that was really the only competitive Eldar TItan build.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:


As I recall, while you could hit Phantoms fairly easily with barrage weapons (although I didn't have many - just a single detachment of deathstrikes with plasma warheads and a detachment of Whirlwinds), they were still hard to damage due to their silhouette - unlike the Warlord or Great Gargant where a centre mass shot at least guaranteed a hit (at the cost of targeting the heaviest armour), there was nowhere on a Phantom that you couldn't miss it from. And then Titan Legions re-introduced experience advances for titans, and allowed Eldar to get a skill that allowed them to save vs blast weapons, and my regular opponent's Revenants became unkillable.

The problem with those skills was that the only worthwhile ones to pick were ones that basically mitigated the glaring vulnerabilities of the holofield system. I would say there is a problem with the fundamental rules if everything else has to basically patch up the weaknesses.

Iracundus wrote:


Phantom/Warlocks were Warlord equivalent back in Epic days. It wasn't until Forge World later seemed to downgrade them to being merely Reaver equivalent. Revenants were Warhound equivalents. Again it seems that it is Forge World that goes around making the Eldar versions inferior to the Imperium ones.

An upside could be the introduction of a superior class of Eldar machine to rival the Warlord.

 Stormonu wrote:
I hope if they get around to Tyranids we get completely reworked biotitans. I hate the look of the current one from FW. For one, it looks to gangly. I’d prefer one that is closer to a Carnifex/Warrior in appearance, or perhaps a Trigon.
Godzilla & friends really should be the inspiration for the ‘kids, or at least the robeasts of Voltron

The Tyranid biotitans look like spiders because the original Epic biotitans looked like spiders. However Forge World made the 40k scale version with excessively spiky blade-like feet, even though biomechanically it would have needed far thicker feet to make more solid contact with the ground.

Like the Eldar TItans though, their hit template meant shots scattered off. The Tyranid biotitan weapon choices were also like the Eldar in that there were clearly superior choices.

Iracundus wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Which leads to an interesting Concept.

Revenants are of course somewhere between a Knight and a Warhounds in terms of battlefield role, if not size.

The Phantom/Warlock, arguably Reaver equivalent, though again in battlefield role falling between Warhound and Reaver.

There’s precisely nothing stopping them from creating a new class, one better suited to counter Warlords. Now quite what that might look like, I dunno. I’ll leave that to people more into their Eldar.

But one idea did pop into my head, psychically charged monofilament Cannon. Imagine spraying and enemy Titan with that, and watching the mesh overload shield after shield until it exhausts it’s energies? Void Shields/Power Fields are there to resist large focussed hits. What if the mesh is covering the entirety of the shield, stressing it’s generator for ‘a thousand cuts’. Seems very Eldar to me!

Phantom/Warlocks were Warlord equivalent back in Epic days. It wasn't until Forge World later seemed to downgrade them to being merely Reaver equivalent. Revenants were Warhound equivalents. Again it seems that it is Forge World that goes around making the Eldar versions inferior to the Imperium ones.

Size-wise, yes. However, right from the off, they've been more similar to Reavers in terms of firepower. For a start, their wing mounts were limited to two hard-points (i.e attack dice) each - no super-heavy weapons allowed, since they took up three hard points. Both wing mounts combined are roughly equivalent to a single Imperial titan carapace mount.

bortass wrote:
Has anyone spend any time looking at the buildings that come in the box? I assume they can only be built one way compared to the newer 40K terrain pieces that have options to built your own designs.

It'd be nice if it's possible to have some level of flexibility...

Lots of modularity. Three different heights and the kit will make for a lot of variation and creativity. :-)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and there are a ton of spare roofs and connectors. I could wish for some ruined parts also, but those are likely on their way in a separate kit.

The Phantom is still very much meant to be the Eldar equivelant of the Warlord titan, it's only the 8th ed rules for the Phantom that are so laughably bad that it couldn't dream to hold up in a fight with one (matches how bad the rules are for just about everything Eldar that FW produce). Last edition they were pretty much equal in capability, whoever went first was likely to win (fun fact, it was physically impossible for Phantom with duel Pulsars to miss a Warlord, even with only a 5" template a max 8" scatter in any direction would still clip the Warlord).

The Revenant fills the same role as the Warhound, they're both Scout titans, it's just the Revenant's firepower gets close to the Reavers. It's the Reaver that Eldar have no equivelant to, but the versatility of both the Revenant and Phantom means they generally don't need one (not that I'd complain if they make one).

 Xanthos wrote:

bortass wrote:
Has anyone spend any time looking at the buildings that come in the box? I assume they can only be built one way compared to the newer 40K terrain pieces that have options to built your own designs.

It'd be nice if it's possible to have some level of flexibility...

Lots of modularity. Three different heights and the kit will make for a lot of variation and creativity. :-)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and there are a ton of spare roofs and connectors. I could wish for some ruined parts also, but those are likely on their way in a separate kit.

I swear, I know its probably because its modular, but man, those square tiles for the roof look perfect for putting the square Epic bases on. Its eerie.

 KTG17 wrote:


I swear, I know its probably because its modular, but man, those square tiles for the roof look perfect for putting the square Epic bases on. Its eerie.

Future proofing, man, future proofing...

 Sherrypie wrote:

 KTG17 wrote:


I swear, I know its probably because its modular, but man, those square tiles for the roof look perfect for putting the square Epic bases on. Its eerie.

Future proofing, man, future proofing...

They are. Perfect in every way. :-)

I'm considering making some of these in the old school T shapes of the cardboard terrain. Just as a callback. Already doing urban camo for the carapaces of my Legio Tempestus engines. The first Warlord is closing on finished, will update my painting blog once it's done. ;-)

Are all those wee vents and greebles on the roofs there part of the kit?

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
All about how they work in the game.

Traditionally? Eldar have been fast. And indeed, their Holofields depended on keeping on the move. Their guns were never the best, but thanks to being swifter, they typically got in better shots, compensating somewhat. This was all offset by being, Holofields aside, really really easy to smash up. Unlike other Titans, couple of solid hits would do serious damage.

Orks? Polar opposite. They couldn’t really manoeuvre worth a damn, but they were hell to stop. They came with more shields than anyone for a start, but couldn’t reinstate any they lost. Other than that, you just had to keep on hitting them, and hitting them. No Plasma reactor to tonk. Blow its head off and you just made ordering it about a bit harder. Blow off a foot? Didn’t topple over and die.

At the moment, with both sides using the same rules, booms and drawbacks, it’s fairly easy to have a properly functioning game. But start adding in other races? That’s quite the challenge to keep it all even. Though the more potential variety of opponents, the more weapon upgrades they’ll sell. I mean, against Orks? I need every shot to count, so go for punch over rate of fire. Eldar? More or less the opposite. Just pagga them with as many shots as you can, because it doesn’t take many hits getting through to give them a bad day.

Eldar Titans were the worst because of their Holofields. It did not protect them at all against barrage weapons which were used a lot by the Imperium and the Squats. Another crippling feature was the effect of a Holofield depending on the Order:

First Fire: 4+
Advance: 3+
Charge: 2+

You want to shoot with a Titan so the Charge Order was in most cases a waste. If you picked Advance order then you would be gunned down by all units on First Fire because Advance fire was always resolved later. And if you picked First Fire then you needed the blessing of the dice gods or else you wouldn´t survive the return fire.

Imperial & Squat Void shields were therefore vastly superior and could even regenerate. Hell, I would even prefer orkish Power Fields. So when were Eldar Titans really good? Against a foe with almost zero access to barrage weapons and who would have very short range shooting attacks (Chaos & Orks).

Are you talking about Epic as a whole, or Adeptus Titanicus here? Restricting things to just titans does mean the number of blasts weapons available might not be as much, and there should be more large structures to block LOS - if a Warlord can hide behind a tower block, a highly manoeuvrable Phantom can too.

As I recall, while you could hit Phantoms fairly easily with barrage weapons (although I didn't have many - just a single detachment of deathstrikes with plasma warheads and a detachment of Whirlwinds), they were still hard to damage due to their silhouette - unlike the Warlord or Great Gargant where a centre mass shot at least guaranteed a hit (at the cost of targeting the heaviest armour), there was nowhere on a Phantom that you couldn't miss it from. And then Titan Legions re-introduced experience advances for titans, and allowed Eldar to get a skill that allowed them to save vs blast weapons, and my regular opponent's Revenants became unkillable.

I was talking about Epic/SM. Imperial Guard had artillery companies, Leviathan and the Warlord Titan with the barrage missile launcher which produced D6 barrage templates. Eldar Titans (ET) were just a waste of points against them. Squats had the Land Train, Colossus and the Goliath Mega Battery which also would make swiss cheese out of ET.

About the silhouette: You rolled two six-sided dice and each die would have only two results which would change the direction of the designated target location (Left, Right & Up, Down). So you chose the plasma reactor location of ET as a target, fire a barrage weapon with a nice asm and roll a D6: A roll of 5+ on the damage would cause it to explode. Even a roll of 3-4 on the table was quite dangerous for ET.

You want to hide ET? Barrage weapons could be fired indirectly. You needed only a friendly unit with LOS. IG would usually use bike companies for target spotting and Squats had the Armoured Airship.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Are all those wee vents and greebles on the roofs there part of the kit?

Yup. All of the roofs are double sided, and most have greeblies, so you can have with or without greeblies as you please. :-)

 Sherrypie wrote:

 KTG17 wrote:


I swear, I know its probably because its modular, but man, those square tiles for the roof look perfect for putting the square Epic bases on. Its eerie.

Future proofing, man, future proofing...

Hmm, that´s a bummer. I expected GW to release buildings with circular roofs just to mess with us customers.

A 32mm circular base fits inside a 40mm square pretty easily.

 Nurglitch wrote:
A 32mm circular base fits inside a 40mm square pretty easily.

Nobody said something about 32mm. Let´s see how and if they release any other units apart from Titans & Knights.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
My 40k Warhound is painted in the colours of the Death's Heads, to ally with my Emperor's Children, Cyclothraithe dark mechanicum and House Atrax Knights. That won't stop me using it in 40k (alongside said Knights) with my Elysians and Space Wolves; I'll just mumble a bit when someone asks what legion it's from.

Black and red is also so simple that I could see something similer getting reused anyway

New sprues for the warhounds

2 warhounds are on the sprues, 124 components in total, 62 per warhound (well not exactly 62 as there are multiple options for the weapons)

From left to right: 40, 48 and 36 components

Quite blurry but it seems there is one of each weapon type per warhound, so that would be 8 in total (2 x inferno guns, 2 x Plasma Blastgun, 2 x Turbo Laser Destructor, 2 x Vulcan Mega-Bolter)

The sprue contents look impressive, quite so. Still irked the images i've seen they still have the notch in the nose of the warhound and the two teeth. It's an alteration to a design that's been around for a long time, and i'm having a difficult time adjusting to it, I just prefer the more minimal look.

Mendi Warrior wrote:
New sprues for the warhounds

2 warhounds are on the sprues, 124 components in total, 62 per warhound

From left to right: 40, 48 and 36 components

Quite blurry but it seems there is one of each weapon type per warhound, so that would be 8 in total (2 x inferno guns, 2 x Plasma Blastgun, 2 x Turbo Laser Destructor, 2 x Vulcan Mega-Bolter)

Inferno Guns were only useful to combat infantry. I hope GW knows this and releases infantry for AT in January 2019.

From Daemons-at-work on FB according to a post elsewhere on the net

Just got my Warlord, Knights, and rules box order in and I have to say, I'm completely blown away by the Knights sprue. The level of details on these are just insanity.

Mendi Warrior wrote:
New sprues for the warhounds

2 warhounds are on the sprues, 124 components in total, 62 per warhound (well not exactly 62 as there are multiple options for the weapons)

From left to right: 40, 48 and 36 components

Quite blurry but it seems there is one of each weapon type per warhound, so that would be 8 in total (2 x inferno guns, 2 x Plasma Blastgun, 2 x Turbo Laser Destructor, 2 x Vulcan Mega-Bolter)

So these look like three full size spues. It has me wondering about the rrp (not that i expect anyone can predict a price given the vagaries of the GW pricing model). But that's the same number of sprues as the 40K Knight Crusader.. IIRC the AT warlord has 3 sprues too, but a lot less plastic than the 28mm Knight. I assume the Reavers will be sold singly, on two sprues. Still, curious about cost.

(Why does spellcheck redline the word "Sprues"? It's definitely a word. As is "Reavers".

JWBS wrote:

So these look like three full size spues. It has me wondering about the rrp (not that i expect anyone can predict a price given the vagaries of the GW pricing model). But that's the same number of sprues as the 40K Knight Crusader.. IIRC the AT warlord has 3 sprues too, but a lot less plastic than the 28mm Knight. I assume the Reavers will be sold singly, on two sprues. Still, curious about cost.

(Why does spellcheck redline the word "Sprues"? It's definitely a word. As is "Reavers".

The Reaver will be sold individually on three sprues, they have been shown a while ago at Warhammer Fest.

My guess is £40-45 for the warhounds (I hope they won't be more), and £50-55 for the Reaver.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Official pics

Could someone there confirm the base size for the Warhound please? I'm guessing 60 or 80mm round?

I want to order custom bases for all my titan legion ASAP (going for 1.5mm high laser cut acrylic to match my other Epic models) and not knowing the Warhound size is holding me back.

GlynG wrote:
Could someone there confirm the base size for the Warhound please? I'm guessing 60 or 80mm round?

I want to order custom bases for all my titan legion ASAP (going for 1.5mm high laser cut acrylic to match my other Epic models) and not knowing the Warhound size is holding me back.

Those are definitely 60’s, they even have the age of mold related flaws of a 60mm base visible in the unpainted warhound pic.

Somehow those warhounds appeal me MORE than the warlord...Oh dear if epic ever gets rereleased it's going to be expensive.

Thanks for the base confirmation changemod!

tneva82 wrote:
Somehow those warhounds appeal me MORE than the warlord...Oh dear if epic ever gets rereleased it's going to be expensive.

Me too actually, it's my favourite of the 3

Epic is still alive and supported by a loyal fanbase currently actually (there's 11 Epic tournaments around the UK this year). I'm aiming to build a titan legion from the AT models to use at Epic tournaments (I initially plan to use a list of 1 Warlord, 1 Reaver and 5 Warhounds, though I like the 2 Warlords and 2 Reavers army build too). I'm hoping we might see some new players give Epic a try when they realise their AT collection can also be used to play Epic (the models and bases are larger but the rules and tournament conventions are relaxed about such and it's a trade off in games terms).

tneva82 wrote:
Somehow those warhounds appeal me MORE than the warlord...Oh dear if epic ever gets rereleased it's going to be expensive.

absolutely beautiful minis yeah.

After perusing the rulebook last night, I am heartened that the rule book explicitly mentions expansions to both the rules and miniature ranges.

Meaning that they are at least planned and/or in development

...and yes, the Warhounds are beautiful miniatures. I see myself doing Reaver/Warhound maniples.

on another note, I'm thinking of going with the Legio Crucius for my titans


the black and white would normally have me a touch concerned but I'm thinking of painting the plates before I attach them anyway so can prime the white bits a nice light grey primer I have.

I expect if they ever get Legio rules it'll have something to do with better plasma control or something.

So, fellow princeps, can anyone answer me this - is there benefit to kitting a Knight out with 2 of the same weapon (such as 2 chainswords)? In the rules it says

"Instead of attacking with each Knight individually, make an attack with each different weapon in turn. For each weapon, multiply the Dice characteristic by the number of Knights in the Banner that are equipped with that weapon, and which are within range and line of sight of the target"

I'm taking that to mean if you had 3 knights with 2 chainswords each you'd still only be making 3 attacks, because it's about the number of knights equipped with the weapon, not the number of that weapon carried by the banner... Make sense to anyone else?

It's a bit of a pisser as I really want to equip some knights with 2 ranged weapons, and I'm going to end up with some that are decidedly derp (or just not used) if I go that way since the kit doesn't support that. I guess I could chop them up as wrecks to adorn scenery / to become objective markers.

GlynG wrote:
Could someone there confirm the base size for the Warhound please? I'm guessing 60 or 80mm round?

I want to order custom bases for all my titan legion ASAP (going for 1.5mm high laser cut acrylic to match my other Epic models) and not knowing the Warhound size is holding me back.

Warhounds will be on 80mm round bases, unless someone screwed up big time; the smallest turning/corridor template in the rules pack is 80mm wide and, I just checked, fits an 80mm base much better than a 60mm one.

GlynG wrote:
Could someone there confirm the base size for the Warhound please? I'm guessing 60 or 80mm round?

I want to order custom bases for all my titan legion ASAP (going for 1.5mm high laser cut acrylic to match my other Epic models) and not knowing the Warhound size is holding me back.

The warhound bases are 80mm

Is it worth building one of the knights with the gatling cannon or should I wait for a third party or ebay battlecannon/melta cannon?

Question for those who have a warlord and knight - the gattling guns on the knight - would they fit onto the mini gun positions on the warlord (the fore and after defence guns under the upper armour)

 Overread wrote:
Question for those who have a warlord and knight - the gattling guns on the knight - would they fit onto the mini gun positions on the warlord (the fore and after defence guns under the upper armour)

Nope, the defensive guns on the Warlord are closer to the Knights' stubber aux weapon in size.

 ElvisJuice wrote:
So, fellow princeps, can anyone answer me this - is there benefit to kitting a Knight out with 2 of the same weapon (such as 2 chainswords)? In the rules it says

"Instead of attacking with each Knight individually, make an attack with each different weapon in turn. For each weapon, multiply the Dice characteristic by the number of Knights in the Banner that are equipped with that weapon, and which are within range and line of sight of the target"

I'm taking that to mean if you had 3 knights with 2 chainswords each you'd still only be making 3 attacks, because it's about the number of knights equipped with the weapon, not the number of that weapon carried by the banner... Make sense to anyone else?

It's a bit of a pisser as I really want to equip some knights with 2 ranged weapons, and I'm going to end up with some that are decidedly derp (or just not used) if I go that way since the kit doesn't support that. I guess I could chop them up as wrecks to adorn scenery / to become objective markers.

As there are double gun equipped knights pictured in the book, I doubt this effect is intended.

It doesn't hurt to magnetise the knight arms in case a FAQ rules in favour. I've started doing mine anyway as I'd like to optimise weapon loadouts later.

So the basic rulesbook gives 3 maniple types. The Axiom Battleline of 1 Warlord, 1 Reaver, 1 Warhound, with an optional additional reaver and Warhound, the Myrmadon Battleline, of 2 warlords and a reaver, with an additional optional warlord and reaver, and venator light maniple of 1 reaver and 2 warhounds with an additional 2 warhounds optional.

So picking through my Grand Master box, two things that I've noticed:

- the buildings can easily accommodate the 20mm epic bases
- The oop Forgeworld Epic scale superheavy tanks appear to be in scale with them! They look ace next to the Knights

 zedmeister wrote:
So picking through my Grand Master box, two things that I've noticed:

- the buildings can easily accommodate the 20mm epic bases
- The oop Forgeworld Epic scale superheavy tanks appear to be in scale with them! They look ace next to the Knights

wish I coukld find some broken ones, they'd make great titan stompings for the bases

I've got a bunch of old Epic that my folks found literally at the back of a wardrobe last year.

Had no idea what to do with them as I didn't really think they were good enough condition to make a price worth selling them for, 12 months on and what do you know?

There's a reason why we wargamers keep everything and buy things with no specific use in mind you know!

I am wondering if a 40k bastion woud make a good Drop Keep for the AT scale Knights - maybe need several combined?

BrianDavion wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:
So picking through my Grand Master box, two things that I've noticed:

- the buildings can easily accommodate the 20mm epic bases
- The oop Forgeworld Epic scale superheavy tanks appear to be in scale with them! They look ace next to the Knights

wish I coukld find some broken ones, they'd make great titan stompings for the bases

£rd parties. For sure.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:
I am wondering if a 40k bastion woud make a good Drop Keep for the AT scale Knights - maybe need several combined?

I reckon there'll be loads of 40k bits that will suitably grace the AT battlefield.

These things (no 28mm doors present, so they can be viewed as moumental cathedral sized windows https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BRAND-NEW-COMPLETE-Terrain-Sections-from-Warhammer-40K-Kill-Team-Core-Set/113183923037?hash=item1a5a499b5d:g:yv0AAOSwrLZbZghd
And I'd love to see these statues https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sector-Imperialis-Basilicanum-Games-Workshop-Kill-Team-Necromunda-40k-Terrain/223070833783?epid=8021433308&hash=item33f00ecc77:g:l7wAAOSw0BdbUvei

 Mr Morden wrote:
I am wondering if a 40k bastion woud make a good Drop Keep for the AT scale Knights - maybe need several combined?

Imperial dropships for some inspiration

Time to switch over my 30 odd old Epic paladins and errant over to 40mm bases.

So how did launch day go in your area? My 'friendly' 'local' game store had but three copies of the Grand Master box, 2 of which sold basically at opening time. They had a few boxes of everything else on sale, Warlords, Knights, terrain....but no rule set boxes. Manager said Fedex lost the box that had the standalone rulesets in it. On another front, they've had a hard time keeping the Kill Team box and rulebook in stock.

 totalfailure wrote:
So how did launch day go in your area? My 'friendly' 'local' game store had but three copies of the Grand Master box, 2 of which sold basically at opening time. They had a few boxes of everything else on sale, Warlords, Knights, terrain....but no rule set boxes. Manager said Fedex lost the box that had the standalone rulesets in it. On another front, they've had a hard time keeping the Kill Team box and rulebook in stock.

I popped into my local GW and apaprently he didn't get a single set to sell in the store due to how many copies got ordered, anyone who hadn't ordered in advance was SOL.

Mendi Warrior wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
I am wondering if a 40k bastion woud make a good Drop Keep for the AT scale Knights - maybe need several combined?

Imperial dropships for some inspiration

Where the heck is that pic from?

I stopped by my FLGS at around 2pm. As I came in, I ran into the store owner, who was on the way out. There was a table full of AT stuff sitting next to us, and he told me that they'd already sold out. I clarified "Grand Master Edition?" while pointing at an AT box I saw on the table. But he clarified that no, that was the little box (presumably the "rulebook and one warlord" box I saw on GW's website). For some reason, his store hadn't received *any* of the GMEs. But it appears that they sold out of everything that they did get.

I didn't ask how much they'd received, so I don't know how many units they moved in total. But it would appear that there's a lot of interest in the game locally. Hopefully it'll stay that way once people have a chance to play with the rules.

And hopefully they get a restock soon. He mentioned next year. I *really* hope he was mistaken (he hasn't been around much for reasons).

 Davespil wrote:
Is it worth building one of the knights with the gatling cannon or should I wait for a third party or ebay battlecannon/melta cannon?

Magnetize your weapons and you can build AND get third party/eBay stuff when the time comes.

Eumerin wrote:
I stopped by my FLGS at around 2pm. As I came in, I ran into the store owner, who was on the way out. There was a table full of AT stuff sitting next to us, and he told me that they'd already sold out. I clarified "Grand Master Edition?" while pointing at an AT box I saw on the table. But he clarified that no, that was the little box (presumably the "rulebook and one warlord" box I saw on GW's website). For some reason, his store hadn't received *any* of the GMEs. But it appears that they sold out of everything that they did get.

I didn't ask how much they'd received, so I don't know how many units they moved in total. But it would appear that there's a lot of interest in the game locally. Hopefully it'll stay that way once people have a chance to play with the rules.

And hopefully they get a restock soon. He mentioned next year. I *really* hope he was mistaken (he hasn't been around much for reasons).

it sold really well, Gamesworkshoips order site still has some in if you really want it

Miniature Market still has it available as well.

 totalfailure wrote:
Miniature Market still has it available as well.

I’d be skeptical about that. MM sometimes takes orders and leaves you hanging for restocks.

Flgs had some gme in stock so I grabbed one for now. Shipping box for them said case x out of iirc 3065, with 3 per case.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Flgs had some gme in stock so I grabbed one for now. Shipping box for them said case x out of iirc 3065, with 3 per case.

so 9195 copies. I'm gonna guess that was among their US distributors. so.. north America got roughly ten thousand copies more or less

In the latest marketing email about Warhounds, GW mentions that more weapons packs and titans are on the way...

They seem to have underestimated the popularity of the game,
and now are playing catch up.

 Stormonu wrote:

Mendi Warrior wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
I am wondering if a 40k bastion woud make a good Drop Keep for the AT scale Knights - maybe need several combined?

Imperial dropships for some inspiration

Where the heck is that pic from?

From the underlying event map I do guess it was some art for one of the stands at an event ages ago, but I have no clue when or where exactly it was, nor if it exists elsewhere in a WD, codex, book, …

I love the feeling of gigantism it conveys, especially when you check above the dropships and see the "mother" ship

 schoon wrote:
They seem to have underestimated the popularity of the game,
and now are playing catch up.

The popularity of titans, at least. It remains to be seen whether they'll still be popular once people start playing the game.

But assuming they are, then that would probably be the understatement of the year.

Whatever happened to that modular scenery that was supposedly being developed for Dropzone Commander?

 schoon wrote:

and now are playing catch up.

That's not how this works. Anything coming out in the next year will have been under production well before AT released. We've already seen several of the weapon add-ons, and I'm sure more will be unveiled soon.

Is there an appropriate YMDC equivalent for AT yet? I have questions:

1. Princeps Seniores Personal Trait #3 ‘Swift Killer’ (p.55): when it says ‘before you make an attack’ does that mean before a specific weapon attacks, or when the unit is activated to attack?

2. Legio Gryphonicus, Legion Specific Wargear: Gravatus Plating: when it says to add one to its armour, I’m assuming that means increase the values needed to deal damage, so effectively applying a -1 modifier to all incoming attacks, rather than adding an extra hole on the command terminal?

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Is there an appropriate YMDC equivalent for AT yet? I have questions:

1. Princeps Seniores Personal Trait #3 ‘Swift Killer’ (p.55): when it says ‘before you make an attack’ does that mean before a specific weapon attacks, or when the unit is activated to attack?

2. Legio Gryphonicus, Legion Specific Wargear: Gravatus Plating: when it says to add one to its armour, I’m assuming that means increase the values needed to deal damage, so effectively applying a -1 modifier to all incoming attacks, rather than adding an extra hole on the command terminal?

thats my interpretation yes


BTW anyone else find it odd that the Legio Mortis is given such a prominant place in the books, but it's legio temptus given rules? Legio temptus I don't think even has transfers avaliable in the warlord box.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Is there an appropriate YMDC equivalent for AT yet? I have questions:

1. Princeps Seniores Personal Trait #3 ‘Swift Killer’ (p.55): when it says ‘before you make an attack’ does that mean before a specific weapon attacks, or when the unit is activated to attack?

2. Legio Gryphonicus, Legion Specific Wargear: Gravatus Plating: when it says to add one to its armour, I’m assuming that means increase the values needed to deal damage, so effectively applying a -1 modifier to all incoming attacks, rather than adding an extra hole on the command terminal?

thats my interpretation yes


BTW anyone else find it odd that the Legio Mortis is given such a prominant place in the books, but it's legio temptus given rules? Legio temptus I don't think even has transfers avaliable in the warlord box.

Yeah,I also noticed that, and found it puzzling. Tempestus has neither transfers nor artwork in the book. Mortis has artwork and transfers but no rules.
Gryphonicus of course has all three, but that is hardly puzzling, knowing FW. ;-)

Not that I'm complaining, I want to do Tempestus and already have my paint scheme figured out. :-p

Please post all rule questions in the Games Workshop Board Games & Specialist/Legacy Games for the time being.

They can easily add more Legio s on the decal sheets included in the reaver and warhound boxes

 Breotan wrote:
Whatever happened to that modular scenery that was supposedly being developed for Dropzone Commander?

It was available for sale for a short time, but high prices and low sales saw it discontinued.

 BrookM wrote:
Please post all rule questions in the Games Workshop Board Games & Specialist/Legacy Games for the time being.

Created a new thread here.

Most excellent, many thanks!

Eumerin wrote:

 schoon wrote:
They seem to have underestimated the popularity of the game,
and now are playing catch up.

The popularity of titans, at least. It remains to be seen whether they'll still be popular once people start playing the game.

But assuming they are, then that would probably be the understatement of the year.

Given the near universal backlash at the pricing upon reveal amongst other things, you can see why they might have been tentative.

Dudeface wrote:

Eumerin wrote:

 schoon wrote:
They seem to have underestimated the popularity of the game,
and now are playing catch up.

The popularity of titans, at least. It remains to be seen whether they'll still be popular once people start playing the game.

But assuming they are, then that would probably be the understatement of the year.

Given the near universal backlash at the pricing upon reveal amongst other things, you can see why they might have been tentative.

Aye, plus the fact that it is a very small game in its model count at launch - just two models. With there being perhaps only four by the end of the year. Granted there's weapon variety in there, but that is still a very small launch by GW standards; even skirmish games by other companies launch with more models for a new game (at least if not more than double that number between two or more factions).

It's a lot of risk on a high value product. So its good that GW has underplayed their hand a bit and found hte demand so strong; hopefully this keeps up beyond the launch period.

Eumerin wrote:
The popularity of titans, at least. It remains to be seen whether they'll still be popular once people start playing the game.

But assuming they are, then that would probably be the understatement of the year.

This is only based upon my initial read through of the rules - haven't played it out yet - but the rules look pretty good. A game of maneuver.

It strikes me that terrain density on the table could have significant effects on the outcome of games.

My point being that I think the rules and game play should support long term viability rather than hamper it.

 schoon wrote:

This is only based upon my initial read through of the rules - haven't played it out yet - but the rules look pretty good. A game of maneuver.

It strikes me that terrain density on the table could have significant effects on the outcome of games.

My point being that I think the rules and game play should support long term viability rather than hamper it.

Good, that is what terrain should do. It's not called "the third army" for nothing.

 schoon wrote:

Eumerin wrote:
The popularity of titans, at least. It remains to be seen whether they'll still be popular once people start playing the game.

But assuming they are, then that would probably be the understatement of the year.

This is only based upon my initial read through of the rules - haven't played it out yet - but the rules look pretty good. A game of maneuver.

It strikes me that terrain density on the table could have significant effects on the outcome of games.

My point being that I think the rules and game play should support long term viability rather than hamper it.

Agreed. that said the crowd who think 40k is too complex are likely to HATE AT


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xanthos wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Is there an appropriate YMDC equivalent for AT yet? I have questions:

1. Princeps Seniores Personal Trait #3 ‘Swift Killer’ (p.55): when it says ‘before you make an attack’ does that mean before a specific weapon attacks, or when the unit is activated to attack?

2. Legio Gryphonicus, Legion Specific Wargear: Gravatus Plating: when it says to add one to its armour, I’m assuming that means increase the values needed to deal damage, so effectively applying a -1 modifier to all incoming attacks, rather than adding an extra hole on the command terminal?

thats my interpretation yes


BTW anyone else find it odd that the Legio Mortis is given such a prominant place in the books, but it's legio temptus given rules? Legio temptus I don't think even has transfers avaliable in the warlord box.

Yeah,I also noticed that, and found it puzzling. Tempestus has neither transfers nor artwork in the book. Mortis has artwork and transfers but no rules.
Gryphonicus of course has all three, but that is hardly puzzling, knowing FW. ;-)

Not that I'm complaining, I want to do Tempestus and already have my paint scheme figured out. :-p

My guess is they're saving Mortis for a supplement book as they know "has rules for Legio Mortis" will be a selling item in and of itself

BrianDavion wrote:
My guess is they're saving Mortis for a supplement book as they know "has rules for Legio Mortis" will be a selling item in and of itself

I could easily see a "Legio Titanicus" supplement with rules for the more common Legios, some scenarios and weapons, being quite popular.

 schoon wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
My guess is they're saving Mortis for a supplement book as they know "has rules for Legio Mortis" will be a selling item in and of itself

I could easily see a "Legio Titanicus" supplement with rules for the more common Legios, some scenarios and weapons, being quite popular.

I could too. It's a question IMHO weather or not they'll go that route or drip and drab it out via books focusing on certain battles etc. given this is forge world I expect they'll drip and drab it out. after all that's what they did for Horus Heresy

I have the feeling Mortis rules will buff warlords. They were known for having heavy titans and very few warhounds. But I absolutely want to see rules for Mortis and Krytos next..as far as the traitor legios go.

 Thargrim wrote:
I have the feeling Mortis rules will buff warlords. They were known for having heavy titans and very few warhounds. But I absolutely want to see rules for Mortis and Krytos next..as far as the traitor legios go.

well legio Grypfonicus has rules allowing you to subsitue any titan in a maniple for a reaver, maybe Mortis will allow for you to do so for a Warlord? thus enabling some truely sick things like a axiom maniple with 5 warlords.

Gryphonicus only lets you do it once though, so no all-Reaver maniples yet.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Gryphonicus only lets you do it once though, so no all-Reaver maniples yet.

ahh just once? missed that. Good eye. still even then I could see Mortis being similer. An Axiom maniple with 2 warlords, 1 reaver and 2 warhounds could be kiiinda handy. especially if you bought rh GME as then you'll only need to buy 1 reaver box and a warhound box to have a maniple

what was the Legio that used massed warhounds again?

Legio Audax

 Nurglitch wrote:
Legio Audax

wonder what their rules are gonna be, obviously they'll have the ursus claw

 Nostromodamus wrote:

 totalfailure wrote:
Miniature Market still has it available as well.

I’d be skeptical about that. MM sometimes takes orders and leaves you hanging for restocks.

While by no means a regular customer, I've never had any issues with the occasional order I've placed there.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Gryphonicus only lets you do it once though, so no all-Reaver maniples yet.

Surely you can take an Axiom with 1 Warlord & 2 Reavers, then replace the Warlord? edit I'm dumb, thought both Warhounds were optional

I think my go-to build will probably be a Gryphonicus Myrmidon with 1 Warlord 3 Reaver, then pad out with knights as needed. Can't wait for the Reaver release.

 totalfailure wrote:

 Nostromodamus wrote:

 totalfailure wrote:
Miniature Market still has it available as well.

I’d be skeptical about that. MM sometimes takes orders and leaves you hanging for restocks.

While by no means a regular customer, I've never had any issues with the occasional order I've placed there.

Many do. I suppose it's the nature of the industry now. I use TripleHelix, some delays (only a week or so, so I don't mind too muc).

I've not had any issues of note with MM. I once placed an order for an item that they ran out of stock on and they promptly refunded me the cost of that particular item; order placed on a Wednesday and refund issued a day later when the warehouse didn't have any to ship. Not seeing where it was a sale or anything weird, though I did have to source that particular box from another vendor. I was leery when they showed 20+ GMEs available given the stories of so few being available, but now they're down to 5. Mine should be arriving from them tomorrow and between discount and rewards it was an appreciable savings; certainly enough to be worth a few days wait.

On the actual game, I've read 5mmx1mm magnets will work for the Warlords, which is handy since that's the same size I already get for Flames of War. Looking at the Knights though it seems like there's a possibility for magnets there too. Has anyone already done so and if so, what size magnets did you go with?

More pics of the warhound sprues have emerged on Battle Bunnies http://battlebunnies.blogspot.com/2018/08/adeptus-titanicus-warhound-sprues.html.

The warhounds have 2 different heads, 2 different crotch armour plates, and 3 different armour plates for the legs. All come in pairs.

There are 4 different top armour plates (one pair traitors with 2 designs, 1 pair loyalists with 2 designs).

Legs are in one bit but there are differences in how they are positioned (different angles) and I would not be surprised if you can use left as right and vice-versa.

What are peoples thoughts on the FW Realm of Battle tiles that are coming out for AT? Was quite tempted by them as an easy (though probably not cheap) way to get some decent scenery, but looking at the ones being previewed on the Warhammer Community page they look very busy and full of stuff, for instance, one of them seems to have a building that takes up half the tile and both of them have all sorts of quite large details around that makes me wonder whether they'd be awkward to play on.

Obviously, as they've been designed for AT I assume that some thought has gone into their layout to make them suitable so maybe I'm misjudging. Has anyone who's already played any games of AT got any thoughts on them? Or has anyone actually played on them at one of the demo games?

Maybe there are also some more open tiles coming, as obviously the preview is only of 2, whereas I'd assume there will be at least 4 to allow for the standard 4x4 battlefield and I've seen what look like other tiles in some of the preview shots, such as the one with rail tracks for the train and another that just appears to be hills, but obviously they could just be scratch-built terrain rather than tiles.

Tavis75 wrote:
What are peoples thoughts on the FW Realm of Battle tiles that are coming out for AT? Was quite tempted by them as an easy (though probably not cheap) way to get some decent scenery, but looking at the ones being previewed on the Warhammer Community page they look very busy and full of stuff, for instance, one of them seems to have a building that takes up half the tile and both of them have all sorts of quite large details around that makes me wonder whether they'd be awkward to play on.

Obviously, as they've been designed for AT I assume that some thought has gone into their layout to make them suitable so maybe I'm misjudging. Has anyone who's already played any games of AT got any thoughts on them? Or has anyone actually played on them at one of the demo games?

Maybe there are also some more open tiles coming, as obviously the preview is only of 2, whereas I'd assume there will be at least 4 to allow for the standard 4x4 battlefield and I've seen what look like other tiles in some of the preview shots, such as the one with rail tracks for the train and another that just appears to be hills, but obviously they could just be scratch-built terrain rather than tiles.

They look nice but frankly I can find better things to spend my money on.

From the demo games I've played and looking at the rules it definitely seems like a gmae where the more terrain the better.

Mendi Warrior wrote:
More pics of the warhound sprues have emerged on Battle Bunnies http://battlebunnies.blogspot.com/2018/08/adeptus-titanicus-warhound-sprues.html.

The warhounds have 2 different heads, 2 different crotch armour plates, and 3 different armour plates for the legs. All come in pairs.

There are 4 different top armour plates (one pair traitors with 2 designs, 1 pair loyalists with 2 designs).

Legs are in one bit but there are differences in how they are positioned (different angles) and I would not be surprised if you can use left as right and vice-versa.

Also looks to be two of each weapon, so no red headed stepchild Warhound forced to tote the big flame weapon.

They previewed 4 different ones, I think it was during last May Warhammer Fest.



They are gorgeous, very tempting (but my wallet says a big no).

No experience playing on those yet. They would provide lots of opportunities for manoeuvering and using cover.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


Also looks to be two of each weapon, so no red headed stepchild Warhound forced to tote the big flame weapon.

Absolutely, this confirms what I suspected https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/3630/716640.page#10114392

More components, nice for basing or conversions. Thinking "the Guns of Navarone" reboot scenario play there

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Mendi Warrior wrote:
More pics of the warhound sprues have emerged on Battle Bunnies http://battlebunnies.blogspot.com/2018/08/adeptus-titanicus-warhound-sprues.html.

The warhounds have 2 different heads, 2 different crotch armour plates, and 3 different armour plates for the legs. All come in pairs.

There are 4 different top armour plates (one pair traitors with 2 designs, 1 pair loyalists with 2 designs).

Legs are in one bit but there are differences in how they are positioned (different angles) and I would not be surprised if you can use left as right and vice-versa.

Also looks to be two of each weapon, so no red headed stepchild Warhound forced to tote the big flame weapon.

For at least 1 game I'm going to play a Warhound with double flamers.

 Krinsath wrote:

On the actual game, I've read 5mmx1mm magnets will work for the Warlords, which is handy since that's the same size I already get for Flames of War. Looking at the Knights though it seems like there's a possibility for magnets there too. Has anyone already done so and if so, what size magnets did you go with?

I magnetised all my knight weapons at the wrist using leftover magnets from my 40k admech. Not sure if they were 2mm or 3mm and I'm not at home right now to check, but they did line up perfectly with the part you would normally glue onto the weapon. For the chainswords I snipped off the top 1mm or so of plastic so they didn't hang down too far like this:

 Imateria wrote:

Tavis75 wrote:
What are peoples thoughts on the FW Realm of Battle tiles that are coming out for AT? Was quite tempted by them as an easy (though probably not cheap) way to get some decent scenery, but looking at the ones being previewed on the Warhammer Community page they look very busy and full of stuff, for instance, one of them seems to have a building that takes up half the tile and both of them have all sorts of quite large details around that makes me wonder whether they'd be awkward to play on.

Obviously, as they've been designed for AT I assume that some thought has gone into their layout to make them suitable so maybe I'm misjudging. Has anyone who's already played any games of AT got any thoughts on them? Or has anyone actually played on them at one of the demo games?

Maybe there are also some more open tiles coming, as obviously the preview is only of 2, whereas I'd assume there will be at least 4 to allow for the standard 4x4 battlefield and I've seen what look like other tiles in some of the preview shots, such as the one with rail tracks for the train and another that just appears to be hills, but obviously they could just be scratch-built terrain rather than tiles.

They look nice but frankly I can find better things to spend my money on.

From the demo games I've played and looking at the rules it definitely seems like a gmae where the more terrain the better.

They are custom designed to hold the Civitas Imperialis cities. If they aren't ridiculously expensive I'm getting them (so I'm not). Reason being if there are rules for blowing up buildings then you can easily remove the city piece and leave a foundation.

 Imateria wrote:


For at least 1 game I'm going to play a Warhound with double flamers.

At S7 the Inferno gun is much more powerful than what it was in 40k/HH rules. It can actually melt titans now.

There are only 2 different tiles on those Forge World slides aren't there? (Not counting the work in progress one), pretty sure the ones titled tile 1 and tile 3 are the same tile, just that one of them has a few buildings from the Civitas Imperialis set placed on it (and is rotated compared to the first picture).

Tavis75 wrote:
There are only 2 different tiles on those Forge World slides aren't there? (Not counting the work in progress one), pretty sure the ones titled tile 1 and tile 3 are the same tile, just that one of them has a few buildings from the Civitas Imperialis set placed on it (and is rotated compared to the first picture).

Can you give us a link to what pictures you are referring to?

Tavis75 wrote:
There are only 2 different tiles on those Forge World slides aren't there? (Not counting the work in progress one), pretty sure the ones titled tile 1 and tile 3 are the same tile, just that one of them has a few buildings from the Civitas Imperialis set placed on it (and is rotated compared to the first picture).

That is a good point. I initially thought that as well. If you take a very close look at the buildings, the one on tile 1 seems to have less depth than the one on tile 3. The one on tile 3 seems about 70-75% deeper. Now this can be an optic trick. Both tile 1 and 3 have definitely the same base. Apart from that specific building all the rest seems pretty much the same. On the demo picture the depth seem to be the same though.

I would not understand FW showing them as separate tiles if they were just the same with added civitas imperialis components. We'll see once they are made available.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

puzzledust wrote:

Can you give us a link to what pictures you are referring to?

They are under the spoiler in my previous post https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/3690/716640.page#10117032

Mendi Warrior wrote:

Tavis75 wrote:
There are only 2 different tiles on those Forge World slides aren't there? (Not counting the work in progress one), pretty sure the ones titled tile 1 and tile 3 are the same tile, just that one of them has a few buildings from the Civitas Imperialis set placed on it (and is rotated compared to the first picture).

That is a good point. I initially thought that as well. If you take a very close look at the buildings, the one on tile 1 seems to have less depth than the one on tile 3. The one on tile 3 seems about 70-75% deeper. Now this can be an optic trick. Both tile 1 and 3 have definitely the same base. Apart from that specific building all the rest seems pretty much the same. On the demo picture the depth seem to be the same though.

I would not understand FW showing them as separate tiles if they were just the same with added civitas imperialis components. We'll see once they are made available.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

puzzledust wrote:

Can you give us a link to what pictures you are referring to?

They are under the spoiler in my previous post https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/3690/716640.page#10117032

Oh I'm sorry, I missed that. On the Warhammer Fest Blog it says "These boards have been designed to be fully compatible with the Civitas Imperialis kits, letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings."
After seeing your image, I really don't see that at all. They look like they are just randomly put on the board and don't fit in with the rest of the design. That makes it an easy pass for me.

Chopstick wrote:

 Imateria wrote:


For at least 1 game I'm going to play a Warhound with double flamers.

At S7 the Inferno gun is much more powerful than what it was in 40k/HH rules. It can actually melt titans now.

Originally, before 2nd edition Epic, that weapon was a multi-melta, not a flamethrower.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

puzzledust wrote:
On the Warhammer Fest Blog it says "These boards have been designed to be fully compatible with the Civitas Imperialis kits, letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings."
After seeing your image, I really don't see that at all. They look like they are just randomly put on the board and don't fit in with the rest of the design. That makes it an easy pass for me.

All the detail matches or complements the buildings. The "platform" areas are edged with details that are identical to the wall pieces on the sprues. They don't slot exactly into place, but then, most buildings have some paved ground around them.

puzzledust wrote:

Oh I'm sorry, I missed that. On the Warhammer Fest Blog it says "These boards have been designed to be fully compatible with the Civitas Imperialis kits, letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings."
After seeing your image, I really don't see that at all. They look like they are just randomly put on the board and don't fit in with the rest of the design. That makes it an easy pass for me.

I am afraid I don't understand your point.

If you refer to the demo picture, there is nothing preventing you from putting the civitas imperialis buildings in other combinations. To me they seem indeed fully compatible with civitas imperialis buildings. And if indeed tile 3 is exactly equal to tile 1 + added civitas imperialis buildings on top of the corner building, I would think that they fit perfectly with the rest of the design. The tiles are representing an urban area and the more buildings you have, the more cover your titans and knights have, and the more strategic your moves are. There are also advanced rules with stray shots and destruction of buildings.

As far as I am concerned the pass would rather depend on their price (not known yet) than on their integration/compatibility with civitas imperialis buildings which imho is absolutely brilliant.

I believe this is referred to as future proofing yeah ?

You would imagine they'd be £80 line the 40k RoB boards (for a 2x2 square. So £320 for a 4x4 board

 xttz wrote:

 Krinsath wrote:

On the actual game, I've read 5mmx1mm magnets will work for the Warlords, which is handy since that's the same size I already get for Flames of War. Looking at the Knights though it seems like there's a possibility for magnets there too. Has anyone already done so and if so, what size magnets did you go with?

I magnetised all my knight weapons at the wrist using leftover magnets from my 40k admech. Not sure if they were 2mm or 3mm and I'm not at home right now to check, but they did line up perfectly with the part you would normally glue onto the weapon. For the chainswords I snipped off the top 1mm or so of plastic so they didn't hang down too far like this:

I just checked and they are 2mm magnets.

Mendi Warrior wrote:

puzzledust wrote:

Oh I'm sorry, I missed that. On the Warhammer Fest Blog it says "These boards have been designed to be fully compatible with the Civitas Imperialis kits, letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings."
After seeing your image, I really don't see that at all. They look like they are just randomly put on the board and don't fit in with the rest of the design. That makes it an easy pass for me.

I am afraid I don't understand your point.

If you refer to the demo picture, there is nothing preventing you from putting the civitas imperialis buildings in other combinations. To me they seem indeed fully compatible with civitas imperialis buildings. And if indeed tile 3 is exactly equal to tile 1 + added civitas imperialis buildings on top of the corner building, I would think that they fit perfectly with the rest of the design. The tiles are representing an urban area and the more buildings you have, the more cover your titans and knights have, and the more strategic your moves are. There are also advanced rules with stray shots and destruction of buildings.

As far as I am concerned the pass would rather depend on their price (not known yet) than on their integration/compatibility with civitas imperialis buildings which imho is absolutely brilliant.

I was under the impression there would be slots for the Civitas Imperialis kits to "lock in" to the terrain. Which is what "letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings" seems to imply. I'm not seeing that in the picture. Ideally the slots would even have ruble underneath them so when you knock down a building and remove it from the board you are left with a small pile of rubble. IMHO that would be really cool and was what I was hoping for. What I had hoped for is more flat areas with various slots you could lock in your buildings. That being said, I'm not liking the fact that there is very little room for the titans to move. Do the rules allow you to step up onto the higher terrain?

Anyway, it's just my opinion and and I have the right to pass on something for any reason do I not?

 xttz wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 Krinsath wrote:

On the actual game, I've read 5mmx1mm magnets will work for the Warlords, which is handy since that's the same size I already get for Flames of War. Looking at the Knights though it seems like there's a possibility for magnets there too. Has anyone already done so and if so, what size magnets did you go with?

I magnetised all my knight weapons at the wrist using leftover magnets from my 40k admech. Not sure if they were 2mm or 3mm and I'm not at home right now to check, but they did line up perfectly with the part you would normally glue onto the weapon. For the chainswords I snipped off the top 1mm or so of plastic so they didn't hang down too far like this:

I just checked and they are 2mm magnets.

I assume you drilled or did you just glue the magnets to the ends of both pieces?

puzzledust wrote:

I was under the impression there would be slots for the Civitas Imperialis kits to "lock in" to the terrain. Which is what "letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings" seems to imply. I'm not seeing that in the picture. Ideally the slots would even have ruble underneath them so when you knock down a building and remove it from the board you are left with a small pile of rubble. IMHO that would be really cool and was what I was hoping for. What I had hoped for is more flat areas with various slots you could lock in your buildings. That being said, I'm not liking the fact that there is very little room for the titans to move. Do the rules allow you to step up onto the higher terrain?

I now understand your point, thanks for clarifying. I saw it differently, to me the "specially designed fittings" are the "built" areas on the tiles (e.g. the squared building serving as basis for a gigantic skyscraper, or the storage building on which you add a tower, ...). The piles of rubble are a very good idea, definitely something I would model. I don't know if there are specific elements in the rules for stepping up onto higher terrain, nor what would be considered "higher terrain".

puzzledust wrote:
Anyway, it's just my opinion and and I have the right to pass on something for any reason do I not?

Absolutely, I never put this into question.

Mendi Warrior wrote:

puzzledust wrote:

I was under the impression there would be slots for the Civitas Imperialis kits to "lock in" to the terrain. Which is what "letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings" seems to imply. I'm not seeing that in the picture. Ideally the slots would even have ruble underneath them so when you knock down a building and remove it from the board you are left with a small pile of rubble. IMHO that would be really cool and was what I was hoping for. What I had hoped for is more flat areas with various slots you could lock in your buildings. That being said, I'm not liking the fact that there is very little room for the titans to move. Do the rules allow you to step up onto the higher terrain?

I now understand your point, thanks for clarifying. I saw it differently, to me the "specially designed fittings" are the "built" areas on the tiles (e.g. the squared building serving as basis for a gigantic skyscraper, or the storage building on which you add a tower, ...). The piles of rubble are a very good idea, definitely something I would model. I don't know if there are specific elements in the rules for stepping up onto higher terrain, nor what would be considered "higher terrain".

puzzledust wrote:
Anyway, it's just my opinion and and I have the right to pass on something for any reason do I not?

Absolutely, I never put this into question.

Cool, no worries! Hopefully you can step up onto some of those building foundations in the rules as that will allow a little more room to move about. Good point about modeling in your own rubble. I guess I'll wait and see the final product and how they say it all works.

Any building that is less than half the height of your Titan, can be moved over freely. At least in thr basic rules. So those foundations would be open terrain for a Warlord and a Reaver, but some of them might give a Warhound issues, and Knights probably have to go around some.

How's the height measured?

 Xanthos wrote:
Any building that is less than half the height of your Titan, can be moved over freely. At least in thr basic rules. So those foundations would be open terrain for a Warlord and a Reaver, but some of them might give a Warhound issues, and Knights probably have to go around some.

Knights can freely move through all terrain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nurglitch wrote:
How's the height measured?

Titans all have a scale value. A Titan can step over terrain if it's hight in inches is no more than half the scale value and the width of the terrain is less than the width of the base. The real problem comes when you realies a Warlord is scale 10 but only 5 or so inches high.

That's not really a problem. It just means the warlord can walk through buildings that are shorter than it is without getting stuck in the rubble, which I have no trouble believing.

For those who've read the rules or, better yet, played the game, do the rules seem conducive to adding "Epic" style infantry and tanks at a later date or are they laser focused on Titans to the detriment of others potential unit types? I don't have much interest in AT but the idea of playing Epic 40k intrigues me.

 warboss wrote:
For those who've read the rules or, better yet, played the game, do the rules seem conducive to adding "Epic" style infantry and tanks at a later date or are they laser focused on Titans to the detriment of others potential unit types? I don't have much interest in AT but the idea of playing Epic 40k intrigues me.

You're not going to play full Epic with infantry and manage Titans with the level of rules presented in AT. Red posted above a quote from the rulebook where they've future-proofed in the ability for the current rules to refer to 'Units' beyond Titans and Knight Banners, so maybe Superheavy tanks in the future, but I don't think infantry and regular armor are on the same level.

 Prometheum5 wrote:

 warboss wrote:
For those who've read the rules or, better yet, played the game, do the rules seem conducive to adding "Epic" style infantry and tanks at a later date or are they laser focused on Titans to the detriment of others potential unit types? I don't have much interest in AT but the idea of playing Epic 40k intrigues me.

You're not going to play full Epic with infantry and manage Titans with the level of rules presented in AT. Red posted above a quote from the rulebook where they've future-proofed in the ability for the current rules to refer to 'Units' beyond Titans and Knight Banners, so maybe Superheavy tanks in the future, but I don't think infantry and regular armor are on the same level.

TBH I think anything lesser then a bane blade would basicly just be useless as something other then cannon fodder.

IMHO going full on epic would proably force them to simplify the game a fair bit. not saying they can't just that with the way record sheets etc are handled, going full epic might be a headache

Fw does have a range of Ordinatus minoris in 28mm scale that seem logical to add

I'm looking at you Capitol Imperialis

So I'm curious whats everyone think'll be the best way to deploy a titan maniple? the Axiom proably the best?

Vorian wrote:
You would imagine they'd be £80 line the 40k RoB boards (for a 2x2 square. So £320 for a 4x4 board

Yep, that's what I've been expecting, they look similar in complexity and size to the basic FW city tiles, so I'd expect them to be around that sort of price rather than closer to some of the larger and more complex tiles like the crashed Thunderhawk etc.

bortass wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 Krinsath wrote:

On the actual game, I've read 5mmx1mm magnets will work for the Warlords, which is handy since that's the same size I already get for Flames of War. Looking at the Knights though it seems like there's a possibility for magnets there too. Has anyone already done so and if so, what size magnets did you go with?

I magnetised all my knight weapons at the wrist using leftover magnets from my 40k admech. Not sure if they were 2mm or 3mm and I'm not at home right now to check, but they did line up perfectly with the part you would normally glue onto the weapon. For the chainswords I snipped off the top 1mm or so of plastic so they didn't hang down too far like this:

I just checked and they are 2mm magnets.

I assume you drilled or did you just glue the magnets to the ends of both pieces?

There's nothing to drill really, 2mm magnets are the same width as the arms. I snipped off excess plastic where I could, particularly on the chainswords:

Kind of OT, but even looking at my partially built Warlord, I can’t quite believe the game is finally out!

I am excited! My copy arrived yesterday. Tonight after work the fun begins! XD

 Zethnar wrote:
That's not really a problem. It just means the warlord can walk through buildings that are shorter than it is without getting stuck in the rubble, which I have no trouble believing.

IDK. The old Titan weapon included "Rubble claws" (presumably to make walking on tons of steel and ceramite rubble a less risky proposition). It even mentions stuff like this in Abnett's "Titanicus". What I'd like to see (and it may well be the case, I don't know), is some sort of penalty. Like, walking your Titan straight through a building represents some hazard, or at least a temporary negative effect on performance.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/08/21/21st-aug-adeptus-titanicus-part-9-a-trip-down-memory-lanegw-homepage-post-4fw-homepage-post-1/

Interesting article if anyone is interested in how this whole Epic thing began

 Prometheum5 wrote:

 warboss wrote:
For those who've read the rules or, better yet, played the game, do the rules seem conducive to adding "Epic" style infantry and tanks at a later date or are they laser focused on Titans to the detriment of others potential unit types? I don't have much interest in AT but the idea of playing Epic 40k intrigues me.

You're not going to play full Epic with infantry and manage Titans with the level of rules presented in AT. Red posted above a quote from the rulebook where they've future-proofed in the ability for the current rules to refer to 'Units' beyond Titans and Knight Banners, so maybe Superheavy tanks in the future, but I don't think infantry and regular armor are on the same level.

I think if they left it with just the Basic rules and stripped out the Advanced and Optional rules it wouldn't be that hard to add smaller vehicles in the future with infantry being an expansion on those rules.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Prometheum5 wrote:

 warboss wrote:
For those who've read the rules or, better yet, played the game, do the rules seem conducive to adding "Epic" style infantry and tanks at a later date or are they laser focused on Titans to the detriment of others potential unit types? I don't have much interest in AT but the idea of playing Epic 40k intrigues me.

You're not going to play full Epic with infantry and manage Titans with the level of rules presented in AT. Red posted above a quote from the rulebook where they've future-proofed in the ability for the current rules to refer to 'Units' beyond Titans and Knight Banners, so maybe Superheavy tanks in the future, but I don't think infantry and regular armor are on the same level.

TBH I think anything lesser then a bane blade would basicly just be useless as something other then cannon fodder.

IMHO going full on epic would proably force them to simplify the game a fair bit. not saying they can't just that with the way record sheets etc are handled, going full epic might be a headache

A lot of people are saying this, but from what I've seen/read the game doesn't look all that complicated, even with 'managing' the titans (which is just a few dicerolls in the cleanup phase anyway). I don't think adding in armoured and infantry units would add all that much complexity or make the game unmanageable, it would just run longer (which isn't something that would bother me really).

Changes the nature of the game though.

Knights are dangerous, because they don’t have to worry about limited manouevres, but need to use that to be of real use.

Using these rules with infantry would be like turrets becoming widely available in X-Wing. It’d just strip out a huge part of the game’s tactical challenge.

 Imateria wrote:

 Prometheum5 wrote:

 warboss wrote:
For those who've read the rules or, better yet, played the game, do the rules seem conducive to adding "Epic" style infantry and tanks at a later date or are they laser focused on Titans to the detriment of others potential unit types? I don't have much interest in AT but the idea of playing Epic 40k intrigues me.

You're not going to play full Epic with infantry and manage Titans with the level of rules presented in AT. Red posted above a quote from the rulebook where they've future-proofed in the ability for the current rules to refer to 'Units' beyond Titans and Knight Banners, so maybe Superheavy tanks in the future, but I don't think infantry and regular armor are on the same level.

I think if they left it with just the Basic rules and stripped out the Advanced and Optional rules it wouldn't be that hard to add smaller vehicles in the future with infantry being an expansion on those rules.

I was expecting 8th edition on a smaller scale with big robots. This does appear to be not what they've made so at this point this has become such a hard pass for me its not even funny. Weapon Arcs? Leave that nonsense in 7th edition where it belonged!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Changes the nature of the game though.

Knights are dangerous, because they don’t have to worry about limited manouevres, but need to use that to be of real use.

Using these rules with infantry would be like turrets becoming widely available in X-Wing. It’d just strip out a huge part of the game’s tactical challenge.

Why couldn't they just supply a new set of Epic Rules with the launch of the new units? (answer: They could but this is GW so they will make you re-buy everything again in a slightly different scale )
Seriously though, just release a new rulebook and let us use everything we've purchased up to that point. Then sell a bunch of new epic scale miniatures.
1. They would sell a ton of the previously made units for AT, to the players that were waiting on Epic. (Great for them because high return on all of these previously made molds, etc.)
2. Those of us who already bought into AT would be happy that we now could expand the game and get more use out of our models. (Great for them because now they highly increase the chances of AT players adopting into a new line of miniatures in addition to those who just wanted Epic)
3. They would sell a ton of new models that fit into the Epic line.

Everybody's happy. Win/win. Next.

 Togusa wrote:
I was expecting 8th edition on a smaller scale with big robots... Weapon Arcs? Leave that nonsense in 7th edition where it belonged!

puzzledust wrote:

Why couldn't they just supply a new set of Epic Rules with the launch of the new units? (answer: They could but this is GW so they will make you re-buy everything again in a slightly different scale )

This is a new edition of Adeptus Titanicus, not a new edition of Epic. AT was always about managing a small number of units in detail. It was after all created as a competitor to Battletech.

I have no doubt that should this prove sufficiently popular we'll see the same approach as the first time around; a gradual increase in the range of available units with new rules for AT. Then eventually once the model range has enough depth, there will be with a new ruleset that has less emphasis on Titans and more on other units.

 xttz wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
I was expecting 8th edition on a smaller scale with big robots... Weapon Arcs? Leave that nonsense in 7th edition where it belonged!

puzzledust wrote:

Why couldn't they just supply a new set of Epic Rules with the launch of the new units? (answer: They could but this is GW so they will make you re-buy everything again in a slightly different scale )

This is a new edition of Adeptus Titanicus, not a new edition of Epic. AT was always about managing a small number of units in detail. It was after all created as a competitor to Battletech.

I have no doubt that should this prove sufficiently popular we'll see the same approach as the first time around; a gradual increase in the range of available units with new rules for AT. Then eventually once the model range has enough depth, there will be with a new ruleset that has less emphasis on Titans and more on other units.

I think you missed my point. I'm basically saying the same thing. "Why can't they release new rules with the launch of new Epic miniatures down the line?" Which according to you is what they did before.

Why would they bother doing that for stuff they stopped selling over a decade ago?

If they have new stuff to sell, they'll make rules for it

It's taken them two years to sculpt four miniatures. How much longer would it take, do you think, for them to do an entire Epic range?

All of which misses the main point; The game they wanted to publish was not Epic - it was Adeptus Titanicus.

puzzledust wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Changes the nature of the game though.

Knights are dangerous, because they don’t have to worry about limited manouevres, but need to use that to be of real use.

Using these rules with infantry would be like turrets becoming widely available in X-Wing. It’d just strip out a huge part of the game’s tactical challenge.

Why couldn't they just supply a new set of Epic Rules with the launch of the new units? (answer: They could but this is GW so they will make you re-buy everything again in a slightly different scale )
Seriously though, just release a new rulebook and let us use everything we've purchased up to that point. Then sell a bunch of new epic scale miniatures.
1. They would sell a ton of the previously made units for AT, to the players that were waiting on Epic. (Great for them because high return on all of these previously made molds, etc.)
2. Those of us who already bought into AT would be happy that we now could expand the game and get more use out of our models. (Great for them because now they highly increase the chances of AT players adopting into a new line of miniatures in addition to those who just wanted Epic)
3. They would sell a ton of new models that fit into the Epic line.

Everybody's happy. Win/win. Next.

Specialist Games remain a risky product.

Bloodbowl and Necromunda were well received, but haven’t been out long enough to show staying power.

Epic? Unlike other Specialist Games, that’s quite a development intensive game. You need different kinds of infantry (at least matching those in 40k), same with Tanks, Flyers and Titans. That all costs money.

Adeptus Titanicus? Three core kits. Warlord, Reaver and Warhound. Call it nine sprues in total, 10 counting the Knights. Investment wise, that’s far more restrained, and is easily expanded upon with resin add ons.

If the game fails to take off, or maintain sales, your investment is suitably limited, compared to churning out different types of models for four or five different armies (for Heresy Era, not 40k). Indeed, with that restraint, it may prove difficult to actually not make some kind of return on said Investment.

And if it takes off? Rinse and repeat for Orks and Eldar.

If that shows sales being maintained, then you can look at introducing Super Heavies and assorted Tanks, keeping with the armoured theme, and providing an alternative to Knights, encouraging The Big Boys to have to vary their weapon selection to deal with different potential threats.

Then, then can come Infantry, either as a specific expansion, or a second game system which happens to share models.

So, is the problem that, even after years of talking about Adeptus Titanicus, years of rules previews, interviews with James Hewitt and Forge World, public playtests, and MORE, there are some people who are upset that the game is EXACTLY what was previewed all along, and not something else completely?

I would enjoy seeing super heavy tanks being represented in AT, but I have no desire to be pushing around stands of infantry in the game (or their associated transports). I’m iffy about some of the lesser tanks - Leman Russes, Whirlwinds and the like (though I could see Deathstrikes being useful). Anything where I’m pushing around five models or so to deal one wound to a Titan just isn’t something I’m interested in fielding in this game.

When seeing the command terminal for knights I believe adding super heavy tanks or even squadrons of lesser tanks would be quite easy to do, but I am convinced they would be and remain strictly optional unit types. The focus of AT is on titans after all.

Perhaps they could a compromise and do a run of metal Epic vehicles like they’ve done with the other one-time run of metal figures for those who want the models (infantry can be e-bayed easily enough).

As far as rules, I’m sure the community could come up with something - or GW could simply repost the Epic rules on their site like they used to do years ago for those who want to go that route, and let the community figure out how to mix/match old Epic and new AT.

 judgedoug wrote:
So, is the problem that, even after years of talking about Adeptus Titanicus, years of rules previews, interviews with James Hewitt and Forge World, public playtests, and MORE, there are some people who are upset that the game is EXACTLY what was previewed all along, and not something else completely?

No, there's no problem at all, just people expressing a preference or discussing ways the game could expand in the future.

EDIT: Wait nvm, he's replied again. For those a few pages back wondering about Knights, James confirmed over on FB that the intended way to deal with it is Dice*Total number of weapon. So a Banner of three Knights each with two Battle Cannons would put out 12 shots in each Combat Phase.

 Togusa wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

 Prometheum5 wrote:

 warboss wrote:
For those who've read the rules or, better yet, played the game, do the rules seem conducive to adding "Epic" style infantry and tanks at a later date or are they laser focused on Titans to the detriment of others potential unit types? I don't have much interest in AT but the idea of playing Epic 40k intrigues me.

You're not going to play full Epic with infantry and manage Titans with the level of rules presented in AT. Red posted above a quote from the rulebook where they've future-proofed in the ability for the current rules to refer to 'Units' beyond Titans and Knight Banners, so maybe Superheavy tanks in the future, but I don't think infantry and regular armor are on the same level.

I think if they left it with just the Basic rules and stripped out the Advanced and Optional rules it wouldn't be that hard to add smaller vehicles in the future with infantry being an expansion on those rules.

I was expecting 8th edition on a smaller scale with big robots. This does appear to be not what they've made so at this point this has become such a hard pass for me its not even funny. Weapon Arcs? Leave that nonsense in 7th edition where it belonged!

That was never what this game was going to be though, a cursery glance at any of the information we've had on it over the last 2 years would have told you that. With 8th ed 40K rules at this scale the game would be completely devoid of any depth or interest, there's just not enough on the table for those rules to work.

Honestly...if you want 8th edition, just buy AT and run it with 8th edition 40K rules, swap inches over to CM and just do that. Problem solved. Easy way to run an "apocalypse" style game. I would say "on the cheap", but there appears to be nothing cheap about AT.

 Elbows wrote:
Honestly...if you want 8th edition, just buy AT and run it with 8th edition 40K rules, swap inches over to CM and just do that. Problem solved. Easy way to run an "apocalypse" style game. I would say "on the cheap", but there appears to be nothing cheap about AT.

A full maniple will still cost me only a third of what a 40K army at 2000pts will. As cheap as Kill Team and Necromunda? No, and it was never going to be remotely like that.

It's also about 8% the price of playing AT in 28mm scale.

Vorian wrote:
Why would they bother doing that for stuff they stopped selling over a decade ago?

If they have new stuff to sell, they'll make rules for it

To make money? They didn#t stop because they didn't sell. They outsold their exptations(enough to justify production of lots of new models) by 400%...

Just chill folks.

If Titanicus proves it can stand on its own two feet, we’re likely to get full blown Epic in time.

For now, just enjoy your red hot Titan on Titan action!

If anything will hurt this game it's a lack of players. The game seems to have done okay in europe but in the states...not too confident about that. I think I was the only one at my lgs to buy in and I got the rules box, not the crazy expensive big one.

 Stormonu wrote:
Perhaps they could a compromise and do a run of metal Epic vehicles...

You should be able to find plenty on eBay.

 Thargrim wrote:
If anything will hurt this game it's a lack of players. The game seems to have done okay in europe but in the states...not too confident about that. I think I was the only one at my lgs to buy in and I got the rules box, not the crazy expensive big one.

There were seven of us at my FLGS that got GME boxes and I don't think any of us knew the others were doing it since I don't think most of us know each other, lol. Epic was the best game system GW ever put out IMHO. I hope AT does well enough that it remains supported and they don't start doing the stupid stuff they did in 40K with named characters, etc.

tneva82 wrote:

Vorian wrote:
Why would they bother doing that for stuff they stopped selling over a decade ago?

If they have new stuff to sell, they'll make rules for it

To make money? They didn#t stop because they didn't sell. They outsold their exptations(enough to justify production of lots of new models) by 400%...

That would explain why it would make sense to make new epic models and release rules for them. It wouldn't explain why they would release rules now to use old models with.

 Thargrim wrote:
If anything will hurt this game it's a lack of players. The game seems to have done okay in europe but in the states...not too confident about that. I think I was the only one at my lgs to buy in and I got the rules box, not the crazy expensive big one.

My flgs had apparently already sold out on Saturday.

Is this the place to discuss tactics? I can't see a tactics/list discussion thread (and dont have time/experiance to create and admin one). Played my first game last night and it was AMAZING! I have many list idea's and tactics to discuss...but no where to do it!

AccidentalCultist wrote:
Is this the place to discuss tactics? I can't see a tactics/list discussion thread (and dont have time/experiance to create and admin one). Played my first game last night and it was AMAZING! I have many list idea's and tactics to discuss...but no where to do it!

I think you can go there to discuss tactics https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/762459.page

You can also create a new topic in the Games Workshop Board Games & Specialist/Legacy Games sub-forum https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/forums/show/57.page

 Breotan wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
Perhaps they could a compromise and do a run of metal Epic vehicles...

You should be able to find plenty on eBay.

Yeah, but prices fluctuate wildly, as does scarcity on e-bay. If GW did a Made to Order, there's a good chance you wouldn't have to pay collector's price for it.

In other news, it turns out both of my FLGS did not order ANY Titanicus stuff - I was told it was "preorder only" (and since neither one of them offer a discount, I didn't preorder from them nor did apparently anyone else in the area, though I'd would have liked to pick up some extra knights, dice or whatnot), so I agree I don't think it was flying off the shelves in the US apparently like in the UK. Even Miniature Market took until today to sell out of the GME set, and still appears to have tons of the other components available.

Still waiting for my rules set and knights to show up, though. Deciding how I want to do the Reaver and Warhound - pay extra for earlier availability, or save a little and wait a week or two for it to show up... :(

 Stormonu wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
Perhaps they could a compromise and do a run of metal Epic vehicles...

You should be able to find plenty on eBay.

Yeah, but prices fluctuate wildly, as does scarcity on e-bay. If GW did a Made to Order, there's a good chance you wouldn't have to pay collector's price for it.

In other news, it turns out both of my FLGS did not order ANY Titanicus stuff - I was told it was "preorder only" (and since neither one of them offer a discount, I didn't preorder from them nor did apparently anyone else in the area, though I'd would have liked to pick up some extra knights, dice or whatnot), so I agree I don't think it was flying off the shelves in the US apparently like in the UK. Even Miniature Market took until today to sell out of the GME set, and still appears to have tons of the other components available.

Still waiting for my rules set and knights to show up, though. Deciding how I want to do the Reaver and Warhound - pay extra for earlier availability, or save a little and wait a week or two for it to show up... :(

Your FLGS not offering any kind of discount would probably explain why nobody bought from them.

I was at my local GW and heard at least 2 people say they're gonna pick AT up a bit but right now are so focused on Kill team that they couldn't snag AT on release.

 Imateria wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
Perhaps they could a compromise and do a run of metal Epic vehicles...

You should be able to find plenty on eBay.

Yeah, but prices fluctuate wildly, as does scarcity on e-bay. If GW did a Made to Order, there's a good chance you wouldn't have to pay collector's price for it.

In other news, it turns out both of my FLGS did not order ANY Titanicus stuff - I was told it was "preorder only" (and since neither one of them offer a discount, I didn't preorder from them nor did apparently anyone else in the area, though I'd would have liked to pick up some extra knights, dice or whatnot), so I agree I don't think it was flying off the shelves in the US apparently like in the UK. Even Miniature Market took until today to sell out of the GME set, and still appears to have tons of the other components available.

Still waiting for my rules set and knights to show up, though. Deciding how I want to do the Reaver and Warhound - pay extra for earlier availability, or save a little and wait a week or two for it to show up... :(

Your FLGS not offering any kind of discount would probably explain why nobody bought from them.

I could understand for the GME box and possibly Warlords, but they didn't even bother to order any of the knight boxes, rules or dice, which is unusual for either store.

I was very meh on ATuntil my buddy bought the GME and showed me the knights. I love them! Putting them together was a lot of fun because I've already built 7 normal sized questoris knights. Just wish they made the Propheron and another size titan to give you more than just 4 options. I'll probably hold off until they make the Eldar faction.

Honestly when I opened a box of knights they weren't much to look at on the sprue. Very detailed, but once they were built I was quite happy with them. Probably some of my favorite models of that particular size. I could only imagine how cool cerastus knights would be at this scale, if they ever do those i'll get at least a couple boxes.

Vorian wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Vorian wrote:
Why would they bother doing that for stuff they stopped selling over a decade ago?

If they have new stuff to sell, they'll make rules for it

To make money? They didn#t stop because they didn't sell. They outsold their exptations(enough to justify production of lots of new models) by 400%...

That would explain why it would make sense to make new epic models and release rules for them. It wouldn't explain why they would release rules now to use old models with.

Thing is they could easily sell models as well. Hell they wouldn't have to even make rules. Bit of editing only and they could release rules and models and sell them and expand customer base for the new titans in the process.

tneva82 wrote:

Vorian wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Vorian wrote:
Why would they bother doing that for stuff they stopped selling over a decade ago?

If they have new stuff to sell, they'll make rules for it

To make money? They didn#t stop because they didn't sell. They outsold their exptations(enough to justify production of lots of new models) by 400%...

That would explain why it would make sense to make new epic models and release rules for them. It wouldn't explain why they would release rules now to use old models with.

Thing is they could easily sell models as well. Hell they wouldn't have to even make rules. Bit of editing only and they could release rules and models and sell them and expand customer base for the new titans in the process.

Old Epic models are both out of scale and far, far inferior in terms of detail to the new Titans. GW wasn't going to rerelease them, and they weren't going to expend the resources up front to make a full new Epic range. Titanicus wasn't originally planned to be plastic at all, but demand for blood bowl and necromunda got them to convert it over, leading to delays. Setting it in the heresy lets them use a small number of shared models, like the original game, while expansions will also likely go towards other classes of titans and xenos titans, since they take up far fewer resources to design and produce than a full epic range. And fighting with massive armies, either you get a slow ruleset, or titans get so watered down that the game isn't about them anymore, plus GW would rather see people playing massive armies at 28mm scale.

I could see things like super heavy companies being included in the game as a alternative to knight banners mind you.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:


Thing is they could easily sell models as well. Hell they wouldn't have to even make rules. Bit of editing only and they could release rules and models and sell them and expand customer base for the new titans in the process.

Old Epic models are both out of scale and far, far inferior in terms of detail to the new Titans.

 Mysterio wrote:


You might be right on the scale thing, but definitely not on the detail thing - unless you're stuck thinking about the original AT and Epic stuff?

Because towards the end, the Epic stuff getting released was quite nice.

Anyway, given what we know about Knights (3 for $35), any better guesses on Warhounds?

2 for $50?

I'm going to 'need' at least 4.

Not that long time ago people here were posting pictures of epic models and titans and commenting how well scaled the titans are :lol:

And they might not be state of the art but they would still sell and help sales of new titans as well.

The Grand Master Edition box is still available on the Aussie GW webstore

It's been, what, ten days since pre-orders started?

Good old Australia Tax markup...

Mind you, I would imagine most locals are buying from other sources.

Regarding Epic minis and level of detail: The metals from the Epic 40K era (late 90s) had ludicrous levels of detail. Even more so than many of the later Epic Armageddon ones. Tons of variant sculpts.

The 3rd ed Eldar Titans were bleh, though.

 Overread wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Eumerin wrote:

 schoon wrote:
They seem to have underestimated the popularity of the game,
and now are playing catch up.

The popularity of titans, at least. It remains to be seen whether they'll still be popular once people start playing the game.

But assuming they are, then that would probably be the understatement of the year.

Given the near universal backlash at the pricing upon reveal amongst other things, you can see why they might have been tentative.

Aye, plus the fact that it is a very small game in its model count at launch - just two models. With there being perhaps only four by the end of the year. Granted there's weapon variety in there, but that is still a very small launch by GW standards; even skirmish games by other companies launch with more models for a new game (at least if not more than double that number between two or more factions).

It's a lot of risk on a high value product. So its good that GW has underplayed their hand a bit and found hte demand so strong; hopefully this keeps up beyond the launch period.

I have found that even with the low model count there is a TON of variety built in. For instance, you can make Household Knights several different types of functional units. You have the Rapid Fire Battlecannon type which likes to get into melee or the versions that hang back, the Thermal Knights which flank and harass. There is flexibility in there and it is very interesting tactically.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

puzzledust wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
I was expecting 8th edition on a smaller scale with big robots... Weapon Arcs? Leave that nonsense in 7th edition where it belonged!

puzzledust wrote:

Why couldn't they just supply a new set of Epic Rules with the launch of the new units? (answer: They could but this is GW so they will make you re-buy everything again in a slightly different scale )

This is a new edition of Adeptus Titanicus, not a new edition of Epic. AT was always about managing a small number of units in detail. It was after all created as a competitor to Battletech.

I have no doubt that should this prove sufficiently popular we'll see the same approach as the first time around; a gradual increase in the range of available units with new rules for AT. Then eventually once the model range has enough depth, there will be with a new ruleset that has less emphasis on Titans and more on other units.

I think you missed my point. I'm basically saying the same thing. "Why can't they release new rules with the launch of new Epic miniatures down the line?" Which according to you is what they did before.

It's called checking market interest. The more people who buy this the more likely other formats like epic could return with rules to use knights and titans from AT


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AccidentalCultist wrote:
Is this the place to discuss tactics? I can't see a tactics/list discussion thread (and dont have time/experiance to create and admin one). Played my first game last night and it was AMAZING! I have many list idea's and tactics to discuss...but no where to do it!

I want tactic discussions! Point me to the place!

Zenithfleet wrote:


The 3rd ed Eldar Titans were bleh, though.

I agree the original Phantoms are superior, but the Epic 40k ones were really fun to paint. Especially when dry brushing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 xttz wrote:
AT was always about managing a small number of units in detail. It was after all created as a competitor to Battletech.

Not entirely true. Rules for vehicles following in White Dwarf like 2 months after the first AT release. I think there was always a plan, just limited resources at the time.

Well, FW'S ROW price bump is going to make any resin parts or models more expensive.

I'm still hoping there is at least one plastic upgrade for the warlord, and they avoid resin for the more commonly taken weapons. Not too keen on those US prices.

Ditto, even with U.K. prices!

Regarding FW move, I would have preferred to retain the possibility to choose from paying in £ or in my local currency, I am afraid costs will be higher indeed (curious to see how things will compare when factoring shipping, import taxes, FX conversion fees and the like into the total costs).

Killing time waiting for my boxes to arrive I compared the changes in stock at ElementGames between yesterday and today (approximately covering a 24h window). It is purely anecdotical as I have no comparison point at all.

Civitas Imperialis: 3 sold
Civitas Imperialis Sector: 13 sold
Imperial Knights: 16 sold
Rules Set: 8 sold
Warlord: 21 sold
Bundle (Rules set + 2 x Warlord + 2 x Knights + 1 x Civitas Imperialis): 10 sold
Bundle (Rules set + 1 x Warlord + 1 x Knights): 8 sold

 Thargrim wrote:
I'm still hoping there is at least one plastic upgrade for the warlord, and they avoid resin for the more commonly taken weapons. Not too keen on those US prices.

So did I pick a bad time to jump on the GW / AT train?

Outside of some kind of matched play thing run by GW I wouldn't worry much about the resin Forgeworld aftermarket stuff - I imagine the market will be flooded with resin alternatives and 3D printed options which'll cover you.

puzzledust wrote:

 Thargrim wrote:
I'm still hoping there is at least one plastic upgrade for the warlord, and they avoid resin for the more commonly taken weapons. Not too keen on those US prices.

So did I pick a bad time to jump on the GW / AT train?

Not necessarily, I think Necromunda will be more affected by this than AT because the upgrade kits are more essential for some gangs. (not to mention necromundas character/beast/brute models) This only means that if they do resin stuff for AT it will be a tad more costly. Good thing is its designed to be magnetized so I guess you only need to buy a weapon arm once. They kind of indicated that they were going to try and do plastic upgrade sprues anyways, that is why the sprues are laid out with armor plates on one, weapons on the other, etc.

As far as i'm concerned GW is still good ol GW, it's just that they have a community team now to put on a good public face.

 Thargrim wrote:
I'm still hoping there is at least one plastic upgrade for the warlord, and they avoid resin for the more commonly taken weapons. Not too keen on those US prices.

Given that all the digital sculpting was done at roughly the same time, I'd bet that the initial round of weapons (the ones for which we currently have cards) will be plastic.

After that, I'm guessing resin will be the norm.

 schoon wrote:

 Thargrim wrote:
I'm still hoping there is at least one plastic upgrade for the warlord, and they avoid resin for the more commonly taken weapons. Not too keen on those US prices.

Given that all the digital sculpting was done at roughly the same time, I'd bet that the initial round of weapons (the ones for which we currently have cards) will be plastic.

After that, I'm guessing resin will be the norm.

Well I was looking in the rulebook and carapace turbo lasers, plus the plasma annihilator were seen on a couple of the warlord models. So the sculpts on those are done...why they didn't preview those at warhammerfest I do not know...as they obviously have models built and painted with those options. Hopefully those two, plus the fist/claw and one head option make it onto an upgrade sprue.

The knight missile pods may end up being resin, but i'm hoping they do a tiny sprue like the size of primaris chapter upgrades. Except put 2 little powerfists, 2 missile pods, and 3 knight head options on there or something. I think they only have one sculptor working on this stuff though (hopefully andy hoare has already put him to work on cerastus knights).

I'm nearly positive the next warlord sprue will be a pair of laser blasters, 1 sunfury, and one arioch claw, with a mars beta head or two, going by the art in the books and what is already sculpted in 28mm. And they are already cad so no near to measure to convert in.

Reaver would take longer, but there are 28mm versions of the chainfist, volcano cannon, melta cannon, and carapace turbolasers already.

Now, I may be thicker than a Whale omelette with this statement, but.....

Totally just twigged the name of the game.

It’s not Horus Heresy; Adeptus Titanicus. But Adeptus Titanicus; Horus Heresy.

May suggest plans already foot for Xenos additions.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Now, I may be thicker than a Whale omelette with this statement, but.....

Totally just twigged the name of the game.

It’s not Horus Heresy; Adeptus Titanicus. But Adeptus Titanicus; Horus Heresy.

May suggest plans already foot for Xenos additions.

that's their plan yeah. if AT does well eneugh to warrent expanding, they'll put out xenos kits etc it'll praobyl be a few years though

I got my GME today. Wow.

First off, the box. I havent seen GW release a game in such a sturdy box. Its about as indestructable of a box I have ever seen a game come in. Very impressed.

The detail of the Warlords and Knights is amazing. And ridiculously complex to build. For those that don't know, each comes with their own instruction book for assembly. I honestly wish the Warlord (and everything else) was smaller in size. I think its in part the reason these are so expensive, and no doubt will keep some people interested in the game on the sidelines.

I had enough time to read the basic rules and felt, 'Okay I got this' and then I breezed through the Advanced rules and my head was spinning. Def a game you kind of have to take on in steps. The print text of the book doesnt help either. They do a night job placing page numbers on where to go to read up on more rules, which helps. Overall the rulebook is nice, but I also feel kind of skimpy on the Horus Heresy. I guess a game like this assumes you know what AT is and what the Horus Heresy is if you are shelling this much out for it.

The titan templates to track all the damage and whatnot are actually smaller than I thought. I think they still take up too much space. I think they could have designed them to be read clearer and smaller in size and that would have been easier to find room for them when playing. Keep in mind when they say the game was designed to play on a 4x4 foot table, they kind of assume players are playing on a bigger table, like a 6x4, and will use the unused space for these cards. And to be honest, the Warlords being so big, I will prob just play on a 6x4 space anyway. I think 4x4 is too small for the size of these models.

The buildings are nicer in person than how they look online. Going to be fun to build and I will def be ordering some more.

The rulebook does specifiy expansion, and the game has sold well, so I hope we see more beyond the Reavers and Warlords. To be honest, I have a feeling we'll be seeing some kind of Space Marine follow up, maybe as a set of self contained units like Knights, or whatever. Given the detail of the Knights I can only imagine what Land Raiders would look like.


The Warlord has little guns facing the back. Looks like a set of lascannons and maybe some anti-personel weapon. They certainly didn't need to put these on, so I am guessing they were done deliberately in the event they expand the game to include infantry and vehicles.


I wasn't crazy about making Epic minis based on 8mm, but seeing the detail of the guns on the Knights, I think it was the right move. If they do release mini marines, they will look amazing.


I feel its kind of an elitest game, given the price to play and the limited number of current units, which is a disappointment. If the models were a little smaller and more affordable, I am sure EVERYONE would buy this set. The rules do provide a lot of game play, and I appreciate the effort they do to give a nod to the original AT. The newer rules are def more complex than the older ones, and its going to involve a lot of tracking and dice rolling, but I think it will be interesting for awhile at least.


I will def be buying a couple of Reavers, and at least 4 Warhounds. I don't think I'll buy another Warlord.


I really, REALLY, hope FW gets on board with this and releases custom parts, weapons, and so on. Even if they are the ones that release infantry and vehicle models, I would be ok with that.


I'll give the set an A-, mostly due to the quality of the components and the fact they even pulled this off. Will have to play a few games to see where that rating goes.

 KTG17 wrote:
The Warlord has little guns facing the back. Looks like a set of lascannons and maybe some anti-personel weapon. They certainly didn't need to put these on, so I am guessing they were done deliberately in the event they expand the game to include infantry and vehicles.

The ardex guns are on there to help provide scale, and because they are on the full size model.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 KTG17 wrote:
The Warlord has little guns facing the back. Looks like a set of lascannons and maybe some anti-personel weapon. They certainly didn't need to put these on, so I am guessing they were done deliberately in the event they expand the game to include infantry and vehicles.

The ardex guns are on there to help provide scale, and because they are on the full size model.

They have rule, it's written on the Warlord terminal : D3 S5 hit for target in Front and Rear arc within 6"

after much procastinating I've finally begin assmbly of my titans, got the leg assmbly of the first warlord done just now, which TBH was what worried me the most (I hate ball and socket joints. I get they wanted to give us amazing posability but I spent all evening worrying I was gonna feth it up) I've already decided on names for my warlords, Dominus Belli and Ferrus Rex

Sorry for a question that I know is somewhere back in the last 29 pages of this thread, but does someone have the base sizes of Reavers and Warhounds ready to hand?

Reavers - 105mm oval or 115 but I can’t find that size on GW’s site.
Warhound - 80mm round
(Going by the turning/arc templates)

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Now, I may be thicker than a Whale omelette with this statement, but.....

Totally just twigged the name of the game.

It’s not Horus Heresy; Adeptus Titanicus. But Adeptus Titanicus; Horus Heresy.

May suggest plans already foot for Xenos additions.

Orks and Eldar are active and use the same engines in the Heresy as they do in 40k so they donlt even need to move the time period.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Orks and Eldar are active and use the same engines in the Heresy as they do in 40k so they donlt even need to move the time period.

Eldar might be possible exception. Fall isn't that far off. Did eldar use spirit stones before fall? If not that tech is basically from great crusade onward.

Though main reason to shift timeline would be explore new area of fluff. The beast for orks for example. Put them into main focus. In HH orks would be sideline stuff rather than main focus so if you expand for orks...Put them on main focus!

The fall was before the HH

Vorian wrote:
The fall was before the HH

Which is why I said great crusade didn't I? Great crusade began with the birth of Slaanesh. If spirit stones weren't used before they became essential to protect from slaanesh then the eldar had ~200 years to come up with those wraith constructs...Also COULD they do spirit stones? At least in 40k you get spirit stones from the planets inside the Eye of Terror...

So while not conclusive one could make case for HH era eldars still being quite new. They are only about 200 years or so since Slaanesh was born.

tneva82 wrote:

Vorian wrote:
The fall was before the HH

Which is why I said great crusade didn't I? Great crusade began with the birth of Slaanesh. If spirit stones weren't used before they became essential to protect from slaanesh then the eldar had ~200 years to come up with those wraith constructs...Also COULD they do spirit stones? At least in 40k you get spirit stones from the planets inside the Eye of Terror...

So while not conclusive one could make case for HH era eldars still being quite new. They are only about 200 years or so since Slaanesh was born.

Wasn't it the Age of Strife that began with the birth of Slaanesh, and the Great Crusade about five thousand years later when things had settled down a bit?

But this game is HH, what would the crusade have to do with being able to use the same titans in both?

In any event, before Slaanesh they'd just reincarnate so there'd be no need for spiritstones.

They must have been developed in the run up to the fall by the factions that saw the fall coming - so yeah, must be a relatively new concept at the time of the fall - but the Craftworld's and their infinity circuits were already complete by then, so the technology must have been pretty well developed.

 General Helstrom wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Vorian wrote:
The fall was before the HH

Which is why I said great crusade didn't I? Great crusade began with the birth of Slaanesh. If spirit stones weren't used before they became essential to protect from slaanesh then the eldar had ~200 years to come up with those wraith constructs...Also COULD they do spirit stones? At least in 40k you get spirit stones from the planets inside the Eye of Terror...

So while not conclusive one could make case for HH era eldars still being quite new. They are only about 200 years or so since Slaanesh was born.

Wasn't it the Age of Strife that began with the birth of Slaanesh, and the Great Crusade about five thousand years later when things had settled down a bit?

Age of strife was started by Slaanesh BEGINNING to form which caused warp storms that prevented humans traveling much. Emperor later sensing birth of slaanesh knew time to move was coming and united Earth and formed up his marine legions. Slaanesh birth blew away warp storm calming warp and allowing Emperor to begin his great crusade. Great crusade was IMPOSSIBLE before Slaanesh was born for good due to the warp storms.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Vorian wrote:
But this game is HH, what would the crusade have to do with being able to use the same titans in both?

That Eldar had only 200 years or so to develop those titans and have enough to to make impact. Seeing how glacial pace development generally is(how much eldars changed in past 10k?) that seems awfully short time for building up classes of titans etc...

Which makes eldars as good candinate for having different way to fight and tech during HH. Now sure GW could go "oh they have already those" but it's possible to go for alternative road and have present eldar titans come on later date. Maybe later expand eldars during HH by having different kind of tech they used before they mastered spirit stone tech. Seems like win-win situation.

But like I said, they had Craftworlds which are small planet scale constructs using exactly the same technology as their titans.

I think it's a pretty safe bet that HH Eldar are basically identical to 40k Eldar

Since Phantom and Warlock titans are mentioned in HH: Inferno (In Ordo Sinister backgroud), it seems modern Eldar engines were already present by Great Crusade; possibly they are pre-fall designs, just retrofitted with spiritstones. Besides, why would you spend your limited resourses and elfpower on designing titanic warmachines, in such a situation?

tneva82 wrote:


Age of strife was started by Slaanesh BEGINNING to form which caused warp storms that prevented humans traveling much. Emperor later sensing birth of slaanesh knew time to move was coming and united Earth and formed up his marine legions. Slaanesh birth blew away warp storm calming warp and allowing Emperor to begin his great crusade. Great crusade was IMPOSSIBLE before Slaanesh was born for good due to the warp storms.

Ah so it was the conception of Slaanesh that set off the Age of Strife, and the birth that ended it. Thanks for clearing that up

Thinking forward if GW want to eventually advance AT into supporting a rebirth of Epic then it would make sense that whatever they release into AT remains viable in the 40K environment.

That aid Titans tend to hang around for a LONG time so even classic or older Eldar designs could be retained as vintage warmachines into the 41st millennium. That said its far more likely that they give us the phantoms and such that everyone knows, loves and wants to see; and then add additional titan types to give them some variety and new content

Regis_sotum wrote:
Since Phantom and Warlock titans are mentioned in HH: Inferno (In Ordo Sinister backgroud), it seems modern Eldar engines were already present by Great Crusade; possibly they are pre-fall designs, just retrofitted with spiritstones. Besides, why would you spend your limited resourses and elfpower on designing titanic warmachines, in such a situation?

Eldar titans are also mentioned as participating in at least one battle during the horus heresy in the new Adeptus Titanicus rule book.

012.M31 The Balthor Sigma Intervention: " Entirely unheralded a force of xenos titan analogues, Later determined to belong to the Eldar, intervenes to devestating effect."

Eldar Titans are also present (in ancient, ruined form) in A Thousand Sons, before the Heresy. It makes it sound like they were around for a LONG time before that.

You know, if you guys can keep the xenos titan conversation going for about 3 more years, you'll successfully pass the time until xenos titans become a realistic deliverable.

I thought Eldar Titans didn’t use spirit stones for command&control?
Their Titan crews are real meat people sitting in couches in the head, linked together into a psychic gestalt in order to provide sufficient Warp and computational power to drive the staggering requirements of the Titan.

IIRC of course , but I also thought that they retrofitted spirit stones to repair them in battle, along with a nest of wraith spiders.

Classically, Eldar Titans had both pilots and backup spirit stones (same with Knights). I forget the order, but one of the two was primary, yet if slain, the other could take over with a reduced statline.

And it took the super rare Eldar Triplets to power/run the awesome Warlock Titan too!

Can't wait to see them all re-imagined here, in today's tech.

(Today's pricing? Not so much...)

I hope they release those full color transfer sheets soon. Hoping they did one for Krytos/Tempestus too, since they have unique imagery as well. Maybe we'll get some accessories alongside the reaver release.

One little thing that annoys me is ‘volcano cannon’. It sounds dumb. For those of you that weren’t around for the first Titanicus go around, this weapon used to be the defense laser. A better name I thought, as it was basically a Titan mounted version of a weapon that a ground based installation would use to defend itself from low orbit threats....anyway, volcano cannon rubs me the wrong way.

OK?

So...pizza for dinner tonight?

I'm more annoyed that there aren't more options (in plastic) available at launch, in the box, for the Warlords.

Now that's lame!

 totalfailure wrote:
One little thing that annoys me is ‘volcano cannon’. It sounds dumb. For those of you that weren’t around for the first Titanicus go around, this weapon used to be the defense laser. A better name I thought, as it was basically a Titan mounted version of a weapon that a ground based installation would use to defend itself from low orbit threats....anyway, volcano cannon rubs me the wrong way.

the modern explination is that the weapon is so massive that when it hits rocks it results is massive gushes of liquid rock "like a volcano had gone off"

which yeah I agree is silly

Warhammer 40,000 Rogue Trader came out in 1987 and it was the Defence Laser there. Space Marine 2nd edition came out in 1991 and renamed it the Volcano Cannon. It's had that name for 90% of the lifespan of the setting.

Titan Legions retconned the Defence Laser as being a Volcano Cannon with AA capability, for what it's worth. The Imperator Titan had one, right at the top.

So I've decided to go with Legio Atarus, for my titans, Aka the Firebrands. as I figured that out I've been doing some research on associated knight orders for the world of Atar-Meridian which is the home forgrworld of the Legio. my inital readings of their colour scheme didn't give me one, but I lucked out and found a diaorama done of a battle with the knight house involved. looks like it's a simple red and silver scheme.



thought I'd post it for anyone else as it took a tinsy bit of research to find it

I don’t disagree it’s been volcano cannon for a long time...that just means it’s had a dumb name for a long time, though! The right hand Titan in this BGG photo is a Warlord Eclipse variant and its data card with defense laser, from the original AT.
https://boardgamegeek.com/image/331822/adeptus-titanicus

Well, I just got my rules set and box of Knights and started putting things together.

The Knights are gorgeous little things, but I'm now irked. Only one of each ranged weapon? Really? And no missile pod? I really feel like for the price I paid I should have at least been able to make one twin gatling armed knight like the picture in the rulebook.

 Stormonu wrote:
Well, I just got my rules set and box of Knights and started putting things together.

The Knights are gorgeous little things, but I'm now irked. Only one of each ranged weapon? Really? And no missile pod? I really feel like for the price I paid I should have at least been able to make one twin gatling armed knight like the picture in the rulebook.

you should proably glad you didn't get what you wanted then, A twin gatling Knight apparently is nearly useless in AT

BrianDavion wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
Well, I just got my rules set and box of Knights and started putting things together.

The Knights are gorgeous little things, but I'm now irked. Only one of each ranged weapon? Really? And no missile pod? I really feel like for the price I paid I should have at least been able to make one twin gatling armed knight like the picture in the rulebook.

you should proably glad you didn't get what you wanted then, A twin gatling Knight apparently is nearly useless in AT

Did I miss something in the rules? They seem like they would be excellent Void Shield strippers and could rip up other Knights (but nothing bigger)

 Stormonu wrote:


Did I miss something in the rules? They seem like they would be excellent Void Shield strippers and could rip up other Knights (but nothing bigger)

Voidshield is immune to S3 or less attack.

Which is pretty dump to make AGC S3 because it had similar caliber to the vulcan mega bolter. The stat for the weapon is simply wrong, wrong number of dice, wrong range, wrong strength

 Stormonu wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
Well, I just got my rules set and box of Knights and started putting things together.

The Knights are gorgeous little things, but I'm now irked. Only one of each ranged weapon? Really? And no missile pod? I really feel like for the price I paid I should have at least been able to make one twin gatling armed knight like the picture in the rulebook.

you should proably glad you didn't get what you wanted then, A twin gatling Knight apparently is nearly useless in AT

Did I miss something in the rules? They seem like they would be excellent Void Shield strippers and could rip up other Knights (but nothing bigger)

They are Strength 3, so Titan Void Sheilds ignore them, they are only good enough to hit other knights.

Chopstick wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:


Did I miss something in the rules? They seem like they would be excellent Void Shield strippers and could rip up other Knights (but nothing bigger)

Voidshield is immune to S3 or less attack.

Which is pretty dump to make AGC S3 because it had similar caliber to the vulcan mega bolter. The stat for the weapon is simply wrong, wrong number of dice, wrong range, wrong strength

vulcan mega bolter fires 20 shots to the avenger's 12, at just under twice the range. Thats the only differance so yeah... avanger being STR 4 might not be a bad idea...

that said.. balance might be an issue here, they might not want knights being the best void strippers point for point in the game.

I've played battletech for years and have had plenty of oppertunities in the past to people who where on the design team. and people would occasionally ask them why tanks wheren't better, why infantry wasn't better etc, and they where pretty unapologetic in that the rules where designed to ensure Battlemechs dominated the battlefield. there might be an element of that where they deliberatly wanted to ensure knights were's so good people that the "international grand tourny winning lists" wheren't "all knight lists"


speaking of knights just assmbled mine. man the scale of the game doesn't hit you until you're assmbling those suckers and comparing the process mentally to building a full size one. and realizing "this fiddly little bit if a canon bigger then the model on the 28mm scale one!"

Dagnabit, I thought STR 3 was the minimum to affect Void Shields. Puts a real crimp in my battleplan.

Although, I've been working all day today putting together stats for Superheavy tanks and the like. This game has me pumped to be trying it out.

BrianDavion wrote:


there might be an element of that where they deliberatly wanted to ensure knights were's so good people that the "international grand tourny winning lists" wheren't "all knight lists"

That won't be a problem with approriate point cost. Knight's strongest asset is their devastating charge and melee. So you'd want to avoid spending too much on their shooting. Which is not cheap.

It's hint in the book that they'd get their own household trait in the future so that might change. Also Knight dominus with all those gun easily out dakka titans any days, it's the problem in GW, they have no problem updating the old knight giving it more firepower but the titan remain the same for decade.

Does anyone know when the likely release of the warhounds and reaver is? I've been scouring the thread and couldn't find anything?

 Plant wrote:
Does anyone know when the likely release of the warhounds and reaver is? I've been scouring the thread and couldn't find anything?

given Orks look to be in October, September seems sucpiciously quiet. I'm crossing my fingers we get a release then. My gut feeling is they're gonna want the inital range complete before december, so that Titanfall can cap the whole inital range off.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Plant wrote:
Does anyone know when the likely release of the warhounds and reaver is? I've been scouring the thread and couldn't find anything?

given Orks look to be in October, September seems sucpiciously quiet. I'm crossing my fingers we get a release then. My gut feeling is they're gonna want the inital range complete before december, so that Titanfall can cap the whole inital range off.

Reaver will be in September WD along with the new LoTR set and Rogue Trader. They were less certain on the Warhound, which could be October or November.

 xttz wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Plant wrote:
Does anyone know when the likely release of the warhounds and reaver is? I've been scouring the thread and couldn't find anything?

given Orks look to be in October, September seems sucpiciously quiet. I'm crossing my fingers we get a release then. My gut feeling is they're gonna want the inital range complete before december, so that Titanfall can cap the whole inital range off.

Reaver will be in September WD along with the new LoTR set and Rogue Trader. They were less certain on the Warhound, which could be October or November.

YAY! *sets aside money!*

Warhound is very likely to be November. I was told by the designer at Games Day that it was finished, but they weren't allowed to show it off, since it was outside their three month release schedule.

The Reaver was shown at Games Day Uk, meaning that it is coming next month, barring some sort of disaster.

Warhound was shown off in Germany, menaing that it is now less than three months from release.