Price.
Imperial armies only.
Not buying a game with only two available models for the entire game system.
New scale not compatible with currrent gw games.
Concern that like all GW boxed games this will be regulated to the bargin bins in a few weeks.
Judging by the fact that they couldn't actually fully stock third parties due to demand, I don't think "bust" is quite the right word. In fact, it looks like they severely underestimated demand.
While the sticker shock on the GM edition is definitely real, (assuming 25% online discount)£15 for the Knights, £26 for the Reaver, £49 for the Warlord, and a rumoured £38 for a pair of Warhounds isn't unreasonable in the context of GW's existing price structure, which I'm assuming they're willing to tolerate in other contexts.
Not buying a game with only two available models for the entire game system.
Discarding the game because they can't wait literally a few weeks for the additional releases? Sounds more like they were looking for an excuse, most of us won't even have finished painting our first Titan before the Reaver is out.
New scale not compatible with currrent gw games.
Unless they're talking about 40K which makes little sense since it being a different scale to 40K is the entire point, that's actually a false perception. Epic never had a consistent scale to begin with and the new Warlords fall well within the range that was being used for "truescale" Epic Titans by forumware and third party products.
Concern that like all GW boxed games this will be regulated to the bargin bins in a few weeks.
This isn't a GW boxed game, it's a Specialist Game. I've yet to see Necromunda or Blood Bowl products in any "bargain bin", and just like those two they already have at least a solid year or two's worth of releases planned out.
So is Adeptus Titanicus a bust?
No.
If you did buy into it, what did you get and why?
Warlord, Rules Pack, two Knight Banners, and in the short term I'll be adding two Reavers and a box of Warhounds for a standard Maniple. If they release the other Knight chassis, the FW ones especially, I intend to collect an entire Household of Knights. Why? Because I want a Titan Maniple and a Knight Household, and I could never afford those things in 40K scale. The fact the models come alongside one of the most crunchy and tactically engaging games GW have put out since Battlefleet Gothic in the late 90's is icing on the cake.
I would suggest that it's worth getting your local shop to reconsider, they're missing out on an excellent game with genuinely fantastic models(the detail on the Knights is ridiculous considering their size) for reasons that aren't really accurate.
Price.
Not buying a game with only two available models for the entire game system.
New scale not compatible with currrent gw games.
Concern that like all GW boxed games this will be regulated to the bargin bins in a few weeks.
So is Adeptus Titanicus a bust?
If you did buy into it, what did you get and why?
Thanks dakka!
So... because your store doesn't understand value the game is a bust?
I don't know about many others but spending $290 to get $430 worth of product is a steal to me.
Then we go to the fact that, within just 3 weeks we get a second unit. 3 weeks! That's amazing.
Let's go into the actual game. 2 models? Sure, except those models have a good variety in play and it would be hard to play every idea until the next model dropped.
Yodhrin wrote: The fact the models come alongside one of the most crunchy and tactically engaging games GW have put out since Battlefleet Gothic in the late 90's is icing on the cake.
I would suggest that it's worth getting your local shop to reconsider, they're missing out on an excellent game with genuinely fantastic models(the detail on the Knights is ridiculous considering their size) for reasons that aren't really accurate.
This. 100% this.
The game is fantastic. The I go and you go play, the arcs, the movement and multitude of tactical decisions... Yea. It's a crunchy game that will have a Knight Household book, likely an Militarum book, and several campaign books.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ratius wrote: Thought it looked interesting. I missed the whole Epic phase as was too poor and invested in 2nd ed, hence AT grabbed my attention.
However the kicker for me was Imp only. I would have snapped it up with Eldar/Orks/other factions but Imp VS Chaos was too limited Im afraid.
To me this is a flimsy thing. Other factions are extremely easy for them to add to the game.
It's cheaper for the company to start this way and add based off sales instead of investing all in once and cause many issues with buyers and the like.
Ratius wrote: Thought it looked interesting. I missed the whole Epic phase as was too poor and invested in 2nd ed, hence AT grabbed my attention.
However the kicker for me was Imp only. I would have snapped it up with Eldar/Orks/other factions but Imp VS Chaos was too limited Im afraid.
Good point. Many people mentioned that too. I will add that to the list.
As far as supply goes, you can get a brand new grandmaster edition on the secondary market for less that retail price with shipping. That says a lot as far as demand goes.
In regards to my shop being the end all be all of the “bust” , that’s why I made the poll.
Ratius wrote: Thought it looked interesting. I missed the whole Epic phase as was too poor and invested in 2nd ed, hence AT grabbed my attention.
However the kicker for me was Imp only. I would have snapped it up with Eldar/Orks/other factions but Imp VS Chaos was too limited Im afraid.
Good point. Many people mentioned that too. I will add that to the list.
As far as supply goes, you can get a brand new grandmaster edition on the secondary market for less that retail price with shipping. That says a lot as far as demand goes.
In regards to my shop being the end all be all of the “bust” , that’s why I made the poll.
You can great anything off the secondary market for cheaper. That's how they get you to buy.
Basically its about your group not getting a "good enough deal" no matter that a GM box is a free warlord and you only pay a little bit for a box of knights.
I bought the rules a warlord and some knights and will buy everything I can for the system, it’s an awesome game at a good scale and is cheap to get into compared to 40k or Sigmar, (£30: ruleset, 3x titans minimum for a “matched play game” £65 each for most expensive plus cost of paints and glue. That £225 minimum for models) 40k assuming you don’t want either army from the starter set it’s £35 rules, £20 chapter approved(every year) £20-30 codex, £50 start collecting box, £30-70 for a vehicle or monster plus paint and glue. Let’s say you spend a total of £100 on vehicles and/or monsters and other units and you bought the £20 codex... that’s £225, the same cost yes you have more models (you’ll need more paint and glue and storage space for them) but you also no where near the points bracket everyone will Force you to play at so at the end of the day Titanicus is cheaper, the complaints are because it’s not cross compatible an to that I say you’ve not got a very good imagination, setup a second smaller table with the terrain set out the same (in a smaller scale) later the ranges of the titans weapon to match the smaller scale and play as if those titans where on the big table (yeah you’d need to do some work, and make some compromises and couldn’t do it for competitive games but when was the last time you say one of the Forgeworld titans move in a standard 40k or apocalypse game?)
I bought rules pack and a planing on adding a reaver (for now). I wast outraged when I saw the price on the GME, but when I got the rules, I realised its not a starter set. Its basically a entire army (2 warlords and 6 knights, you can easily spend 1250 points for them). Ok sure, you can't play a maniple, but still. You also get lots of terrain. With all that said, I still won't buy a GME because its too much for me to spend in one go. Also, I don't intend to play with 2 warlords.
I agree that its a shame that there is no xeno titans. But you can always get into the game later if GW releases eldars or orks (or tyranids).
Price.
Imperial armies only.
Not buying a game with only two available models for the entire game system.
New scale not compatible with currrent gw games.
Concern that like all GW boxed games this will be regulated to the bargin bins in a few weeks.
So is Adeptus Titanicus a bust?
If you did buy into it, what did you get and why?
Thanks dakka!
ok first of all it sounds like the price may not be as b ad as initaly thought, the warlord titan is expensive but the other titans are MUCH easier to choke down, (I've been saying from day 1, they should have made the Reaver the first released Titan) the new game with "only 2 models" is hardly an issue as we know other models are coming out hot on the heels of the inital release and, as others have said, chances are you won't be finished your warlord by time the reaver comes out. The scale issue is a bit of a silly complaint, the entire point of AT is a differant scale, and IMHO that makes AT MORE likely to receive long term support, games that use 40k models are easy to pull the plug on. games with their own model line require a more signficigent investment.
As for the Imperial armies only, honestly? that's smart. eventually Eldar, Ork etc will come, but focusing on just one line at launch is a good idea. eaither way it woulda taken time to release various factions. consider necromundia, not all the gangs are released yet. AT is starting off, and will build organicly from the solding beginning. we can't expect GW to put out an entirely new game system with all the factions developed over 30 years of warhammer 40k in a month
I don't think its a bust, they just made a mistake by not letting people know the prices until the week of pre orders. This led to a bit of a shock for some people. However it looks like it did sell okay and having the models in hand I do believe they are amazing kits worth the money. I think what they do next and how the game is treated by GW will have a big impact on the games future. It also helps that the reaver is reasonably priced, allowing people to skip the warlord if they want and get in cheaper.
I quite like the horus heresy setting so I don't mind loyalist vs traitor, thematically there are some pretty awesome narrative possibilities.
I think the main problem was that they added the moust expensive titan first, and thus further boosted the impression that AT is immensly expensive for its scale, but is it realy that expensive? i havent bought the warlord yet cuz it is not part of the maniple i want, but the knights are atleast dirt cheap. and the price for the rule box aint too bad either considereing what you get.
It allso dont help that there is no info on the box that this is 30k, not 40k.
This is a game that needs years to grow, and hopefully in time it gets meat on the bone.
Ask again in 2 years, asking after 2 weeks is way too short time.
Did i buy into AT?, yes but im buying 1 box at a time, thus spreading out the expenses.
Its a full bust in my neck of the woods. I have over 50 Epic Imperial Titans, not needing models I inquired if Incould scare up an opponent even if I supplied the models. Crickets... No opponents, no games, no go.
I think many might change their minds in time - Reavers are coming and knights are already very affordable. The Warlord is a big price but its a very impressive model to behold and put together.
Certainly there is local variety in where it has and hasn't taken off, but that is pretty normal. That the game has sold so well and likely beyond GW's initial expectations means that its in a very strong and solid position overall. Yes some local areas have loads and some have few or new players; but the overall picture (based on the fast sales of the core wargame box - which is expensive) is that it has done very well for itself at its launch.
That said the games going to not draw in everyone, to be blunt, it;s a VERY differant game from 40k, small number of models, fairly complex crunchy rules etc. If you just wanna toss stupid numbers of dice and sweep models off the board, AT isn't for you.
dracpanzer wrote: Its a full bust in my neck of the woods. I have over 50 Epic Imperial Titans, not needing models I inquired if Incould scare up an opponent even if I supplied the models. Crickets... No opponents, no games, no go.
Sounds like not much was tried. Did you grab a rule box? Do Demo games? advertise a week or more out?
I ask because I do demos for several flgs's and painting in public, having tables set up etc entice players. Hell I have sold a couple of GM boxes for my efforts so its not a lost cause. Just got to be willing to work for it.
Nothing worth having is going to be cheap or easy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: That said the games going to not draw in everyone, to be blunt, it;s a VERY differant game from 40k, small number of models, fairly complex crunchy rules etc. If you just wanna toss stupid numbers of dice and sweep models off the board, AT isn't for you.
You COULD throw large number of dice. . . it just does not remove models very well. . . dual gatlings on knights are not good at much except for weapon targets in CC range on a titan. Rolls an intense amount of dice though
As a game system, it's got a lot of potential. All of the pieces are there to turn this into a really great game.
But, they really need to add in some more variety. Eldar, Orks, Chaos, even Tyranid bio-titans would be great to see in this game, so that it's not all Warlord v Warlord action.
drbored wrote: As a game system, it's got a lot of potential. All of the pieces are there to turn this into a really great game.
But, they really need to add in some more variety. Eldar, Orks, Chaos, even Tyranid bio-titans would be great to see in this game, so that it's not all Warlord v Warlord action.
Yea. Would be great. Go buy the game, at least the rules so that the fame can grow to the point of getting more factions. GW isn't going to invest in a system as heavily as more factions if they don't know how it will go
drbored wrote: As a game system, it's got a lot of potential. All of the pieces are there to turn this into a really great game.
But, they really need to add in some more variety. Eldar, Orks, Chaos, even Tyranid bio-titans would be great to see in this game, so that it's not all Warlord v Warlord action.
Yea. Would be great. Go buy the game, at least the rules so that the fame can grow to the point of getting more factions. GW isn't going to invest in a system as heavily as more factions if they don't know how it will go
I'm expecting to see house rules for eldar and Ork titans pretty fast, Eldar will likely get conversions of some of the wraith unit constructs going and Ork players will do what they do best
drbored wrote: As a game system, it's got a lot of potential. All of the pieces are there to turn this into a really great game.
But, they really need to add in some more variety. Eldar, Orks, Chaos, even Tyranid bio-titans would be great to see in this game, so that it's not all Warlord v Warlord action.
Yea. Would be great. Go buy the game, at least the rules so that the fame can grow to the point of getting more factions. GW isn't going to invest in a system as heavily as more factions if they don't know how it will go
I'm expecting to see house rules for eldar and Ork titans pretty fast, Eldar will likely get conversions of some of the wraith unit constructs going and Ork players will do what they do best
Orks are easy. Give them higher armor, lower speed unless they are painted red. The mega Gargant might not even a base turn unless they push. Heck they might even be able to double push for an added bonuses. I could see them having Belly Guns that are corridor arc like a warlord carapace weapon.
Eldar are more interesting and a bit more difficult...
I don't care when the 1985 version took place, they should've made it 40k. I don't understand this desire for 30k. Is it just so they can have chaos knights be the same model with a different paint job?
Limiting yourself to mirror matches basically is boring. No ork gargants? Tyranid bio titans? eldar phantoms? tau'nar supremacy armor?
But I think the major turn off for a lot of people is all the stuff on FW for specialist games. Want special characters for BB? DIfferent weapons for Necromunda? Knights, Weapons, Terrain for Titanicus? Forgeworld or tough sh*t bro. And now that they've done the whole 30-50% price increase nobody wants to touch it. The reliance on FW and the price increase basically shoots itself in the foot. I don't know what they were thinking.
I was initially angry that the price wasn't lower, as GW has been slinging out some hot deals of late. But the longer I tried to resist, tte more I realized that not picking up the GME, a pretty great starter for a game which I was bound to get into sooner or later, was making a chump out of me.
Don Savik wrote: I don't care when the 1985 version took place, they should've made it 40k. I don't understand this desire for 30k. Is it just so they can have chaos knights be the same model with a different paint job?
Limiting yourself to mirror matches basically is boring. No ork gargants? Tyranid bio titans? eldar phantoms? tau'nar supremacy armor?
But I think the major turn off for a lot of people is all the stuff on FW for specialist games. Want special characters for BB? DIfferent weapons for Necromunda? Knights, Weapons, Terrain for Titanicus? Forgeworld or tough sh*t bro. And now that they've done the whole 30-50% price increase nobody wants to touch it. The reliance on FW and the price increase basically shoots itself in the foot. I don't know what they were thinking.
The original was like this from what I heard. They can always increase the years as they add books and reach into Epic.
See, GW is taking a baby step and investing potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars into a venture that might go bust. If it did then all they have are small knights, warlords, warhounds and reavers expended which they can either fix d a use for or leave alone.
If GW had jumped in support for a game as complex as a full 40k roster it would not go well. Too much too soon, not enough fast enough, the community would hate it.
The current method allows the build up and expanding capability of a brand new game. Game companies don't just pop out 6 factions of full rosters at once and hope for a balanced game. Especially when the cost of producing that many models would be insane. It would of had to be limited TOFW resin instead of plastic and then the game would never of had the size of release which old of doomed it.
The FW concern is a high one yes, that's one side I worry about but if they keep things in plastic we could see some pretty cool things
A new game is a financal risk, and plastic minis are expensive, imagine if they produced a MASSIVE range, with 4 titans from every race even if they went the cheap option and had Chaos and Imperium use the same models you're looking at over 20 unique models. that's a huuuge risk for them. Best to start modest and small and build up over time.
and mirror matches can actually be pretty intreasting if the game has eneugh depth as it tends to require both sides to use tactics and stragety.
and mirror matches can actually be pretty intreasting if the game has eneugh depth as it tends to require both sides to use tactics and stragety.
The issue I think is people see this AS Mirror Matches.
They don't see this clearly because they have not seen many lists that could be created. Sure it's Imperial on Imperial, yet it's actually more akin to the Maniple and build. Suddenly you could see a duo Venator list with 2 reavers and 4 warhounds in 1500 points vs a Myrmidon backed with Knights, or an Gryphonicus Axiom with 2 Reavers and a Warlord vs another Axiom with Warlord, Reaver and 2 warhounds.
I think I will make 10 that are my favorites and post them tomorrow. I am going to do some pretty interesting things and will even include my Strategem ideas so as to give people an idea of what a single lists depth could entail.
As far as supply goes, you can get a brand new grandmaster edition on the secondary market for less that retail price with shipping. That says a lot as far as demand goes.
I quickly checked both eBay UK and US for the GME prices. In the UK you (I mean you in general) find nothing below £175 while in the US you find 2 listings for less than $290 but … one is for half a GME + 2 reavers for $245 and the other for half a GME at $175 (incidentally the description might not be accurate as it lists "2x Adeptus Titanicus: Civitas Imperialis (half of the terrain)" and the GME contains the equivalent of 2 boxes of civitas imperialis). Best to check and do some math before jumping to conclusions.
Also, if I had bought with a nice discount (hard to get but on day 1 some online retailers were offering up to 25% discount to RRP), I might try to resell it for a profit below the RRP. So a price below RRP is not conclusive in itself.
Beware of scams. Maybe these 2 listings on eBay are genuine but I remember seeing one listing on eBay on the Sunday of the pre-orders weekend. There were 5 available GME for less than $50. It goes without saying they were selling like hot cakes. After 32 boxes were sold (the revisions history showed quantity being modified each time one sold), eBay pulled the listing. The eBay profile selling had not been active for more than a year, with no wargaming items whatsoever in the past. Pretty sure those who bought got disappointed.
Imho, AT is not a bust. It is a great game, very tactical. The models are pure beauties. It is very scalable. Indeed, as it is set in the Horus Heresy, you "only" have 2 factions: loyalists vs. traitors. Various legions with specific traits, more to come in campaign books, and Eldar and Orks can be easily added.
Don Savik wrote: I don't care when the 1985 version took place, they should've made it 40k. I don't understand this desire for 30k. Is it just so they can have chaos knights be the same model with a different paint job?
Thing is that when it comes to Titans 30K or 40K basically makes no difference to them. They are warmachines that are basically timeless and whilst their design has evolved over time as everything else from GW has (as new methods, new castings and new art directions come and go), they are, in the story, still pretty much unchanged.
So shifting from 30K to 40K basically means all GW has to do is release a lore book and say "its now all 40K". Likely done alongside adding more Xeno.
The rules for AT are solid - much more maneuver warfare than most other GW games.
If they made a mistake - IMO - it's the model release schedule.
You really need to play with a full titan maniple to take full advantage of the tactics involved, and unless you're willing to proxy, you won't be able to do that till the Warhounds come out in October (?).
schoon wrote: The rules for AT are solid - much more maneuver warfare than most other GW games.
If they made a mistake - IMO - it's the model release schedule.
You really need to play with a full titan maniple to take full advantage of the tactics involved, and unless you're willing to proxy, you won't be able to do that till the Warhounds come out in October (?).
I agree on this. The more I think about it, the more I'm puzzled by the choice of putting two Warlords in the GME box, let alone with two Volcano Cannons each. As it stands it probably won't be until near the end of the year that we'll get to see mixed maniples of Warlords, Reavers and Warhounds with a good variety of loadouts between them. And that's when the game will really start to shine in terms of interesting gameplay and model diversity. I think it would have been more amazing if the game had launched with two Reavers, two Warhounds and two banners of Knights in the GME box.
That said, I did buy in. And I drummed up local support and got five others interested, four of whom have also bought in. I organized an intro game earlier this week and we all had a blast stomping about with our awesome Warlords. Like any new game it needs one or two folks to "pull the cart" and get the momentum going. If no-one is taking up that role, the game will - locally - be a bust.
I was straight in with my pre-order. I'm a massive Epic fan of old and no way am I going to pass up the start of a new edition. Gimmie those Titans!
Rules are very simple in an "easy to learn, difficult to master" style. Lots of nice throwbacks to previous Epic editions. And, best of all, my old Epic scenery works nicely with the new Titans
schoon wrote: The rules for AT are solid - much more maneuver warfare than most other GW games.
If they made a mistake - IMO - it's the model release schedule.
You really need to play with a full titan maniple to take full advantage of the tactics involved, and unless you're willing to proxy, you won't be able to do that till the Warhounds come out in October (?).
true this. if you are very rules strict, you cant play narrative or matched games yet cuz they require maniples, and 1 of 3 maniples can at the earliest be made in 1 1/2 weeks.
i get that drip feeding is GWs new thing but it should not be for AT, it should be full maniple model releases with alt weapons.
this game wont be fully playable until moust likely end of october.
schoon wrote: The rules for AT are solid - much more maneuver warfare than most other GW games.
If they made a mistake - IMO - it's the model release schedule.
You really need to play with a full titan maniple to take full advantage of the tactics involved, and unless you're willing to proxy, you won't be able to do that till the Warhounds come out in October (?).
true this. if you are very rules strict, you cant play narrative or matched games yet cuz they require maniples, and 1 of 3 maniples can at the earliest be made in 1 1/2 weeks.
i get that drip feeding is GWs new thing but it should not be for AT, it should be full maniple model releases with alt weapons.
this game wont be fully playable until moust likely end of october.
I think GW/FW is assuming that the first month or two people are going to take it easy and simply focus on learning the game. I have a feeling they really are working on a slow release with december being when the game is "launch complete"
No, I haven´t bought it and never will. All people I have spoken to say the same thing: Price is absurd (230 Euros) and content is low. You only have two different unit types in the box. Who thought that this was a good idea? No one in my local area is interested. And the majority of people who bought the box are scalpers anyway. Total failure GW.
Just think how much more value you get when you purchase Necromunda or Blood Bowl for a fraction of AT´s price.
But neither of them comes with a huge dynamic post warlord titan - let alone two of them. The box price is higher but the core units are far bigger and way more imposing on the table.
Overread wrote: But neither of them comes with a huge dynamic post warlord titan - let alone two of them. The box price is higher but the core units are far bigger and way more imposing on the table.
When I glance into my glass cabinet there is a Stompa and two IK ready for action. Today I finish my third IK. These models are more imposing than a AT Warlord model. Most of the members of my community also already own an IK or an equivalent unit for 40K. So you won´t get these guys into playing AT for this reason alone.
I watched gameplay of AT on youtube. I liked the micromanaging aspect of the void shields, plasma reactor, damage control, orders & critical hits. It is nice to know that GW is still capable to write interesting rules for one of their tabletop games. So this game was practically made for me and not for the PS4 generation that demands a dumbed down version of 40K because they can´t memorize a couple of special rules. But the suits in GWHQ are still greedy dimwits, if they think that people will buy their products without checking the price tag. For christ´s sake 230 Euros are 460 DM! No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in because it shows that people still have some sense left.
But you can buy all the boxed set stuff on its own in separate purchases. That's the thing, there is nothing unique in the box; its just got a high price tag because its got enough of everything to get started in one big go. Much like the Battalion bundles that GW has on their website (which are of similar cost in the hundreds). Sure most don't buy them - they buy a bit here and a bit there.
Also I'd agree there are bigger models - the Warlord to my eye is well sized to allow for the inclusion of BIGGER titans in the game in the future (such as the iconic and imposing Imperator and perhaps other new things from xeno races that we've never seen).
Bought in and brought some fellas down with me, so here we'll be laughing our God-Machine arses off when people think of this game as a bust. Of course it isn't, it sold out like hot cakes and will very likely carry on in the same vein, as it finally allows proper 40k titan clashes without spending your kidneys on Forge World and requiring a table the size of a tennis court. Yes, there were older Epic ones around for that too, but they're not on the same level of quality as modern GW sculpts by any metric (bar perhaps personal aestethic preference).
And really, 200~ euros for a fully functional starting army + rules + terrain isn't an unreasonable amount of money for most people if they like the game. Is it more than one might have liked? Likely. Is it as far over the horizon of acceptable as some people claim? Of course it isn't, people can prioritize their money however they like if they think the game is worth it. Ruleswise, it is.
zerosignal wrote: "No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in"
You are demonstrably wrong.
If you had taken a moment to read my whole post then you would have understood that I meant my local community and not the rest of the world. I repeat this just for you again:
NO one bought the AT box in MY FLGS and there were even NO demo games in MY area. The local GW also has NOT a single box displayed in the store. Why? The store manager said that nobody has shown any interest in this game.
zerosignal wrote: "No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in"
You are demonstrably wrong.
If you had taken a moment to read my whole post then you would have understood that I meant my local community and not the rest of the world. I repeat this just for you again:
NO one bought the AT box in MY FLGS and there were even NO demo games in MY area. The local GW also has NOT a single box displayed in the store. Why? The store manager said that nobody has shown any interest in this game.
schoon wrote: The rules for AT are solid - much more maneuver warfare than most other GW games.
If they made a mistake - IMO - it's the model release schedule.
You really need to play with a full titan maniple to take full advantage of the tactics involved, and unless you're willing to proxy, you won't be able to do that till the Warhounds come out in October (?).
true this. if you are very rules strict, you cant play narrative or matched games yet cuz they require maniples, and 1 of 3 maniples can at the earliest be made in 1 1/2 weeks.
i get that drip feeding is GWs new thing but it should not be for AT, it should be full maniple model releases with alt weapons.
this game wont be fully playable until moust likely end of october.
2 of 3 is you play Legio Gryphonicus.
I think the reason GW did it was so that people could absorb the sticker shock instead of having three cheap kits dropped then then $110 model dropped.
The biggest models also sell the least so having them apart of the GME means they are moved quicker and people get to see big stompy robots which, let's be honest here, is a HUGE "Ohhhh what's that" factor compared to smaller stompy robots.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Strg Alt wrote: For christ´s sake 230 Euros are 460 DM! No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in because it shows that people still have some sense left.
Read your entire post, can I now say you are still demonstrably wrong?
See the issue is you are looking at sticker price, while that is a good idea to judge things it's only one piece of the pie here.
Value is another. In USD I know I am getting a free Warlord titan plus some in a GME set. A. Free. $110. Model
Mind you, you speak of "imposing" that's nice and all but the Warlord was a hell of a lot of fun to build and looks far better to me than those knights. The knights are just... Boring.
Overread wrote: But you can buy all the boxed set stuff on its own in separate purchases. That's the thing, there is nothing unique in the box; its just got a high price tag because its got enough of everything to get started in one big go. Much like the Battalion bundles that GW has on their website (which are of similar cost in the hundreds). Sure most don't buy them - they buy a bit here and a bit there.
Also I'd agree there are bigger models - the Warlord to my eye is well sized to allow for the inclusion of BIGGER titans in the game in the future (such as the iconic and imposing Imperator and perhaps other new things from xeno races that we've never seen).
I just checked the GW homepage for the AT stuff. The rules package for 45 Euros looks promising because I started a while ago to write my own homebrew rules for IK:R. Stuff like damage control, plasma reactor management and machine spirits interfering with your orders could definitely spice up my game. So thank you for the tip.
But to sell the city skyscrapers for 100 Euros is just plain stupid. Just go to your home improvement store and build the terrain by yourself. You will be surprised how much money you can save. I also don´t see the value of a Warlord costing 85 Euros while a Gorkanaut which is bigger and wider has the same price tag attached to it. The former doesn´t even have weapon options and is stuck with it´s loadout until FW gives you the opportunity to spend even more many for a sensible Titan armament. Jesus Chrysler!
Strg Alt wrote: For christ´s sake 230 Euros are 460 DM! No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in because it shows that people still have some sense left.
Many retailers sold out their stock of GME boxes on the first day. I have half a dozen people in my direct area who purchased a set.
The only thing no-one does is calculate Euros back to old money. It's 2018 for Christ's sake.
schoon wrote: The rules for AT are solid - much more maneuver warfare than most other GW games.
If they made a mistake - IMO - it's the model release schedule.
You really need to play with a full titan maniple to take full advantage of the tactics involved, and unless you're willing to proxy, you won't be able to do that till the Warhounds come out in October (?).
true this. if you are very rules strict, you cant play narrative or matched games yet cuz they require maniples, and 1 of 3 maniples can at the earliest be made in 1 1/2 weeks.
i get that drip feeding is GWs new thing but it should not be for AT, it should be full maniple model releases with alt weapons.
this game wont be fully playable until moust likely end of october.
2 of 3 is you play Legio Gryphonicus.
I think the reason GW did it was so that people could absorb the sticker shock instead of having three cheap kits dropped then then $110 model dropped.
The biggest models also sell the least so having them apart of the GME means they are moved quicker and people get to see big stompy robots which, let's be honest here, is a HUGE "Ohhhh what's that" factor compared to smaller stompy robots.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Strg Alt wrote: For christ´s sake 230 Euros are 460 DM! No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in because it shows that people still have some sense left.
Read your entire post, can I now say you are still demonstrably wrong?
See the issue is you are looking at sticker price, while that is a good idea to judge things it's only one piece of the pie here.
Value is another. In USD I know I am getting a free Warlord titan plus some in a GME set. A. Free. $110. Model
Mind you, you speak of "imposing" that's nice and all but the Warlord was a hell of a lot of fun to build and looks far better to me than those knights. The knights are just... Boring.
You cannot argue over taste. You don´t like the Knights and had tons of fun building the Titan. That´s fine. I am happy for you that you enjoy the hobby and support one of GW´s specialist games despite the costs. If we are lucky we might even see Gargants & Phantom Titans in the future.
Strg Alt wrote: For christ´s sake 230 Euros are 460 DM! No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in because it shows that people still have some sense left.
Many retailers sold out their stock of GME boxes on the first day. I have half a dozen people in my direct area who purchased a set.
The only thing no-one does is calculate Euros back to old money.
Believe me your wallet will thank you for it, if you do.
Strg Alt wrote: For christ´s sake 230 Euros are 460 DM! No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in because it shows that people still have some sense left.
Many retailers sold out their stock of GME boxes on the first day. I have half a dozen people in my direct area who purchased a set.
The only thing no-one does is calculate Euros back to old money.
Believe me your wallet will thank you for it, if you do.
Life's too short, man. It's been sixteen years.
Reading this thread confirms my suspicions that AT only does well in areas where there has been some grassroots push to get people interested. If no-one in an area is excited enough to be that firestarter, nothing's going to happen. That's fair enough. I find it interesting that there are such big regional variations in uptake though, even ones with well-established and large wargaming communities.
schoon wrote: The rules for AT are solid - much more maneuver warfare than most other GW games.
If they made a mistake - IMO - it's the model release schedule.
You really need to play with a full titan maniple to take full advantage of the tactics involved, and unless you're willing to proxy, you won't be able to do that till the Warhounds come out in October (?).
true this. if you are very rules strict, you cant play narrative or matched games yet cuz they require maniples, and 1 of 3 maniples can at the earliest be made in 1 1/2 weeks.
i get that drip feeding is GWs new thing but it should not be for AT, it should be full maniple model releases with alt weapons.
this game wont be fully playable until moust likely end of october.
2 of 3 is you play Legio Gryphonicus.
I think the reason GW did it was so that people could absorb the sticker shock instead of having three cheap kits dropped then then $110 model dropped.
The biggest models also sell the least so having them apart of the GME means they are moved quicker and people get to see big stompy robots which, let's be honest here, is a HUGE "Ohhhh what's that" factor compared to smaller stompy robots.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Strg Alt wrote: For christ´s sake 230 Euros are 460 DM! No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in because it shows that people still have some sense left.
Read your entire post, can I now say you are still demonstrably wrong?
See the issue is you are looking at sticker price, while that is a good idea to judge things it's only one piece of the pie here.
Value is another. In USD I know I am getting a free Warlord titan plus some in a GME set. A. Free. $110. Model
Mind you, you speak of "imposing" that's nice and all but the Warlord was a hell of a lot of fun to build and looks far better to me than those knights. The knights are just... Boring.
You cannot argue over taste. You don´t like the Knights and had tons of fun building the Titan. That´s fine. I am happy for you that you enjoy the hobby and support one of GW´s specialist games despite the costs. If we are lucky we might even see Gargants & Phantom Titans in the future.
I dont understand what you mean by costs. I have a tournament capable army for $350 usd. Can you have a tournament ready army in 40k for that?
Hell I could EASILY ditch the GME box, grab a Reaver pack coming out next week, a rules pack, and when the warhounds come out two sets of those and likely spend LESS than a GME box. . . That would STILL give me a tournament ready army with a lot of built in fun and design. Hmmm Might need the warhound cards and the Venator terminal pack so over a GME in the end and yet. . . far more than enough to play the game.
The warlords were a blast. More pieces per model than the Knights, amazing detail, and a breeze to paint.
ValentineGames wrote: No I bloody didn't. And from what I've seen of the full shelves in stores not many people did.
Your loss. Great game. Lots of potential and fun.
No it really isn't my loss at all. Not even in the slightest.
If you can't afford something you're losing nothing.
I also don't want to spend stupid amounts of money on a model you can only build in 1 set manner in an era where plastic allows huge variety.
That's just moronic.
£65 for 1 model walking monkey in 1 set load out for an already dead system, when I can buy 3 28mm tanks for £40-50 with 8 variants each with hundreds of systems to play in.
Yeah...I'm REALLY losing out so much...
Strg Alt wrote: For christ´s sake 230 Euros are 460 DM! No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in because it shows that people still have some sense left.
Many retailers sold out their stock of GME boxes on the first day. I have half a dozen people in my direct area who purchased a set.
The only thing no-one does is calculate Euros back to old money.
Believe me your wallet will thank you for it, if you do.
Life's too short, man. It's been sixteen years.
Reading this thread confirms my suspicions that AT only does well in areas where there has been some grassroots push to get people interested. Ff no-one in an area is excited enough to be that firestarter, nothing's going to happen. That's fair enough. I find it interesting that there are such big regional variations in uptake though, even ones with well-established and large wargaming communities.
Possibly. I wanted the game because I never got to play AT and this looked fun. It helps that the models look better than knights and the Battle reports that are out right now speak of the game as Walking battleships and I am HUGE sucker for naval style games.
ValentineGames wrote: No I bloody didn't. And from what I've seen of the full shelves in stores not many people did.
Your loss. Great game. Lots of potential and fun.
No it really isn't my loss at all. Not even in the slightest.
If you can't afford something you're losing nothing.
I also don't want to spend stupid amounts of money on a model you can only build in 1 set manner in an era where plastic allows huge variety.
That's just moronic.
£65 for 1 model walking monkey in 1 set load out for an already dead system, when I can buy 3 28mm tanks for £40-50 with 8 variants each with hundreds of systems to play in.
Yeah...I'm REALLY losing out so much...
BITTER! So much bitter.
And you can only use 40k knights in?
You can only use 40k Warlords in?
You can only use 40k Banblades in?
Congrats for ignorance and plain outrage. You almost deserve an award.
I could care less of what your opinion is but to say the game is already dead. Not only is that ignorant but idiotic to the nth degree.
And you can only use 40k knights in?
You can only use 40k Warlords in?
You can only use 40k Banblades in?
You can use them in many systems...not just 40k But what has that got to do with limited loadout options for a £65 plastic model in an age where options are limitless???
You didn't address that.
Sorry to piss on the fanboy corn flakes.
I also find it interesting that people who don't like the game seem to be very angry about all the money they're not spending on it. Is this what the proletariat does all day?
ValentineGames wrote: No I bloody didn't. And from what I've seen of the full shelves in stores not many people did.
Your loss. Great game. Lots of potential and fun.
No it really isn't my loss at all. Not even in the slightest.
If you can't afford something you're losing nothing.
I also don't want to spend stupid amounts of money on a model you can only build in 1 set manner in an era where plastic allows huge variety.
That's just moronic.
£65 for 1 model walking monkey in 1 set load out for an already dead system, when I can buy 3 28mm tanks for £40-50 with 8 variants each with hundreds of systems to play in.
Yeah...I'm REALLY losing out so much...
What is this insane jibber jabber? A model walking monkey?
Oh well. Your loss.
Anyway. I think the biggest barrier to AT will purely be that it's competing with 40k. The same people who might buy AT might also look at what they could buy for their favourite army instead and think... "nah, I will stick with the system I've already invested in."
I'm fairly sure it's going to be a supported range for a couple of years though, and when people realise you can get a fairly competitive force for a lot cheaper than 40k, new players will join. Reavers and Warhounds will help.
schoon wrote: The rules for AT are solid - much more maneuver warfare than most other GW games.
If they made a mistake - IMO - it's the model release schedule.
You really need to play with a full titan maniple to take full advantage of the tactics involved, and unless you're willing to proxy, you won't be able to do that till the Warhounds come out in October (?).
true this. if you are very rules strict, you cant play narrative or matched games yet cuz they require maniples, and 1 of 3 maniples can at the earliest be made in 1 1/2 weeks.
i get that drip feeding is GWs new thing but it should not be for AT, it should be full maniple model releases with alt weapons.
this game wont be fully playable until moust likely end of october.
2 of 3 is you play Legio Gryphonicus.
I think the reason GW did it was so that people could absorb the sticker shock instead of having three cheap kits dropped then then $110 model dropped.
The biggest models also sell the least so having them apart of the GME means they are moved quicker and people get to see big stompy robots which, let's be honest here, is a HUGE "Ohhhh what's that" factor compared to smaller stompy robots.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Strg Alt wrote: For christ´s sake 230 Euros are 460 DM! No one is going to spend such a high sum of money for a game. And I am very glad that nobody bought in because it shows that people still have some sense left.
Read your entire post, can I now say you are still demonstrably wrong?
See the issue is you are looking at sticker price, while that is a good idea to judge things it's only one piece of the pie here.
Value is another. In USD I know I am getting a free Warlord titan plus some in a GME set. A. Free. $110. Model
Mind you, you speak of "imposing" that's nice and all but the Warlord was a hell of a lot of fun to build and looks far better to me than those knights. The knights are just... Boring.
You cannot argue over taste. You don´t like the Knights and had tons of fun building the Titan. That´s fine. I am happy for you that you enjoy the hobby and support one of GW´s specialist games despite the costs. If we are lucky we might even see Gargants & Phantom Titans in the future.
I dont understand what you mean by costs. I have a tournament capable army for $350 usd. Can you have a tournament ready army in 40k for that?
Hell I could EASILY ditch the GME box, grab a Reaver pack coming out next week, a rules pack, and when the warhounds come out two sets of those and likely spend LESS than a GME box. . . That would STILL give me a tournament ready army with a lot of built in fun and design. Hmmm Might need the warhound cards and the Venator terminal pack so over a GME in the end and yet. . . far more than enough to play the game.
The warlords were a blast. More pieces per model than the Knights, amazing detail, and a breeze to paint.
You are barking up the wrong tree here. I don´t go to tournaments and still play 2nd 40K with two characters, three squads, a Rhino and a Dreadnought. This takes usually only 90 min and not 4h like many people try to make you believe on the interwebz.
The problem in my area is that specialist games are rarely played. I did a ton of BB & Necromunda demo games in the past but only one guy agreed to participate in a N17 campaign. The rest plays religiously 40K and spend ridiculously amounts of money to expand their force. They see the price tag on the AT box and are instanly turned off. In addition, these people are also accustomed to 8th 40K rules and would get a brain stroke, if they tried to understand how AT works.
More pieces than a Knight? I like to paint but not to build.
General Helstrom wrote: I also find it interesting that people who don't like the game seem to be very angry about all the money they're not spending on it. Is this what the proletariat does all day?
It seems like it's a case of "I didn't buy it, so please let it be a bust!" for what reason I don't know.
Bought the GME and will be adding a few reavers and some more knights as well as more terrain the coming months.
I bought it because i love the scale and the idea of commanding huge machines. Dont care its not compatible with 40k since i hate that game.
AT is the most fun ive had with a GW game since i played Warmaster many years ago and imo the best game they have atm, even with the limited range right now.
in what form? Weapons? Meh. Instead of making it a near 200 piece kit costing as much as a single 40k Knight they split the weapons sprue off.
Meanwhile in the real world of proper wargaming you can buy kits for £18 with 6 variations to choose from...
Or sprues of 100 pieces for £6...
Ridiculous.
I own the GME, and have been playing Epic for most of my life. It is my favorite scale of any table top game I have played.
I have some issues with the size of the new models (being too big), but the detail of the models themselves is pretty amazing.
I said some time ago if GW doesn't expand this to include marines and vehicles like SM1, then this game will collect dust on the shelves a year from now. No one is going to play a game over and over again that involves so few models, that's just the reality.
I think you can pin interest like this:
Hardcore Epic fans bought, none core fans didn't.
The price was a hard swallow, and kicked some people aside.
If you stick to Imperial models only, you'll lose some existing fans.
If you don't include Xenos, you'll prob miss out on some newer fans.
If GW doesn't follow up with 'Epic' units within a year or so, you'll lose a bunch of existing fans.
I think this game has to grow to become more successful. People will need to see that to make this kind of investment. There is only so much you can do with so few models. You want to encourage people to collect and build armies. I hope GW understands this, and if they dig their heels in and refuse to make it Epic, no one is going to care about this game a year from now.
in what form? Weapons? Meh. Instead of making it a near 200 piece kit costing as much as a single 40k Knight they split the weapons sprue off.
Meanwhile in the real world of proper wargaming you can buy kits for £18 with 6 variations to choose from...
Or sprues of 100 pieces for £6...
Ridiculous.
Care to actually list an example of a single model near that size? Come now, name a GW product that gives you 100 pieces of something for £6 on a single model in high quality injection mould plastic at msrp
Have not bought the game. Have not played the game. It's a little too expensive to dabble in. And, I do sincerely hope the gameplay is all that and more. I'm all for more good games. But, truth is, I have yet to build two 40K Knights from the new Renegade box ( a true killer deal!), and also two Forgebane Amigers awaiting the painting table. If I do give AT a go, I'll look at adapting it to those models. Bringing Knight's to a Knight Fight is one of my fantasies. Besides, the concept of Knights jousting somewhere in no man's land makes more sense to me than Titans fighting duels on an otherwise unoccupied battlefield. But, that's not behind my decision to sit this one out (which I rarely do).
The scale of AT is wrong. Warlords should be Armiger size, not almost as big and as expensive as Knights. It should not be a major purchasing and building project to field six Warlords between the two sides. Warhounds should be 40K Terminator size. Knights don't belong in a titan fight. The intermediate scale is betwixt and between. Too large to be practical, and should not inevitably compare with 40K Knights. But, its not small enough in scale to convey the impression these are grand Godmachines rampaging across a battlefield they absolutely dominate. At the "right scale," they would have had me,. Again, I hope its a great game, and does well. Maybe someday I'll eat a hearty helping of crow, and dive right in.
Lysenis wrote: In USD I know I am getting a free Warlord titan plus some in a GME set. A. Free. $110. Model.
THIS is what I mean by saying, NOT buying the GME was starting to make me feel like a chump. I was initially angry because of sticker shock and no one in my group was going to buy it either. But the GME has great value, it's just getting over the initial emptional reaction against that price.
in what form? Weapons? Meh. Instead of making it a near 200 piece kit costing as much as a single 40k Knight they split the weapons sprue off.
Meanwhile in the real world of proper wargaming you can buy kits for £18 with 6 variations to choose from...
Or sprues of 100 pieces for £6...
Ridiculous.
Care to actually list an example of a single model near that size? Come now, name a GW product that gives you 100 pieces of something for £6 on a single model in high quality injection mould plastic at msrp
I shall wait with bated breath.
Why do I need to name a GW product that gives 100 pieces for £6??
I never mentioned GW.
You're not very attentive.
I didn't get the GME but I will be buying it piecemeal. It's much more palatable as its not such a huge initial investment. And I can get stuff painted as I buy.
It looks really good, I personally think the GME was a bit over priced - the savings were easy to pass on since the buy in was so high.
I gotta admit I'm a little surprised at some of the vitriol I see for a game that by all accounts seems not only well written but also appears to have excedeed gw's expectations in terms sales. I know they were playing it safe with the small production run but as has been mentioned (many... many times!) the price for the gme box was a shock to a lot of people. (not really sure why? I'd budgeted for it to be around £250 before I heard we were getting a warlord for free. I mean look at gw's prices there were no surprises here.)
One of the few valid bits of criticism I've seen is that the game should have come with reavers instead of warlords to make it a little more affordable which is a fair point. But I'm more than happy with my two warlords. Plus the box seems like it was made with a view to those that would split the box with a friend.
But anyways to answer the OP's question I got the GME and a Civitas sector since this game looks like it'll work better with decent amount of terrain, and I got it because I've always been a big fan of epic, also the more i heard about the rules the more interesting it sounded and once I got to see a few of the models the deal was sealed.
Sasquatch wrote: I gotta admit I'm a little surprised at some of the vitriol I see for a game that by all accounts seems not only well written but also appears to have excedeed gw's expectations in terms sales. I know they were playing it safe with the small production run but as has been mentioned (many... many times!) the price for the gme box was a shock to a lot of people. (not really sure why? I'd budgeted for it to be around £250 before I heard we were getting a warlord for free. I mean look at gw's prices there were no surprises here.)
One of the few valid bits of criticism I've seen is that the game should have come with reavers instead of warlords to make it a little more affordable which is a fair point. But I'm more than happy with my two warlords. Plus the box seems like it was made with a view to those that would split the box with a friend.
But anyways to answer the OP's question I got the GME and a Civitas sector since this game looks like it'll work better with decent amount of terrain, and I got it because I've always been a big fan of epic, also the more i heard about the rules the more interesting it sounded and once I got to see a few of the models the deal was sealed.
A lot of the Vitriol, it seems, has it's roots as anger over the price, a "rargh GW priced me out of this game!" mentality. It almost seems to me that people seemed to expect that on account of the models not being usable in 40k, even as cultist proxies, GW owed it to them to have a cheaper price when, economics, sadly, tells us the exact oppisite is likely true. There's also the lack of epic from the start which has some people mad and I think shifting to epic would be a good way to kill two birds with one stone as presumably a land raider squadron would be a cheaper entrypoint. Although me myself I like the tighter rules a titan focus allows. There's also the useal "what about Xenos" crowd. although the cold and bitter truth is even if Xenos had been planned from day one there would have been a wait.
but basicly the Vitriol boils down to "this game isn't right for me at the moment so it should be right for no one" Personally as a "big stompy robot" guy I couldn't be happier with the game. and am eager to see what the future brings.
although yeah I maintain my statement, we NEED a starter set with reavers or even warhounds to keep the entry elvel, price down. Maybe for christmas GW should release a "Venator Princips" pack, that includes 1 reaver box and 1 warhound box. toss in a venator command terminal, and price it at 150 bucks and you've got a great starting point.
KTG17 wrote: I own the GME, and have been playing Epic for most of my life. It is my favorite scale of any table top game I have played.
I have some issues with the size of the new models (being too big), but the detail of the models themselves is pretty amazing.
I said some time ago if GW doesn't expand this to include marines and vehicles like SM1, then this game will collect dust on the shelves a year from now. No one is going to play a game over and over again that involves so few models, that's just the reality.
I think you can pin interest like this:
Hardcore Epic fans bought, none core fans didn't.
The price was a hard swallow, and kicked some people aside.
If you stick to Imperial models only, you'll lose some existing fans.
If you don't include Xenos, you'll prob miss out on some newer fans.
If GW doesn't follow up with 'Epic' units within a year or so, you'll lose a bunch of existing fans.
I think this game has to grow to become more successful. People will need to see that to make this kind of investment. There is only so much you can do with so few models. You want to encourage people to collect and build armies. I hope GW understands this, and if they dig their heels in and refuse to make it Epic, no one is going to care about this game a year from now.
That´s the way I see it too. Space Marine/Epic was great in the 90s. So GW, you know what to do:
I do wanna BTW disagree that people won't play a game with so few models, niot everyone needs a million models on the table to play a game. unless you mean model varity, and that's an issue yes for a host of reasons.
Given the maniples out there, right now, the most titans I could see myself needing is 3 Warlords, 4 Reavers, and 4 Warhounds, this is eneugh to deploy any maniple in the rules, and to subsitue a few reavers into the mix if I'm feeling like playing legio Gryphonicus and utilizing their ability to swap in Reavers.
now titans are big titcket items sure, but that's a pretty reachable goal. I mean I've already got 2 warlords, to keep the bucks flowing in we'll definatly need more stuff, and upgrade sprues likely won't do it. FW's been layering in mention of other titans for awhile now so it's clear thats one avenue of upgrade, there's a LOT of room for oddball machines if they wanna work with it. For example, a reaver sized titan, with only arm mounted weapons but more speed might be well received as a melee specialist design, I could see some sort of warhound sized titan thats slower with a carapiece weapin as a "light battler titan" finding a place in peoples armies. Beyond those, Xenos titans seem a logical step, as Orks and Eldar would be a whole new range that people'd collect. There's a fair bit of room to expand without going to epic. I think Epic will come simply because it's clear there is an intreast in games at this SCALE, but for some people the cost of a titan is a bit much. GW's 40k practices suggests that there is very much a desire to ensure people can enter the game easier
Epic(or, more likely, Space Marine) is at least two years away if it comes at all.
You've got several additional Knight chassis(Cerastus and Acastus from the FW range, Castellan and maybe eventually Armiger from GW's new kits), and the possibility to provide resin "upgrade packs" with the Mechanicum-flavoured carapace, head, and weapon options.
You've got the new variant Titans they plan to "spin off" from the old specialised named loadouts for the core three, plus all the new ones they've been name-dropping in the HH series.
You've got the possibility they brought up of doing "precursor" versions of things like the Subjugator.
And of course potential Chaos expansions(both carapace and weapon packs for the existing chassis, and proper daemon engines) and three plausible(assuming they stick with Knights & Titans only) Xenos factions as well.
At three or four releases a year they could milk that list for a long time without needing to go for Epic. I very much hope they do of course, both in terms of adding a limited selection of stuff to AT in a similar manner to Knight Banners, and eventually with a full additional game system more focused on the giant battle side of things, but I don't think they'd actually be forced to at any point, they could comfortably extract a complete and profitable "life-cycle" out of AT with just Knights & Titans.
Yodhrin wrote: Epic(or, more likely, Space Marine) is at least two years away if it comes at all.
You've got several additional Knight chassis(Cerastus and Acastus from the FW range, Castellan and maybe eventually Armiger from GW's new kits), and the possibility to provide resin "upgrade packs" with the Mechanicum-flavoured carapace, head, and weapon options.
You've got the new variant Titans they plan to "spin off" from the old specialised named loadouts for the core three, plus all the new ones they've been name-dropping in the HH series.
You've got the possibility they brought up of doing "precursor" versions of things like the Subjugator.
And of course potential Chaos expansions(both carapace and weapon packs for the existing chassis, and proper daemon engines) and three plausible(assuming they stick with Knights & Titans only) Xenos factions as well.
At three or four releases a year they could milk that list for a long time without needing to go for Epic. I very much hope they do of course, both in terms of adding a limited selection of stuff to AT in a similar manner to Knight Banners, and eventually with a full additional game system more focused on the giant battle side of things, but I don't think they'd actually be forced to at any point, they could comfortably extract a complete and profitable "life-cycle" out of AT with just Knights & Titans.
yeah I think the only reason why they'd "need" to go epic IMHO is to open this scale up to an easier entry point. One thing a lotta people might be missing BTW are team games. If I have a warlord, you have a reaver, a buddy has a pair of warhounds? we;ve got a maniple among us and could play vs another 3 man group with a similer set up. this method of play isn't very common in 40k, but games similer to AT (such as Btech) you see it not infrequently
in what form? Weapons? Meh. Instead of making it a near 200 piece kit costing as much as a single 40k Knight they split the weapons sprue off.
Meanwhile in the real world of proper wargaming you can buy kits for £18 with 6 variations to choose from...
Or sprues of 100 pieces for £6...
Ridiculous.
Care to actually list an example of a single model near that size? Come now, name a GW product that gives you 100 pieces of something for £6 on a single model in high quality injection mould plastic at msrp
I shall wait with bated breath.
Why do I need to name a GW product that gives 100 pieces for £6??
I never mentioned GW.
You're not very attentive.
Ah, so you are talking 3rd party. Then we can't expect the quality or scope of release.
I am very attentive. You can't produce a GW model at 100 pieces for £6. Hell any you did would have to be utter crap because they can't even pay themselves on that unoess they are selling thousands consistently.
Yodhrin wrote: Epic(or, more likely, Space Marine) is at least two years away if it comes at all.
You've got several additional Knight chassis(Cerastus and Acastus from the FW range, Castellan and maybe eventually Armiger from GW's new kits), and the possibility to provide resin "upgrade packs" with the Mechanicum-flavoured carapace, head, and weapon options.
You've got the new variant Titans they plan to "spin off" from the old specialised named loadouts for the core three, plus all the new ones they've been name-dropping in the HH series.
You've got the possibility they brought up of doing "precursor" versions of things like the Subjugator.
And of course potential Chaos expansions(both carapace and weapon packs for the existing chassis, and proper daemon engines) and three plausible(assuming they stick with Knights & Titans only) Xenos factions as well.
At three or four releases a year they could milk that list for a long time without needing to go for Epic. I very much hope they do of course, both in terms of adding a limited selection of stuff to AT in a similar manner to Knight Banners, and eventually with a full additional game system more focused on the giant battle side of things, but I don't think they'd actually be forced to at any point, they could comfortably extract a complete and profitable "life-cycle" out of AT with just Knights & Titans.
yeah I think the only reason why they'd "need" to go epic IMHO is to open this scale up to an easier entry point. One thing a lotta people might be missing BTW are team games. If I have a warlord, you have a reaver, a buddy has a pair of warhounds? we;ve got a maniple among us and could play vs another 3 man group with a similer set up. this method of play isn't very common in 40k, but games similer to AT (such as Btech) you see it not infrequently
Not really. Epic is an eventualll byproduct of AT which is good but they don't need it to be easier to get into. That happens in October with the Warhound drop. At that point you can start playing the game for about $195ish at minimum points and another $75ish opens up far more possibilities for 1250 and that's without knights
The game is not expensive to get into you just need to get over the sticker shock of the base box. It's not a starter set. It's the "here is 85% of what you need to play" set
in what form? Weapons? Meh. Instead of making it a near 200 piece kit costing as much as a single 40k Knight they split the weapons sprue off.
Meanwhile in the real world of proper wargaming you can buy kits for £18 with 6 variations to choose from...
Or sprues of 100 pieces for £6...
Ridiculous.
Care to actually list an example of a single model near that size? Come now, name a GW product that gives you 100 pieces of something for £6 on a single model in high quality injection mould plastic at msrp
I shall wait with bated breath.
Why do I need to name a GW product that gives 100 pieces for £6??
I never mentioned GW.
You're not very attentive.
Ah, so you are talking 3rd party. Then we can't expect the quality or scope of release.
I am very attentive. You can't produce a GW model at 100 pieces for £6. Hell any you did would have to be utter crap because they can't even pay themselves on that unoess they are selling thousands consistently.
You are not very smart are you? I mean you come on here and rag on a game you know next to nothing about, you come from some odd place of superiority you don't have. So boring
He is talking about historical games, not GW. He is one of those people who feel it is necessary to go on threads about GW to tell everyone how much they suck and how they don't play them anymore.
in what form? Weapons? Meh. Instead of making it a near 200 piece kit costing as much as a single 40k Knight they split the weapons sprue off.
Meanwhile in the real world of proper wargaming you can buy kits for £18 with 6 variations to choose from...
Or sprues of 100 pieces for £6...
Ridiculous.
Care to actually list an example of a single model near that size? Come now, name a GW product that gives you 100 pieces of something for £6 on a single model in high quality injection mould plastic at msrp
I shall wait with bated breath.
Why do I need to name a GW product that gives 100 pieces for £6??
I never mentioned GW.
You're not very attentive.
Ah, so you are talking 3rd party. Then we can't expect the quality or scope of release.
I am very attentive. You can't produce a GW model at 100 pieces for £6. Hell any you did would have to be utter crap because they can't even pay themselves on that unoess they are selling thousands consistently.
You are not very smart are you? I mean you come on here and rag on a game you know next to nothing about, you come from some odd place of superiority you don't have. So boring
He is talking about historical games, not GW. He is one of those people who feel it is necessary to go on threads about GW to tell everyone how much they suck and how they don't play them anymore.
In other words he's trying to justify his decision by convincing others to agree with him,
Believe me your wallet will thank you for it, if you do.
Not really. The conversion rate today is totally off. 230€ used to be 450 Mark, but the world has moved on, it's been almost 18 years since we got the Euro.
If I converted my net household income into Mark and ignored completely what happened in the last 18 years, yeah that would have been a kingly number and at 1999's prices it would have been a very nice living that might have made me shop around for a Jacuzzi ... Turns out that that isn't much money nowadays.
in what form? Weapons? Meh. Instead of making it a near 200 piece kit costing as much as a single 40k Knight they split the weapons sprue off.
Meanwhile in the real world of proper wargaming you can buy kits for £18 with 6 variations to choose from...
Or sprues of 100 pieces for £6...
Ridiculous.
Care to actually list an example of a single model near that size? Come now, name a GW product that gives you 100 pieces of something for £6 on a single model in high quality injection mould plastic at msrp
I shall wait with bated breath.
Why do I need to name a GW product that gives 100 pieces for £6??
I never mentioned GW.
You're not very attentive.
Ah, so you are talking 3rd party. Then we can't expect the quality or scope of release.
I am very attentive. You can't produce a GW model at 100 pieces for £6. Hell any you did would have to be utter crap because they can't even pay themselves on that unoess they are selling thousands consistently.
You are not very smart are you? I mean you come on here and rag on a game you know next to nothing about, you come from some odd place of superiority you don't have. So boring
He is talking about historical games, not GW. He is one of those people who feel it is necessary to go on threads about GW to tell everyone how much they suck and how they don't play them anymore.
In other words he's trying to justify his decision by convincing others to agree with him,
So basically it's false equivalency. Got it.
Meh, boring. I have played At, played dozens of other games, including several various slnaval style games (my favorite types) and the rules are crunchy enough and well enough written that I expect them to last for years easily.
in what form? Weapons? Meh. Instead of making it a near 200 piece kit costing as much as a single 40k Knight they split the weapons sprue off.
Meanwhile in the real world of proper wargaming you can buy kits for £18 with 6 variations to choose from...
Or sprues of 100 pieces for £6...
Ridiculous.
Care to actually list an example of a single model near that size? Come now, name a GW product that gives you 100 pieces of something for £6 on a single model in high quality injection mould plastic at msrp
I shall wait with bated breath.
Why do I need to name a GW product that gives 100 pieces for £6??
I never mentioned GW.
You're not very attentive.
Ah, so you are talking 3rd party. Then we can't expect the quality or scope of release.
I am very attentive. You can't produce a GW model at 100 pieces for £6. Hell any you did would have to be utter crap because they can't even pay themselves on that unoess they are selling thousands consistently.
You are not very smart are you? I mean you come on here and rag on a game you know next to nothing about, you come from some odd place of superiority you don't have. So boring
He is talking about historical games, not GW. He is one of those people who feel it is necessary to go on threads about GW to tell everyone how much they suck and how they don't play them anymore.
In other words he's trying to justify his decision by convincing others to agree with him,
So basically it's false equivalency. Got it.
Meh, boring. I have played At, played dozens of other games, including several various slnaval style games (my favorite types) and the rules are crunchy enough and well enough written that I expect them to last for years easily.
adeptus titanicus reminds me a lot of battletech, and that games been kicking for 30+ odd years now.
It's a really neat idea for a game and all, but I need another game like I need a hole in my head. I know in my local area the game has picked up no steam at all, so that doesn't help.
I think it probably would have helped locally if GW had released more than just the Warlord and Knights at initial release (and the Warlord not having any weapon options in the box is pretty insane). If GW ever release a proper starter box for the game (Rules, a couple reavers and some warhounds or something for around 150$) I might be willing to give it a try.
Not to say GME was a bad deal, just with my current games taking up a lot of my time, no local scene, and the boxed set cost of entry, I will just leave it to those who are very passionate about it.
It's almost as if it might be a Specialist Game aimed at more involved hobbyists...
Yes, it is expensive. I saved up for it as soon as it was announced. I am very happy with what I got for my money.
Hardcore Epic fans bought, none core fans didn't.
The price was a hard swallow, and kicked some people aside.
If you stick to Imperial models only, you'll lose some existing fans.
If you don't include Xenos, you'll prob miss out on some newer fans.
If GW doesn't follow up with 'Epic' units within a year or so, you'll lose a bunch of existing fans.
Not sure I agree with this.
I am neither of the first
Not that high compared to an actual 40k army. Just a lot at one time.
This disregards realities of business AND the internal flexibility of the lists
Once again, realities of business.
More people who buy the more this is likely. Even then likely only Imperial to start since creating 5 factions at one time would be expensive.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sabotage! wrote: It's a really neat idea for a game and all, but I need another game like I need a hole in my head. I know in my local area the game has picked up no steam at all, so that doesn't help.
I think it probably would have helped locally if GW had released more than just the Warlord and Knights at initial release (and the Warlord not having any weapon options in the box is pretty insane). If GW ever release a proper starter box for the game (Rules, a couple reavers and some warhounds or something for around 150$) I might be willing to give it a try.
Not to say GME was a bad deal, just with my current games taking up a lot of my time, no local scene, and the boxed set cost of entry, I will just leave it to those who are very passionate about it.
Like any brand new game if there is no one showing it off there will be no interest. People tend to pick things up a couple of ways. They see it at a Con and buy in they see it played at a store and buy in and RARELY people see it on a shelf and then buy in.
The first two are the most common with the second happening more than the others. Its how I get people into games.
Wait a week. The fact that the Reavers are coming out 3 weeks after release is important and people are ignoring this bit. Due to the initial costs of the game it was smart that GW did not release everything at once. In fact they waited for people to get a new paycheck. Its one of their smartest decisions I think so far.
For the Warlord , adding in another full sprue of weapon options would of make the box as expensive as a standard 40k Knight. Sorry but that would of made cost to entry FAR higher. Make up your mind. Complete game or reasonable costs
KTG17 wrote: I own the GME, and have been playing Epic for most of my life. It is my favorite scale of any table top game I have played.
I have some issues with the size of the new models (being too big), but the detail of the models themselves is pretty amazing.
I said some time ago if GW doesn't expand this to include marines and vehicles like SM1, then this game will collect dust on the shelves a year from now. No one is going to play a game over and over again that involves so few models, that's just the reality.
I think you can pin interest like this:
Hardcore Epic fans bought, none core fans didn't.
The price was a hard swallow, and kicked some people aside.
If you stick to Imperial models only, you'll lose some existing fans.
If you don't include Xenos, you'll prob miss out on some newer fans.
If GW doesn't follow up with 'Epic' units within a year or so, you'll lose a bunch of existing fans.
I think this game has to grow to become more successful. People will need to see that to make this kind of investment. There is only so much you can do with so few models. You want to encourage people to collect and build armies. I hope GW understands this, and if they dig their heels in and refuse to make it Epic, no one is going to care about this game a year from now.
Looking at the stats its a near 50% takeup on the game for those voting. When you consider that there are only a handful of Imperial only models that's an astounding number! No Xenos no Chaos and a limited roster and still a near 50% take up in buyers.
Granted the sample size here is tiny and its internet based so biased somewhat already; but its still a very powerful number considering all its current limitations.
Certainly the kind of stats that can allow a game to grow and develop from and be worth investing more into.
KTG17 wrote: I own the GME, and have been playing Epic for most of my life. It is my favorite scale of any table top game I have played.
I have some issues with the size of the new models (being too big), but the detail of the models themselves is pretty amazing.
I said some time ago if GW doesn't expand this to include marines and vehicles like SM1, then this game will collect dust on the shelves a year from now. No one is going to play a game over and over again that involves so few models, that's just the reality.
I think you can pin interest like this:
Hardcore Epic fans bought, none core fans didn't.
The price was a hard swallow, and kicked some people aside.
If you stick to Imperial models only, you'll lose some existing fans.
If you don't include Xenos, you'll prob miss out on some newer fans.
If GW doesn't follow up with 'Epic' units within a year or so, you'll lose a bunch of existing fans.
I think this game has to grow to become more successful. People will need to see that to make this kind of investment. There is only so much you can do with so few models. You want to encourage people to collect and build armies. I hope GW understands this, and if they dig their heels in and refuse to make it Epic, no one is going to care about this game a year from now.
A lot of good points being made here.
You mean a lot of refuted points that are incorrect or based on a false premise.
For instance I have gotten several people who never played the original AT (like I did not) to get into the game. So point 1 is wrong
Its poor points that takes very little reality into consideration and more wishlisting
For the Warlord , adding in another full sprue of weapon options would of make the box as expensive as a standard 40k Knight. Sorry but that would of made cost to entry FAR higher. Make up your mind. Complete game or reasonable costs
This is just silly. I'd rather pay $125 for a complete plastic kit with all the options, than pay $110 for a kit with no options and then have to pay $40-$50 to get two different arm weapons from FW. And considering a few Lascannons for a Valkyrie conversion is now $33, my price estimate on two weapons is rather low.
For the Warlord , adding in another full sprue of weapon options would of make the box as expensive as a standard 40k Knight. Sorry but that would of made cost to entry FAR higher. Make up your mind. Complete game or reasonable costs
This is just silly. I'd rather pay $125 for a complete plastic kit with all the options, than pay $110 for a kit with no options and then have to pay $40-$50 to get two different arm weapons from FW. And considering a few Lascannons for a Valkyrie conversion is now $33, my price estimate on two weapons is rather low.
There is actually a good indication that the warlord will actually get at least one plastic weapon upgrade sprue, not resin. Reason why is the developers stated this is why the sprues are designed by weapons/armor plates/carapace. No way you'll have to pay that much for the initial warlord upgrades.
I’ve used this game to kick off Horus heresy in epic scale at my local club, and it’s spread like wildfire, we have been buying lots and lots of shapeways and eBay to fill the gaps and get some heresy looking tanks and units and so far we have all had a blast, we’re using the standard 30k rules with some major and minor tweaks to fit the scale.
Formosa wrote: I’ve used this game to kick off Horus heresy in epic scale at my local club, and it’s spread like wildfire, we have been buying lots and lots of shapeways and eBay to fill the gaps and get some heresy looking tanks and units and so far we have all had a blast, we’re using the standard 30k rules with some major and minor tweaks to fit the scale.
For the Warlord , adding in another full sprue of weapon options would of make the box as expensive as a standard 40k Knight. Sorry but that would of made cost to entry FAR higher. Make up your mind. Complete game or reasonable costs
This is just silly. I'd rather pay $125 for a complete plastic kit with all the options, than pay $110 for a kit with no options and then have to pay $40-$50 to get two different arm weapons from FW. And considering a few Lascannons for a Valkyrie conversion is now $33, my price estimate on two weapons is rather low.
As far as I have found we are getting plastic weapons sprues.
This is important. It is important because it means we will likely see alternate sprues for more weapons for variants not yet out. Want a Deathbringer Warlord? Well we could see armor and weapon changes with new plastic sprues
You want it all at once. That's nice. I want a game that has an extended life.
Changes: all are being playtested as we speak so this is all subject to heavy change and are primarily to speed up the game at such a scale or add a little more abstraction.
General:
All references to inches are changed to centimetres
All references to “dangerous terrain” are removed unless otherwise specified by the terrain type.
Alternating unit/squadron activation
Template weapons are d3/d6 shots respectively and must roll to hit, apocalyptic weapons use standard templates.
Vehicles:
All vehicles can move and fire all weapons.
All vehicles only have a front and rear armour value.
Vehicle damage chart is removed.
Transports can disembark units at any point during its move
Infantry:
Difficult terrain is removed, infantry may move up to two levels in a building per turn.
A infantry unit that is at least two levels above its target gains the plunging fire ability (-1 to enemy cover save, targets rear armour on all non dreadnought, Land raider or vindicator vehicle)
Assault:
All assault moves are 8cm
No challenges
Still working through this.
As for models shapeways, just google epic models on there and you will find them, it’s a bit expensive but if you buy in bulk like we did it’s much much cheaper.
Formosa wrote: I’ve used this game to kick off Horus heresy in epic scale at my local club, and it’s spread like wildfire, we have been buying lots and lots of shapeways and eBay to fill the gaps and get some heresy looking tanks and units and so far we have all had a blast, we’re using the standard 30k rules with some major and minor tweaks to fit the scale.
For the Warlord , adding in another full sprue of weapon options would of make the box as expensive as a standard 40k Knight. Sorry but that would of made cost to entry FAR higher. Make up your mind. Complete game or reasonable costs
This is just silly. I'd rather pay $125 for a complete plastic kit with all the options, than pay $110 for a kit with no options and then have to pay $40-$50 to get two different arm weapons from FW. And considering a few Lascannons for a Valkyrie conversion is now $33, my price estimate on two weapons is rather low.
As far as I have found we are getting plastic weapons sprues.
This is important. It is important because it means we will likely see alternate sprues for more weapons for variants not yet out. Want a Deathbringer Warlord? Well we could see armor and weapon changes with new plastic sprues
You want it all at once. That's nice. I want a game that has an extended life.
yeah demanding everything at once is silly. expecting Xenos right at the start is just silly. each of these models is a lot of work to bring out, just giving us Orks and Eldar would have delayed release another year or two and given the staggered release we'd not see them for some more time even then so... eaither way you've got 4 or 5 years before seeing xenos most likely
yeah demanding everything at once is silly. expecting Xenos right at the start is just silly. each of these models is a lot of work to bring out, just giving us Orks and Eldar would have delayed release another year or two and given the staggered release we'd not see them for some more time even then so... eaither way you've got 4 or 5 years before seeing xenos most likely
Nah, I suspect we should start seeing orks and eldar in the next 6 months. They only need the rules and could easily be added in a campaign book.
As for Epic I say 18 months maybe 2 years tops since the rules are all there already
I think they only had one model designer working on all of these titans, and it took him 1-2 years to do them if not longer. There's no way they will release xenos before 2020, prepare to be disappointed. If anything we will get cerastus knights/porphyrion, upgrade sprues, new imperial titan class before any xenos. We already know they are doing a beta garmon campaign book which is very much a HH battle and that isn't even scheduled to be out this year at all.
For the Warlord , adding in another full sprue of weapon options would of make the box as expensive as a standard 40k Knight. Sorry but that would of made cost to entry FAR higher. Make up your mind. Complete game or reasonable costs
This is just silly. I'd rather pay $125 for a complete plastic kit with all the options, than pay $110 for a kit with no options and then have to pay $40-$50 to get two different arm weapons from FW. And considering a few Lascannons for a Valkyrie conversion is now $33, my price estimate on two weapons is rather low.
There is actually a good indication that the warlord will actually get at least one plastic weapon upgrade sprue, not resin. Reason why is the developers stated this is why the sprues are designed by weapons/armor plates/carapace. No way you'll have to pay that much for the initial warlord upgrades.
I really hope that would be the case, something like that would be a lot more useful and accessible.
For the Warlord , adding in another full sprue of weapon options would of make the box as expensive as a standard 40k Knight. Sorry but that would of made cost to entry FAR higher. Make up your mind. Complete game or reasonable costs
This is just silly. I'd rather pay $125 for a complete plastic kit with all the options, than pay $110 for a kit with no options and then have to pay $40-$50 to get two different arm weapons from FW. And considering a few Lascannons for a Valkyrie conversion is now $33, my price estimate on two weapons is rather low.
As far as I have found we are getting plastic weapons sprues.
This is important. It is important because it means we will likely see alternate sprues for more weapons for variants not yet out. Want a Deathbringer Warlord? Well we could see armor and weapon changes with new plastic sprues
You want it all at once. That's nice. I want a game that has an extended life.
As far as you have found? Was that mentioned to you by a FW employee or is that speculation?
You are being a bit presumptuous of what I want, and more than a bit condescending. That's not a great way to convince someone to play a game you are championing. You might want to tone it down a bit. If a game could very well only have three chassis of titans (plus knights), the loadouts are going to be one of the major differentiating factors between titans. If that's the case, then yes, I do want more weapon options, because variety and tactical options are the key to replayability.
Sabotage! wrote: As far as you have found? Was that mentioned to you by a FW employee or is that speculation?
It was announced on one of the WarhammerTV things - common weapons would be on a plastic sprue, and the rarer / more exotic stuff would be resin. Specialist Games have limited access to the plastic machines so either have to stagger their releases or do more in resin.
Sabotage! wrote: As far as you have found? Was that mentioned to you by a FW employee or is that speculation?
It was announced on one of the WarhammerTV things - common weapons would be on a plastic sprue, and the rarer / more exotic stuff would be resin. Specialist Games have limited access to the plastic machines so either have to stagger their releases or do more in resin.
Well that's good to know, thanks for the clarification.
yeah demanding everything at once is silly. expecting Xenos right at the start is just silly. each of these models is a lot of work to bring out, just giving us Orks and Eldar would have delayed release another year or two and given the staggered release we'd not see them for some more time even then so... eaither way you've got 4 or 5 years before seeing xenos most likely
Nah, I suspect we should start seeing orks and eldar in the next 6 months. They only need the rules and could easily be added in a campaign book.
As for Epic I say 18 months maybe 2 years tops since the rules are all there already
the rules aren't gonna be the bottle neck. the minis are. it took them 2 years to do the ones we already have, we're not going to get new xenos titans anytime soon given they've apparently not even begun work on them. If the Eldar FW Titans where a newer model I could see it (the warlord and Questoris Knights where apparently easy as they could just scale down their CAD files) but they're not so it'll take time.
Sabotage! wrote: As far as you have found? Was that mentioned to you by a FW employee or is that speculation?
It was announced on one of the WarhammerTV things - common weapons would be on a plastic sprue, and the rarer / more exotic stuff would be resin. Specialist Games have limited access to the plastic machines so either have to stagger their releases or do more in resin.
This is why I'm hoping the comment that was made about their new FW facility being filled with "machines for production"(or words to that effect) refers to new, dedicated HIPS production lines, rather than just some new resin pressure pots or somesuch.
Thargrim wrote: I think they only had one model designer working on all of these titans, and it took him 1-2 years to do them if not longer. There's no way they will release xenos before 2020, prepare to be disappointed. If anything we will get cerastus knights/porphyrion, upgrade sprues, new imperial titan class before any xenos. We already know they are doing a beta garmon campaign book which is very much a HH battle and that isn't even scheduled to be out this year at all.
Depends. More interest and sales means more allocation of personnel
As far as you have found? Was that mentioned to you by a FW employee or is that speculation?
You are being a bit presumptuous of what I want, and more than a bit condescending. That's not a great way to convince someone to play a game you are championing. You might want to tone it down a bit. If a game could very well only have three chassis of titans (plus knights), the loadouts are going to be one of the major differentiating factors between titans. If that's the case, then yes, I do want more weapon options, because variety and tactical options are the key to replayability.
Look, you either buy in or not. Si ce you seem to not be interested in helping build a community but are more than interested enough to watch reaction, 8 think you will buy in when you are ready
As for people saying 2 years for the game, sure except that includes the rules right? Now we have Eldar which are just scaled down. They did say that they had to scale the current models down and then place them onto sprue layouts.
All you need to do is figure out rules, stats, weapons, and voila. Just about done. Play test which can be done with bases
Oh, and what ifound was from the development team and they have more products waiting. What exactly I don't know but as they have said more things so I expect the new knights a Scale 4 and more coming.
5hia is interesting to watch. I sense alternate models and weapons. Maybe we will see the Warhound only Maniple with Ursa Claws
The rules as they exist now are a solid framework for quite a bit of expansion.
If anything, they're a little too skeletal. There are a few places that beg to be fleshed out, such as Lego traits and equipment.
They've certainly left themselves plenty of room to grow, which feels like it was planned.
Whether you (in the general sense) have the patience to wait is a question only the individual can answer.
Me personally - I've waited years for this game to come back, so a little more waiting is not a big deal. (And I've got fun toys to paint in the meantime)
I’m happy to wait too, from what I’ve seen this game has sold like hot cakes, but as others have said it remains to be seen if it has the legs to stay around.
I think GW always thought AT would be a slow build project for them and the game. It's small model count but its high price for the "good stuff". So whilst its similar to games like Infinity or Malifux; its a lot more pricey so it appeals to a different market segment.
Hence slowly rolling out updates and additions makes sense because its spreading the price load. If they'd launched with a very expensive Warlord, and Reavers and Hounds and Knights and expansion weapon packs the "price shock" would have been a lot bigger. Right now they've spread it out so those keen on it are already being budgeted by GW's release schedule somewhat.
It lowers that initial buy-in price to get started "with everything" and gets games and models in peoples hands and being played.
That AT has sold out pretty much at launch of its starter box globally means that its done far better than GW thought; its blazed its way out there and think that means so long as GW supports it and updates it, it will stick around at least in the medium if not the long term.
Sadly if the weapons packs are forge world I won’t be buying them, the current pricing debacle has put me right off supporting them and that’s combined with the slashing of a large part of the range such as solar aux, dark angels upgrades etc.
Formosa wrote: Sadly if the weapons packs are forge world I won’t be buying them, the current pricing debacle has put me right off supporting them and that’s combined with the slashing of a large part of the range such as solar aux, dark angels upgrades etc.
Most of the weapons will be coming out in plastic, as per the design team, with some more esoteric options getting done in resin.
Formosa wrote: Sadly if the weapons packs are forge world I won’t be buying them, the current pricing debacle has put me right off supporting them and that’s combined with the slashing of a large part of the range such as solar aux, dark angels upgrades etc.
Most of the weapons will be coming out in plastic, as per the design team, with some more esoteric options getting done in resin.
That’s good to hear then thanks for letting me know
Might have been here but there were some good power fist conversions that look easy enough to do
Price.
Not buying a game with only two available models for the entire game system.
New scale not compatible with currrent gw games.
Concern that like all GW boxed games this will be regulated to the bargin bins in a few weeks.
So is Adeptus Titanicus a bust?
If you did buy into it, what did you get and why?
Thanks dakka!
So... because your store doesn't understand value the game is a bust?
I don't know about many others but spending $290 to get $430 worth of product is a steal to me.
Then we go to the fact that, within just 3 weeks we get a second unit. 3 weeks! That's amazing.
Let's go into the actual game. 2 models? Sure, except those models have a good variety in play and it would be hard to play every idea until the next model dropped.
I have about 6 players in my FLGS alone.
It's 430 dollars worth of product according to GW that makes up all the prices. But flat comparing the amount of plastic you get to other similar scale gw products (Which are, themselves, overpriced), there is a real markup. And using that extensive individual price to then give a discount is flat marketing tricks to get you to buy the bigger boxes over the individual ones.
Formosa wrote: Sadly if the weapons packs are forge world I won’t be buying them, the current pricing debacle has put me right off supporting them and that’s combined with the slashing of a large part of the range such as solar aux, dark angels upgrades etc.
Not all are resin. The primary weapons (the cards we get in the rules set) are most likely plastic. The RARE things are going to be resin like an inferno gun or Vortex Missile on a Warlord
It's 430 dollars worth of product according to GW that makes up all the prices. But flat comparing the amount of plastic you get to other similar scale gw products (Which are, themselves, overpriced), there is a real markup. And using that extensive individual price to then give a discount is flat marketing tricks to get you to buy the bigger boxes over the individual ones.
So, which other kit comes with 11 full sprues and 6 half sprues, full rules, dice, cards, and other accessories?
I bought two masters sets. Several folks at my flgs have bought in, the game is a hit here. Ita mote popular than kill team here.
From watching other game stores and ebay, it has sold very well.
I wouldn't say it was a bust at all. The game seems alot like the horus heresy from fw or kingdom death... pricier and a smaller community, but a great quality premium collector game.
Finally got my GME yesterday, for 195€. Couldn't be happier!
I for one am happy to see AT grow slowly. The level of detail on the models is amazing, but the prospect of building those Warlords is quite daunting - so many parts! So I have plenty to do, the Reaver is right around the corner, and the Warhound is not far off either. Additions to the original three titan classes are already set to be released not too long afterwards, so I can't complain at all.
Looking forward to see what else is coming, and when - if at all - Xenos make a debut.
I get the sense this game sold like gangbusters in the UK, but not nearly so quickly in the US (maybe because of the popularity of BattleTech in the states).
I personally picked up the rules set & knights. Until I can put aside some for the remaining Titans, will be proxying models in (I have 3 knights [reavers], 2 armigers [warhounds], several gundam/leviathan/robotech models I could use as Warlords and a slew of old battlemech/robotech mechs I can proxy as knights). Things may be a bit oversized, but I don't think it'll be an issue.
Also been working on statting up the various vehicles, and I have a bunch of 1/100 tanks, old epic vehicles (and a freshly 3D Shadowsword) I'd like to put on the table.
Stormonu wrote: I get the sense this game sold like gangbusters in the UK, but not nearly so quickly in the US (maybe because of the popularity of BattleTech in the states).
I personally picked up the rules set & knights. Until I can put aside some for the remaining Titans, will be proxying models in (I have 3 knights [reavers], 2 armigers [warhounds], several gundam/leviathan/robotech models I could use as Warlords and a slew of old battlemech/robotech mechs I can proxy as knights). Things may be a bit oversized, but I don't think it'll be an issue.
Also been working on statting up the various vehicles, and I have a bunch of 1/100 tanks, old epic vehicles (and a freshly 3D Shadowsword) I'd like to put on the table.
You’ve got the scale completely wrong, Armigers are about Warlord sized.
Stormonu wrote: I get the sense this game sold like gangbusters in the UK, but not nearly so quickly in the US (maybe because of the popularity of BattleTech in the states).
I personally picked up the rules set & knights. Until I can put aside some for the remaining Titans, will be proxying models in (I have 3 knights [reavers], 2 armigers [warhounds], several gundam/leviathan/robotech models I could use as Warlords and a slew of old battlemech/robotech mechs I can proxy as knights). Things may be a bit oversized, but I don't think it'll be an issue.
Also been working on statting up the various vehicles, and I have a bunch of 1/100 tanks, old epic vehicles (and a freshly 3D Shadowsword) I'd like to put on the table.
I think the reduced popularity in north America is more price factor then any thing else, Battletech isn't exactly at it's peak of popularity these days. I think the UK price was solid one but the NA price managed to slide just up into "ouch expensive" range
Manchu wrote: I was initially angry that the price wasn't lower, as GW has been slinging out some hot deals of late. But the longer I tried to resist, tte more I realized that not picking up the GME, a pretty great starter for a game which I was bound to get into sooner or later, was making a chump out of me.
Just wait until Christmas when they put a big bundle with discount?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stormonu wrote: I get the sense this game sold like gangbusters in the UK, but not nearly so quickly in the US (maybe because of the popularity of BattleTech in the states).
I was always think this is a difficult assertion to make. If you artificially restrict supply for the combined two player set, especially to the independent retailers then it is going to look as a success as it forces people to buy early to avoid missing out (or you have to wait until next year, or pay the higher price at GW). That can increase sales significantly in the first week. This is probably what GW want a quick turnaround of the supply so not to be sitting on shelves for months. They can then gauge how extra appetite there is and plan accordingly. If they don't restrict supply then people start thinking "well I'll wait 6 months and see how it goes" that potentially deflates sales initially and then in the long term as well.
Insidious thoughts there. Actually possible. Though it is Specialist Games and they had the kit made in China so it could of been a budget thing or not. The Warlord models themselves were made in the UK so who knows.
It could be that they didn't have the capacity for more or funds, or they wanted an inflated launch. Though I suspect we will see a Reaver and Warhound starter kit if they are serious about this, with rules for about $135ish USD. (I price the Warhounds at $75 because they are a box set of 2)
Stormonu wrote: I get the sense this game sold like gangbusters in the UK, but not nearly so quickly in the US (maybe because of the popularity of BattleTech in the states).
I personally picked up the rules set & knights. Until I can put aside some for the remaining Titans, will be proxying models in (I have 3 knights [reavers], 2 armigers [warhounds], several gundam/leviathan/robotech models I could use as Warlords and a slew of old battlemech/robotech mechs I can proxy as knights). Things may be a bit oversized, but I don't think it'll be an issue.
Also been working on statting up the various vehicles, and I have a bunch of 1/100 tanks, old epic vehicles (and a freshly 3D Shadowsword) I'd like to put on the table.
You’ve got the scale completely wrong, Armigers are about Warlord sized.
Yes, I know. I’m using the models I have. If I could find something dreadnought-sized, I’d use that for knights (hmm...maybe a Contemptor from Calth?).
Besides, there’s no “wrong” scale. These things aren’t based on anything real, so you can make them as big or small as desired. At worst, weapon ranges would need a tweak.
Stormonu wrote: I get the sense this game sold like gangbusters in the UK, but not nearly so quickly in the US (maybe because of the popularity of BattleTech in the states).
I personally picked up the rules set & knights. Until I can put aside some for the remaining Titans, will be proxying models in (I have 3 knights [reavers], 2 armigers [warhounds], several gundam/leviathan/robotech models I could use as Warlords and a slew of old battlemech/robotech mechs I can proxy as knights). Things may be a bit oversized, but I don't think it'll be an issue.
Also been working on statting up the various vehicles, and I have a bunch of 1/100 tanks, old epic vehicles (and a freshly 3D Shadowsword) I'd like to put on the table.
I think the reduced popularity in north America is more price factor then any thing else, Battletech isn't exactly at it's peak of popularity these days. I think the UK price was solid one but the NA price managed to slide just up into "ouch expensive" range
Battletech not popular? That´s a pity. I played it in the 90s but focused later on GW & various rpg products. Later Pacific Rim ignited a desire to paint big robots and nowadays three IK stand in my glass cabinet ready for action. What issues does Battletech have despite the price?
I'd say that Battletech certainly still has its devotees. A lot of people I know are playing the Alpha Strike version, though, where you can have a lot of mechs on the field and still settle a game in less than a weekend. 'Classic' Battletech seems more niche, with its detailed rules and lots of die rolling. It came from a different era, where large complicated rulebooks, lots of die rolling, and vast games that took forever to play a few turns were common in the 80s. Like Star Fleet Battles and Car Wars...super popular 30 years ago, now far more niche.
Stormonu wrote: I get the sense this game sold like gangbusters in the UK, but not nearly so quickly in the US (maybe because of the popularity of BattleTech in the states).
I personally picked up the rules set & knights. Until I can put aside some for the remaining Titans, will be proxying models in (I have 3 knights [reavers], 2 armigers [warhounds], several gundam/leviathan/robotech models I could use as Warlords and a slew of old battlemech/robotech mechs I can proxy as knights). Things may be a bit oversized, but I don't think it'll be an issue.
Also been working on statting up the various vehicles, and I have a bunch of 1/100 tanks, old epic vehicles (and a freshly 3D Shadowsword) I'd like to put on the table.
I think the reduced popularity in north America is more price factor then any thing else, Battletech isn't exactly at it's peak of popularity these days. I think the UK price was solid one but the NA price managed to slide just up into "ouch expensive" range
Battletech not popular? That´s a pity. I played it in the 90s but focused later on GW & various rpg products. Later Pacific Rim ignited a desire to paint big robots and nowadays three IK stand in my glass cabinet ready for action. What issues does Battletech have despite the price?
you just proved my point. I never said Battletech isn't popular just that it's not at "peak popularity" thats not a bash of the game, just a honest reckongization.
Battletech's issues are more due to it's play style (it's a 80s style table top game.. I mean when people say 40k is too complex, a game like Btech isn't going to have mass market appeal) there's also the matter of visability, which it just isn't these days, not a lot of gaming stores carry it anymore.
I hope the game does catch on. I loved battletech - I just thought the crunchy game was too crunchy and time consuming and the alpha-strike took the simplification to overkill levels. Plus the models - ugh. Some are just so ugly.
I may have to get into AT once more models get released.
SirWeeble wrote: I hope the game does catch on. I loved battletech - I just thought the crunchy game was too crunchy and time consuming and the alpha-strike took the simplification to overkill levels. Plus the models - ugh. Some are just so ugly.
I may have to get into AT once more models get released.
Another one comes out this Saturday, the Hound next month.
Alpha striking is decent but less likely with the mechanics and the game is crunchy with just a few models.
The game was poorly released, no one can argue that I think.
The intent here was a big meaty game for gamers. No pre-measuring, templates, strict LoS rules and an almost infinite ability to be expanded upon with entirely new lines and theaters of operation.
There might not even be a two player starter at all, they aren't worried about "getting new players" as is the case with their range of two player options for their various other offerings.
Now the range should have been released at the same time, absolutely. Aside from the diehards who bought in with a GM or two at launch we have had a hard time trying to sell it locally. Asking a $200 buy in for a Warlord, a Banner and Rule Bundle hasn't gone well and I think the AT community as a whole has suffered from the setback.
Once the range is out and I can tell a random interested person at the store "Yeah if you buy this $70 box of Hounds and this $35 Banner we can fake the rest of it.
Suddenly your buy in is less than a two player "Big Box" and said person can sit down, knock out 5 fairly simple models and get a decently involved game in. Something like that can really have a positive effect on perception in so far as how buyable a game system is.
Right now people are still affected by sticker shock and its a toss up wether or not attention spans will hang tough long enough for Hounds to drop.
Basically, interest is there sans the prices on Warlords and I hope GWs decision to not release Hounds first doesn't kill communities before they even get started.
P.S. Absolutely brilliant rules, system makes you feel like you are playing with massive lumbering land ships on legs and the comparison between a Knights Rapid Fire Battlecannon and a Warlords Volcano Cannon is extremely satisfying.
Alpha striking is decent but less likely with the mechanics and the game is crunchy with just a few models.
By "alpha strike" i was referring to the simplified version of battletech. Normal battletech is obscenely detailed. Each mech requires a full sheet printout to track everything and a 4vs4 mech battle can run many hours. Alpha strike dumbs every unit down to 2 stats. Its an extreme contrast and I always thought there could have been something a bit more in-between. From the very little I've seen of Adeptus Titanicus, it seems it kind of does this well.
The game was poorly released, no one can argue that I think.
The intent here was a big meaty game for gamers. No pre-measuring, templates, strict LoS rules and an almost infinite ability to be expanded upon with entirely new lines and theaters of operation.
There might not even be a two player starter at all, they aren't worried about "getting new players" as is the case with their range of two player options for their various other offerings.
Now the range should have been released at the same time, absolutely. Aside from the diehards who bought in with a GM or two at launch we have had a hard time trying to sell it locally. Asking a $200 buy in for a Warlord, a Banner and Rule Bundle hasn't gone well and I think the AT community as a whole has suffered from the setback.
Once the range is out and I can tell a random interested person at the store "Yeah if you buy this $70 box of Hounds and this $35 Banner we can fake the rest of it.
Suddenly your buy in is less than a two player "Big Box" and said person can sit down, knock out 5 fairly simple models and get a decently involved game in. Something like that can really have a positive effect on perception in so far as how buyable a game system is.
Right now people are still affected by sticker shock and its a toss up wether or not attention spans will hang tough long enough for Hounds to drop.
Basically, interest is there sans the prices on Warlords and I hope GWs decision to not release Hounds first doesn't kill communities before they even get started.
P.S. Absolutely brilliant rules, system makes you feel like you are playing with massive lumbering land ships on legs and the comparison between a Knights Rapid Fire Battlecannon and a Warlords Volcano Cannon is extremely satisfying.
Yet a few weeks later the Reavers are out.
They went nostalgic with their initial release and the sticker shock is overblown by the community not actually pricing things properly. When said "Sticker shock" nets you the biggest model for free is it much of a sticker shock or just overblown opinions?
Alpha striking is decent but less likely with the mechanics and the game is crunchy with just a few models.
By "alpha strike" i was referring to the simplified version of battletech. Normal battletech is obscenely detailed. Each mech requires a full sheet printout to track everything and a 4vs4 mech battle can run many hours. Alpha strike dumbs every unit down to 2 stats. Its an extreme contrast and I always thought there could have been something a bit more in-between. From the very little I've seen of Adeptus Titanicus, it seems it kind of does this well.
Ahhh ok
Yea, AT18 is less crunchy than Battletech but far more than Alpha Strike
Lysenis wrote: Insidious thoughts there. Actually possible. Though it is Specialist Games and they had the kit made in China so it could of been a budget thing or not. The Warlord models themselves were made in the UK so who knows.
It could be that they didn't have the capacity for more or funds, or they wanted an inflated launch. Though I suspect we will see a Reaver and Warhound starter kit if they are serious about this, with rules for about $135ish USD. (I price the Warhounds at $75 because they are a box set of 2)
My biggest concern at the moment is the saturation bombing that is going on by GW. There's simply not time to buy, paint game with everything that is coming out. Blood bowl, necromunda, LoTR, new gorkamorka, kill team, 40k quest etc. Something is going to give eventually. Rather than a more steady release its like they want to get out everything now. That could have worrying consequences because you can't keep up this hectic schedule of new games.
I rather see it as GW offering different lines for different fans - they don't expect every customer to be a customer of everything.
Plus many long term fans already have big armies for their core games. They've already got 50000K points of Space Marines - a customer like that is very unlikely to buy an entire new SM army; though they will likely pick up a new model here and there now as you release them. But you can only bloat an army so far before you ahve to recycle old sculpts.
So having other armies helps ;but so too does having other and different game systems open for the player; and those who want something else.
The only issue I see is GW managing to support all these games in the future; however with GW opening a brand new factory and putting dedicated teams behind each of the specialist games that says to me that they are going to do a darn good try at supporting them.
Instead of the secondary games being side projects worked on by people inbetween other projects; they have their own team and dedicated focus. That's a big thing as it means many projects can work and progress alongside each other.
Lysenis wrote: Insidious thoughts there. Actually possible. Though it is Specialist Games and they had the kit made in China so it could of been a budget thing or not. The Warlord models themselves were made in the UK so who knows.
It could be that they didn't have the capacity for more or funds, or they wanted an inflated launch. Though I suspect we will see a Reaver and Warhound starter kit if they are serious about this, with rules for about $135ish USD. (I price the Warhounds at $75 because they are a box set of 2)
My biggest concern at the moment is the saturation bombing that is going on by GW. There's simply not time to buy, paint game with everything that is coming out. Blood bowl, necromunda, LoTR, new gorkamorka, kill team, 40k quest etc. Something is going to give eventually. Rather than a more steady release its like they want to get out everything now. That could have worrying consequences because you can't keep up this hectic schedule of new games.
As Overread stated, GW seems to be going big net casting and letting us the fish bite where we please. It can backfire in sales but so far its been amazing.
The game was poorly released, no one can argue that I think.
(snip)
I'd disagree based on my experience.
Granted, with a kid and work, my hobby time is a trifle limited, but by the time I have my terrain and Warlords ready for play, the Reavers will be out. And the time needed to get those ready will carry me to the Warhound release date.
I fully acknowledge that for someone wanting to play with all the toys "today," this isn't ideal, but I doubt I'll even notice.
And regardless of how people feel about the pricing, my pocketbook is glad for the respite between releases.
So it might not be quite as botched as you think. I get the feeling GW intentionally went with a "slow burn" release schedule.
Haven't bought it yet. For titan vs titan type of battles I have battletech. I'm waiting(or dreading depending on do you ask my heart or my wallet...) for the epic if they ever get it. If that happens I will get titans(and maybe rules for the AT) but until that not one cent will go to the game. Well unless somebody sells me a warlord for literally a cent Guess I can pay that much for paperweight.
Whirlwind wrote: My biggest concern at the moment is the saturation bombing that is going on by GW. There's simply not time to buy, paint game with everything that is coming out. Blood bowl, necromunda, LoTR, new gorkamorka, kill team, 40k quest etc. Something is going to give eventually. Rather than a more steady release its like they want to get out everything now. That could have worrying consequences because you can't keep up this hectic schedule of new games.
Yeah it's absolutely raining new releases now. And not just new figures but entirely new game systems that are not cross-compatible. As an individual games I don't have a problem with this - I'm a big boy and I can make rational decisions about what I do and don't buy (all evidence to the contrary aside). It's my circle of gaming buddies I'm holding my breath for. Some people are running this way and some that, chasing wildly different systems. The single hardest thing to come by in wargaming is good, committed opponents. I've been fortunate enough to see half a dozen friends buy into AT but I feel sorry for the single Infinity player or the two poor schmucks interested in Kill Team...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote: Haven't bought it yet. For titan vs titan type of battles I have battletech. I'm waiting(or dreading depending on do you ask my heart or my wallet...) for the epic if they ever get it. If that happens I will get titans(and maybe rules for the AT) but until that not one cent will go to the game. Well unless somebody sells me a warlord for literally a cent Guess I can pay that much for paperweight.
BattleTech needs to hurry up and get its big box release out there. It's like the game doesn't even want to be played
Lysenis wrote: Insidious thoughts there. Actually possible. Though it is Specialist Games and they had the kit made in China so it could of been a budget thing or not. The Warlord models themselves were made in the UK so who knows.
It could be that they didn't have the capacity for more or funds, or they wanted an inflated launch. Though I suspect we will see a Reaver and Warhound starter kit if they are serious about this, with rules for about $135ish USD. (I price the Warhounds at $75 because they are a box set of 2)
My biggest concern at the moment is the saturation bombing that is going on by GW. There's simply not time to buy, paint game with everything that is coming out. Blood bowl, necromunda, LoTR, new gorkamorka, kill team, 40k quest etc. Something is going to give eventually. Rather than a more steady release its like they want to get out everything now. That could have worrying consequences because you can't keep up this hectic schedule of new games.
Good news is you don't HAVE to play everything. What this however allows is catching many players who wouldn't be interested in your products. If you only sell 2-3 items you won't get as large customer base as you would get with 6-7 products.
Sure individual player might not be able to get 6-7 but so what? Everybody isn't interested about everything.
Good news is you don't HAVE to play everything. What this however allows is catching many players who wouldn't be interested in your products. If you only sell 2-3 items you won't get as large customer base as you would get with 6-7 products.
Sure individual player might not be able to get 6-7 but so what? Everybody isn't interested about everything.
That's not really correct because it assumes that the market base is infinitely large and has infinite ability to spend money/time on the hobby which it isn't. What can happen is that games start cannibalising sales of other systems that GW produces. In effect each product has less sales reducing the overall margins on all of the games. That can make the long term viability of some games much worse.
For example lets suppose you are interested in both Necromunda and Kill Team. They both being fundamentally similar games (small number skirmish games). Suppose because of time or money you can only afford to get one of them. That person has to make a choice. Lets say they choose Kill Team. The spend on Necromunda has been reduced. Now you could say well in 6 months when the painting load has reduced you can pick up Necromunda - however that assumes there isn't some new flashy toy in 6 months. If that continues then the money never gets spent on Necromunda. Now if that applies equally across everyone but the split is more equal it means both Kill Team and Necromunda have lost out. It's why a lot of businesses fail (not that Im suggesting GW is going to fail at the current time). They see a large growth and expand considerably without really looking at the details of the growth. If that goes to far and then there is a contraction you are suddenly left with a lot of capital spend that is no longer viable. It works on the assumption that growth can be sustained.
Good news is you don't HAVE to play everything. What this however allows is catching many players who wouldn't be interested in your products. If you only sell 2-3 items you won't get as large customer base as you would get with 6-7 products.
Sure individual player might not be able to get 6-7 but so what? Everybody isn't interested about everything.
That's not really correct because it assumes that the market base is infinitely large and has infinite ability to spend money/time on the hobby which it isn't. What can happen is that games start cannibalising sales of other systems that GW produces. In effect each product has less sales reducing the overall margins on all of the games. That can make the long term viability of some games much worse.
For example lets suppose you are interested in both Necromunda and Kill Team. They both being fundamentally similar games (small number skirmish games). Suppose because of time or money you can only afford to get one of them. That person has to make a choice. Lets say they choose Kill Team. The spend on Necromunda has been reduced. Now you could say well in 6 months when the painting load has reduced you can pick up Necromunda - however that assumes there isn't some new flashy toy in 6 months. If that continues then the money never gets spent on Necromunda. Now if that applies equally across everyone but the split is more equal it means both Kill Team and Necromunda have lost out. It's why a lot of businesses fail (not that Im suggesting GW is going to fail at the current time). They see a large growth and expand considerably without really looking at the details of the growth. If that goes to far and then there is a contraction you are suddenly left with a lot of capital spend that is no longer viable. It works on the assumption that growth can be sustained.
But that's only true when you consider those things in isolation. You also have to factor in the people who want both and will buy both, and would other wise have spend the additional money on another hobby or a kickstarter rather than GW product. There are also the people who're not interested in Necromunda, but are interested in Kill Team. Or the people who play one of the "main" games, get bored, and go looking for something different, who will be more likely to remain within GW's ecosystem with a broader selection of SGs since it's more probably they'll find something that exactly fits their taste and mood without having to look elsewhere. Releasing only Necromunda might prevent the first group that you mention from splitting their spending, but it also guarantees that you lose out on the revenue from all the others.
Now, GW could get their estimates wrong about how many of each group there are and how worthwhile it is to cater to any given niche, which would cost them, but it's not as simple as the zero sum you present.
The thing is so long as each game retains enough customers to remain viable then there's a market for it. Considering that Bloodbowl was still running tournaments and how many skirmish level KS have been financed over the last few years there is clearly enough money for several product lines in the market. GW is taking full advantage of their previous lines; of their brand and marketing to re-dominate the market in several sectors.
I think its an attitude change away from having just one big money earner (space marines) and diversifying their range and having profitable ranges that are not "as" profitable as some others, but which ar still viable on their own terms.
The game was poorly released, no one can argue that I think.
(snip)
I'd disagree based on my experience.
Granted, with a kid and work, my hobby time is a trifle limited, but by the time I have my terrain and Warlords ready for play, the Reavers will be out. And the time needed to get those ready will carry me to the Warhound release date.
I fully acknowledge that for someone wanting to play with all the toys "today," this isn't ideal, but I doubt I'll even notice.
And regardless of how people feel about the pricing, my pocketbook is glad for the respite between releases.
So it might not be quite as botched as you think. I get the feeling GW intentionally went with a "slow burn" release schedule.
Second this.
It feels like GW actually thought this out and decided not to push everything at once which saves money
Good news is you don't HAVE to play everything. What this however allows is catching many players who wouldn't be interested in your products. If you only sell 2-3 items you won't get as large customer base as you would get with 6-7 products.
Sure individual player might not be able to get 6-7 but so what? Everybody isn't interested about everything.
That's not really correct because it assumes that the market base is infinitely large and has infinite ability to spend money/time on the hobby which it isn't. What can happen is that games start cannibalising sales of other systems that GW produces. In effect each product has less sales reducing the overall margins on all of the games. That can make the long term viability of some games much worse.
For example lets suppose you are interested in both Necromunda and Kill Team. They both being fundamentally similar games (small number skirmish games). Suppose because of time or money you can only afford to get one of them. That person has to make a choice. Lets say they choose Kill Team. The spend on Necromunda has been reduced. Now you could say well in 6 months when the painting load has reduced you can pick up Necromunda - however that assumes there isn't some new flashy toy in 6 months. If that continues then the money never gets spent on Necromunda. Now if that applies equally across everyone but the split is more equal it means both Kill Team and Necromunda have lost out. It's why a lot of businesses fail (not that Im suggesting GW is going to fail at the current time). They see a large growth and expand considerably without really looking at the details of the growth. If that goes to far and then there is a contraction you are suddenly left with a lot of capital spend that is no longer viable. It works on the assumption that growth can be sustained.
But that's only true when you consider those things in isolation. You also have to factor in the people who want both and will buy both, and would other wise have spend the additional money on another hobby or a kickstarter rather than GW product. There are also the people who're not interested in Necromunda, but are interested in Kill Team. Or the people who play one of the "main" games, get bored, and go looking for something different, who will be more likely to remain within GW's ecosystem with a broader selection of SGs since it's more probably they'll find something that exactly fits their taste and mood without having to look elsewhere. Releasing only Necromunda might prevent the first group that you mention from splitting their spending, but it also guarantees that you lose out on the revenue from all the others.
Now, GW could get their estimates wrong about how many of each group there are and how worthwhile it is to cater to any given niche, which would cost them, but it's not as simple as the zero sum you present.
One reason it was a good idea for GW to start off at a large set. It allowed them to gauge the serious side of the market and extrapolate from there. More is great sure but when you have mass sales you have a drop off rate after a time. Interest wanes or people get what they wanted and stop buying. So having weapon sprues and expandable inventory is a great thing. Bad to start for those nterested but great for the long run.
Yodhrin wrote: But that's only true when you consider those things in isolation. You also have to factor in the people who want both and will buy both, and would other wise have spend the additional money on another hobby or a kickstarter rather than GW product. There are also the people who're not interested in Necromunda, but are interested in Kill Team. Or the people who play one of the "main" games, get bored, and go looking for something different, who will be more likely to remain within GW's ecosystem with a broader selection of SGs since it's more probably they'll find something that exactly fits their taste and mood without having to look elsewhere. Releasing only Necromunda might prevent the first group that you mention from splitting their spending, but it also guarantees that you lose out on the revenue from all the others.
Now, GW could get their estimates wrong about how many of each group there are and how worthwhile it is to cater to any given niche, which would cost them, but it's not as simple as the zero sum you present.
Yeah. My spendings on GW decreased when GW dropped epic armageddon and then some more when fantasy was killed off. 40k is all fine and good but there's still only finite amount of money I'm willing to spend on that game. Remove options...Well that money doesn't go 100% to 40k. No. Some MIGHT go or what actually happened was the money I spent on non-40k went actually totally elsewhere.
GW mistakenly thinking it doesn't matter how many games they provide, people will spend equal amount for GW, is what drove GW away from specialist games. But there are shock horror people who will buy game A but not game B. So if you sell only game B you will lose customers who would buy game A. Of course there are players who would spend same amount of money to one game as two game buying both games reducing profit margin but there's also people who will buy both games AND spend more money...
Yeah there's technically limit but so far GW doesn't have that much games yet that they would really cannibalize each other. Different games appeal to different markets. Just because you like Blood Bowl doesn't mean you will be interested in 40k or AT.
Lysenis wrote: So, which other kit comes with 11 full sprues and 6 half sprues, full rules, dice, cards, and other accessories?
Kill Team? I mean, I'm not completely sure, but I think it packs at least that. Dem scenery sprues are really big, and the GSC and skitarii boxes are 5 sprues by themselves.
As to the OP question, I don't think the game is a bust at all. I personally have not bought it for multiple reasons (cost, size of the minis, I already have Battletech which offers a similar experience... it's complicated), and over here is moving slowly, but people is getting stuff, painting and playing, and I believe they're doing it in sufficient numbers to call the release a success. Time will tell if the game has staying power or not, but that's gaming life for you.
The GSC and Skitarii sprues will have already paid for themselves by a wide margin though so will cost GW literally a few pence worth of power and plastic pellets to make, while every sprue in Titanicus is brand new.
Yodhrin wrote: The GSC and Skitarii sprues will have already paid for themselves by a wide margin though so will cost GW literally a few pence worth of power and plastic pellets to make, while every sprue in Titanicus is brand new.
That still leaves all the scenery sprues unaccounted for, doesn't it? And even if that 's the case, no sprue in the GME is exclusive of it either, so...
Furthermore, the question was "Which other kit comes with 11 full sprues and 6 half sprues, full rules, dice, cards, and other accessories?". Adding the caveat "but only, you know, non-amortized sprues" to the question after the fact is moving the goal posts around, I think (and not really important to the final customer).
Still, it was actually a question because I don't remember... how many sprues does the KT box include?
Lysenis wrote: Insidious thoughts there. Actually possible. Though it is Specialist Games and they had the kit made in China so it could of been a budget thing or not. The Warlord models themselves were made in the UK so who knows.
It could be that they didn't have the capacity for more or funds, or they wanted an inflated launch. Though I suspect we will see a Reaver and Warhound starter kit if they are serious about this, with rules for about $135ish USD. (I price the Warhounds at $75 because they are a box set of 2)
My biggest concern at the moment is the saturation bombing that is going on by GW. There's simply not time to buy, paint game with everything that is coming out. Blood bowl, necromunda, LoTR, new gorkamorka, kill team, 40k quest etc. Something is going to give eventually. Rather than a more steady release its like they want to get out everything now. That could have worrying consequences because you can't keep up this hectic schedule of new games.
You are not supposed to buy every game GW releases. Just stick with one or two that you hold dear. The only new stuff I have purchased was N17 due to nostalgia. Simply a great immersive skirmish game with lots of detail. The other game which I support is BB but my collection is so extensive from the 90s that there was no reason to spend a single Euro for anything so far.
Also don't forget in the past a lot of these games were running at the same time as well or within a limited window of each other. Others, like Blood bowl, have never really stopped and kept going well for years after GW stopped keeping it going; it even spawned a few big Kickstarters from other companies running a similar styled game
I was VERY much looking forward ti getting, until as many have said "I saw the price". I just got kill team and have several other boxed games, but I was expecting a price around or under $200.00 USD and over $300 for the boxed game with Titans, bldgs etc is just too much for me to part with in one go... Sorry GW you blew it on the pricing I think... My concern is that if Adep Titanicus doesn't sell they will thin it is due to lack of interest when I suspect that if it doesn't sell it is cause of the dang price!!!
Lord_Zaherial wrote: I was VERY much looking forward ti getting, until as many have said "I saw the price". I just got kill team and have several other boxed games, but I was expecting a price around or under $200.00 USD and over $300 for the boxed game with Titans, bldgs etc is just too much for me to part with in one go... Sorry GW you blew it on the pricing I think... My concern is that if Adep Titanicus doesn't sell they will thin it is due to lack of interest when I suspect that if it doesn't sell it is cause of the dang price!!!
But it sold very well - GME sold out, and the Reaver is currently "Temporarily out of stock" due to demand.
if you look at the wepcard that are included in the rules box, there realy aint need for a big expensive warlord aslong as you stick to open play.
1 reaver and 2 hounds plus a box of knights and you have IMO a good army to start to learn the game.
the reavers have some solid weapons and the warhounds has some good utility.
and these titans are far cheaper then the warlord.
if you look at the wepcard that are included in the rules box, there realy aint need for a big expensive warlord aslong as you stick to open play.
1 reaver and 2 hounds plus a box of knights and you have IMO a good army to start to learn the game.
the reavers have some solid weapons and the warhounds has some good utility.
and these titans are far cheaper then the warlord.
and the Venator Maniple IMHO is a pretty solid Maniple for matched play. 1 reaver and 4 warhounds is pretty easy, then fill it out with some knights, your enemy might have trouble handling the target saturation.
if you look at the wepcard that are included in the rules box, there realy aint need for a big expensive warlord aslong as you stick to open play.
1 reaver and 2 hounds plus a box of knights and you have IMO a good army to start to learn the game.
the reavers have some solid weapons and the warhounds has some good utility.
and these titans are far cheaper then the warlord.
and the Venator Maniple IMHO is a pretty solid Maniple for matched play. 1 reaver and 4 warhounds is pretty easy, then fill it out with some knights, your enemy might have trouble handling the target saturation.
I remember when the original got released in 1989 I think it was..So yea I've been around. But I just can't justify spending that much money on a game. I am retired and would love to have it since I hav been around since rogue trader but I just cant afford it. I guess GW has forgotten what got them to be able to charge what they do. I just cant afford what they charge for stuff these days(in one lump sum). I have a newish deathguard army and custodes army, when I say new, I mean since the new figs came out but thing have changed financially for me since I retired, I think myself as one of the founding members so to speak as far as GW goes in the US, I am guessing the hobby has passed me by price wise. So as much as I would love to have AT. I just don't see it in my future. I am sorry GW but you do expect loyalty from us but not us to you. I hate saying the last, but I think the hobby I have loved for the last 40ish years has passed me by...
if you look at the wepcard that are included in the rules box, there realy aint need for a big expensive warlord aslong as you stick to open play.
1 reaver and 2 hounds plus a box of knights and you have IMO a good army to start to learn the game.
the reavers have some solid weapons and the warhounds has some good utility.
and these titans are far cheaper then the warlord.
and the Venator Maniple IMHO is a pretty solid Maniple for matched play. 1 reaver and 4 warhounds is pretty easy, then fill it out with some knights, your enemy might have trouble handling the target saturation.
I remember when the original got released in 1989 I think it was..So yea I've been around. But I just can't justify spending that much money on a game. I am retired and would love to have it since I hav been around since rogue trader but I just cant afford it. I guess GW has forgotten what got them to be able to charge what they do. I just cant afford what they charge for stuff these days(in one lump sum). I have a newish deathguard army and custodes army, when I say new, I mean since the new figs came out but thing have changed financially for me since I retired, I think myself as one of the founding members so to speak as far as GW goes in the US, I am guessing the hobby has passed me by price wise. So as much as I would love to have AT. I just don't see it in my future. I am sorry GW but you do expect loyalty from us but not us to you. I hate saying the last, but I think the hobby I have loved for the last 40ish years has passed me by...
i guess retirement can have its financial challenges, but i wouldent know since im barly halfway to that point personaly.
now, granted we do NOT know the price of a wardog BUT we know it will be less then a reaver and moust likely more then knights, so my GUESS is in the region of 40-50$
if you break it down, perhaps saving up 50$ over a set period of times to afford to buy say a wardog whit the goal beeing owning 3 wardogs, is that something your financinal situation allows you to do?
not all games of AT MUST be whit the big titans. 3 warhounds whit 50p of weponry is 690p add a knight box that costs 35$ and you have around 850p army for open play.
Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.
(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)
tneva82 wrote: Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.
(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)
designed for titan on titan, 700-1250 games which is interesting because of your opponent brings 1250 and you bring 850 you get more Strategems that balance the game out.
Financially limited? Ehhhh go buy the rules and a Reaver. Voila started for 120 l, add some knights and you. Could get up there ish.
tneva82 wrote: Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.
(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)
but AT IS designed for games below 1000p.
in matched play, skirmish is spesificly ment for 700-1250p and takes less then 2H to play when you are familiar whit the rules.
heck, epic clash that is the higest point bracket in matched is 1750-2500p. wanna go above 2500p then you have to go narrative or open play.
not all of us want big armys. personly im getting 1 warlord, 1 reaver, 1 wardog and 1 box of knights. that is 1200p that will be my force for a loong time.
tneva82 wrote: Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.
(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)
designed for titan on titan, 700-1250 games which is interesting because of your opponent brings 1250 and you bring 850 you get more Strategems that balance the game out.
Financially limited? Ehhhh go buy the rules and a Reaver. Voila started for 120 l, add some knights and you. Could get up there ish.
Titan vs titan is not that interesting...2 titans binging shields without much damage either way. You just demonstrated my point. You need multiple titans to game really work which isn't unsurprising. Same issue is with Battlefleet Gothic for example. 2 ships binking each other not getting result.
Generally games with too small armies are either a) neither side can cause significant damage(AT, BFG etc) or b) it's basically who goes first or who gets bit of bad luck who wins(40k, FB etc)
Games rarely(that's never) work with bare minimum units.
So look more like 3 titans and knights. Reaver and 2 warhounds is pretty much bare MINIMUM and we are talking about game where designers have mentioned multiple warlords in normal game...
tneva82 wrote: Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.
(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)
designed for titan on titan, 700-1250 games which is interesting because of your opponent brings 1250 and you bring 850 you get more Strategems that balance the game out.
Financially limited? Ehhhh go buy the rules and a Reaver. Voila started for 120 l, add some knights and you. Could get up there ish.
Titan vs titan is not that interesting...2 titans binging shields without much damage either way. You just demonstrated my point. You need multiple titans to game really work which isn't unsurprising. Same issue is with Battlefleet Gothic for example. 2 ships binking each other not getting result.
Generally games with too small armies are either a) neither side can cause significant damage(AT, BFG etc) or b) it's basically who goes first or who gets bit of bad luck who wins(40k, FB etc)
Games rarely(that's never) work with bare minimum units.
So look more like 3 titans and knights. Reaver and 2 warhounds is pretty much bare MINIMUM and we are talking about game where designers have mentioned multiple warlords in normal game...
Then add in terrain. I do suggest 2v2 as well but Reaver V warlord? Well better have that terrain set up. Did a demo with good sized terrain and it was a huge blast for me. I rushed a building with many full stride orders, then as we circled I spun around and next turn when he was first and had selected First Fire, I took a hit then backed up to avoid the rest of his shots and gaining his side. Was fun.
Oh and use different load outs. Yes it's not wysiwyg but it will be fine. Most people shouldn't care as you. Have it clearly labeled in your Titan Terminal
I was hoping to get the grand master box a few months down the road, but grabbed one upon finding out that it was a limited release.
I'm not sure what GW's goal is here with such a pricey starter. I realize that you get a ton of stuff for the dollar, but the issue isn't the value - it's the sticker shock.
GW made a smart choice with their starter sets for 40k. They're what, $80-ish US? That's a price people can stomach. Your average person can skip out on buying a video game they weren't really excited about and start that hobby they were always curious about. But $290 is a good chunk of the month's rent - depending on location. Hopefully they will put out some better starter deals down the road. Something like a few warhounds + knights or some other combination for below $80.
For me personally - what pushed me was the more detailed rules. I've been back into 40k for a rather short time and I'm already a bit bored with the simplicity.
SirWeeble wrote: I was hoping to get the grand master box a few months down the road, but grabbed one upon finding out that it was a limited release.
I'm not sure what GW's goal is here with such a pricey starter. I realize that you get a ton of stuff for the dollar, but the issue isn't the value - it's the sticker shock.
GW made a smart choice with their starter sets for 40k. They're what, $80-ish US? That's a price people can stomach. Your average person can skip out on buying a video game they weren't really excited about and start that hobby they were always curious about. But $290 is a good chunk of the month's rent - depending on location. Hopefully they will put out some better starter deals down the road. Something like a few warhounds + knights or some other combination for below $80.
For me personally - what pushed me was the more detailed rules. I've been back into 40k for a rather short time and I'm already a bit bored with the simplicity.
So you are saying that getting 2/3rds of a full army is too much of a sticker shock?
Just checking because all you need on top of the GME is a Reaver and boom Myrmidon Maniple and as I have shown it is REALY hard to build that for under 1250 points. Add in knights and voila good sized force right out of 2 boxes.
SirWeeble wrote: I was hoping to get the grand master box a few months down the road, but grabbed one upon finding out that it was a limited release.
I'm not sure what GW's goal is here with such a pricey starter. I realize that you get a ton of stuff for the dollar, but the issue isn't the value - it's the sticker shock.
GW made a smart choice with their starter sets for 40k. They're what, $80-ish US? That's a price people can stomach. Your average person can skip out on buying a video game they weren't really excited about and start that hobby they were always curious about. But $290 is a good chunk of the month's rent - depending on location. Hopefully they will put out some better starter deals down the road. Something like a few warhounds + knights or some other combination for below $80.
For me personally - what pushed me was the more detailed rules. I've been back into 40k for a rather short time and I'm already a bit bored with the simplicity.
So you are saying that getting 2/3rds of a full army is too much of a sticker shock?
Just checking because all you need on top of the GME is a Reaver and boom Myrmidon Maniple and as I have shown it is REALY hard to build that for under 1250 points. Add in knights and voila good sized force right out of 2 boxes.
It is understandable, though, because sticker shock does not stem from lack of seen value, but from the fact that to get anything you have to spend a lot at once. I wouldn't say spending 10000 euros on a luxury boat would be bad value, but it would be way too much for my financial level. Though I got the GME, I wouldn't mind them coming up with a starter kit for those who might want to get in for a tad lower price. Rules Set along with some slightly discounted reavers and knights without terrain would probably be half the price of GME and allow these people to get aboard, buying more later on when their dispensable income allows.
SirWeeble wrote: I was hoping to get the grand master box a few months down the road, but grabbed one upon finding out that it was a limited release.
I'm not sure what GW's goal is here with such a pricey starter. I realize that you get a ton of stuff for the dollar, but the issue isn't the value - it's the sticker shock.
GW made a smart choice with their starter sets for 40k. They're what, $80-ish US? That's a price people can stomach. Your average person can skip out on buying a video game they weren't really excited about and start that hobby they were always curious about. But $290 is a good chunk of the month's rent - depending on location. Hopefully they will put out some better starter deals down the road. Something like a few warhounds + knights or some other combination for below $80.
For me personally - what pushed me was the more detailed rules. I've been back into 40k for a rather short time and I'm already a bit bored with the simplicity.
So you are saying that getting 2/3rds of a full army is too much of a sticker shock?
Just checking because all you need on top of the GME is a Reaver and boom Myrmidon Maniple and as I have shown it is REALY hard to build that for under 1250 points. Add in knights and voila good sized force right out of 2 boxes.
It is understandable, though, because sticker shock does not stem from lack of seen value, but from the fact that to get anything you have to spend a lot at once. I wouldn't say spending 10000 euros on a luxury boat would be bad value, but it would be way too much for my financial level. Though I got the GME, I wouldn't mind them coming up with a starter kit for those who might want to get in for a tad lower price. Rules Set along with some slightly discounted reavers and knights without terrain would probably be half the price of GME and allow these people to get aboard, buying more later on when their dispensable income allows.
Not only are you saving in USD alone $140 (around 85 quid or so) but you have a near full tournament legal army and ALL components. . .
I get the sticker shock and it is HIGH but the for what it is, its amazing and GW failed to talk about that and that is hurting them more than anything.
A starter box is a bit harder. I would like one as well but the easiest would be a Reaver with Warhound box and Rules and unless they have a big sales expectation (as the hounds are a 2 in a box buy at armiger prices from what I have found) the base cost in USD is $195. Thats base MSRP. If they bundle it then it needs its own packaging which will be more so how much do you think they can cut from that?
I hope they don't bring back the GME box, it won't help grow the playerbase. They need a start collecting that has the rules box contents, one reaver, 3 knights (built in discount so knights are free) and that's it, to keep the cost reasonable.
So you are saying that getting 2/3rds of a full army is too much of a sticker shock?
Just checking because all you need on top of the GME is a Reaver and boom Myrmidon Maniple and as I have shown it is REALY hard to build that for under 1250 points. Add in knights and voila good sized force right out of 2 boxes.
Sure 80ish but lets go over what you get:
I explicitly said it **is** a good value, but the price is too still high. Like SherryPie said with an analogy about a boat. Doesn't matter if the boat is worth a million dollars, when you can't afford 10,000.
If they offered people a 'starter box' with just a few models, no rules, no dice, etc - they'd be more apt to buy it and buy the rules/dice/etc later. The reason people whined that the price was too high to begin with was because they didn't see "you get models, rules, cards, etc etc". They saw "you get 2 big models and 6 tiny models". If something like that was put out for $150-$180, people would be less hesitant to buy it. Then later on, they could pick up cards, panels, dice, etc at their leisure.
Stormonu wrote: We need a “Start Collecting” Titanicus - One Reaver, Two Warhounds + Knights in a box.
Thats a base price that will be roughly $165 and still no rules. Its a good set and you could discount it to maybe $130 maybe 140 to not totally lose out on the knights.
The only issue is that all you can play is a Venator list at that point and having placed the Warlord in the GME they made it FAR more likely you can run all 3 base Maniples with just buying the reaver and warhounds which most people would do because the Warlords ARE expensive.
So you are saying that getting 2/3rds of a full army is too much of a sticker shock?
Just checking because all you need on top of the GME is a Reaver and boom Myrmidon Maniple and as I have shown it is REALY hard to build that for under 1250 points. Add in knights and voila good sized force right out of 2 boxes.
Sure 80ish but lets go over what you get:
I explicitly said it **is** a good value, but the price is too still high. Like SherryPie said with an analogy about a boat. Doesn't matter if the boat is worth a million dollars, when you can't afford 10,000.
If they offered people a 'starter box' with just a few models, no rules, no dice, etc - they'd be more apt to buy it and buy the rules/dice/etc later. The reason people whined that the price was too high to begin with was because they didn't see "you get models, rules, cards, etc etc". They saw "you get 2 big models and 6 tiny models". If something like that was put out for $150-$180, people would be less hesitant to buy it. Then later on, they could pick up cards, panels, dice, etc at their leisure.
A starter box would be fine but then they would of had to release more and have less to release later. This means they seem to support the game less. Reavers came out 3 weeks after launch. 3 weeks! That's spectacular for a brand new game. It means that they have a lineup and a time table. While you want a starter this game is not intended for everyone. Its intended for people willing to play a crunchy game. If you want to play the game you will buy the game. You dont HAVE to have a spectacular deal every time even though this is.
If the price is going to dissuade you from playing a fantastic game I am not sure it would be worth your time no matter the price.
I'd like to see a "Venator Maniple Starter box" 1 Reaver, 2 Warhounds (they're sold in packs of 2) data cards for a venator Maniple, the tokens, and a "quick start" soft cover book that gives the basic rules for about 150 bucks USD. that'd be a PERFECT starter
BrianDavion wrote: I'd like to see a "Venator Maniple Starter box" 1 Reaver, 2 Warhounds (they're sold in packs of 2) data cards for a venator Maniple, the tokens, and a "quick start" soft cover book that gives the basic rules for about 150 bucks USD. that'd be a PERFECT starter
Yea. Thats 700ish points and with tokens and quick start rules that is about $150 in value so they could drop that to $130 and it would be a steal I think.
Lysenis wrote: Insidious thoughts there. Actually possible. Though it is Specialist Games and they had the kit made in China so it could of been a budget thing or not. The Warlord models themselves were made in the UK so who knows.
It could be that they didn't have the capacity for more or funds, or they wanted an inflated launch. Though I suspect we will see a Reaver and Warhound starter kit if they are serious about this, with rules for about $135ish USD. (I price the Warhounds at $75 because they are a box set of 2)
My biggest concern at the moment is the saturation bombing that is going on by GW. There's simply not time to buy, paint game with everything that is coming out. Blood bowl, necromunda, LoTR, new gorkamorka, kill team, 40k quest etc. Something is going to give eventually. Rather than a more steady release its like they want to get out everything now. That could have worrying consequences because you can't keep up this hectic schedule of new games.
You are not supposed to buy every game GW releases. Just stick with one or two that you hold dear. The only new stuff I have purchased was N17 due to nostalgia. Simply a great immersive skirmish game with lots of detail. The other game which I support is BB but my collection is so extensive from the 90s that there was no reason to spend a single Euro for anything so far.
I'm going to second not buying every game. GW really has released a staggering number of new products over the last couple years, but I think they are assuming that every player won't buy into every system (I certainly won't). I think the intent is you play one or a few of them. I know in my case I have really benefited from the new wave of games (or revitalized systems) they have put out. I play Blood Bowl and Necromunda, and I appreciate GW supporting both of them. By supporting games other than 40k and AoS they made someone who probably would be buying roughly one box of fantasy minis a year (and some bits from third party sellers) for a Mordheim band to someone who spends a couple hundred dollars a year on their products.
On the other hand If they hadn't done anything with Necromunda or Blood Bowl I really doubt I would buy any of their products, maybe I'd give KT a shot, but I doubt it.
BrianDavion wrote: I'd like to see a "Venator Maniple Starter box" 1 Reaver, 2 Warhounds (they're sold in packs of 2) data cards for a venator Maniple, the tokens, and a "quick start" soft cover book that gives the basic rules for about 150 bucks USD. that'd be a PERFECT starter
Yea. Thats 700ish points and with tokens and quick start rules that is about $150 in value so they could drop that to $130 and it would be a steal I think.
If they released something like this for 130$, I would certainly pick it up to try the game out. If I don't end up liking it, I would have three really nice display models and wouldn't feel my money is wasted (I think the Reavers and the Warhounds are much nicer models than the Warlord).
Lysenis wrote: While you want a starter this game is not intended for everyone. Its intended for people willing to play a crunchy game. If you want to play the game you will buy the game. You dont HAVE to have a spectacular deal every time even though this is.
If the price is going to dissuade you from playing a fantastic game I am not sure it would be worth your time no matter the price.
That is a good point - it may be part of why they chose the price point that they did. They probably realized that only a subset of existing fans would even take the plunge - likely long time fans, people that remember EPIC, and older returning fans that are already bored with the candy-land-esque rules of 40k. It's quite possible they realized that new fans and "mommy, i want that toy!" demographics have 0 interest in it.
However, I think there were alot of existing fans that would have given it a chance if there had been a lower cost to enter - even if it meant paying more in the end by having a smaller starter set and separate rules/tools. Maybe that plan is still on the horizon though - who knows?
Lysenis wrote: While you want a starter this game is not intended for everyone. Its intended for people willing to play a crunchy game. If you want to play the game you will buy the game. You dont HAVE to have a spectacular deal every time even though this is.
If the price is going to dissuade you from playing a fantastic game I am not sure it would be worth your time no matter the price.
That is a good point - it may be part of why they chose the price point that they did. They probably realized that only a subset of existing fans would even take the plunge - likely long time fans, people that remember EPIC, and older returning fans that are already bored with the candy-land-esque rules of 40k. It's quite possible they realized that new fans and "mommy, i want that toy!" demographics have 0 interest in it.
However, I think there were alot of existing fans that would have given it a chance if there had been a lower cost to enter - even if it meant paying more in the end by having a smaller starter set and separate rules/tools. Maybe that plan is still on the horizon though - who knows?
As I said a Venator Maniple starter for 150 would be the perfect entrypoint
tneva82 wrote: Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.
(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)
designed for titan on titan, 700-1250 games which is interesting because of your opponent brings 1250 and you bring 850 you get more Strategems that balance the game out.
Financially limited? Ehhhh go buy the rules and a Reaver. Voila started for 120 l, add some knights and you. Could get up there ish.
Titan vs titan is not that interesting...2 titans binging shields without much damage either way. You just demonstrated my point. You need multiple titans to game really work which isn't unsurprising. Same issue is with Battlefleet Gothic for example. 2 ships binking each other not getting result.
Generally games with too small armies are either a) neither side can cause significant damage(AT, BFG etc) or b) it's basically who goes first or who gets bit of bad luck who wins(40k, FB etc)
Games rarely(that's never) work with bare minimum units.
So look more like 3 titans and knights. Reaver and 2 warhounds is pretty much bare MINIMUM and we are talking about game where designers have mentioned multiple warlords in normal game...
I agree. I also think what will put the nail in the coffin for this game is no introduction of infantry and tanks. I just dont give a gak what it does to the balance of the system, people will get board of moving a handful of models around a table.
I think the cost of the game really is a tad high, and think it would have been cheaper had they just made smaller models. Halfway between the original Warlord and the new one would have been perfectly fine.
I’ve been into Epic for most of my life, so I had no option other than to buy the GME. But even still, if a friend wanted to play any version of Epic and I have them all, I would prefer SM2/TL. It’s just more colorful and fun with a lot more variety. People who think Titans only is the way to go are missing out on how important variety is.
Lysenis wrote: While you want a starter this game is not intended for everyone. Its intended for people willing to play a crunchy game. If you want to play the game you will buy the game. You dont HAVE to have a spectacular deal every time even though this is.
If the price is going to dissuade you from playing a fantastic game I am not sure it would be worth your time no matter the price.
That is a good point - it may be part of why they chose the price point that they did. They probably realized that only a subset of existing fans would even take the plunge - likely long time fans, people that remember EPIC, and older returning fans that are already bored with the candy-land-esque rules of 40k. It's quite possible they realized that new fans and "mommy, i want that toy!" demographics have 0 interest in it.
However, I think there were alot of existing fans that would have given it a chance if there had been a lower cost to enter - even if it meant paying more in the end by having a smaller starter set and separate rules/tools. Maybe that plan is still on the horizon though - who knows?
The initial cost for people with old models is cheap. Just buy the rules. Want a warlord and rules 170, want Reaver and rules 120. Build from there.
You are just asking for a deal every time. This isn't a "starter set" it's a game master edition
GW has never grasped the concept of a loss leader EVER!!! I wish they would learn the concept of pinning the ears back of the people that support them financially year in and year out... after over 30+ yrs I am more than disappointed in GW on this pricing!
I think GW is more concerned that if they release something with too much of a discount, the stock gets snapped up by 3rd party sellers who then market it on against for a reasonable price but with profit that doesn't go to GW. They don't seem to be hurting for sales on anything so there is little incentive for GW to lower the prices on their luxury hobby materials.
Lord_Zaherial wrote: GW has never grasped the concept of a loss leader EVER!!! I wish they would learn the concept of pinning the ears back of the people that support them financially year in and year out... after over 30+ yrs I am more than disappointed in GW on this pricing!
except thats not true, their boxed sets are ALWAYS great discounts. the GME has a 150-200 dollar discount vs buying everything seperately.
it's still expensive but that doesn't mean it's not a loss leader. Thing is you can only do so much of that if you wanna sell the rest seperately. no one would buy a reaver if you could get a pair of warlords in a GME for 200 bucks
Lord_Zaherial wrote: GW has never grasped the concept of a loss leader EVER!!! I wish they would learn the concept of pinning the ears back of the people that support them financially year in and year out... after over 30+ yrs I am more than disappointed in GW on this pricing!
except thats not true, their boxed sets are ALWAYS great discounts. the GME has a 150-200 dollar discount vs buying everything seperately.
it's still expensive but that doesn't mean it's not a loss leader. Thing is you can only do so much of that if you wanna sell the rest seperately. no one would buy a reaver if you could get a pair of warlords in a GME for 200 bucks
It's got some loss built in. At least USD price wise, you pay for the Titans and Knights but get 2 sets of terrain for free and a free rules kit.
That's decent loss right there. Three boxes of things given in discount. It's just the fact that they are giving the biggest baddest models to you first that hurts but it's good because as I said it's 2/3rd a full Maniple. So for just 350 USD you have a tournament legal army. (that's just one Reaver on top the GME)
I am pretty sure you can't play in a 40k tournament on $350 of models
Also they are doing Warhammer Conquest magazine in the UK (with views to wanting to take it to other countries) which is certainly a loss leader product.
Thing is not every game GW makes is going to work with a loss-leader. 40K works; but AT is not the kind of product that can work like that. There's too few products and its too new to make it a viable strategy. Plus don't forget they are not Tescos - they can't just totally write off huge blocks of loss-leader products to get people in the stores because chances are most people only go in for one, maybe two items at a time anyway from the model line - more in paints and accessories; but in general few people are going to walk into a GW store after 1 loss-leader product and then buy 5 or 6 other products.
Superstores have loss leaders partly because they know if they get you in the store they can sell you a dozens to hundreds of other things; heck it might even be enough to get you to spend your weekly shopping there instead of in another store.
Stormonu wrote: We need a “Start Collecting” Titanicus - One Reaver, Two Warhounds + Knights in a box.
Thats a base price that will be roughly $165 and still no rules. Its a good set and you could discount it to maybe $130 maybe 140 to not totally lose out on the knights.
The only issue is that all you can play is a Venator list at that point and having placed the Warlord in the GME they made it FAR more likely you can run all 3 base Maniples with just buying the reaver and warhounds which most people would do because the Warlords ARE expensive.
I was thinking about $130, with the knights coming out to be “free”*; maybe a Reaver + Knights to get it down to about $85. It’s an idea for a Start Collecting. Nothing to do with whether you can run a complete army. SC is designed to give you a starting point - some models to push around and incentive to grow your army. The main idea is to put forth a package that makes folks go “Hey, that’s not a bad price, I can afford that!”.
* Perhaps Reaver + 2 Warhounds + Knights could be a $130 Starter set like the mid-range No Fear/Tempest of Souls starters. Especially if it included a stripped down, non-hardback rules and cardboard counters & terminals instead of the plastic & punchboard versions in the GME.
Stormonu wrote: We need a “Start Collecting” Titanicus - One Reaver, Two Warhounds + Knights in a box.
Thats a base price that will be roughly $165 and still no rules. Its a good set and you could discount it to maybe $130 maybe 140 to not totally lose out on the knights.
The only issue is that all you can play is a Venator list at that point and having placed the Warlord in the GME they made it FAR more likely you can run all 3 base Maniples with just buying the reaver and warhounds which most people would do because the Warlords ARE expensive.
I was thinking about $130, with the knights coming out to be “free”*; maybe a Reaver + Knights to get it down to about $85. It’s an idea for a Start Collecting. Nothing to do with whether you can run a complete army. SC is designed to give you a starting point - some models to push around and incentive to grow your army. The main idea is to put forth a package that makes folks go “Hey, that’s not a bad price, I can afford that!”.
* Perhaps Reaver + 2 Warhounds + Knights could be a $130 Starter set like the mid-range No Fear/Tempest of Souls starters. Especially if it included a stripped down, non-hardback rules and cardboard counters & terminals instead of the plastic & punchboard versions in the GME.
The issue I think you see and Override pointed this out, this is basically a brand new game with no set excess. Kill Teams has excess because you can use many models from your normal collection or add those models to a 40k game. Bloodbowl has Fantasy models, Necromunda is not set up as a get started because there is not much expansion for it.
Titanicus is its own scale and game which means its going to behave differently in sales.
Thing is AT has 4 models to generate profit from. Just 4 products. That's a very small number and many of them are small number purchases too. You won't typically need 10 boxes of knights or 10 warlords. Heck GW even put magnet slots into the Warlord arms; they already know Warlords are going to be few per player even for the very keen.
Give AT 5-10 years and its range will broaden out, but right now it is where it is. Plus considering its outsold GW's estimations so fast I'd say their plan has more than worked at a global scale.
Overread wrote: Thing is AT has 4 models to generate profit from. Just 4 products. That's a very small number and many of them are small number purchases too. You won't typically need 10 boxes of knights or 10 warlords. Heck GW even put magnet slots into the Warlord arms; they already know Warlords are going to be few per player even for the very keen.
Give AT 5-10 years and its range will broaden out, but right now it is where it is. Plus considering its outsold GW's estimations so fast I'd say their plan has more than worked at a global scale.
Overread wrote: Thing is AT has 4 models to generate profit from. Just 4 products. That's a very small number and many of them are small number purchases too. You won't typically need 10 boxes of knights or 10 warlords. Heck GW even put magnet slots into the Warlord arms; they already know Warlords are going to be few per player even for the very keen.
Give AT 5-10 years and its range will broaden out, but right now it is where it is. Plus considering its outsold GW's estimations so fast I'd say their plan has more than worked at a global scale.
Where are we seeing sales to expectations?
Mostly on the boxed set being sold out at most places. GW even recalled their store stock in the UK so that the main GW site had stock and some for events. To me that suggests that the most expensive, the biggest sticker-shock item sold out at a rate that either just as GW planned or way above what they expected. And that was the most expensive single purchase which contained nothing unique to it - its only feature was a free Warlord in savings.
Being their most expensive boxed set to date and being it sold out in a couple of days I think that its a sign that it sold more powerfully than expected and hoped.
Yodhrin wrote: The fact the models come alongside one of the most crunchy and tactically engaging games GW have put out since Battlefleet Gothic in the late 90's is icing on the cake.
I would suggest that it's worth getting your local shop to reconsider, they're missing out on an excellent game with genuinely fantastic models(the detail on the Knights is ridiculous considering their size) for reasons that aren't really accurate.
This. 100% this.
The game is fantastic. The I go and you go play, the arcs, the movement and multitude of tactical decisions... Yea. It's a crunchy game that will have a Knight Household book, likely an Militarum book, and several campaign books.
This is where I have an issue with pretty much everything that goes on at my local GW. I'm not sure why they are so picky there, but they are. Maybe gamers are that way at every store. Anyway, Necromunda was truly an epic fail at the store I go to. NO ONE was interested in it. The store carries zero Necromunda Starter Boxes and zero Necromunda Gangs (not sure about the Gang War books). So, let's say I try to pick up the game at another store or drop the money to buy it online. To get people truly excited about the game would require buying the core box, all four Gang War books, more than just the base two gangs so they can get a feel for what all is available to them, and most of all time... lots of time spent at the store trying to get people to play the game, teaching them the basics of both the game and gang they are using, and being patient as they learn a new game system.
To top *all* of that off, there still may not be enough people interested in the game and therefore all that money is a waste unless I can find an FLGS that has a group with a lot of interest in Necromunda.
So, we're talking:
Core Game - $125USD Gang War - $30USD Gang War 2 - $30USD Gang War 3 - $30USD Gang War 4 - $30USD Additional Gang - $40USD
Total - $285USD
Time - Whatever time is necessary to assemble all three gangs and terrain along with painting all three gangs and terrain. And, that would mean spending A LOT of what limited time I have outside of work away from my wife and two year old son just to attempt to get this game going at my local GW.
Building interest in a newer tabletop game at a GW or LGS where it completely failed the first time takes an incredibly large investment in money and time. And, even with that large investment in money and time, there's no guarantee that enough or any gamers at your GW or LGS will become interested enough to put their money and time into the game.
Asking a local store's gamers to reconsider... yeah, I hate to be the realist (or some people may see it as pessimist) here, but unless you honestly have the large amount of money and time to invest and won't be upset or down if it doesn't catch on, it's probably not worth it.
Yodhrin wrote: The fact the models come alongside one of the most crunchy and tactically engaging games GW have put out since Battlefleet Gothic in the late 90's is icing on the cake.
I would suggest that it's worth getting your local shop to reconsider, they're missing out on an excellent game with genuinely fantastic models(the detail on the Knights is ridiculous considering their size) for reasons that aren't really accurate.
This. 100% this.
The game is fantastic. The I go and you go play, the arcs, the movement and multitude of tactical decisions... Yea. It's a crunchy game that will have a Knight Household book, likely an Militarum book, and several campaign books.
This is where I have an issue with pretty much everything that goes on at my local GW. I'm not sure why they are so picky there, but they are. Maybe gamers are that way at every store. Anyway, Necromunda was truly an epic fail at the store I go to. NO ONE was interested in it. The store carries zero Necromunda Starter Boxes and zero Necromunda Gangs (not sure about the Gang War books). So, let's say I try to pick up the game at another store or drop the money to buy it online. To get people truly excited about the game would require buying the core box, all four Gang War books, more than just the base two gangs so they can get a feel for what all is available to them, and most of all time... lots of time spent at the store trying to get people to play the game, teaching them the basics of both the game and gang they are using, and being patient as they learn a new game system.
To top *all* of that off, there still may not be enough people interested in the game and therefore all that money is a waste unless I can find an FLGS that has a group with a lot of interest in Necromunda.
So, we're talking:
Core Game - $125USD
Gang War - $30USD
Gang War 2 - $30USD
Gang War 3 - $30USD
Gang War 4 - $30USD
Additional Gang - $40USD
Total - $285USD
Time - Whatever time is necessary to assemble all three gangs and terrain along with painting all three gangs and terrain. And, that would mean spending A LOT of what limited time I have outside of work away from my wife and two year old son just to attempt to get this game going at my local GW.
Building interest in a newer tabletop game at a GW or LGS where it completely failed the first time takes an incredibly large investment in money and time. And, even with that large investment in money and time, there's no guarantee that enough or any gamers at your GW or LGS will become interested enough to put their money and time into the game.
Asking a local store's gamers to reconsider... yeah, I hate to be the realist (or some people may see it as pessimist) here, but unless you honestly have the large amount of money and time to invest and won't be upset or down if it doesn't catch on, it's probably not worth it.
SG
This is going to come off harsh no matter what way I say it so I will be blunt. Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. I have the same sort of experience but I have taken games like Dropzone Commander, Dropfleet Commander, SW Armada and even 40k which in my flgs was DEAD!!! and I revived them and Brought them back.
Its not easy, it takes work and my FLGS gives me one HELL of a discount which makes this worthwhile but ultimately its anecdotal. Its all based on the players themselves wanting to play the game and if they want to play they will buy. People spend FAR MORE on a 40k army than they will on a AT18 army and that can even include all models needed for every current maniple.
There is a large investment in time and money but if you are going to be building and painting, doing so at the FLGS is the same as drawing interest. People love to see new things and a demo here and there. Always a good time.
Lysenis wrote: This is going to come off harsh no matter what way I say it so I will be blunt. Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. I have the same sort of experience but I have taken games like Dropzone Commander, Dropfleet Commander, SW Armada and even 40k which in my flgs was DEAD!!! and I revived them and Brought them back.
Its not easy, it takes work and my FLGS gives me one HELL of a discount which makes this worthwhile but ultimately its anecdotal. Its all based on the players themselves wanting to play the game and if they want to play they will buy. People spend FAR MORE on a 40k army than they will on a AT18 army and that can even include all models needed for every current maniple.
There is a large investment in time and money but if you are going to be building and painting, doing so at the FLGS is the same as drawing interest. People love to see new things and a demo here and there. Always a good time.
WOW! That was super harsh. Totally kidding. You honestly didn't come across as harsh at all, and you have some good points. There are a few things I want to throw out there, though.
First of all, I have about 30 minutes per day (on a good week) for assembling and painting. Right now, my stepson is going through the terrible twos, and my wife and I are doing our best to try to figure out how to work through these situations properly. So, the time that I could spend modeling or painting on any given night or series of nights might be spent talking with her instead... just trying to figure out what to do in which situations. I have zero problem with that as my wife and my son mean way, way, way more to me than any piece of plastic. They will always come first.
Secondly, the two FLGS are about 30 to 45 minutes away when traffic is agreeing. Probably closer to 45 minutes to an hour if traffic isn't agreeing. I can see how assembling and painting in the stores would be a good way to attract attention to something new. That's actually very good advice. But, if I have to drive 45+ minutes to get to my GW (used to live about five minutes away but recently moved when I got married) or about an hour to get to the other FLGS, I need to get my money's worth per se. Like if I'm going to burn that much gas and spend that much time, I need to be able to stay there for three or four hours. And, that's not overly easy to schedule. If my wife happens to want to go shopping near either store, then it might be easier. But, otherwise, it means being away from the house for 5 to 6 hours (two of which are most likely driving).
Thirdly, if I help the manager at my local GW start selling a lot of Necromunda core sets or Necromunda gangs, that's great for him. It means that I have more people who will want to play Necromunda when I have the time to play. But, that's all I'm going to get out of it. Lots of money, lots of time, and all I'd get would be additional people to play against. I'd have to turn the demoing of the game and getting people excited over to someone else as soon as is possible so I can get back to my family. And GW never, ever, ever gives discounts on anything. I know non-GW stores can take I believe up to 15% off MSRP if they choose to. But, GW stores won't. The GW is much closer, and I know more people there already. So, I get no discount, no kickbacks of any kind, no free stuff, nothing. The only thing I'd gain by making Necromunda bigger at my local GW is a larger pool of people to play against.
Unfortunately, there just aren't any positive reasons for me to drop $300+ (would probably buy all gangs for Necromunda) and spend so much time only to have more people to play against.
Service - honestly I'd find a second person to help you push the game so that $300 turns into $150. And yes you are right the only bonus to you is more players; but that's not quite all. More players means more games, it means others running events, it means models in the local second hand pool, it means conversions and painting and all kinds of other things going on.
Plus if you extrapolate out more players at the local level builds into the players at the national and international scene. that means more chance of GW keeping the game going and releasing more stuff for it. Sure your club has 0 statistical impact on its own; but when added to all the others it has all the power.
That said it sounds like its just not time for you do be devoting that much energy to something like this with your family coming first and being at a busy time. Even if GW were giving you 50% off chances are time would still be an issue for you. Plus you'd likely not want the added stress of managing the local hobby scene and attracting players ontop of work and home stresses .
Overread wrote: Service - honestly I'd find a second person to help you push the game so that $300 turns into $150. And yes you are right the only bonus to you is more players; but that's not quite all. More players means more games, it means others running events, it means models in the local second hand pool, it means conversions and painting and all kinds of other things going on.
I can't disagree with a lot of what you are saying. Again, you make some great points. But, the idea of buying where you play... it kinda hits home here. If I were at an FLGS, probably wouldn't be that big of a deal. But, in the fairly small community at my local GW, not buying any of my models there would most definitely be picked up on by the manager and probably not looked upon kindly. Would he understand? On a personal level, sure he would. Would he like me taking money away from his store? Not at all. Has he ever fussed at anyone for buying on the second hand market and bringing it into the store? Not that I am aware of. Still, if I want that GW to stay in business, then it's best to buy GW products from that GW. So, the second hand market that would be created unfortunately wouldn't help me. The other FLGS has so many other things (Comics, Gundam models, Flames of War, Warmachine/Hordes, and so much more) to help keep them in business that I really don't think they'd care of they saw me come in with a chuck of money in models that didn't come from their store.
Overread wrote: That said it sounds like its just not time for you do be devoting that much energy to something like this with your family coming first and being at a busy time. Even if GW were giving you 50% off chances are time would still be an issue for you. Plus you'd likely not want the added stress of managing the local hobby scene and attracting players ontop of work and home stresses .
You are 100% correct on this one. It's definitely not the time for me to even attempt to try to do something like this. Maye 5 to 8 years down the road when my stepson is old enough to not only understand how to build and paint but appreciate the money and time that goes into the models, I can bring him with me, and he and I can start building interest in a certain game that we both enjoy that just didn't take off somewhere.
In the end, I guess what bothers me is that, besides Kill Team (which seems to be fairly popular right now), there is maybe one other Skirmish game played at my local GW. And, that is Shadespire. No Necromunda, no AoS Skirmish, nothing. And, that GW is just barely out of my way on the drive home from work. It'd be so easy to drop by there and get one game in before going home.
There may be some more Skirmish-type tabletop games played at the other FLGS like Company of Iron... just really wish Privateer Press would get into the plastic age and get away from metal models. Having any metal models that have any amount of lead in them, regardless of how much, around a two year old just isn't a good idea. And, that FLGS is nowhere near work or home, so a trip to play a game there would have to be a special trip (maybe once per month or once every two months).
ServiceGames wrote: WOW! That was super harsh. Totally kidding. You honestly didn't come across as harsh at all, and you have some good points. There are a few things I want to throw out there, though.
First of all, I have about 30 minutes per day (on a good week) for assembling and painting. Right now, my stepson is going through the terrible twos, and my wife and I are doing our best to try to figure out how to work through these situations properly. So, the time that I could spend modeling or painting on any given night or series of nights might be spent talking with her instead... just trying to figure out what to do in which situations. I have zero problem with that as my wife and my son mean way, way, way more to me than any piece of plastic. They will always come first.
Secondly, the two FLGS are about 30 to 45 minutes away when traffic is agreeing. Probably closer to 45 minutes to an hour if traffic isn't agreeing. I can see how assembling and painting in the stores would be a good way to attract attention to something new. That's actually very good advice. But, if I have to drive 45+ minutes to get to my GW (used to live about five minutes away but recently moved when I got married) or about an hour to get to the other FLGS, I need to get my money's worth per se. Like if I'm going to burn that much gas and spend that much time, I need to be able to stay there for three or four hours. And, that's not overly easy to schedule. If my wife happens to want to go shopping near either store, then it might be easier. But, otherwise, it means being away from the house for 5 to 6 hours (two of which are most likely driving).
Thirdly, if I help the manager at my local GW start selling a lot of Necromunda core sets or Necromunda gangs, that's great for him. It means that I have more people who will want to play Necromunda when I have the time to play. But, that's all I'm going to get out of it. Lots of money, lots of time, and all I'd get would be additional people to play against. I'd have to turn the demoing of the game and getting people excited over to someone else as soon as is possible so I can get back to my family. And GW never, ever, ever gives discounts on anything. I know non-GW stores can take I believe up to 15% off MSRP if they choose to. But, GW stores won't. The GW is much closer, and I know more people there already. So, I get no discount, no kickbacks of any kind, no free stuff, nothing. The only thing I'd gain by making Necromunda bigger at my local GW is a larger pool of people to play against.
Unfortunately, there just aren't any positive reasons for me to drop $300+ (would probably buy all gangs for Necromunda) and spend so much time only to have more people to play against.
SG
I can't argue there. Like I said my store gives discounts to their volunteers because they know they are spending that time and money. Maybe you can work a deal with your FLGS. Just start with a base set. See if you can run a demo day (even around the munchkins inquisitive desires)
Now I live in Portland Oregon where we have about 7 games stores in a 20ish mile radius or less so I know I am spoiled.
Still, if you can make the time or work something out it can be fruitful.
Building a community is also great on resumes and is fun but you have to have the desire to do the sale. The excitement needs to be genuine.
the plan is to get the game eistablished first and then expand into Xenos Titans at a later time.
Establish game get base. Expand game to other races. Expand game to Epic Armageddon.
To do that you need money, a game that sells, and a community. A company isnt going to spend tons of money on r&d and production just to have it potentially fail. Thats a lot of R&D time and spure presses to make
Yeah, but a game with NOTHING but Imperials isn't a game. If the boxed game were Imperial vs Chaos Knights, with a full rulebook that covers Orks and Eldar, a la BFG, that would have been a great start. But only releasing 1 faction isn't going to work, especially if it's going to be more than a few months before the Orks and Eldar hit the tabletop.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Yeah, but a game with NOTHING but Imperials isn't a game. If the boxed game were Imperial vs Chaos Knights, with a full rulebook that covers Orks and Eldar, a la BFG, that would have been a great start. But only releasing 1 faction isn't going to work, especially if it's going to be more than a few months before the Orks and Eldar hit the tabletop.
Well. It worked before so it can work now. There would never ever ever have been eldar and ork titans if the release pattern couldn't work.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Yeah, but a game with NOTHING but Imperials isn't a game. If the boxed game were Imperial vs Chaos Knights, with a full rulebook that covers Orks and Eldar, a la BFG, that would have been a great start. But only releasing 1 faction isn't going to work, especially if it's going to be more than a few months before the Orks and Eldar hit the tabletop.
Play the game before you say that. There is enough in the base game that it is a crunchy affair that has a lot of flexibility and fun. Hmmm I actually show this in lists I designed for just the different maniples
A game requires flexibility and the ability for tactics to work. Factions can be added if the base game works but if that base game does not work then the amount of factions will never matter.
Basically think of it as the test of the game itself. If on its own with just the same units you get a diverse game with many possibilities and no set meta then you have a great platform to use as your base. I
JohnHwangDD wrote: If it's just a test, it should be a hell of a lot cheaper
Thus one reason why they need to due the test. The Warlords are nearly the size of a knight and are more pieces than a knight. Yet cheaper than a knight.
You say cheaper I say its relative and the point of the test is to see what level of market this game will have. If you are going to hard pass without even trying the game then its likely not for you in any time. Its not a game that you just collect every army or the factions you like above others. This is designed as a game for campaigns, interactive, Armageddon, and some tournament play.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Yeah, but a game with NOTHING but Imperials isn't a game
Yes, yes it is. What a foolish statement to make that is completely and irrevocably false. Just because it is something that you don't want doesn't mean it is not a game. It is Imperials vs Traitors. IF it goes well GW may well expand into other races as some staff have said at events
Whilst the Imperium has a lot of titan classes (that we know of as opposed to many Xeno where we just know less) I'd wager it won't be long before we see Chaos Titans. GW will probably narrate their exposure so we'll start off with corrupted vrsions of current titans and build into more and more warped creations
I picked up the rules pack and will slowly be painting a Manilple.
The thing is, I find it appealing with a small selection of models and only a handful needed to play.
This makes it easy to get into and new players can avoid the bloat most game systems have.
It's crunchy and has a solid base.
So GW has actually made collecting and building a force easy and relatively cheap. I couldn't afford the GM. But the game isn't that expensive to get a complete force for right now.
Those complaning vehemently about the sticker shock have plenty of options to spread out the cost. It's what I'm doing.
Ghool wrote: I picked up the rules pack and will slowly be painting a Manilple.
The thing is, I find it appealing with a small selection of models and only a handful needed to play.
This makes it easy to get into and new players can avoid the bloat most game systems have.
It's crunchy and has a solid base.
So GW has actually made collecting and building a force easy and relatively cheap. I couldn't afford the GM. But the game isn't that expensive to get a complete force for right now.
Those complaning vehemently about the sticker shock have plenty of options to spread out the cost. It's what I'm doing.
Exactly this! I was contemplating giving AOS another chance (Die hard Fantasy Fan) and took one look at the amount of factions and just gave up trying to work out how my classic army actually fits into any of it.
JohnHwangDD wrote: If it's just a test, it should be a hell of a lot cheaper
I suggest trying the game before rejecting it.
I own the 28mm Imperial Knights: Renegade game and a couple of Knights (Eldar & Imperial), so what could AT possibly do better than the game I already own?
I'm not spending GW money on a 'test" game that I flat out don't need; however, if someone wants to send me a review copy, I'll be happy to give it a spin.
But hey, if it floats your boat, more power to ya!
JohnHwangDD wrote: It worked fantastic for BFG, but that's not what we have here.
It worked fantastically for AT which led to eldar and ork titans.
Again: If this release pattern couldn't work there wouldn't BE those eldar titans and ork gargants you are asking for. Nope. never would have come. Zero. Zip. Nada. Nothing.
JohnHwangDD wrote: If it's just a test, it should be a hell of a lot cheaper
I suggest trying the game before rejecting it.
I own the 28mm Imperial Knights: Renegade game and a couple of Knights (Eldar & Imperial), so what could AT possibly do better than the game I already own?
I'm not spending GW money on a 'test" game that I flat out don't need; however, if someone wants to send me a review copy, I'll be happy to give it a spin.
But hey, if it floats your boat, more power to ya!
Renegade has rules for wait for it...1 faction with 2 sides(imperial knights and renegade knights). Whee!!!!! WHAT AN AMAZING amount of factions. Oh wait why that sounds familiar...And unit wise it has even less. AT has 3 titans with weapon options+ knights with weapon options. Renegade has 1 knight with weapon options. WOW! What an AMAZING amount of units to play with! Real example of wide amount of faction and unit depth! Surely pinacle in it's kind!
Lord_Zaherial wrote: GW has never grasped the concept of a loss leader EVER!!! I wish they would learn the concept of pinning the ears back of the people that support them financially year in and year out... after over 30+ yrs I am more than disappointed in GW on this pricing!
<Takes a look at the WFB and 40k starters since the dawn of time>
Mostly on the boxed set being sold out at most places. GW even recalled their store stock in the UK so that the main GW site had stock and some for events. To me that suggests that the most expensive, the biggest sticker-shock item sold out at a rate that either just as GW planned or way above what they expected. And that was the most expensive single purchase which contained nothing unique to it - its only feature was a free Warlord in savings.
It depends on where you are. Over here I could buy 10+ GME boxes if I just went to the physical stores in the region (...and had the money, natch).
JohnHwangDD wrote: If it's just a test, it should be a hell of a lot cheaper
I suggest trying the game before rejecting it.
I own the 28mm Imperial Knights: Renegade game and a couple of Knights (Eldar & Imperial), so what could AT possibly do better than the game I already own?
I'm not spending GW money on a 'test" game that I flat out don't need; however, if someone wants to send me a review copy, I'll be happy to give it a spin.
But hey, if it floats your boat, more power to ya!
Sure, well let's see, a more tactically crunchy game with a variety of options, not just rolling saves and hits, using commands to alter the base functionality of your units, the reactor die to add in risk to every potential reward, reactor management to make pushing your titan risky yet powerful, weapon destruction, arcs, templates, and not just management of a knight.
In to list creation. Lists that are so wide in variety that there is no "best" load outs, no bad decisions, Strategems that feel more than just CP farm fodder, primary missions, secondary missions, tertiary missions, tricks, assets, etc. List creation that crests a Turn 0 layer of game play, a turn 0.5 layer of game play, the ability to take less than your opponent but still be tactically capable.
Beautiful models that are not only a fun to build but to paint.
The game is deep. It's not ocean deep but there is enough to test and play that the Meta is going to be varied from game to game tournament to tournament
Lysenis wrote: The game is deep. It's not ocean deep but there is enough to test and play that the Meta is going to be varied from game to game tournament to tournament
How would you say it compares rules-wise with Battletech? That is still the game I perceive as being most similar in scope to AT18.
Warlord is about same size so smaller models what? And AT has more variety. So if you want variety get AT rather than renegade. Renegade sucks for variety. AT has 4x of it. Actually more...
Rulewise I fell in love just reading this little bit of tidbit: Remember, you check weapons line of sight, not models. Bloody hell. Who would have thought you see GW game again with that sensible concept.
AT is much more variety. It's not just more models avaiable. More Missions. Rules are lot more extensive. Not to forget... the known Rules are just the start. GW will support the next 3-4 years with new content, campaigns and more.
Rulewise I fell in love just reading this little bit of tidbit: Remember, you check weapons line of sight, not models. Bloody hell. Who would have thought you see GW game again with that sensible concept.
yup, on paired weapons, if both weapons dont have a clear line of sight you can only roll whit the one that has meaning half amount of attacks.
makes laser dot/line markers a VERY usefull tool.
Rulewise I fell in love just reading this little bit of tidbit: Remember, you check weapons line of sight, not models. Bloody hell. Who would have thought you see GW game again with that sensible concept.
yup, on paired weapons, if both weapons dont have a clear line of sight you can only roll whit the one that has meaning half amount of attacks.
makes laser dot/line markers a VERY usefull tool.
And it stops the 40k sillyness of "my toe sees your toe so we both shoot freely with accuracy that would make god himself jealous". And makes it possible bigger titan can see top of carapace but smaller titan is in such a position guns DON'T see. Holy smoke. Some sense of logic in GW game.
Rulewise I fell in love just reading this little bit of tidbit: Remember, you check weapons line of sight, not models. Bloody hell. Who would have thought you see GW game again with that sensible concept.
yup, on paired weapons, if both weapons dont have a clear line of sight you can only roll whit the one that has meaning half amount of attacks.
makes laser dot/line markers a VERY usefull tool.
And it stops the 40k sillyness of "my toe sees your toe so we both shoot freely with accuracy that would make god himself jealous". And makes it possible bigger titan can see top of carapace but smaller titan is in such a position guns DON'T see. Holy smoke. Some sense of logic in GW game.
yup, it makes the movment fase realy, realy important, cuz not only do you have to know where you are going/want to go, you allso have to make shure you weapons have LoS to your intended target, and there is shooting arcs for the weps.
and whit no pre measure allowed and multiple things to manage in advanced rules, the rule style of this game does fit thouse players who preferd the older version of 40k whit its more deeper rules.
Lysenis wrote: The game is deep. It's not ocean deep but there is enough to test and play that the Meta is going to be varied from game to game tournament to tournament
How would you say it compares rules-wise with Battletech? That is still the game I perceive as being most similar in scope to AT18.
I played Battletech for a while - both the 'full' version as well as Alpha-strike. Adeptus Titanicus is a bit like a lighter version of battletech in terms of damage tracking. It feels similar with it's movement and turning. The management of reactors, shields, and commands adds a layer that battletech doesn't have. Battletech has heat management, but it is pretty shallow. Basically if you have a well built mech, you won't be overheating and if you are - you just forego firing hot weapons for a turn. There are actually alot of similarities in weapon functions between BT and AT. In BT, when you needed to soften a target, you use missles which would hit random parts of a mech with low damage - essentially weakening it's overall armor - and you would follow up with a high damage weapon - hoping to penetrate the armor and knock out a weapon or blow up a reactor. In AT, you use low damage, high volume weapons to knock out shields and high damage weapons to damage structure or do critical damage.
Overall, I feel it's quite a bit deeper than BT as far as rules go, yet cleaner and faster to play. Obviously there are less units in AT now - but when I played BT, no-one ever used anything but mechs. Vehicles were flatly inferior. Battlesuits were situationally useful, but rarely seen.
Lysenis wrote: The game is deep. It's not ocean deep but there is enough to test and play that the Meta is going to be varied from game to game tournament to tournament
How would you say it compares rules-wise with Battletech? That is still the game I perceive as being most similar in scope to AT18.
From what battletech players have told me as I have not played that system. But from what I have observed of Battletech, the research I did when i wanted to play etc, its not as crunchy. It is a deep game but not a 6 hour game for a 4 mech v 4 mech game.
Rulewise I fell in love just reading this little bit of tidbit: Remember, you check weapons line of sight, not models. Bloody hell. Who would have thought you see GW game again with that sensible concept.
yup, on paired weapons, if both weapons dont have a clear line of sight you can only roll whit the one that has meaning half amount of attacks.
makes laser dot/line markers a VERY usefull tool.
We were discussing this with the Apoc Missiles Barrage ability. It can create some very interesting situations
Lysenis wrote: The game is deep. It's not ocean deep but there is enough to test and play that the Meta is going to be varied from game to game tournament to tournament
How would you say it compares rules-wise with Battletech? That is still the game I perceive as being most similar in scope to AT18.
I played Battletech for a while - both the 'full' version as well as Alpha-strike. Adeptus Titanicus is a bit like a lighter version of battletech in terms of damage tracking. It feels similar with it's movement and turning. The management of reactors, shields, and commands adds a layer that battletech doesn't have. Battletech has heat management, but it is pretty shallow. Basically if you have a well built mech, you won't be overheating and if you are - you just forego firing hot weapons for a turn. There are actually alot of similarities in weapon functions between BT and AT. In BT, when you needed to soften a target, you use missles which would hit random parts of a mech with low damage - essentially weakening it's overall armor - and you would follow up with a high damage weapon - hoping to penetrate the armor and knock out a weapon or blow up a reactor. In AT, you use low damage, high volume weapons to knock out shields and high damage weapons to damage structure or do critical damage.
Overall, I feel it's quite a bit deeper than BT as far as rules go, yet cleaner and faster to play. Obviously there are less units in AT now - but when I played BT, no-one ever used anything but mechs. Vehicles were flatly inferior. Battlesuits were situationally useful, but rarely seen.
EDIT: One point, though... missiles are for crit fishing, not the other way around! SRMs are particularly effective in that regard. LRMs are often used to soften up targets a bit due to range and IF capabilities more than overall comparative damage, IME.
Lysenis wrote: The game is deep. It's not ocean deep but there is enough to test and play that the Meta is going to be varied from game to game tournament to tournament
How would you say it compares rules-wise with Battletech? That is still the game I perceive as being most similar in scope to AT18.
From what battletech players have told me as I have not played that system. But from what I have observed of Battletech, the research I did when i wanted to play etc, its not as crunchy. It is a deep game but not a 6 hour game for a 4 mech v 4 mech game.
Interesting... thanks both!
I'm not really very interested in the scale of AT (too big for me tbh except for the knights, which are lovely), but I might give the rules a try.
Lysenis wrote: The game is deep. It's not ocean deep but there is enough to test and play that the Meta is going to be varied from game to game tournament to tournament
How would you say it compares rules-wise with Battletech? That is still the game I perceive as being most similar in scope to AT18.
I played Battletech for a while - both the 'full' version as well as Alpha-strike. Adeptus Titanicus is a bit like a lighter version of battletech in terms of damage tracking. It feels similar with it's movement and turning. The management of reactors, shields, and commands adds a layer that battletech doesn't have. Battletech has heat management, but it is pretty shallow. Basically if you have a well built mech, you won't be overheating and if you are - you just forego firing hot weapons for a turn. There are actually alot of similarities in weapon functions between BT and AT. In BT, when you needed to soften a target, you use missles which would hit random parts of a mech with low damage - essentially weakening it's overall armor - and you would follow up with a high damage weapon - hoping to penetrate the armor and knock out a weapon or blow up a reactor. In AT, you use low damage, high volume weapons to knock out shields and high damage weapons to damage structure or do critical damage.
Overall, I feel it's quite a bit deeper than BT as far as rules go, yet cleaner and faster to play. Obviously there are less units in AT now - but when I played BT, no-one ever used anything but mechs. Vehicles were flatly inferior. Battlesuits were situationally useful, but rarely seen.
EDIT: One point, though... missiles are for crit fishing, not the other way around! SRMs are particularly effective in that regard. LRMs are often used to soften up targets a bit due to range and IF capabilities more than overall comparative damage, IME.
Lysenis wrote: The game is deep. It's not ocean deep but there is enough to test and play that the Meta is going to be varied from game to game tournament to tournament
How would you say it compares rules-wise with Battletech? That is still the game I perceive as being most similar in scope to AT18.
From what battletech players have told me as I have not played that system. But from what I have observed of Battletech, the research I did when i wanted to play etc, its not as crunchy. It is a deep game but not a 6 hour game for a 4 mech v 4 mech game.
Interesting... thanks both!
I'm not really very interested in the scale of AT (too big for me tbh except for the knights, which are lovely), but I might give the rules a try.
Model size sells it for me. Since the game is played on a 4x4 base the size of models helps give that big stompy robots feel. Add in that you could EASILY see 6+ titans on the board at once plus knights. Its all a blast! When warhounds come out they will be amazing. Especially since they will be around 3" or so tall
Lysenis wrote: Model size sells it for me. Since the game is played on a 4x4 base the size of models helps give that big stompy robots feel. Add in that you could EASILY see 6+ titans on the board at once plus knights. Its all a blast! When warhounds come out they will be amazing. Especially since they will be around 3" or so tall
Hey, I'm glad that people like the minis ^_^. It's just that they are a bit "maxi" for me xD
Lysenis wrote: Model size sells it for me. Since the game is played on a 4x4 base the size of models helps give that big stompy robots feel. Add in that you could EASILY see 6+ titans on the board at once plus knights. Its all a blast! When warhounds come out they will be amazing. Especially since they will be around 3" or so tall
Hey, I'm glad that people like the minis ^_^. It's just that they are a bit "maxi" for me xD
It would really be hard to scale a Warlord down further. The Warhound is already around 3" and when they do Epic those will be sized to the Titans so its not going to be huge. The Warlord will be one of the biggest if they dont do an Imperator
Lysenis wrote: Model size sells it for me. Since the game is played on a 4x4 base the size of models helps give that big stompy robots feel. Add in that you could EASILY see 6+ titans on the board at once plus knights. Its all a blast! When warhounds come out they will be amazing. Especially since they will be around 3" or so tall
Hey, I'm glad that people like the minis ^_^. It's just that they are a bit "maxi" for me xD
I’m right there with ya - the Reaver model is plenty big for me, but I used to play Battletech - which is what all the knights are sized as anyway.
I’ve read the AT rules and just recently played a game of Battletech - I think AT is going to hit that nice middle ground between classic BattleTech and Alpha Strike. We get a few more mid-range titan variants and I think this game will be good to go. Right now though, I want ma Warhounds.
The Ender 3 is the best way to start. About as good as as most $500 pri terms for $200 or less. Printed a sweet Shadowsword recently for kicks
Okay, you just got my attention
Do you have any pictures of models like this that have been printed (either by you or others)? And which Ender 3 should I be looking at (seems to be a few versions)?
All the reviews from the game seems ok. Just don't see the depth of it (though is more than 40k, I don't see the variation to be to much more to justify a new game) or the variation so big that I cant buy 40k equivalent (for similar cost) and get almost the same game + more. BFG or something totally different yes I see it. But, a game where we already get the mechs and can use them I don't see the point...
Spectral Ceramite wrote: All the reviews from the game seems ok. Just don't see the depth of it (though is more than 40k, I don't see the variation to be to much more to justify a new game) or the variation so big that I cant buy 40k equivalent (for similar cost) and get almost the same game + more. BFG or something totally different yes I see it. But, a game where we already get the mechs and can use them I don't see the point...
Similar cost I mean Knights etc
Have you Read my blog? In just 3 articles I create different lists that all have different concepts and potential. Add in the fact that the game does not use a set Point value to determine what you build to but instead uses a range of points (medium sized game is 1250 minimum and 1750 maximum) and then taking less than your opponent is balanced by getting more stratagems and such.
Spectral Ceramite wrote: All the reviews from the game seems ok. Just don't see the depth of it (though is more than 40k, I don't see the variation to be to much more to justify a new game) or the variation so big that I cant buy 40k equivalent (for similar cost) and get almost the same game + more. BFG or something totally different yes I see it. But, a game where we already get the mechs and can use them I don't see the point...
Similar cost I mean Knights etc
Have you Read my blog? In just 3 articles I create different lists that all have different concepts and potential. Add in the fact that the game does not use a set Point value to determine what you build to but instead uses a range of points (medium sized game is 1250 minimum and 1750 maximum) and then taking less than your opponent is balanced by getting more stratagems and such.
It's got a ton of depth
Nah haven't read your blogs but seen enough reviews and matches on GMG and MWG to know that its not for me (rather spend my money on Necormunda, 40k and now AOS. As I said it has depth but not enough to make me buy...nah, for regular games (the gw board games like silver tower make me buy more for throw away's with family member's that come over once a month etc)
Spectral Ceramite wrote: All the reviews from the game seems ok. Just don't see the depth of it (though is more than 40k, I don't see the variation to be to much more to justify a new game) or the variation so big that I cant buy 40k equivalent (for similar cost) and get almost the same game + more. BFG or something totally different yes I see it. But, a game where we already get the mechs and can use them I don't see the point...
Similar cost I mean Knights etc
Have you Read my blog? In just 3 articles I create different lists that all have different concepts and potential. Add in the fact that the game does not use a set Point value to determine what you build to but instead uses a range of points (medium sized game is 1250 minimum and 1750 maximum) and then taking less than your opponent is balanced by getting more stratagems and such.
It's got a ton of depth
Nah haven't read your blogs but seen enough reviews and matches on GMG and MWG to know that its not for me (rather spend my money on Necormunda, 40k and now AOS. As I said it has depth but not enough to make me buy...nah, for regular games (the gw board games like silver tower make me buy more for throw away's with family member's that come over once a month etc)
I appreciate that you might not find the game interesting, your opinion is as valid as mine, but I dont get how you think AT doesnt offer enough variation when you seem to justify spending your money on three other games that are all much more similar to each other then anyone of them are to AT?
Spectral Ceramite wrote: All the reviews from the game seems ok. Just don't see the depth of it (though is more than 40k, I don't see the variation to be to much more to justify a new game) or the variation so big that I cant buy 40k equivalent (for similar cost) and get almost the same game + more. BFG or something totally different yes I see it. But, a game where we already get the mechs and can use them I don't see the point...
Similar cost I mean Knights etc
Have you Read my blog? In just 3 articles I create different lists that all have different concepts and potential. Add in the fact that the game does not use a set Point value to determine what you build to but instead uses a range of points (medium sized game is 1250 minimum and 1750 maximum) and then taking less than your opponent is balanced by getting more stratagems and such.
It's got a ton of depth
Nah haven't read your blogs but seen enough reviews and matches on GMG and MWG to know that its not for me (rather spend my money on Necormunda, 40k and now AOS. As I said it has depth but not enough to make me buy...nah, for regular games (the gw board games like silver tower make me buy more for throw away's with family member's that come over once a month etc)
Those two have been getting things wrong and I am pretty sure you have seen what 3 videos?
Regardless, if its not for you its not for you. Have a great time but until you actually do a proper demo or a full game you will never really know the game.
Spectral Ceramite wrote: All the reviews from the game seems ok. Just don't see the depth of it (though is more than 40k, I don't see the variation to be to much more to justify a new game) or the variation so big that I cant buy 40k equivalent (for similar cost) and get almost the same game + more. BFG or something totally different yes I see it. But, a game where we already get the mechs and can use them I don't see the point...
Similar cost I mean Knights etc
Have you Read my blog? In just 3 articles I create different lists that all have different concepts and potential. Add in the fact that the game does not use a set Point value to determine what you build to but instead uses a range of points (medium sized game is 1250 minimum and 1750 maximum) and then taking less than your opponent is balanced by getting more stratagems and such.
It's got a ton of depth
Nah haven't read your blogs but seen enough reviews and matches on GMG and MWG to know that its not for me (rather spend my money on Necormunda, 40k and now AOS. As I said it has depth but not enough to make me buy...nah, for regular games (the gw board games like silver tower make me buy more for throw away's with family member's that come over once a month etc)
I appreciate that you might not find the game interesting, your opinion is as valid as mine, but I dont get how you think AT doesnt offer enough variation when you seem to justify spending your money on three other games that are all much more similar to each other then anyone of them are to AT?
But they have multitude of factions. If I go Space Marine e.t.c (i have multiple chapters and Deathwach and GK alone) I can go Eldar multi again. If I buy a Warlord Eldar Titan I can use it in my norm matches or leave it out and use my normal cheap 40k army, I can buy big expansive unites or go cheap units. For the same money as a GMC I can play/buy 2 games/armies at 500/1000pts if want (if want to break it down) and tbh40k and AOS have more depth (in regards to units and player base).
TBH for me I will buy BFG if release but big robots killing each other....meh I will just play mechwarrior online.
Spectral Ceramite wrote: All the reviews from the game seems ok. Just don't see the depth of it (though is more than 40k, I don't see the variation to be to much more to justify a new game) or the variation so big that I cant buy 40k equivalent (for similar cost) and get almost the same game + more. BFG or something totally different yes I see it. But, a game where we already get the mechs and can use them I don't see the point...
Similar cost I mean Knights etc
Have you Read my blog? In just 3 articles I create different lists that all have different concepts and potential. Add in the fact that the game does not use a set Point value to determine what you build to but instead uses a range of points (medium sized game is 1250 minimum and 1750 maximum) and then taking less than your opponent is balanced by getting more stratagems and such.
It's got a ton of depth
Nah haven't read your blogs but seen enough reviews and matches on GMG and MWG to know that its not for me (rather spend my money on Necormunda, 40k and now AOS. As I said it has depth but not enough to make me buy...nah, for regular games (the gw board games like silver tower make me buy more for throw away's with family member's that come over once a month etc)
I appreciate that you might not find the game interesting, your opinion is as valid as mine, but I dont get how you think AT doesnt offer enough variation when you seem to justify spending your money on three other games that are all much more similar to each other then anyone of them are to AT?
People saying the game doesn't have enough variation based off a video from before the retail launch of the game really bores me. I mean, come on. The game when fully out (should be seeing something on those Warhounds soon I hope!) will have a ton of variation.
Want to take 2 Reavers and 3 Warhounds? Well take the Gryphonicus rules and replace a warhound with a Reaver. Just be careful you give Stratagem points to your opponent. That could give them more objectives or ways to mess with you!
Want to play with 6 Warhounds? Well you will need at least 1 reaver but you could do it.
Want to play with 12 knights? Sure, don't forget your Maniple though.
Seriously, 3 maniples with 3-5 titans each with all various loadouts and options means you have some interesting combinations. Want Warhounds that only use a flamer Template? Well you could do that and use a bit of shenanigans to make the strength of that attack higher (I go over this on https://opustitanicus.wordpress.com/2018/09/02/venator-maniple-list-variety/). You could do a Shiledbane only list if you wanted.
I just get REALLY annoyed when people say "Oh this doesn't have enough variety based off a limited experience and no actual reading of rules or full gameplay"
Spectral Ceramite wrote: All the reviews from the game seems ok. Just don't see the depth of it (though is more than 40k, I don't see the variation to be to much more to justify a new game) or the variation so big that I cant buy 40k equivalent (for similar cost) and get almost the same game + more. BFG or something totally different yes I see it. But, a game where we already get the mechs and can use them I don't see the point...
Similar cost I mean Knights etc
AT doesn't really compare to 40k. In 40k you've really only got a handful of options with your units. Move and fire and that's about it. No flanking, little maneuvering, etc - which is fine for a game with that high of a model count. From what I've seen in AT in my test games and from demos, it feels as if it offers a lot of tactical flexibility with each model. For example - If you forego attacking, get some cover, pump shields and attempt emergency repairs every turn, you can tank a Warlord's assault on a Warhound for a few turns while some knights maneuver to its rear. In that situation, now your opponent's Warlord needs to decide if he will stay focused and hope to knock out the turtling Warhound, or pump some energy into maneuvering to get a bead on the knights. The Warlords turn very slowly, which makes it harder to get the fast-moving knights into it's fire arc. However, if he turns to engage the knights - it's likely that the Warhound will break cover and go for the now-exposed Warlord flank.
In a similar situation in 40k - you'd just basically have CC units running straight at their target and there are few options to boost your defenses besides cover and smoke launchers on vehicles. And in the end, this situation would largely be decided by what units are involved. 40k is largely decided pre-game with your list. My preliminary opinion is that AT games feel as if they are going to be more based around tactical choices.
I really don't think AT is nearly as expensive as 40k either. If you're only playing 40k with knights or custodes - maybe. otherwise, a full 1500-2000 point army will set you back a lot further than the 5-6 models you'd need for a fairly flexible force for AT. I do think the cost per model is a bit steeper than it should be though - at least vs 40k. Likely due to GW's expectations of lower volume of sales.
I imagine the tactical depth won't appeal to everyone - but I'm personally a bit bored with 40k's simplicity and I've only been back into the hobby for a short while.
Spectral Ceramite wrote: All the reviews from the game seems ok. Just don't see the depth of it (though is more than 40k, I don't see the variation to be to much more to justify a new game) or the variation so big that I cant buy 40k equivalent (for similar cost) and get almost the same game + more. BFG or something totally different yes I see it. But, a game where we already get the mechs and can use them I don't see the point...
Similar cost I mean Knights etc
Have you Read my blog? In just 3 articles I create different lists that all have different concepts and potential. Add in the fact that the game does not use a set Point value to determine what you build to but instead uses a range of points (medium sized game is 1250 minimum and 1750 maximum) and then taking less than your opponent is balanced by getting more stratagems and such.
It's got a ton of depth
Nah haven't read your blogs but seen enough reviews and matches on GMG and MWG to know that its not for me (rather spend my money on Necormunda, 40k and now AOS. As I said it has depth but not enough to make me buy...nah, for regular games (the gw board games like silver tower make me buy more for throw away's with family member's that come over once a month etc)
I appreciate that you might not find the game interesting, your opinion is as valid as mine, but I dont get how you think AT doesnt offer enough variation when you seem to justify spending your money on three other games that are all much more similar to each other then anyone of them are to AT?
But they have multitude of factions. If I go Space Marine e.t.c (i have multiple chapters and Deathwach and GK alone) I can go Eldar multi again. If I buy a Warlord Eldar Titan I can use it in my norm matches or leave it out and use my normal cheap 40k army, I can buy big expansive unites or go cheap units. For the same money as a GMC I can play/buy 2 games/armies at 500/1000pts if want (if want to break it down) and tbh40k and AOS have more depth (in regards to units and player base).
TBH for me I will buy BFG if release but big robots killing each other....meh I will just play mechwarrior online.
That is good. In AT you have at least 12 different base lists to go on from. Hell thats low end since I am only taking into consideration the choice of titant for the maniples, not extra titans, second maniples, weapons, knights, stratagems, and Legio rules.
So sure, it lacks variety. There are only dozens of viable and fun possibilities.
Having more things to choose from is meaningless if they don't offer any actual variation. The main games offer dozens of armies and subfactions, sure, but in the end once you discard all the rules that have different names and wording but functionally do the same thing(usually conditional Mortal Wounds) and factor the outcomes over the course of a whole phase rather than cherry picking stat comparisons, all that "variation" flattens right down into a handful of archetypes, and one shooty horde is much like another, one elite melee army in the end the same as the rest.
Factor in the order of magnitude that AT has over the main two in terms of core mechanical complexity and choosing to play 40K or AoS over AT for "depth" is...genuinely hilarious.
Having more things to choose from is meaningless if they don't offer any actual variation. The main games offer dozens of armies and subfactions, sure, but in the end once you discard all the rules that have different names and wording but functionally do the same thing(usually conditional Mortal Wounds) and factor the outcomes over the course of a whole phase rather than cherry picking stat comparisons, all that "variation" flattens right down into a handful of archetypes, and one shooty horde is much like another, one elite melee army in the end the same as the rest.
Factor in the order of magnitude that AT has over the main two in terms of core mechanical complexity and choosing to play 40K or AoS over AT for "depth" is...genuinely hilarious.
Ohhhh I want to make an article on an actual turn. . . hmmmm
I have no idea if it's a total bust or not. I've spent more on this than I have on any other GW property in recent memory and I like the models quite a bit. By all reports (at least anything I've read) it is selling well too.
BUT the lack of Games Workshop attention for Titanicus leading up to and following the Reaver release is disconcerting. There are no Reaver painting videos from GW, and no Warhammer Community articles. Even the assembly guide included is oddly black & white instead of a full color guide like the Warlord and Knights got, and lacks the pictures instructing where the decals go. If the warhound release goes by with as little fanfare as the reaver release then I will have no high hopes for this game.
RobertDD wrote: I have no idea if it's a total bust or not. I've spent more on this than I have on any other GW property in recent memory and I like the models quite a bit. By all reports (at least anything I've read) it is selling well too.
BUT the lack of Games Workshop attention for Titanicus leading up to and following the Reaver release is disconcerting. There are no Reaver painting videos from GW, and no Warhammer Community articles. Even the assembly guide included is oddly black & white instead of a full color guide like the Warlord and Knights got, and lacks the pictures instructing where the decals go. If the warhound release goes by with as little fanfare as the reaver release then I will have no high hopes for this game.
Yea, it is annoying. I am going to be asking them about that
RobertDD wrote: I have no idea if it's a total bust or not. I've spent more on this than I have on any other GW property in recent memory and I like the models quite a bit. By all reports (at least anything I've read) it is selling well too.
BUT the lack of Games Workshop attention for Titanicus leading up to and following the Reaver release is disconcerting. There are no Reaver painting videos from GW, and no Warhammer Community articles. Even the assembly guide included is oddly black & white instead of a full color guide like the Warlord and Knights got, and lacks the pictures instructing where the decals go. If the warhound release goes by with as little fanfare as the reaver release then I will have no high hopes for this game.
Yeah they really should have done more tip of the day for legio armors, I did ask them via email for tempestus armor guide, also a more detailed guide on painting buildings. They acknowledged they'd pass it along. But instead they kept on doing kill team tips which is obviously the thing GW has been pushing the past few months.
Also wondering where the full color gryphonicus and mortis transfers are, those were previewed a long time ago. I hope they do a sheet for tempestus too it's weird they got rules but have no transfers and no artwork in the book...I know i've said this before but what a bizarre decision.
RobertDD wrote: I have no idea if it's a total bust or not. I've spent more on this than I have on any other GW property in recent memory and I like the models quite a bit. By all reports (at least anything I've read) it is selling well too.
BUT the lack of Games Workshop attention for Titanicus leading up to and following the Reaver release is disconcerting. There are no Reaver painting videos from GW, and no Warhammer Community articles. Even the assembly guide included is oddly black & white instead of a full color guide like the Warlord and Knights got, and lacks the pictures instructing where the decals go. If the warhound release goes by with as little fanfare as the reaver release then I will have no high hopes for this game.
Yeah they really should have done more tip of the day for legio armors, I did ask them via email for tempestus armor guide, also a more detailed guide on painting buildings. They acknowledged they'd pass it along. But instead they kept on doing kill team tips which is obviously the thing GW has been pushing the past few months.
Also wondering where the full color gryphonicus and mortis transfers are, those were previewed a long time ago. I hope they do a sheet for tempestus too it's weird they got rules but have no transfers and no artwork in the book...I know i've said this before but what a bizarre decision.
I completely agree, I almost mentioned the full color decals in my original comment and am glad to see I am not the only one who noticed their absence. This is making me hold back on applying decals right now. And the lack of a final word on scale (8mm is 1:200, but measurements suggest 1:267, and that's a 33% difference!) and no basing kits is making me hold off on basing my titans. (and I just hope we're getting a basing kit, and not scenic bases, cause then I am going to have to rip my titans off of their bases they are glued to now...) A little clarity on what's in the pipeline would go a long way towards making some good decisions!
Also, the other bizarre decision: gaming materials essential to the game (the cards) are in very short supply in the starter and rule boxes, and if you want more (which you absolutely do) then they are special order only (and ridiculously expensive, but that is par for the course for GW so I am not even mentioning that).
I really want this game to succeed though, and culminate into a new edition of Epic.
RobertDD wrote: I completely agree, I almost mentioned the full color decals in my original comment and am glad to see I am not the only one who noticed their absence. This is making me hold back on applying decals right now. And the lack of a final word on scale (8mm is 1:200, but measurements suggest 1:267, and that's a 33% difference!) and no basing kits is making me hold off on basing my titans. (and I just hope we're getting a basing kit, and not scenic bases, cause then I am going to have to rip my titans off of their bases they are glued to now...) A little clarity on what's in the pipeline would go a long way towards making some good decisions!
It's not 8mm, it never has been. Someone misinterpreted the comment "A marine would be 8mm at this scale" to mean the game is 8mm scale and the community has run off with that misconception. It isn't 8mm scale, because an 8mm marine would be representing an 8ft giant. A regular human would be 6mm high at AT scale.
The big problem with AT is that it relies on fairly complex kits that pretty much have to be painted in sub-assemblies for a good result, along with a new scale of terrain that few will have, and core models being drip-fed over the first couple of months. That results in a real lack of momentum to get people playing the game. Despite quite a few people at my local club buying in on day one I've yet to see a single game arranged because everyone wants to finish painting their Warlords before assembling them, and many are working on other projects first.
Compare it to Blood Bowl or Necromunda where you can have your full team assembled in one evening and play on a pre-made gameboard, that made these games far more accessible on release. AT is more like 30k,and needs some time (although not as much) for people to get things on the tabletop.
I hope GW have realised this and have prepared the right releases to follow up on this slow burn start. Say if they drop the Titandeath expansion around xmas with shiny new stuff like Cerastus Knights, Chaos titans or psi-titans. Then at the same time release a 'getting started' maniple boxed set of the core titans that gives a balanced starting force for under £100.
Patriarch wrote:It's not 8mm, it never has been. Someone misinterpreted the comment "A marine would be 8mm at this scale" to mean the game is 8mm scale and the community has run off with that misconception. It isn't 8mm scale, because an 8mm marine would be representing an 8ft giant. A regular human would be 6mm high at AT scale.
I keep hearing this argument, but GW themselves have said it is war in a new scale (not war in a previously existing scale that was discontinued), and that it is 8mm, and they said so over and over again. If it is a misinterpretation, it is not just a single misinterpretation from a single remark by a single person at GW. GW has been saying 8mm, and NOTHING ELSE, for years now!
We really won't know for sure what size humans and marines will be in AT 2018 until we get to see some of those humans and marines, or maybe when we see some human sized features that allow us to extrapolate (but even that is risky).
xttz wrote:The big problem with AT is that it relies on fairly complex kits that pretty much have to be painted in sub-assemblies for a good result, along with a new scale of terrain that few will have, and core models being drip-fed over the first couple of months. That results in a real lack of momentum to get people playing the game. Despite quite a few people at my local club buying in on day one I've yet to see a single game arranged because everyone wants to finish painting their Warlords before assembling them, and many are working on other projects first.
Only the Warlord. I think the other kits can easily be assembled before they are painted (but I will admit that I painted parts of all three kits in sub-assemblies).
I did find that you almost have to apply parts of the legs on both Warlord and Titan to avoid getting them in a position where armor plates no longer fit.
xttz wrote:release a 'getting started' maniple boxed set of the core titans that gives a balanced starting force for under £100.
I don't see that happening for that price.
Fajita Fan wrote:I’m annoyed the cardboard consoles and weapon cards aren’t included with each kit. Mine have unfortunately come all warped too.
Yup, although I can see why they would want to leave that out, if they are supplying these kits for a future Epic system where they won't be needed.
This stuff should at least be readily available in cheap and sufficient supply. It is neither readily available, nor cheap, nor do you get enough.
Patriarch wrote:It's not 8mm, it never has been. Someone misinterpreted the comment "A marine would be 8mm at this scale" to mean the game is 8mm scale and the community has run off with that misconception. It isn't 8mm scale, because an 8mm marine would be representing an 8ft giant. A regular human would be 6mm high at AT scale.
I keep hearing this argument, but GW themselves have said it is war in a new scale (not war in a previously existing scale that was discontinued), and that it is 8mm, and they said so over and over again. If it is a misinterpretation, it is not just a single misinterpretation from a single remark by a single person at GW. GW has been saying 8mm, and NOTHING ELSE, for years now!
We really won't know for sure what size humans and marines will be in AT 2018 until we get to see some of those humans and marines, or maybe when we see some human sized features that allow us to extrapolate (but even that is risky).
You'll have links to them saying that to back up such an adamant position, right? Because I've seen one single solitary definitive "8mm scale" remark from a GW source, and that was the intro blurb on a WC article which ended up not being backed by the text of the article or the video it was featuring. I've seen lots of second and third hand reporting of remarks made by GW designers at events, and it's the fact that such reporting has managed to come up with both "8mm scale" and "8mm Marines" from the exact same remarks from a given event that's been causing the confusion in the first place. And the "war in a new scale" remark could just as easily be referring to AT not being in 40K scale as it could be a contrast with Epic.
Regardless, in the end what GWsay matters less than the models they produce(people still refer to 40K as "28mm heroic scale", which is a farce given they haven't been 28mm by any measure for years now), and those support the "8mm refers to Marines" interpretation given they measure in at around 1:267 scale, in which a 7' tall Marine would be 8mm.
Sure it can. One Warlord one Reaver and two Warhounds for £95 gives you a full axiom to start with at a decent price point. They could even throw in some command terminals or terrain and it would be less of a discount than the 40k Renegade sets.
The question is less of if discounted titan sets it can happen, but rather if it will happen in time to keep momentum up for this game system. If we have to wait two years i think it'll be too late.
Sure it can. One Warlord one Reaver and two Warhounds for £95 gives you a full axiom to start with at a decent price point. They could even throw in some command terminals or terrain and it would be less of a discount than the 40k Renegade sets.
The question is less of if discounted titan sets it can happen, but rather if it will happen in time to keep momentum up for this game system. If we have to wait two years i think it'll be too late.
Except that you giving away the warhounds and part of the Reaver. That's not a decent price that's plain silly.
Why should it happen? The reavers are cheap, the warhounds will be just a bit more because there are two of them, what is there to accomplish with this? A huge need to manufacture more titans and use less production allotments for newer products? This isn't a GW main line they don't get a full factory just areas
Except that you giving away the warhounds and part of the Reaver. That's not a decent price that's plain silly.
Why should it happen? The reavers are cheap, the warhounds will be just a bit more because there are two of them, what is there to accomplish with this? A huge need to manufacture more titans and use less production allotments for newer products? This isn't a GW main line they don't get a full factory just areas
That, or you're getting a Reaver and Warhounds for RRP with the expensive Warlord at half price. It's not like GW are working on tight margins here. How is it any different from the discount applied to boxes like Knight: Renegade, Tooth & Claw, or any of the Start Collecting sets?
Except that you giving away the warhounds and part of the Reaver. That's not a decent price that's plain silly.
Why should it happen? The reavers are cheap, the warhounds will be just a bit more because there are two of them, what is there to accomplish with this? A huge need to manufacture more titans and use less production allotments for newer products? This isn't a GW main line they don't get a full factory just areas
That, or you're getting a Reaver and Warhounds for RRP with the expensive Warlord at half price. It's not like GW are working on tight margins here. How is it any different from the discount applied to boxes like Knight: Renegade, Tooth & Claw, or any of the Start Collecting sets?
it'll happen but only after more titans etc come out I imagine
Except that you giving away the warhounds and part of the Reaver. That's not a decent price that's plain silly.
Why should it happen? The reavers are cheap, the warhounds will be just a bit more because there are two of them, what is there to accomplish with this? A huge need to manufacture more titans and use less production allotments for newer products? This isn't a GW main line they don't get a full factory just areas
That, or you're getting a Reaver and Warhounds for RRP with the expensive Warlord at half price. It's not like GW are working on tight margins here. How is it any different from the discount applied to boxes like Knight: Renegade, Tooth & Claw, or any of the Start Collecting sets?
You are talking about games where the models can be used in that game or elsewhere. Tell me, what game can AT18 be used with that you need more than 3 Warlords? More than 4 Reaver? GW does those sets to get rid of sprues and models no longer made or that are too many of. Many of those getting started boxes are just old sprues repackaged.
Short term box sets like Tooth and Claw are new and are usable for kill team, 40k etc.
Patriarch wrote:It's not 8mm, it never has been. Someone misinterpreted the comment "A marine would be 8mm at this scale" to mean the game is 8mm scale and the community has run off with that misconception. It isn't 8mm scale, because an 8mm marine would be representing an 8ft giant. A regular human would be 6mm high at AT scale.
I keep hearing this argument, but GW themselves have said it is war in a new scale (not war in a previously existing scale that was discontinued), and that it is 8mm, and they said so over and over again. If it is a misinterpretation, it is not just a single misinterpretation from a single remark by a single person at GW. GW has been saying 8mm, and NOTHING ELSE, for years now!
We really won't know for sure what size humans and marines will be in AT 2018 until we get to see some of those humans and marines, or maybe when we see some human sized features that allow us to extrapolate (but even that is risky).
You'll have links to them saying that to back up such an adamant position, right?
That should do as proof of the “for years” and “over and over again”. I can’t prove the “nothing else” part, but if you can disprove that I would like to see it. Also, there’s lots more, just Google Titanicus 8mm.
Please do not argue that that first article is not a direct source. It is a reporter reporting on his personal conversation with Andy Hoare from GW. That’s as close as news gets for me. (In 2016 GW was not publishing Adeptus Titanicus articles)
Yodhrin wrote: Regardless, in the end what GWsay matters less than the models they produce(people still refer to 40K as "28mm heroic scale", which is a farce given they haven't been 28mm by any measure for years now), and those support the "8mm refers to Marines" interpretation given they measure in at around 1:267 scale, in which a 7' tall Marine would be 8mm.
I’m not arguing against your measurements, I’m sure you did a great job. The measurements are just inconsistent with the official word on scale. In fact, I’m thinking you’re probably going to be correct, and I ordered some old epic rhinos and marines to add to my bases.
The only thing that matters in the end is that my Titan bases don’t look horribly out of scale when GW inevitably start producing tanks and infantry for their new version of epic.
Why are people arguing about this? It's a different game for a different feel set in the Warhammer universe. I love the look and feel of giant titans battling it out (I'm collecting tall iced tea cans and electrical switch boxes for terrain). As far as scale goes who looks at Rhinos and Landraiders being scaled properly? Or demon princes? Or even 40k figure bodies?
Sadly enough I'm up to 4 Warlords, 12 knights, and 8 Reavers bought. Just wish I had more time to assemble...
Patriarch wrote:It's not 8mm, it never has been. Someone misinterpreted the comment "A marine would be 8mm at this scale" to mean the game is 8mm scale and the community has run off with that misconception. It isn't 8mm scale, because an 8mm marine would be representing an 8ft giant. A regular human would be 6mm high at AT scale.
I keep hearing this argument, but GW themselves have said it is war in a new scale (not war in a previously existing scale that was discontinued), and that it is 8mm, and they said so over and over again. If it is a misinterpretation, it is not just a single misinterpretation from a single remark by a single person at GW. GW has been saying 8mm, and NOTHING ELSE, for years now!
We really won't know for sure what size humans and marines will be in AT 2018 until we get to see some of those humans and marines, or maybe when we see some human sized features that allow us to extrapolate (but even that is risky).
You'll have links to them saying that to back up such an adamant position, right?
That should do as proof of the “for years” and “over and over again”. I can’t prove the “nothing else” part, but if you can disprove that I would like to see it. Also, there’s lots more, just Google Titanicus 8mm.
Please do not argue that that first article is not a direct source. It is a reporter reporting on his personal conversation with Andy Hoare from GW. That’s as close as news gets for me. (In 2016 GW was not publishing Adeptus Titanicus articles)
Yodhrin wrote: Regardless, in the end what GWsay matters less than the models they produce(people still refer to 40K as "28mm heroic scale", which is a farce given they haven't been 28mm by any measure for years now), and those support the "8mm refers to Marines" interpretation given they measure in at around 1:267 scale, in which a 7' tall Marine would be 8mm.
I’m not arguing against your measurements, I’m sure you did a great job. The measurements are just inconsistent with the official word on scale. In fact, I’m thinking you’re probably going to be correct, and I ordered some old epic rhinos and marines to add to my bases.
The only thing that matters in the end is that my Titan bases don’t look horribly out of scale when GW inevitably start producing tanks and infantry for their new version of epic.
So, the article I already brought up, which doesn't actually state the scale outside of the intro blurb written by the WC person, and secondhand reportage from an event. And actually, yes, I will argue it's not a direct source, because other people attending those same events and conversing with those same GW staffers are the people who were reporting on Dakka and elsewhere that they scaled it to an 8mm Marine, or that exactly what they meant by their scale comments was ambiguous. When you have three different people providing three different interpretations, either they got three different answers or some of them interpreted what they were told incorrectly. Given measuring the actual Titan miniatures supports the interpretation that they made 8mm tall Marines and scaled the Titans accordingly, I'd say that interpretation of what Andy et al were saying at events is the safer bet.
Regardless, why would you continue to argue the scale is 8mm if it's actually not just because GW say so? All that's doing is continuing to provide more instances of "it's 8mm scale" when some unknowing newb follows your suggestion and hits up google, which could mislead them into buying or 3D printing something in the wrong size. It's like people who continue to insist 40K models are "28mm scale" when human and human-adjacent models have been ~30mm to the eyes and ~32mm to the top of the head for years now, it's just perpetuating a falsehood for no real reason.
EDIT: And the reason some folk are arguing about it, Fajita Fan, is that a few of us do enjoy ensuring things are in scale with each other. If the information about the game is correct, both the people who care and the people who don't are happy. If the information about the game is wrong, then it's no problem for the people who don't give a gak, but could result in people who do wasting time and money on stuff they won't want to use.
That should do as proof of the “for years” and “over and over again”. I can’t prove the “nothing else” part, but if you can disprove that I would like to see it. Also, there’s lots more, just Google Titanicus 8mm.
Please do not argue that that first article is not a direct source. It is a reporter reporting on his personal conversation with Andy Hoare from GW. That’s as close as news gets for me. (In 2016 GW was not publishing Adeptus Titanicus articles)
So, the article I already brought up, which doesn't actually state the scale outside of the intro blurb written by the WC person,
A WC person is a GW person, right? So this is a direct quote from GW.
Yodhrin wrote: And actually, yes, I will argue it's not a direct source,
Utterly bizarre argument.
Yodhrin wrote: because other people attending those same events and conversing with those same GW staffers are the people who were reporting on Dakka and elsewhere that they scaled it to an 8mm Marine, or that exactly what they meant by their scale comments was ambiguous. When you have three different people providing three different interpretations, either they got three different answers or some of them interpreted what they were told incorrectly. Given measuring the actual Titan miniatures supports the interpretation that they made 8mm tall Marines and scaled the Titans accordingly, I'd say that interpretation of what Andy et al were saying at events is the safer bet.
Seriously? You ask me for links, poopoo them when I provide them, and then you post this? You are not winning the argument, lol.
I’m gonna need some links myself, to writings from people who directly spoke or listened to Andy Hoare or other GW staffers, that substantiate these claims, ‘cause I’ve been following AT since rumors started, and I never read anything like that until people started measuring and doubting the scale in 2018.
Yodhrin wrote: Regardless, why would you continue to argue the scale is 8mm if it's actually not just because GW say so?
I am not arguing the scale is 8mm. I’m arguing GW is claiming the scale is 8mm, and has done so repeatedly and consistently over the course of several years.
Yodhrin wrote: All that's doing is continuing to provide more instances of "it's 8mm scale" when some unknowing newb follows your suggestion and hits up google, which could mislead them into buying or 3D printing something in the wrong size.
But if the scale ends up being 8mm then your claims have that exact same effect. This is exactly my frustration: what do we believe? Your measurements or the official word of GW? And before you answer, consider that there are miniature games that use a smaller real scale for their bigger models, so that things still look somewhat “in scale” without breaking the bank on the models, or make them unwieldy in play. This includes 40k, where the vehicles are often a bit smaller than they should be.
Note that I am actually betting on your measurements being correct, and the GW statements being wrong, and old and future new epic mixing reasonably well, scale wise. But it’s a bet without knowing for sure...
Yodhrin wrote: EDIT: And the reason some folk are arguing about it, Fajita Fan, is that a few of us do enjoy ensuring things are in scale with each other. If the information about the game is correct, both the people who care and the people who don't are happy. If the information about the game is wrong, then it's no problem for the people who don't give a gak, but could result in people who do wasting time and money on stuff they won't want to use.
The small human-sized doors on the terrain are around 6.5mm tall. A normal door is 6feet 8 inches for residental doors in the US. Maybe in the far flung future this has changed, but it's at least a place to start - assuming their normal doors are made for average humans to walk through - worldwide modern average is 5'4".
Abra-ca-math : a human in AT is 5.135mm tall. Maybe the average human in the 40k world is taller and if they were rounded up to 6mm that might come close to making sense.
Comparing the size of a skitarii vs a knight, it comes partway up it's lower leg. measuring that distance on a AT knight is about 6.5mm - which seems to match close to the vague definition of '6mm scale' if "eye level" is where we're measuring from. However, that would mean humans are the same height as the doors on the buildings.
An 8mm human would go up to just below a knights knee - which seems to match the lore height of marines - or close to it.
either way, based on the models it seems to be leaning more toward 6mm than 8mm. Of course if GW ever comes out with actual plastics for non-titans, they may just scale them to whatever scale looks best so we may just get 10mm marines and 8mm humans who can't fit through doors on GW's own terrain.
Seems to me that GW wasn't real concerned about the scale. Someone along the process said a space marine would be 8mm and someone in the marketing department wrote that down and it's been repeated over and over.
A WC person is a GW person, right? So this is a direct quote from GW.
It is, in the narrowerst most pedantic sense. What it isn't, though, is a direct quote from someone who's been involved with the development of the game and its history. It's a single line written by the PR guy (in between writing similar blurbs for 40k, AoS, Black Library, etc), who was probably not into GW games (or born!) when AT first came out.
A WC person is a GW person, right? So this is a direct quote from GW.
It is, in the narrowerst most pedantic sense. What it isn't, though, is a direct quote from someone who's been involved with the development of the game and its history. It's a single line written by the PR guy (in between writing similar blurbs for 40k, AoS, Black Library, etc), who was probably not into GW games (or born!) when AT first came out.
First-hand reportage would be a direct quote from Andy Hoare. What we got instead was that blog author's paraphrase based on what he remembered - not nearly as reliable. Yodhrin is quite right, not "bizarre" to state that it's not direct source, because ... it isn't.
How can the scale "end up as 8mm"? Are they going to come round and replace the miniatures they've already made? Or have the Conférence Générale des Poids et Mesures redefine the metre? If you want to know how big ground units will be, one of the RoB tiles has a crashed Leman Russ on it - someone can measure that when it comes out.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SirWeeble wrote: The small human-sized doors on the terrain are around 6.5mm tall. A normal door is 6feet 8 inches for residental doors in the US. Maybe in the far flung future this has changed, but it's at least a place to start - assuming their normal doors are made for average humans to walk through - worldwide modern average is 5'4".
The problem there is that ground scale =/= model scale (it never does, except perhaps in 2mm wargames or 1:2400 naval games on very big boards), so the buildings almost certainly are smaller than they "should" be. Otherwise you end up with buildings that are only 25' square.
A WC person is a GW person, right? So this is a direct quote from GW.
It is, in the narrowerst most pedantic sense. What it isn't, though, is a direct quote from someone who's been involved with the development of the game and its history. It's a single line written by the PR guy (in between writing similar blurbs for 40k, AoS, Black Library, etc), who was probably not into GW games (or born!) when AT first came out.
I'm OK with questioning the liability of the source. I do that myself. But one would expect there to be some sort of editing team that oversees all publications. In my experience a corporate web site of a larger corporation is never a single person posting unsupervised.
But I don't know. All I am saying is: direct quote from GW: 8mm. Facepalm it all you want.
AndrewGPaul wrote: First-hand reportage would be a direct quote from Andy Hoare. What we got instead was that blog author's paraphrase based on what he remembered - not nearly as reliable. Yodhrin is quite right, not "bizarre" to state that it's not direct source, because ... it isn't.
Firsthand reportage is a reporter reporting on something he heard or saw first hand.
A direct quote is a direct quote.
There is no form of reportage that's more direct than firsthand reportage. Anything closer to the source would no longer include a reporter, so it is, by definition, not reportage. Since GW did not publish AT articles before 2018 it is impossible to have a link to anything more direct than firsthand reportage. It is an impossible standard.
You can't have an argument where you call someone out for being wrong, demand links, and when given such links, proclaim they do not meet your impossible standards.
Meanwhile, crickets on all the links to the firsthand reportage of people that heard something else than 8mm...
GW has been saying 8mm, and NOTHING ELSE, for years now!
Even if they are wrong (and I totally suspect that they are, based on Yodhrin's measurements) that statement is absolutely true.
SolarCross wrote: Does anyone know if Adeptus Titanicus is going to get more factions and regular vehicles like epic 40k did?
that is prolly tied to lore.
cuz what realy exists in 30k?
eldar is prolly around, nids is munching on planets as usual, orks is ever present.
tau is prolly too young to have epxanded to a point where it would face humanity and necrons is still sleeping.
wishfull thinking from me would be that we will get some other support like the knight banners sutch as a baneblade squad, but it realisticly wont be a huge amount of them, this is still a game of and around titans.
if epic re surface, i hope it will be as a stand alone game where ATs titans can be used but to a mutch more limited scale(1-2 titans per avrage size force)
so if you want army vs army you go epic, if you want titan vs titan you go AT.
tneva82 wrote: So local store noted reaver has sold out and are waiting for GW to cast some more. Pretty good for busted game.
Pretty annoying shortage in that every single maniple requires reaver unless I missed something.
For now they do. Newer ones might not
Well yeah. I suspect FW manages to cast more reavers before we get rules for new maniples though. Point being it's ATM pretty annoying to start as you have only warlords and knights which don't even make you legal maniple yet but with addition of just one reaver to grand master box you WOULD have full maniple.
SolarCross wrote: Does anyone know if Adeptus Titanicus is going to get more factions and regular vehicles like epic 40k did?
that is prolly tied to lore.
cuz what realy exists in 30k?
FW has no requirement to stick with 30k forever. Imperial titans in 30k and 40k are pretty much same so they can easily shift timelines for each release. Indeed if they expand it first to xenos titans I would be astonished if they kept that in 30k timeline. Instead orks would likely be themed around great beast series or something.
For full epic they could in 30k area have all the marines and their vehicles and infantry etc. Later they could easily expand that line to include 40k armies with even shared units.
It's been said many times that tanks, infantry and such are NOT on the cards. This means that they are not planned within the next few years and that AT's balance and game structure isn't even thinking of including them.
And that makes sense, AT is about the titans waging war and the command structure is designed for you to focus more detail on fewer models rather than lots of detail on lots of models (because that grinds things to a boring level of detail for tabletop games).
Most people fully expect them to flesh out the AT range for Imperial Titans and then start adding Chaos titans as they advance the story through the Horus Heresy. Even sticking to that time line alone they've room to add Eldar and Ork titan units into the game.
Also because titans of all races are basically huge unchanging machines of destruction they can jump the time line to the 40K era without having to change a single model.
If Epic comes then it would be a totally different game with its own rule system and being a separate product line. If GW are sensible they will twin the scales so that the AT titans can work in a future Epic game along with all the terrain they make. Epic or similar would, however, be a much bigger investment because they'd be dealing with a much wider range of moulds and models.
*Imperials worship them like gods and won't change the design ; Eldar are fallen and will mostly s tick to their same ultimate level technology; ork ones are "technically" all going to be different but based on the same underlaying tech because they are orks
Overread wrote: It's been said many times that tanks, infantry and such are NOT on the cards. This means that they are not planned within the next few years and that AT's balance and game structure isn't even thinking of including them.
I'm not saying you're wrong that it's unlikely we'll get them any time soon, but given the whole "8mm scale" debacle came entirely from comments made by the design team about how they made Marine sculpts in various scales to help them decide how big to make the Titans - which would only be relevant if they were at least considering adding smaller stuff - and also given that IIRC the actual main designer of the game has stated that he did in fact design the rules to function perfectly well with formations of smaller stuff(one assumes using the same kind of truncated terminals Knights get) they just didn't really playtest that aspect, I really think any insistence from GW now that there's no infantry and tanks coming ever no way no how, so why don't you buy more lovely Titan models with your money right now instead of saving it up, all rings a little hollow.
I'm sure we will see Epic return - but it needs to be in addition to rather than an expansion for Adeptus Titanicus.
By all means, share the Titans across both games in terms of scale. But don't dilute what AT is. It's there to experience Titan on Titan combat, to put us in the seat of the Princeps Senioris.
Epic is more about being The High Command ordering their army about from afar. It's not about the minutiae of how a Titan actually works, and the decisions on how to best use your reactor.
Overread wrote: It's been said many times that tanks, infantry and such are NOT on the cards. This means that they are not planned within the next few years and that AT's balance and game structure isn't even thinking of including them.
I'm not saying you're wrong that it's unlikely we'll get them any time soon, but given the whole "8mm scale" debacle came entirely from comments made by the design team about how they made Marine sculpts in various scales to help them decide how big to make the Titans - which would only be relevant if they were at least considering adding smaller stuff - and also given that IIRC the actual main designer of the game has stated that he did in fact design the rules to function perfectly well with formations of smaller stuff(one assumes using the same kind of truncated terminals Knights get) they just didn't really playtest that aspect, I really think any insistence from GW now that there's no infantry and tanks coming ever no way no how, so why don't you buy more lovely Titan models with your money right now instead of saving it up, all rings a little hollow.
When Specialist Games Studio was first announced, GW mentioned Epic specifically as one of the properties that were eying to bring back. When Adeptus Titanicus was shown for the first time GW mentioned that they had played around with a number of different scales and settled on 8mm, specifically because at that scale a marine still looked good and you could see his insignia. They are well aware of the desire for the return of Epic.
Right now GW is trying to sell titans. They don't want you to focus on what's coming, they want you to buy lots of what's in stores now.
I have heard no rumors of Epic returning within a year, except for the remark in an earlier post here, but I would be very surprised if we had to wait more than three years. I think they will keep doing AT for the next year, and then move on from just titans to full on Epic. That's just my hunch, not a rumor!
Overread wrote: It's been said many times that tanks, infantry and such are NOT on the cards. This means that they are not planned within the next few years and that AT's balance and game structure isn't even thinking of including them.
Not disagreeing - or agreeing. The designer did say that the game was designed to be titan on titan, but they made some considerations and tests to see if infantry would work. However, he said he doesn't think it's likely to happen. It's worth noting that the designer of AT doesn't work at GW anymore though. It's good they were forward thinking enough to make considerations for smaller units.
(below is not in the interview - just me ranting)
It seems like it would be fairly simple to add infantry and tanks. They'd just be simplified. You'd just have "Infantry deatchment" or "spearhead detachment'. Select models that can go in those. They'd have a sheet just like knights, but minus the ion shields. So a spearhead detachment could have 3-6 battletanks. Same armor as or 1 lower than knights. Similar weapon chart. 2 structure ticks.
Also, the other bizarre decision: gaming materials essential to the game (the cards) are in very short supply in the starter and rule boxes, and if you want more (which you absolutely do) then they are special order only (and ridiculously expensive, but that is par for the course for GW so I am not even mentioning that).
The card packs that you can buy contain a different assortment of cards than what comes in the starter. So ideally you'd only need to get one pack of cards for each titan class But yeah, they're horribly overpriced at $12.50US for 26 cards. The good news is that it isn't at all difficult to make your own by cutting up some ordinary 3x5 cards.
I'm curious about what's going to be in the Warhound card pack. With only four Warhound weapons available, 26 cards comes out to 6-7 cards per weapon. That seems a bit much even if you're running a Venator maniple.
Also, the other bizarre decision: gaming materials essential to the game (the cards) are in very short supply in the starter and rule boxes, and if you want more (which you absolutely do) then they are special order only (and ridiculously expensive, but that is par for the course for GW so I am not even mentioning that).
The card packs that you can buy contain a different assortment of cards than what comes in the starter. So ideally you'd only need to get one pack of cards for each titan class But yeah, they're horribly overpriced at $12.50US for 26 cards. The good news is that it isn't at all difficult to make your own by cutting up some ordinary 3x5 cards.
I'm curious about what's going to be in the Warhound card pack. With only four Warhound weapons available, 26 cards comes out to 6-7 cards per weapon. That seems a bit much even if you're running a Venator maniple.
Also, the other bizarre decision: gaming materials essential to the game (the cards) are in very short supply in the starter and rule boxes, and if you want more (which you absolutely do) then they are special order only (and ridiculously expensive, but that is par for the course for GW so I am not even mentioning that).
The card packs that you can buy contain a different assortment of cards than what comes in the starter. So ideally you'd only need to get one pack of cards for each titan class But yeah, they're horribly overpriced at $12.50US for 26 cards. The good news is that it isn't at all difficult to make your own by cutting up some ordinary 3x5 cards.
I'm curious about what's going to be in the Warhound card pack. With only four Warhound weapons available, 26 cards comes out to 6-7 cards per weapon. That seems a bit much even if you're running a Venator maniple.
We'll see, I suppose.
Yup, I knew about the different mix, but even assuming one pack per titan is all you need, you'd be spending $37.50 on cards. Another way of putting it is that they charge $25 for a standard 52 card deck. IMHO they should have made a ~104 card tuck box with enough cards to field 2 of any titan with any combination of weapons, and sold it for $15, which is perfectly acceptable. Another way of doing it would have been to supply a command terminal + all cards needed to use the titan on it with any weapon load out for some reasonable price. I would have been OK with either one of those choices over what's happening now. Oh, and they should not be GW exclusives, that's just silly.
Also, the other bizarre decision: gaming materials essential to the game (the cards) are in very short supply in the starter and rule boxes, and if you want more (which you absolutely do) then they are special order only (and ridiculously expensive, but that is par for the course for GW so I am not even mentioning that).
The card packs that you can buy contain a different assortment of cards than what comes in the starter. So ideally you'd only need to get one pack of cards for each titan class But yeah, they're horribly overpriced at $12.50US for 26 cards. The good news is that it isn't at all difficult to make your own by cutting up some ordinary 3x5 cards.
I'm curious about what's going to be in the Warhound card pack. With only four Warhound weapons available, 26 cards comes out to 6-7 cards per weapon. That seems a bit much even if you're running a Venator maniple.
We'll see, I suppose.
Yup, I knew about the different mix, but even assuming one pack per titan is all you need, you'd be spending $37.50 on cards. Another way of putting it is that they charge $25 for a standard 52 card deck. IMHO they should have made a ~104 card tuck box with enough cards to field 2 of any titan with any combination of weapons, and sold it for $15, which is perfectly acceptable. Another way of doing it would have been to supply a command terminal + all cards needed to use the titan on it with any weapon load out for some reasonable price. I would have been OK with either one of those choices over what's happening now. Oh, and they should not be GW exclusives, that's just silly.
Like I suggested, just cut up standard unlined 3x5 note cards, and write down the weapon stats on the results. They're about the same thickness as the official cards, and you can make at least a couple of weapons cards from each note card.
Games Workshop has a terrible history with spin-off/specialist games that aren't them directly bringing back things like Blood Bowl or Necromunda. If they'd called it 'Epic: Titanicus' maybe they'd have seen more success.
I think a lot of people are waiting to see just how long it's supported for. Maybe it's a self-fulfilling prophecy (people are on the sidelines, nobody buys it, GW/FW scrap it due to lack of interest), but eh.
Arbitrator wrote: If they'd called it 'Epic: Titanicus' maybe they'd have seen more success.
nope they would just has disapointed 2 camps, thouse who awaits the return of epic and us who just want titan action.
we all know by now why people dident rush the stores at day one, but AT is still alot more popular then people think else they wouldent sell out their products.
Case in point: I got into 40k as the specialist games were slowly dropped. 40k took over something like 70% of GW sales (it outsold Fantasy 3:1) and GW took Epic, Bloodbowl, BFG, and all the other games out one by one.
Was this cannibalization of GW’s product stream in favor of 40k to our collective benefit? Their solution to Fantasy’s flagging sales was to jack up prices (fail) and the quick release schedule of 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th edition 40k drove me nuts.
I made a BFG navy for fun and thought the game was really neat. I have like 8 Bloodbowl teams now since the rerelease. I bought in on AT. I like supporting multiple game systems so that your local GW isn’t just a wall of 40k. I think having multiple game systems supporting your IP enriches it, I hope AT succeeds so we see more game systems again in the future. I know that will only happen if they’re “successful” which is measured by GW’s margins and not our notions of their success.
If AT is not your cup of tea or the scale question is a turnoff that’s fine but I should think we’re all hoping ventures like this pay off for GW so we see a richer gaming environment from them.
I made a BFG navy for fun and thought the game was really neat. I have like 8 Bloodbowl teams now since the rerelease. I bought in on AT. I like supporting multiple game systems so that your local GW isn’t just a wall of 40k. I think having multiple game systems supporting your IP enriches it, I hope AT succeeds so we see more game systems again in the future. I know that will only happen if they’re “successful” which is measured by GW’s margins and not our notions of their success.
Something GW of old missed up is that the different games don't automatically just cannibalize each other and that just by killing off epic/bloodbowl/necromunda/etc doesn't mean those customers would buy with that money 40k or even GW stuff all together. There's generally only so much you really want for one game. However mutliple games give players different challenges and models to buy keeping them fresh and investing into them.
Hopefully the GW has learned of this and don't kill games even if they are making easy profit(assumption: GW doesn't greenlight project if the bosses think it will be negative. Thus if sales exceed's GW's own estimations by 400% game IS making clear profit) with it. You don't even need to support the smaller games on the level of 40k(and for example they could easily in future expand AT line into epic line with it's own rules. IF they wanted they could get good start for it by just one new plastic sprue(updated marine infatry and rulebook and they would have decent start for epic...).
FrozenDwarf wrote: AT is still alot more popular then people think else they wouldent sell out their products.
Popularity has nothing to do with selling through. If you make 10 things, and sell all of them, that's not popular if the audience is millions.
If it's popular, it'll get a second and third printing, with expansions.
exept specialist range dont have a huge fan base after they terminated it in early 2000.
for what little supportbase it has, AT is a success. reason why you dont see it beeing played is cuz all models and upgrads havent been released yet.
it is the model release plan that gave AT a thorn in the side, not the actual game.
GW dident have time last year to release AT and it looks the same this year too, else we would have had weekely releases.
its now 3 weeks since the reaver was released and still no warhound.
The mechs linked above are boxy and pretty crap tbh. Sry
I mean if I didn't have my wife, a house, a Harley, our cars, 40k, Necromunda, AoS to spend money on I might look into AT but it just doesn't seem appealing to me for what you get atm. Maybe if they release a few more races or something then ye. But atm meh.
Also what's the SIZE of the models? Are those 40k marine sized or knight sized? 44 models of which some should be at 40k knight sized for 100$ I find unlikely. GW has GW price addition but it's not THAT big
tneva82 wrote: Also what's the SIZE of the models? Are those 40k marine sized or knight sized? 44 models of which some should be at 40k knight sized for 100$ I find unlikely. GW has GW price addition but it's not THAT big
They’re the size of Battletech minis if you play the video.
Something GW of old missed up is that the different games don't automatically just cannibalize each other and that just by killing off epic/bloodbowl/necromunda/etc doesn't mean those customers would buy with that money 40k or even GW stuff all together. There's generally only so much you really want for one game. However mutliple games give players different challenges and models to buy keeping them fresh and investing into them.
For what it's worth, I'm one of those people who basically doesn't buy anything from GW unless it's Specialist Games. Just the odd bit of terrain, paint pot or Made to Order metal mini.
GW used to get the occasional order out of me for a BFG ship or Epic Titan when they kept the SG range available on the online store (up until 2012ish). Just a drop in the ocean to them--I'm no big spender by any means--but that drop dried up once the SGs disappeared.
I nearly spent some cash on the new Necromunda, but balked when I realised they were going to drip-feed the rules. Fortunately Titanicus doesn't suffer from that problem. It's a bit lean in some places, sure--like specific rules for Legions--but the rules are complete out of the box. None of this 'no model, no rule' nonsense that's afflicted N17.
In the last two months I've bought more from GW than in the two years before AT came out. At full Aussie RRP too. It's still just a drop in the proverbial, and I know the plural of anecdote isn't data, but I can't imagine I'm the only one.
That said, though... if Titanicus is a total bust anywhere, I expect it'll be poor old Australia. The markup is so high (on the Warlord particularly) that sales must be hurting. I think it's telling that in the UK and US, the Grand Master box sold out within 24-48 hours, but it was still available on the Aussie website for weeks.
tneva82 wrote: Also what's the SIZE of the models? Are those 40k marine sized or knight sized? 44 models of which some should be at 40k knight sized for 100$ I find unlikely. GW has GW price addition but it's not THAT big
They’re the size of Battletech minis if you play the video.
Oh I rarely check videos. So battletech videos? Waaaaaay too small then so no solution unless your opponents use these as well.
prastie wrote: The models don't come with all of the weapon options and I won't buy two models just to get one with the loadout that I want.
It's not ideal, granted. But the smaller the Titan is, the less of a problem it becomes.
Warlords are the most limited at the moment, and it's a bit annoying. However, the kit is designed with magnets in mind, so you can fit them out with the existing volcano cannons and missile launchers they come with, and await the release of the weapon packs.
Alternatively, you can simply ignore WYSIWYG and go with counts-as. Just think of the Warlord model as having two generic arm guns and two carapace guns. What kind of guns exactly? The weapon cards on your terminal will tell you. Just assume they've been cunningly disguised to fool the enemy until they fire.
It won't really work for the Warlord power claw--a gun is obviously not a fist--but for everything else it should be fine. And it lets you play several loadouts and learn the rules, rather than committing to a choice before you know what's most useful.
Reavers have slightly more flexibility, since you get two arm guns in the kit as well as a fist and a carapace weapon. If you want two of the same gun, or two fists, you'll need two kits. And they're trickier to magnetise than Warlords.
But, again, you can always play counts-as. Just treat the modelled weapons as generic 'guns' and 'close combat weapons'. F'rinstance, you can assume the carapace rocket launcher to be some other carapace weapon. Turbo laser destructor? Obviously they're gigantic krak missiles instead of frags. Mega-bolter? Well, boltguns fire explosive shells anyway; these are just really big ones. Warp missile rack? Every rocket fires at once, Macross Missile Massacre style!
Warhound Scout Titans (about to be released) don't have this problem at all--the kit includes all their weapon options as standard. And since they're cheaper than the other Titans, WYSIWYG becomes more practical because you're likely to be able to afford more models with different loadouts. But of course you can still play the counts-as game if you like.
And Knights have a decent selection of weapons on their sprue. Ideally, yes, you want to buy at least two boxes at once so you can mix and match (e.g. a pair of gatling cannons on a single Knight), and preferably more. Still, knights are the cheapest of the lot (relatively speaking), so this is more practical than it might sound. Even I've managed it, and I don't have a hobby budget so much as a budgette.
