The two Titans added to the range both feature numerous point defence weapons, both Ardex Defensor, and those funky AA carapace weapons.
I’m not at all convinced these are just Rule of Cool. Rather I’m thinking they’re being added with some thought toward Epic?
I think the idea of Epic being a potential future for the models is on the cards design wise; but I don't think its anywhere near on the cards development wise at GW.
That is to say I wouldn't expect Epic until they've started some Chaos/Xenos AT models at the very least.
I think its a good nod to a potential future with GW keeping their options open design wise, but at the same time I don't think they've committed to the idea at all at this stage. I'd love Epic to return, but I'd hate for it to just end up "Horus Heresy" style Marine Vs Marine. Sure that's cheaper for GW, but its again doubling down on a civil war model line that basically lets them make 1 side and count it as both sides.
Considering that Epic is already a niche product I can't see a healthy future if they made it even more niche by leaving out warped chaos and Xenos.
Or they just got the "memo of common sense in big mech design" this time. Modern machine like Imprial Knight or primaris tank and dreadnought often come with anti air weaponry.
Also would be dumb either way if they made a titan vs flyer game and you have to take the only 2 titan that can AA, or Titans with no AA can somehow punch flyers and shot them off.
The two Titans added to the range both feature numerous point defence weapons, both Ardex Defensor, and those funky AA carapace weapons.
I’m not at all convinced these are just Rule of Cool. Rather I’m thinking they’re being added with some thought toward Epic?
The Nemesis Warbringer was a thing in 40k for a while before Titanicus, where I assume the AA weapons do have a use, and the Warmaster seems to just be continuing with that design.
Well we are nearly out of Knights. So I could see super heavy tanks occupying a similar space in the game and model range. But even when Epic(in its various editions) was a supported system, the Titans were always the big draw for me. So I'm more than happy for the gothic mecha train to keep on rolling
GoatboyBeta wrote: Well we are nearly out of Knights. So I could see super heavy tanks occupying a similar space in the game and model range. But even when Epic(in its various editions) was a supported system, the Titans were always the big draw for me. So I'm more than happy for the gothic mecha train to keep on rolling
Surely they will just switch to corrupted Titans and Knights with maybe some more new Titan variants.
I would quite like to see some epic scale vehicles but would also like to see some Elder Titans
Where Titanicus is concerned the AA-Guns might be just be detail and nothing else. Obviously if Epic came back they'd have a role as you have aircraft to shoot at.
On the homebrew front, the most suitable aircraft for AT might be a heavily armed valkyrie vendetta. In hover mode it could move up to 17"( Adjusted from 40K's 20" ), while the Vendetta does offer three twin-lascannon attacks, for which the Acastus already provides rules. If used in normal flight it can go about...38"( 45" in 40K ), which would be too fast for AT, but then again maybe the altitude could play a role here; unlike Aeronautica it could have the danger of crashing into buildings, where pushing the pilots skill could be as much as a risk as a titan pushing its reactors.
While very light in armour compared to even a knight, the Vendetta could have benefits for being hard to hit unless targeted by a rapid fire weapon or an AA-Gun. Where a vendetta could excel at out flanking a titan and cause a lot of mischief, a Questoris with an avenger cannon( or Castigator ) could stand the best chance of hitting it. Suddenly that useless freeblade has a job!
Obviously this would have to go through a lot of trial and error, but it could be fun as an open play rule set.
EDIT: And lets face it, with a Warmaster we have the perfect excuse for a King Kong showdown...
Chopstick wrote: Lol the remaining Knights is enough to drag this game on for another 3 years with this release speed.
That plus the Rapier scout Titan, probably a Reaver-WH tweener, corrupted Titans and Knights, and probably more Psi-Titans. So yeah, plenty to come. And no one should hold their breath for xenos.
I'd say we're about as far away from a new Titan as we are from when the Warbringer was released, and that's maybe a year? I can't remember exactly, but it's a lot longer than would be acceptable to wait for a Traitors book (pretty unfair for the traitor legions for them to wait that long). Just a prediction could be wrong obviously. Also, we won't have endless Knight filler this/next year, so maybe the production of other stuff like new engines will pick up pace.
Pure and wild speculation here, however there is precedence for it.
The Warmasters point defence/smaller weapons aren't really for Titanicus.
Remember that the new models for Titanicus are designed in CAD and thus designed to be a scaled down version of a 40k Titan model (Or to be easily upscaled to 40k, depending on the design process) with only minimal modification. We've seen this with the Warlord and Warbringer.
In theory, it's just a case of design tweaks to the CAD file in terms of details, and make the moulds, it is then ready to be cast as required....
TLDR; The smaller weapons may be for 40k, not AT, Epic etc...
JWBS wrote: I'd say we're about as far away from a new Titan as we are from when the Warbringer was released, and that's maybe a year? I can't remember exactly, but it's a lot longer than would be acceptable to wait for a Traitors book (pretty unfair for the traitor legions for them to wait that long). Just a prediction could be wrong obviously. Also, we won't have endless Knight filler this/next year, so maybe the production of other stuff like new engines will pick up pace.
In the article from Saturday's preview, they specifically call out the Traitor Legios book as coming later this year.
Now, given COVID, I'd tag anything to do with timeframes as "plans subject to change", but at least they're aiming to get the book out in 2021.
Everyone is preparing themselves for resin forgeworld upgrades for corrupted titans I assume? The modular nature of the kits make me think it'll be done that way, like the Psi Titan (please come back into stock).
Maybe a focus on a certain god with bits for the 3 main titans.
I'd love to see platic sprues, but ultimatley would rather that factory space is taken by another titan body and the bits handled by FW.
Fraggle wrote: Everyone is preparing themselves for resin forgeworld upgrades for corrupted titans I assume? The modular nature of the kits make me think it'll be done that way, like the Psi Titan (please come back into stock).
Maybe a focus on a certain god with bits for the 3 main titans.
I'd love to see platic sprues, but ultimatley would rather that factory space is taken by another titan body and the bits handled by FW.
Yeah and they can't come soon enough. The psi titans really need some corrupted titans to square off against.
As we're getting a Loyalist Legios book, I think it's virtually assured that we'll also be getting a Traitor Legios book as well.
Since they went "big" on the Titan release for this one, might we see the Rapier or another small Titan with the second book?
It’s outright stated there’s a Traitor Legions book
I’d love another Titan with it, but I’m not sure how likely that is.
We're almost certain to get a new Titan with the "Traitors" book - most likely that naughty small scout titan that ended up going all Slaanesh eventually!
As we're getting a Loyalist Legios book, I think it's virtually assured that we'll also be getting a Traitor Legios book as well.
Since they went "big" on the Titan release for this one, might we see the Rapier or another small Titan with the second book?
It’s outright stated there’s a Traitor Legions book
I’d love another Titan with it, but I’m not sure how likely that is.
We're almost certain to get a new Titan with the "Traitors" book - most likely that naughty small scout titan that ended up going all Slaanesh eventually!
I can't help but feel that the Imperium shouldn't get that; at least not until Eldar and Tyranids are out - that's where fast close combat titans should be. Eldar sneaking in fast and lithe and slicing you with a powerblade; Tyranids thundering up and soaking up shots before tearing at you with blades and claws and restraining with tentacles.
Let Imperials be like orks; slower harder punching close combat units. AT least where AT close combat is concerned.
I don't think that's a consideration at the studio. Eldar, Orks, Tyranids etc. aren't going be in this version of the game. Setting is HH, and will be until they get through all the stuff they have planned. Maybe someday they might start a new setting like Beast Arises or something. They've said this publicly.
*IF* the Rapier will be a de-Chaosified version of the old Slaaneshi scout Titans as rumored...they might come with CC ability. I would love that. My opponents perhaps not as much. Wouldn't be surprised if we don't see it for another year at this pace though. And how many transfer sheets are they behind...15?...20?
Also, a while back they mentioned a Kado campaign book at one of the events. We got multiple other campaign books since then, but my bet is that one will be where the corrupted Titans/Knights dam breaks, if you read the old fluff (and imagine some updates).
They could do a mix of plastic kits for corrupted/possessed titans. And not every titan needs to have every god as kits. Say a plastic bane lord that uses the warlord body sprue and a new weapon and armor sprue. A variant of the Rapier to make a slaanesh subjugator. Maybe a warbringer variant with a sorcerers tower in place of the carapace mount?
On the carapace guns of the warmaster, I think the design brief for this titan was to do two things- update the old artwork into a modern mars pattern design, and to make an intermediate between the warlord and imperator.
Looking at the upper works, the void shield strip on the warlord are compressed downwards and a centerline heavy weapon added. A pair of warhound guns are mounted above the arms as secondaries, and a set of armored crenelations with battle cannons and aa are mounted to the sides and top. The emperor goes full fortress atop, with point defense battle cannons and some earthshakers on the sides, a massive centerline gun, a defense laser tower, and the more warhound scale guns on towers for wider coverage. Instead of just point defense guns, the shins bulk out and add troops to bring infantry defenders along with it.
zedmeister wrote: A dedicated fast melee titan would be nice as well. A good candidate for the between Warhound/Reaver Titan?
The Nightgaunt would be a good candidate for that, in the original AT game it still used a Warlord model, but it was faster than an average Warlord, only had 4 void shields, had no carapace weapons and was armed with close combat\close assault weapons. So could easily be updated to be a different class as has been done for some of the other patterns of Warlord from AT.
I would think that the WL Psi-Titan shows the path forward for corrupted engines...i.e. hybrid kits. They can probably get more done that way than by waiting for plastic manufacturing capacity. And I think the Banelord would be the obvious first choice as a counterpoint to the Psi-Titan.
We're almost certain to get a new Titan with the "Traitors" book - most likely that naughty small scout titan that ended up going all Slaanesh eventually!
Now they've announced a new plastic titan, GW might then release a new knight to coincide with the traitor book.
That said a small resin titan wouldn't be a problem for FW on the side, as they did bang out those mechanicum knights very close together...
To be honest we haven't got a clue what the rapier is beyond being a scout titan for us to be excited about it. It could be wearing giant clown shoes for all we know....
I'm personally expecing the BELICOSA warbringer to be coming alongside the traitors compendium. Only 1 new sprue, digital assets already exist for the full scale one.
We should be due an Engine Kill article today so we'll hopefully see more detail on the Warmaster.
Or, more likely, we'll see another Knight appear (If they do release the Asterios, I hope they take the opportunity to bring its rules back into line...)
gorgon wrote: I would think that the WL Psi-Titan shows the path forward for corrupted engines...i.e. hybrid kits. They can probably get more done that way than by waiting for plastic manufacturing capacity. And I think the Banelord would be the obvious first choice as a counterpoint to the Psi-Titan.
But who knows?
I think the suscess if the Psi-Titan is what has delayed the Traitor version. The sales of this showed the demand which in turn will lead to a plastic rather than hybrid / resin kit. So I wouldn't be surprised if the traitor titans turn out to be plastic kits, with then some weapon / variants in resin.
Going to be an interesting challenge to use effectively. Seems like it would be long-range fire support based on speed and size but it's more of a mid-field anchor for your force based on weapon ranges. Guess that's where the additional durability comes in.
for 850 points minimum, looking around 1000+ with upgrades, im not sure its actually going to be tough enough. it costs 2x as much as warlord with only being 1 harder to hurt it, 1 more void shield and 1 more crit damage space. This will not be that much harder to kill than a single warlord titan and I have seen a single warhound pack nuke a warlord in 1 turn
Mothman wrote: for 850 points minimum, looking around 1000+ with upgrades, im not sure its actually going to be tough enough. it costs 2x as much as warlord with only being 1 harder to hurt it, 1 more void shield and 1 more crit damage space. This will not be that much harder to kill than a single warlord titan and I have seen a single warhound pack nuke a warlord in 1 turn
It also requires a minimum of 13+ to damage on all locations and the damage tracks are longer. Not forgetting more servitor clades and a longer shield track. Add that all together and it's going to take a fair bit more punishment before it falls.
The void shield track stays at 3+ for longer than most titans have shields. I'm really curious to see how the extended damage tracks affect a game too. Killing these things quickly is going to require some luck with targeted attacks
xttz wrote: The void shield track stays at 3+ for longer than most titans have shields. I'm really curious to see how the extended damage tracks affect a game too. Killing these things quickly is going to require some luck with targeted attacks
Yeah, it's going to take an absolute beating. Especially if you take the Infusive Supercoolant upgrade to drain heat. Add in legio traits and you can really push this fella while keeping it relatively cool
Also interesting is you can mix and match the veritable raft of shoulder weapons. Two vulcan arrays with the plasma destructors will put serious pressure on an enemy Titan
xttz wrote: The void shield track stays at 3+ for longer than most titans have shields. I'm really curious to see how the extended damage tracks affect a game too. Killing these things quickly is going to require some luck with targeted attacks
Yeah, it's going to take an absolute beating. Especially if you take the Infusive Supercoolant upgrade to drain heat. Add in legio traits and you can really push this fella while keeping it relatively cool
I just realised that the new shoulder weapons count as two extra locations. So previously rolling a 'special' result on the dice just directed hits to the body, now they'll randomly go to one of two weapon systems. That drastically reduces the odds of non-targeted attacks hitting the body.
xttz wrote: The void shield track stays at 3+ for longer than most titans have shields. I'm really curious to see how the extended damage tracks affect a game too. Killing these things quickly is going to require some luck with targeted attacks
Yeah, it's going to take an absolute beating. Especially if you take the Infusive Supercoolant upgrade to drain heat. Add in legio traits and you can really push this fella while keeping it relatively cool
I just realised that the new shoulder weapons count as two extra locations. So previously rolling a 'special' result on the dice just directed hits to the body, now they'll randomly go to one of two weapon systems. That drastically reduces the odds of non-targeted attacks hitting the body.
Ya true, good point. Firs time we've seen special come up.
If a knight lance can take one as support, the absolute minimum you could get this monster into a game would be 1,510 points. All nine of the knights armed with avengers and melee weapons.
Chopstick wrote: Another typo. Plasma Blastgun for warmaster now have +1 long range instead of -1.
Most weapon shown does have quite short range for such a slow titan. Since it had no 360 arc weapon it's gonna be quite easy to flank.
Weirdly enough it has maneouver 1/3 so it can turn quite efficiently. But, yes, without support this thing will struggle.
I find it weird its every bit as maneuverable as a warlord, and then some.
Also noticed that melee options seems forthcoming, the plasmatic locomotors thing references weapons without the melee trait.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SamusDrake wrote: If a knight lance can take one as support, the absolute minimum you could get this monster into a game would be 1,510 points. All nine of the knights armed with avengers and melee weapons.
Thats pretty mental.
Another reason to avoid playing against knight lances lol
So in terms of releases, there is the Titan (obviously), a weapon card deck, new book, normally there is a strategy card pack to go with the book, potentially thick card stock terminals (I know the Warmaster will come with one, but it'll be the tin card with no holes in it). Anything else I've missed?
Another reason to avoid playing against knight lances lol
Yeah, shame we can't take a lance of Porphyrions!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheSecretSquig wrote: So in terms of releases, there is the Titan (obviously), a weapon card deck, new book, normally there is a strategy card pack to go with the book, potentially thick card stock terminals (I know the Warmaster will come with one, but it'll be the tin card with no holes in it). Anything else I've missed?
zedmeister wrote: A potential maximum strength of 23. Phew! Using two of those in short range will evaporate Warhounds and probably Reavers as well.
Might also evaporate your Warmaster too; +4 heat is no joke even with the extra pips.
On the other hand I like that it has these upgrades; speed tweak or coolshot is a good choice though I’d like to see anchor turn and seismic sensor as options too.
Edit: makes me feel all tingly inside when I consider the potential of an Imperator macro-plasma annihilator in these terms…
Titans can drain void shield instead of reactor and 3/6 result for the orange roll are S9 hit, which will have a harder time doing any damage to the Warmaster
Looks like they removed they image of the Inferno gun card. Plasma blast gun still showing though
Automatically Appended Next Post: Here’s a thought. With the apocalypse missile bank, maybe we’ll see the return of the Warhound apocalypse launchers? They used to be able to take them in the dim and distant past.
zedmeister wrote: Looks like they removed they image of the Inferno gun card. Plasma blast gun still showing though
There was a mistake on the card image in the article (hopefully not on the actual card), with the strength and number of dice being the wrong way round, so guess it’s been removed for that reason, not because the Warmaster can’t take them. It is also sadly, no longer piloted by a Princess as was originally mentioned in the article.
Vanguard has 6mm sisters, and theres probably a woman in a fancy dress in 6mm somewhere on magister militium somewhere if you look hard enough, could just mount them up on the AA deck, not have to wait for the 28mm version...just sayin'...
Assuming you decide to roleplay as deft princeps who can not use the power to void shield function. It's unlikely to get 4+ reactor push from a single weapon use.
Nostromodamus wrote: Now I’m wondering which options are actually on the sprue and which ones will be FW resin.
Yep, also wondering if the kit has pre-built magnet holes like the Warbringer & Warlord or if the holes need to be drilled like on Reaver arms and Warhounds. Would be a shame if the kit was not magnet-ready...
Nostromodamus wrote: Now I’m wondering which options are actually on the sprue and which ones will be FW resin.
I wouldn't count on much more than what we have seen already being in the first kit. Chaos head, knightly head, Metallica head. Loyalist, horus, and blank carapace side panels. Apoc launches and twin turbolaser shoulders. Carapace AA or battlecannons.
zedmeister wrote: Looks like they removed they image of the Inferno gun card. Plasma blast gun still showing though
Automatically Appended Next Post: Here’s a thought. With the apocalypse missile bank, maybe we’ll see the return of the Warhound apocalypse launchers? They used to be able to take them in the dim and distant past.
I was kinda hoping for missile launcher armed Warhounds!
zedmeister wrote: Here’s a thought. With the apocalypse missile bank, maybe we’ll see the return of the Warhound apocalypse launchers? They used to be able to take them in the dim and distant past.
Are you sure? I don't remember this and the old metal Warhound didn't have it as an option.
One thing I've just realised, the Ardex-Defensor Cannon has the same profile as the Warlord and the Warbringer, so the knee guns and upgrade from Mauler Boltguns to Battlecannons (plus whatever extra weapons it has scattered around) have no effect whatsoever in AT as far as I can see, surprising as it seems like quite a lot of extra firepower compared to the Warlord.
The times they could be used was very brief in either edition, to the point where their use could be considered a typo. I had a fun month or two in 2nd edition with some warhounds with twin melee weapons, before the (what we now call a) datasheet appeared and gave the weapon options. And to be honest I felt a little guilty doing it. I'm an epic grognard to the point where a warhould with missile launchers or melee weapons just feels wrong.
schoon wrote: New rules (and point values) will take some digesting.
Very interested to see where they go with expansions on the arm and carapace weapons. I'm sure they already have plans...
I'm beginning to see why they said an Imperator would break the game (though I still want one for just the modeling fun).
Imperator would be nightmare to point. You have to basically underpoint him compared to sheer killyness/survivability or you auto lose on objectives. But then you hit into issues that you could auto win vs say these...
It's like in 40k with titans. As it is warlord titan is soooooooooo powerful that it costs sooooooo much that you basically auto lose even vs 4k army(you are 6k...). Even 2k army could basically win automatically. However then some armies would actually lose to the warlord. Knight army could very well struggle and stompa army would be in trouble.
It's just too extreme. And generally when you are looking solo model armies you know army is going to be breaking...
One thing I like in warmaster is btw it's got quite low amount of dices for shield stripping. It's what 3 cards each 3 shots for missiles for 9 shots? Plus arm weapons which are meant more for punching unshielded armour. So you are going to need some shield stripper support. So you can't solo that well. And gives opponent way to deal with warmaster even if warmaster itself is too tough for them. Stop shield strippers, warmaster is less scary.
Good safety measure. If model can solo stuff it makes it lot harder to get balanced.
MarkNorfolk wrote: The times they could be used was very brief in either edition, to the point where their use could be considered a typo. I had a fun month or two in 2nd edition with some warhounds with twin melee weapons, before the (what we now call a) datasheet appeared and gave the weapon options. And to be honest I felt a little guilty doing it. I'm an epic grognard to the point where a warhould with missile launchers or melee weapons just feels wrong.
Missile launchers were available throughout 1st and 2nd. Even in Titan Legions, the Launcher was listed as a weapon option.
As for other Weapons, from White Dwarf 144 from 1991 through to Titan Legions (1994) you were allowed to stick anything on the Warhound except Plasma Cannons and Plasma Destructors.
Warhounds have 2 class 1 weapon mounts.
Reavers have 2 class 2 and one class 1 weapon mount.
Warbringers have 2 class 2, 1 class 3
Warlords have 2 class 3, 2 class 2 (can mount class 1 on this slot, though largely a questionable choice)
Warmasters have 2 (3?) class 4, 2 class 1, and whatever the hell that missile launcher is if it isn’t a class 4.
And finally imperators at a glance would appear to have 2 class 4, then a lot of smaller guns in their cathedral, possibly a class 1 or 2 in the central spire?
Warhounds have 2 class 1 weapon mounts.
Reavers have 2 class 2 and one class 1 weapon mount.
Warbringers have 2 class 2, 1 class 3
Warlords have 2 class 3, 2 class 2 (can mount class 1 on this slot, though largely a questionable choice)
Warmasters have 2 (3?) class 4, 2 class 1, and whatever the hell that missile launcher is if it isn’t a class 4.
And finally imperators at a glance would appear to have 2 class 4, then a lot of smaller guns in their cathedral, possibly a class 1 or 2 in the central spire?
In Epic Titan Legions the Imperator had the Hellstorm Cannon, the Plasma Annihilator (a step up from the Plasma Destructor, itself nastier than the Plasma Cannon, and the Plasma Blastgun for Reavers and Warhounds), a Defense Laser (read: Volcano Cannon), and a Main Battery (read: Quake Cannon). Then the four Gun Towers, the eight secondary weapons (lascannons, etc) and 16 dice for Bolters.
Warhounds have 2 class 1 weapon mounts.
Reavers have 2 class 2 and one class 1 weapon mount.
Warbringers have 2 class 2, 1 class 3
Warlords have 2 class 3, 2 class 2 (can mount class 1 on this slot, though largely a questionable choice)
Warmasters have 2 (3?) class 4, 2 class 1, and whatever the hell that missile launcher is if it isn’t a class 4.
And finally imperators at a glance would appear to have 2 class 4, then a lot of smaller guns in their cathedral, possibly a class 1 or 2 in the central spire?
In Epic Titan Legions the Imperator had the Hellstorm Cannon, the Plasma Annihilator (a step up from the Plasma Destructor, itself nastier than the Plasma Cannon, and the Plasma Blastgun for Reavers and Warhounds), a Defense Laser (read: Volcano Cannon), and a Main Battery (read: Quake Cannon). Then the four Gun Towers, the eight secondary weapons (lascannons, etc) and 16 dice for Bolters.
Well, the lascannons and bolters are irrelevant unless they receive special rules treatment for being so densely clustered.
I’m finding your post a little hard to pick apart, what kind of weaponry are you saying is mounted in the gun towers? Sounds roughly like you’re saying it has two fixed loadout Reaver arm slots in amongst the castle guns.
Edit: Ok looking at the old model, it definitely has much more gun to it than modern imperator artwork for some reason. The modern artwork of imperators has no huge gun emplacements built into the top fortress.
Back in Epic: 40k, both the Plasma Annihilator and the Hellstorm cannon had three times the firepower (one counted as 3 Energy weapons and the other as 3 megacannons) of the equivalent Warlord guns. It also ported 3 heavy weapon batteries, each with a Firepower of 10 (For reference, a Leman Russ had Firepower 3 and the same range).
The 6th ed 40K Apocalypse version of the Imperator interpreted the castle guns as six slots up to Reaver Arm class, except melee weapons. Mix’n’match as you please.
I’d say in AT terms, four Warlord Carapace guns (two pairs) and one Warbringer carapace gun, plus one Reaver volcano cannon in an AA mount.
Oh, and the most important weapon of all; the Sensorium Dome which housed a planetary siege scale battlefield CnC room with direct feeds from every Imperial resource in system. Aka free targeted shots and pre-measured ranging.
Mr_Rose wrote: The 6th ed 40K Apocalypse version of the Imperator interpreted the castle guns as six slots up to Reaver Arm class, except melee weapons. Mix’n’match as you please.
I’d say in AT terms, four Warlord Carapace guns (two pairs) and one Warbringer carapace gun, plus one Reaver volcano cannon in an AA mount.
Oh, and the most important weapon of all; the Sensorium Dome which housed a planetary siege scale battlefield CnC room with direct feeds from every Imperial resource in system. Aka free targeted shots and pre-measured ranging.
Six Reaver arms seems a bit much, but certainly on this Lucius variant four warhound arms along with the quake and volcano cannons manages to avoid looking cluttered?
Of course, Lucius variants don’t have the cathedral look, and just look like the hull of a battleship or something, and I’m reasonably sure this is a custom model. Regardless, I can remotely imagine the Imperator design seen in recent heresy artwork managing to hold six reaver arms without it looking really bad.
Yeah, there has only ever been one official model of the Imperator (the original plastic one from Epic: Titan Legions), plus one later mod kit to turn it into the Warmonger variant.
This is the “classic” cathedral look with all the architecture all over it.
If you see anything that looks different it’s either a conversion or a full scratch-build.
This one is slightly converted. Quite a few pieces were added, like the top banner, winged skulls, purity scrolls, hanging censers/purity rolls, laurels, halo, chainsword, crotch banner, small shields at the hips.
This one is slightly converted. Quite a few pieces were added, like the top banner, winged skulls, purity scrolls, hanging censers/purity rolls, laurels, halo, chainsword, crotch banner, small shields at the hips.
It is exquisitely done.
Definitely one of my favorite models of all time.
Can’t say I like the banner, it obscures detail of the castle and I’d recognise a marine back banner piece from 500 miles away.
The Warmonger is made by using the plastic Imperator kit with these metal bits:
The bits don't match. I remember the first picture, the second pic isn't those components (multiple differences there, not just the Vengeance cannon). Maybe there were two?
/edit - actually, if one is kitbashed, it would probably be the first one (those big tubes on the main gun have to be plastic bits, they can't be done in metal and GW used barely any resin back then, even for stuff that wasn't from the main studio).
I think the Warmonger had so few kits sold its not surprising that the only one we can find photos of is a conversion.
Have to say if GW did an Imperator I would have to buy it - that titan alone and the cover art to the old Titan Legions boxed set is what sold me and got me started in wargames years and years ago. I'd love to see a new Imperator with all that GW has learned and improved on with plastic - especially as I sold my Imperators on to others to clear the desk. No regrets at all, but I would like to own an official one again for the new game
Hm. I thought I had the correct Warmonger picture. Nearly every image I can find on Google or Bing show models with at least some conversion going on. :(
Still, the metal bits are accurate.
Edit: Found one. Ignore the few Dark Angles icon bits and it's essentially good.
Warhounds have 2 class 1 weapon mounts.
Reavers have 2 class 2 and one class 1 weapon mount.
Warbringers have 2 class 2, 1 class 3
Warlords have 2 class 3, 2 class 2 (can mount class 1 on this slot, though largely a questionable choice)
Warmasters have 2 (3?) class 4, 2 class 1, and whatever the hell that missile launcher is if it isn’t a class 4.
And finally imperators at a glance would appear to have 2 class 4, then a lot of smaller guns in their cathedral, possibly a class 1 or 2 in the central spire?
In Epic Titan Legions the Imperator had the Hellstorm Cannon, the Plasma Annihilator (a step up from the Plasma Destructor, itself nastier than the Plasma Cannon, and the Plasma Blastgun for Reavers and Warhounds), a Defense Laser (read: Volcano Cannon), and a Main Battery (read: Quake Cannon). Then the four Gun Towers, the eight secondary weapons (lascannons, etc) and 16 dice for Bolters.
Well, the lascannons and bolters are irrelevant unless they receive special rules treatment for being so densely clustered.
I’m finding your post a little hard to pick apart, what kind of weaponry are you saying is mounted in the gun towers? Sounds roughly like you’re saying it has two fixed loadout Reaver arm slots in amongst the castle guns.
Edit: Ok looking at the old model, it definitely has much more gun to it than modern imperator artwork for some reason. The modern artwork of imperators has no huge gun emplacements built into the top fortress.
The gun towers are basically Leman Russ cannons. The Main Battery is not quite a Quake Cannon in terms of armor save modifier (-3 instead of -4) but it is a barrage weapon. The autocannons were not insignificant because that was still enough in Epic to do things like knock down shields. The number of shots and the power of each shot from the Plasma Annihilator depended on how many plasma tokens were allocated to it. One token was needed per green shot, and 2 per red shot. The Hellstorm Cannon could fire 4 shots per turn but had 12 ammo, so only had enough for 3 turns of firing. The Defence Laser was basically a Volcano Cannon with AA capability.
The Imperator had variable plasma output. I think it was 2d6 plasma per turn though unused plasma could be saved up for another turn.
Lascannon (the most powerful common infantry weapon and Imperium weapon technology) and Autocannon aren't "irrelevant" in ATlol. have any of you actually play the current game? Lascannon : S6, autocannon : S4. The infantry version of the meltagun : S8!!!!
Also modern Titan garrison would be Skitarii troop with a powerful sniper rifle like the arquebus or mounted turrets like cognis lascannon, or something even better : Vindicare assassin.
Chopstick wrote: Lascannon (the most powerful common infantry weapon and Imperium weapon technology) and Autocannon aren't "irrelevant" in ATlol. have any of you actually play the current game? Lascannon : S6, autocannon : S4. The infantry version of the meltagun : S8!!!!
Also modern Titan garrison would be Skitarii troop with a powerful sniper rifle like the arquebus or mounted turrets like cognis lascannon, or something even better : Vindicare assassin.
There does seem to be a slight disconnect in the rules for smaller weapons, some of the small knight weapons have individual profiles, whereas some equivalent size (or larger) weapons on Titans just get rolled into the defensor array (or seemingly ignored completely). i.e. the Warmaster has a pair of battlecannons (presumably basically equivalent to a Knights single rapid-fire battlecannon) , knee las-cannon, whatever the thing is on the other knee and at least one more Mauler boltgun (and I suspect some las-cannons round the back like the Warlord) but its defensor array is no stronger than that of the Warbringer, which only has 3 Mauler boltguns.
There does seem to be a slight disconnect in the rules for smaller weapons, some of the small knight weapons have individual profiles, whereas some equivalent size (or larger) weapons on Titans just get rolled into the defensor array (or seemingly ignored completely). i.e. the Warmaster has a pair of battlecannons (presumably basically equivalent to a Knights single rapid-fire battlecannon) , knee las-cannon, whatever the thing is on the other knee and at least one more Mauler boltgun (and I suspect some las-cannons round the back like the Warlord) but its defensor array is no stronger than that of the Warbringer, which only has 3 Mauler boltguns.
People and rule writer got all gunsphobic when it come to Titans, for some reason. "Me tITAns mE onLy caRe abOut teH BIG GUNZ!!! small gunz too many me can't handle"
Would be nice to have a rough idea when releases are coming in 2021. But AT isn't really driven by factions or seasons, so I'm not sure how useful it'd be to share upcoming book titles if there was no indication of what's in the books or what models will accompany them.
If they want a happy customer base, getting caught up with transfers (and re-releasing older sets) would be the best bang for the buck move they could make. IMO.
SamusDrake wrote: Does anyone wish GW would have roadmaps for AT and AI, like they do for Underworlds and Necromunda?
I wouldn't mind roadmaps for all of their specialist games. I've actually emailed FW and mentioned that a roadmap, even a very vague one, would be much welcome for Horus Heresy.
I wouldn't mind roadmaps for all of their specialist games. I've actually emailed FW and mentioned that a roadmap, even a very vague one, would be much welcome for Horus Heresy.
JWBS wrote: Hmm ok, seems cool, I'll take it (though I have to wonder why are my Loyalists naming their greatest weapon thus far in honour of a traitor?).
Mars sided with Horus, didn't it?
Probably set Read-Only on the files so they can't be renamed.
beast_gts wrote: Garro shared on FB some "Minor spoiler from Mortis, relating to Adeptus Titanicus. First sighting of Warmaster titans."
Spoiler:
(Let me know if you can't see the images and I'll copy them over)
I'm glad they tied their namesake to horus specifically, it makes it more believable. It would seem they'll have to explain how the imperials got their hands on some or the stc to make them.
The excerpt from Mortis seems to suggest that they existed prior to the Heresy, the Mechanicum just didn't deploy them, so seems reasonable that the loyalist Mechanicum would have the knowledge of them and that some could already even exist in loyalist Titan Legions.
Meh, copout line from a likely shoddy black library book. As always with 40k 30k, everything is cannon. So, it is entirely possible that the Warmaster was named before Horus and they'd be seen exceedingly rarely when a total battle was needed. I can't believe these wouldn't have been seen duking it out with the Rangda equivalents
Or the class was named for Horus before the heresy but kept in reserve anyway as a just-in-case measure. Then the case happened and everyone deployed them in short order, with the loyalists not bothering to rename them because they needed stompy bois right now, not in three to nine weeks, after the Rite of Renaming was complete.
Nurglitch wrote: Warmaster is a legitimate, if slightly ill-omened rank in 40k.
This too. Macharius had the option of “Warmaster” or “Lord Solar” when he got promoted. We know which he chose but other crusade bosses have chosen to be entitled “Warmaster” since the Heresy. Like Slaydo and Macaroth of the Sabbat Worlds crusade/reconquest.
panzerfront14 wrote: Forgive me if this has already been covered elsewhere, but are Knight Domini getting added to Titanicus, like the Castellan and Valiant?
Also are there any rumors about Xenos Titans in the future or no?
Am new to this and am interested in Titanicus
What exists is more or less what we know.
And - officially - no plans to add xenos titans at this time.
panzerfront14 wrote: Forgive me if this has already been covered elsewhere, but are Knight Domini getting added to Titanicus, like the Castellan and Valiant?
Also are there any rumors about Xenos Titans in the future or no?
Am new to this and am interested in Titanicus
What exists is more or less what we know.
And - officially - no plans to add xenos titans at this time.
I think on one of the GW podcasts they mentioned that they wouldn’t add xenos titans as this is the Horus heresy era. If it was the War of the Beast then you would see Ork Gargants. So hopefully when they eventually add xenos that could how they do it, by introducing them in a new campaign book and not bolted on to the Horus heresy.
panzerfront14 wrote: Forgive me if this has already been covered elsewhere, but are Knight Domini getting added to Titanicus, like the Castellan and Valiant?
Nothing announced yet, but highly likely as the next knight class to be released.
I love you all but they're not adding xenos, play the game first before prognosticating based only on want. This is a game that already falters by pretending knights can be their own faction, xenos factions aren't coming.
Crablezworth wrote: I love you all but they're not adding xenos, play the game first before prognosticating based only on want. This is a game that already falters by pretending knights can be their own faction, xenos factions aren't coming.
You can't seriously believe that, surely?
Like, they're not coming tomorrow or next month, but they only have two, maybe three more "core engine" releases(Rapier, Imperator, potential Warhound/Reaver betweener chassis assuming the Rapier ends up smaller than the Warhound as everyone assumes) before it starts getting a bit ridiculous. Beyond that what are their other options - a non-Nemesis Warbringer with dual Reaver arms and dual Warhound shoulders? The Chaos releases, which would probably end up being a set of armour kits - plastic or resin - for the existing chassis to recreate the modern FW-style Chaos Titans, with an option to make a few more radical god-specific engines like the Banelord. A couple of the knight kits some folk seem to detest so.
That ain't nothing, but it's certainly finite, and if in two or three years time AT is still popular(to the extent a complex specialist game can be), you really think GW are just going to drop it when they could keep making money?
Crablezworth wrote: I love you all but they're not adding xenos, play the game first before prognosticating based only on want. This is a game that already falters by pretending knights can be their own faction, xenos factions aren't coming.
You can't seriously believe that, surely?
Like, they're not coming tomorrow or next month, but they only have two, maybe three more "core engine" releases(Rapier, Imperator, potential Warhound/Reaver betweener chassis assuming the Rapier ends up smaller than the Warhound as everyone assumes) before it starts getting a bit ridiculous. Beyond that what are their other options - a non-Nemesis Warbringer with dual Reaver arms and dual Warhound shoulders? The Chaos releases, which would probably end up being a set of armour kits - plastic or resin - for the existing chassis to recreate the modern FW-style Chaos Titans, with an option to make a few more radical god-specific engines like the Banelord. A couple of the knight kits some folk seem to detest so.
That ain't nothing, but it's certainly finite, and if in two or three years time AT is still popular(to the extent a complex specialist game can be), you really think GW are just going to drop it when they could keep making money?
The ATama with the designer basically spells it out, it was a game envisioned for like 3-5 giant robots to fight it out. People have been trying to stretch an alternating activation game to its limits ever since, gw is included in that. Even the new big titan makes me question if they're aware the game is alternating activation. It was supposed to sorta be chaos/corrupted titans/knights next but they released this big thing instead. I still don't think you'll see xenos, every book has been 30k and loyalist vs traitors, and now blackshields, all titan-based. Knights aren't a terrible support element but they already sorta make a mockery of having to own command terminals that account for a whole 1 thing (armour pips), I don't think adding a bunch of stompas or gargans that function similarly would do anything good for a titan focused game. I'll say it again, we already have to pretend knights as their own faction is a good thing for the game. Xenos armies for titanicus aren't coming, maybe they'll do a cool xenos beast/monster box, there are already scenarios in a couple books with big alien monsters that attack stuff but that seems to be about the extent. Even in the latest book, any mention of xenos isn't even by name, simply "xenos raiders", it's not that the 30k universe is any more devoid of xenos than the 40k one but they're not the focus, it's loyalist vs traitor with a splash of blackshield.
If by some miracle they added xenos, the balance would be an issue as one of the best aspects of AT is its basically mirror match in addition to being alternating activation, it's as close to fair as you're gonna get. Xenos stuff like eldar will likely mess with that too much, for it to work they or other factions would still need a pretty rigid structure and to also have their own versions of command terminals and so on. If eldar titans show up and just work like obnoxious knights or orks get a book and all of a sudden its a sea of activations on one side it just pushes the game too out of whack. I'm all for orks or eldar models or necron that attack both players like an npc model or something. "Oh you rolled a 4 on the wtf table and some gargants showed up, roll for what game edge" "Oh crap, looks like they'll be shooting my warhound" I'm all for that stuff, ork pirates crumping out of sheer bordem or eldar pirates picking a fight above their weight, but it just doesn't make sense in a fairly rigidly structured game that centers around titans.
Spoiler:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Racerguy180 wrote: I think we will get Epic 30k before we see xenos titans in Titanicus.
I think that to be more likely as well. If the scale happens to match and there's cross pollination when it comes to some stratagems or something, sure. Already see that with epic minis and stratagems like titan hunter infantry or forward observers, I have a xiphon model to remind myself if I've used strafing run yet.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Malika2 wrote: But Epic 30k would be a totally separate game, not per se a way of further milking out Titanicus specifically.
As it sorta should be, titanicus being alternating activation means it's not that forgiving to each side having a truck load of activations. It just gets bogged down. Which is also to me why I hope this new titan is the biggest they go because its already a lot of shooting from one model, especially with all the 90 arc weaponry and only one being corridor.
Personally, I can see the Baneblade variants popping up first as they are slow and packing the same armament as titans; mega-bolters and volcano cannons. Also, I could have sworn that they have either ion or void shielding, but l can't find where it states that. Must be thinking of something else...
I think we’ll probably see Xenos eventually, but they aren’t needed for a while. I wouldn’t be surprised if balance falls apart as soon as another faction is added too, this being a GW game after all. That’s why I’m in no rush for them personally.
I can't imagine how to balance agile titans and knights that can fly, jump, and have more powerful psychic abilities than the Imperial titan without butchering said titans and knight for "balance reason".
Which I'm certain if they made rule for these, they'll mess it up and upset one side of players.
SamusDrake wrote: Also, I could have sworn that they have either ion or void shielding, but l can't find where it states that. Must be thinking of something else...
They don't, they have thick front armor, and tanky enough to take a few shot from titan destroyer class weapons. Don't want to be shot at? Use smoke launcher.
My hobby table was a mess, covered in half built models, paint pots, resin dust, half cut sprue. I decided to clean it up, and after a three hour job I found a box neatly packed under it with all my AT stuff in it, still sealed up.
Went down to my FLGS later in the day, and discovered that they're preparing to open back up for in person gaming!
The owner kept telling me about some new titan and one thing lead to another...well, now I am finally building my stock of models. Did GW happen to say when we might see this new Warmaster Titan?
Togusa wrote: I was cleaning up my house this past weekend.
My hobby table was a mess, covered in half built models, paint pots, resin dust, half cut sprue. I decided to clean it up, and after a three hour job I found a box neatly packed under it with all my AT stuff in it, still sealed up.
Went down to my FLGS later in the day, and discovered that they're preparing to open back up for in person gaming!
The owner kept telling me about some new titan and one thing lead to another...well, now I am finally building my stock of models. Did GW happen to say when we might see this new Warmaster Titan?
They don’t give out those kinds of details on the previews but the general window for the previewed stuff is within 3 months.
The fact that we already have the command terminal published leads me to believe it may be sooner rather than later within that bracket but no guarantees.
I guess we know at this point that it is at least 3 weeks away, as we've seen the pre-orders for next Saturday now and GW are currently only doing pre-orders every 2 weeks at the moment (I assume AT pre-orders wont be any different, except possibly any Forgeworld releases).
They don't, they have thick front armor, and tanky enough to take a few shot from titan destroyer class weapons. Don't want to be shot at? Use smoke launcher.
SamusDrake wrote: Personally, I can see the Baneblade variants popping up first as they are slow and packing the same armament as titans; mega-bolters and volcano cannons. Also, I could have sworn that they have either ion or void shielding, but l can't find where it states that. Must be thinking of something else...
OMG, I would so love Titanicus if the Doom Turtles could be their own thing!
Super heavy tanks might not of had shields, but you you might of been thinking of the Capitol Imperialis and Leviathon. They were mobile command centres and had void shields.
Ordinatus had void shields. Ordinatus Minoris would be a cool addition to the game. Warlord scale gun on a warhound level chassis effectively. Keep it moving like a titan rather than a knight. Long ways on a warlord base, and use part of the sprue for a new template that fits the narrow end of the oval rather than the current ones.
TBH I think the problem is more that you've developed a very specific idea in your mind of what AT "should" be that's somewhat at odds with the reality of it, even the reality of it when it was being developed. I mean, are you really going to tell me AT was only ever intended to be a 2-5 engine mirrormatch when we have interviews with the creator of the ruleset clearly stating that he wrote them purposefully such that they could support vehicle and even infantry elements in future if that was an option the company wanted to pursue? The 2-5 engine mirrormatch was always clearly the starting point for AT, not its totality, and whether you like that or not it's something you're really going to have to learn to live with if you want to keep playing the game going forward. Besides which, at this point I think this esports-esque conception of AT as the pinnacle of balanced tactical brow-furrowed seriousness is already something of a memory; forget Knights, even just the plethora of Legio rules(and build-your-own) and traits - with no doubt many more to come - have introduced some clear imbalances. Nothing on the level of a typical GW game of course, AT is still the best modern ruleset and one of their best of all time, but there are clear better and worse options now not merely situationally but absolutely. I don't see any reason that would have to get radically worse with the inclusion of Xenos engines.
The books so far have contained what they do because the setting is currently the Heresy, there's absolutely nothing preventing them from deciding to nip backwards and do a few books covering the Crusade, or forwards to detail a (hopefully less spectacularly dumb)version of War of the Beast, or the Interregnum, or the Apostasy, or the Tyrannic Wars, or entirely new events of their own devising if & when they decide to expand things.
"the creator of the ruleset clearly stating that he wrote them purposefully such that they could support vehicle and even infantry elements in future if that was an option the company wanted to pursue?" They already have, titan hunter infantry, that's not the same as titanicus becoming epic because people want it to be, nor does making a game alternate activation speak to endless scale, you'd need a 30k/40k style turn sequence to support it.
" it's something you're really going to have to learn to live with if you want to keep playing the game going forward."
Really not though, you're going to have to learn adeptus titanicus is, shockingly, a game about titans... I don't know what else it could be.
It's pretty simple, the game is alternating activation with a handful of models, and that's largely why it works as well as it does. That doesn't translate well to adding 50 tanks or hundreds of infantry just as well as it doesn't translate to adding super robots that fly (eldar) or a sea of garbage robots (orks). It's a game already made worse by the less than balanced faction rules, which you mentioned. The game falls apart the higher the points go, simply because even with attrition there's simply too many activations. This is a game where something like reserves is very rare and often only present in specific scenarios and not really in the core game. There's a physical space limit for command terminals as well as a limit on both players ability to wield so many titans. Myself after about 6 titans there's very little space to even place the terminals and I'm fortunate enough to have a 4x8 table.
Epic Armageddon was alternating activation. I haven't actually played the new Adeptus Titanicus, but I have managed to glance at the rulebook and so the discussion of whether (and how) it could be expanded is pretty interesting to me.
Nurglitch wrote: Epic Armageddon was alternating activation. I haven't actually played the new Adeptus Titanicus, but I have managed to glance at the rulebook and so the discussion of whether (and how) it could be expanded is pretty interesting to me.
Ya but if I'm not mistaken you're activating sections, I don't believe opponents alternate every rhino or base of infantry, it's like a sub list.
To bring it back to the big guy, my concern with ever increasing scale of titans is at some point it feels like we're adding a baneblade to kill team, now that's a bit extreme in terms of example but my point is more on the activation side. It's also not just the amount of firepower, it's also the fact that 4/5 weapons have a 90 degree arc. At least with the 5 weapons 2 of them are "special" but the question is how many is too many weapons for one platform? Silly amounts of firepower based on platform size is just as noticeable at the other end with the porphyrion. Like if this ends up not being the biggest titan an we see an imperator, how many guns is too many? At what point does making a fluffly and fairly accurate depiction of the firepower a titan that scale can wield just not good for the game?
Super heavy tanks might not of had shields, but you you might of been thinking of the Capitol Imperialis and Leviathon. They were mobile command centres and had void shields.
Not the ones I was thinking of but I like them already!
Crablezworth wrote: "the creator of the ruleset clearly stating that he wrote them purposefully such that they could support vehicle and even infantry elements in future if that was an option the company wanted to pursue?" They already have, titan hunter infantry, that's not the same as titanicus becoming epic because people want it to be, nor does making a game alternate activation speak to endless scale, you'd need a 30k/40k style turn sequence to support it.
" it's something you're really going to have to learn to live with if you want to keep playing the game going forward."
Really not though, you're going to have to learn adeptus titanicus is, shockingly, a game about titans... I don't know what else it could be.
It's pretty simple, the game is alternating activation with a handful of models, and that's largely why it works as well as it does. That doesn't translate well to adding 50 tanks or hundreds of infantry just as well as it doesn't translate to adding super robots that fly (eldar) or a sea of garbage robots (orks). It's a game already made worse by the less than balanced faction rules, which you mentioned. The game falls apart the higher the points go, simply because even with attrition there's simply too many activations. This is a game where something like reserves is very rare and often only present in specific scenarios and not really in the core game. There's a physical space limit for command terminals as well as a limit on both players ability to wield so many titans. Myself after about 6 titans there's very little space to even place the terminals and I'm fortunate enough to have a 4x8 table.
2nd Ed Space Marine worked fine with alternating activation, and that scaled pretty well (certainly I used to play at 4,000 points).
What helped there was a sliding scale of Victory Point target to win, but with a fixed number of objectives, which gave 5VPs to the player holding them.
Dude, if you got rust monsters to that size compared to tanks and titans, the Imperium got some problems those things are legendary for bringing decades of adventurers to their knees (as they sob over losing their prized items and then an actual foe comes and eats them) Oh and that basilisk has already turned a bunch of them to stone
Nurglitch wrote: Epic Armageddon was alternating activation. I haven't actually played the new Adeptus Titanicus, but I have managed to glance at the rulebook and so the discussion of whether (and how) it could be expanded is pretty interesting to me.
Ya but if I'm not mistaken you're activating sections, I don't believe opponents alternate every rhino or base of infantry, it's like a sub list.
No, it was by detachment. Of course, in Epic 40k a detachment was very variable in size and units.
Nurglitch wrote: Epic Armageddon was alternating activation. I haven't actually played the new Adeptus Titanicus, but I have managed to glance at the rulebook and so the discussion of whether (and how) it could be expanded is pretty interesting to me.
Ya but if I'm not mistaken you're activating sections, I don't believe opponents alternate every rhino or base of infantry, it's like a sub list.
To bring it back to the big guy, my concern with ever increasing scale of titans is at some point it feels like we're adding a baneblade to kill team, now that's a bit extreme in terms of example but my point is more on the activation side. It's also not just the amount of firepower, it's also the fact that 4/5 weapons have a 90 degree arc. At least with the 5 weapons 2 of them are "special" but the question is how many is too many weapons for one platform? Silly amounts of firepower based on platform size is just as noticeable at the other end with the porphyrion. Like if this ends up not being the biggest titan an we see an imperator, how many guns is too many? At what point does making a fluffly and fairly accurate depiction of the firepower a titan that scale can wield just not good for the game?
I think it does depend on how the units (detachments, Titans, etc) are broken up. I could see an Imperator Titan being pretty interesting to play with it is acted like 2-3 Titans in one base, which is to say you'd need to activate it 2x-3x to do everything it could do. It's kind of the inverse of small stuff like Knights being activated in groups.
The funny thing about Orks in Epic Armageddon was that, like in 40k, while they may outnumber an opponent in model-count, the number of units being activated was typically much smaller.
Nurglitch wrote: Epic Armageddon was alternating activation. I haven't actually played the new Adeptus Titanicus, but I have managed to glance at the rulebook and so the discussion of whether (and how) it could be expanded is pretty interesting to me.
Ya but if I'm not mistaken you're activating sections, I don't believe opponents alternate every rhino or base of infantry, it's like a sub list.
No, it was by detachment. Of course, in Epic 40k a detachment was very variable in size and units.
True, and my concern is just a big asymmetry in activation, like 5-6 activations vs like 20. Mostly because you get this weird long tail end for on side until casualties build up.
The funny thing about Orks in Epic Armageddon was that, like in 40k, while they may outnumber an opponent in model-count, the number of units being activated was typically much smaller.
Ya I just mean relative to the titans, so like 15-20 stompas/gargants to like 5 titans? I dunno. I'm not exactly opposed to a small supporting element helping titans it just shouldn't be an all out force like you see in epic. You can already see how both sides having like 1-10 bases of titan hunter infantry would affect the game, it's adding potentially 20 activations on top of titans/knights. I'm used to playing with 10 sp per side so it's no uncommon for both sides to have at least 2 bases of titan hunters, could really add up the higher we go.
So here's hoping an imperator if they come out with one doesn't have like 7-10 guns, it'd just get too silly.
On a side note but extra relevant with the warmaster, they really need a stratagem that counter acts strafing run that would work as an upgrade to ardax on the warbringer and warmaster given the amount of AA mounted on both. Also ardax needs an another stratagem upgrade to help it deal with titan hunter infantry, as it stands now its useless, sort of a downer.
Wish I could see it in a different paint scheme, this one is too optimus prime on acid.
The ratio of Gargants to Titans has always been roughly 1:1, with a Great Gargant the equivalent of a Warlord Titan, and originally Stompas were the equivalent of Knights but in the modern era Stompas are now what used to be Mekboy Gargants (and Warhound equivalent), and Morkanauts/Gorkanauts look very much like the original plastic Stompas. I don't really see the number of activations changing.
Likewise, I don't see why the Titan-hunter infantry/Gorkanauts/whatever-else wouldn't be handled in collections like Knight Banners.
Nurglitch wrote: The ratio of Gargants to Titans has always been roughly 1:1, with a Great Gargant the equivalent of a Warlord Titan, and originally Stompas were the equivalent of Knights but in the modern era Stompas are now what used to be Mekboy Gargants (and Warhound equivalent), and Morkanauts/Gorkanauts look very much like the original plastic Stompas. I don't really see the number of activations changing.
Likewise, I don't see why the Titan-hunter infantry/Gorkanauts/whatever-else wouldn't be handled in collections like Knight Banners.
They've handled titan hunters like a well kept secret because of lack of models I guess, but also stuff like ardax needs to be able to work against those things unlike how it currently functions. That would at least give an indication they play their own game. Again just because any of us want any of these things doesn't mean gw in its current iteration is able to deliver them competently. Like with the open engine war cards, they forget the game doesn't have a core deployment method and just forgot to make one entirely. I may want gargants and other things at least from a model perspective but I don't really trust their implementation, especially with the giant titan that feels like a bait and switch with what they were heavily hinting towards, corrupted titans and chaos stuff.
No, it was by detachment. Of course, in Epic 40k a detachment was very variable in size and units.
True, and my concern is just a big asymmetry in activation, like 5-6 activations vs like 20. Mostly because you get this weird long tail end for on side until casualties build up.
I mean, if there's a big difference in units, that will kind of happen no matter if it's alternating activation or IGOUGO. Simply put, the side with lesser units will eat more fire.
In the case of Epic, the order only matters because you could try and kill or suppress detachments before they can shoot themselves; other than that, units will get shoot and be supressed the same.
TBH I think the problem is more that you've developed a very specific idea in your mind of what AT "should" be that's somewhat at odds with the reality of it, even the reality of it when it was being developed. I mean, are you really going to tell me AT was only ever intended to be a 2-5 engine mirrormatch when we have interviews with the creator of the ruleset clearly stating that he wrote them purposefully such that they could support vehicle and even infantry elements in future if that was an option the company wanted to pursue? The 2-5 engine mirrormatch was always clearly the starting point for AT, not its totality, and whether you like that or not it's something you're really going to have to learn to live with if you want to keep playing the game going forward. Besides which, at this point I think this esports-esque conception of AT as the pinnacle of balanced tactical brow-furrowed seriousness is already something of a memory; forget Knights, even just the plethora of Legio rules(and build-your-own) and traits - with no doubt many more to come - have introduced some clear imbalances. Nothing on the level of a typical GW game of course, AT is still the best modern ruleset and one of their best of all time, but there are clear better and worse options now not merely situationally but absolutely. I don't see any reason that would have to get radically worse with the inclusion of Xenos engines.
The books so far have contained what they do because the setting is currently the Heresy, there's absolutely nothing preventing them from deciding to nip backwards and do a few books covering the Crusade, or forwards to detail a (hopefully less spectacularly dumb)version of War of the Beast, or the Interregnum, or the Apostasy, or the Tyrannic Wars, or entirely new events of their own devising if & when they decide to expand things.
Literallly every time I've ever seen the designers get asked that question(xenos yadda yadda), they've explicitly stated that they wanted the focus of AT to be on the Horus Heresy and the titans in that particular conflict. Frankly I'd rather have them bring back Epic 40K before adding xenos anything to Titanicus. There's a reason that the name of the game is Adeptus Titanicus: the Horus Heresy. It's not Adeptus Titanicus: Some Imperial Titans and a Bunch of Xenos Robots.
If you're talking about aircraft, adapting the Epic Armageddon aircraft rules would be fairly easy to adapt to Titanicus.
In summary (from what I can remember as it's been a long time since I played Epic Armageddon. Probably 10 years now), when you activate aircraft for a turn, you can assign a mission to the aircraft squadron (Combat Air Patrol - chase off enemy aircraft, Ground Attack - bombing run/strafing run, Transport - drop off infantry). Doing something similar with Titanicus would work and then you'd give the AA guns some sort of interceptor ruling that they can strike at aircraft in a certain range. The aircraft stay on the board for the turn and fly off allowing you to retaliate with AA guns only. It'd give something for the Warbringer, Warmaster and even the Knights Rocket Pods and Icarus Weapons to do.
The attacks wouldn't be devastating but, if left ignored, would pose a problem as they pick apart shields and pounce on shutdown Titans.
After the turn is over, they spend a few turns re-arming and returning meaning you'd have to commit them at the right time for the best benefit.
As for the amount of activitions, they'd do what they did with previous editions of Epic. You wouldn't activate a single Land Raider but a whole company. Same for infantry, etc. Titan Hunter infantry are probably abstracted and could end up being 3-6 stands of Rapier Laser Destroyers or Rapier Graviton Cannons which, again, work as a single activation.
Knight Rocket pods (boh of them) are built to hit infantry and ground targets.
The only known icarus rocket pods are from mechanicus and primaris tanks, or vehicle is equipped with targeting array, like Helical array for Dreadnought, will also allow them to target supersonic flyers.
Zwan1One wrote: I think on one of the GW podcasts they mentioned that they wouldn’t add xenos titans as this is the Horus heresy era. If it was the War of the Beast then you would see Ork Gargants. So hopefully when they eventually add xenos that could how they do it, by introducing them in a new campaign book and not bolted on to the Horus heresy.
Yes, and they've been very consistent about that. We may get xenos Titans after they've done everything they can for the HH setting (which could include the Warbringer variant, Rapier Titan, the Reaver-WH 'tweener, Corrupted Titans, more Psi Titans, probably even more Knights, maybe a Warmaster variant, etc.). All you guys 'sitting on the sidelines until you get your xenos' would do better by supporting the current game and making it something that GW will want to continue past the HH. Which will go on for quite some time as long as it makes business sense.
Still, I think xenos Titans are far more likely than them cramming more non-Titan junk into AT and turning it into a bad version of Epic. Setting aside the potential gameplay issues, you can deliver an entire AT Ork faction with 3 or 4 kits. Same for AT Eldar. Epic will want more than a handful of kits, and with so many third party providers, 3d printing options etc. for little tanks and dudes...I just don't know where the money would be for GW. Titan models are a different thing.
And I don't understand the hand-wringing about xenos Titan rules. The way you keep them from being outliers that break the game is by writing rules for them that aren't outliers. You write them to fit the existing system, not to work completely differently. And then playtest them. Given that the scope would be so limited (unlike 40K, etc.), it wouldn't be particularly difficult to playtest. And again...they'll have plenty to time to think about them, because xenos aren't imminent.
No, none of it is news per se but where GW is pushing out things like the Warmaster Titan it can encourage or discourage prospective players from putting a toe in. I think it's something of an indicator where the game is going, in that new content is going to be variations on existing content which makes the notion of Xenos kind of pointless (either they're just a fancy re-skin of Imperial Titans, or they're different and game-breaking).
The game already hinges on the contrivance of battles that were largely fought on both sides by titans, there were likely just as many outright slaughters where only one side hand engines and got their butts kicked. So 30k really is a great setting for it, fluff wise its already allowed for many factions to be playable as both loyalist or traitor. Outside of that framework tho stuff gets sketchy, we all want to see an new epic, it need not come at the cost of AT.
If big robot is the way things are going, lets hope gw remembers they keep confusing impassable terrain and blocking terrain in the new book and they also might want to faq the engine war cards to function. When they get a chance. Lets hope big robot doesn't come at the cost of good stewardship of the game. We all know they'll have to address the warmaster when it comes to stuff like custom legio rules.
Mr. Grey wrote: Literallly every time I've ever seen the designers get asked that question(xenos yadda yadda), they've explicitly stated that they wanted the focus of AT to be on the Horus Heresy and the titans in that particular conflict. Frankly I'd rather have them bring back Epic 40K before adding xenos anything to Titanicus. There's a reason that the name of the game is Adeptus Titanicus: the Horus Heresy. It's not Adeptus Titanicus: Some Imperial Titans and a Bunch of Xenos Robots.
They've actually told us pretty clearly what that's coming (at least by modern standards)...'tweener Titans, more Knights, the WL Psi Titan -- all delivered -- with more 'tweeners, Corrupted Titans, and more Psi Titans being teased. That's the next few years of the game. People just don't want to listen.
To be honest, if they're canny, they'll release infantry and tanks under the Space Marine (as in Epic Space Marine) brand. But using the same engine. They can do the classic "Codex Titanicus" bridge rules that include mixed campaigns and forces and call it Epic Battles.
That way, people can pick and choose without needing to learn a new system. So if you want pure Titans (Adeptus Titancius), pure Infantry and Tanks (Space Marine) or combined (Epic) then you're set. Also, if you want to include a Reaver Titan as a support unit for your legion battlegroup, you can. Or maybe you want to include a Legion Falchion Titan Killer company alongside your maniple, you can.
TBH I think the problem is more that you've developed a very specific idea in your mind of what AT "should" be that's somewhat at odds with the reality of it, even the reality of it when it was being developed. I mean, are you really going to tell me AT was only ever intended to be a 2-5 engine mirrormatch when we have interviews with the creator of the ruleset clearly stating that he wrote them purposefully such that they could support vehicle and even infantry elements in future if that was an option the company wanted to pursue? The 2-5 engine mirrormatch was always clearly the starting point for AT, not its totality, and whether you like that or not it's something you're really going to have to learn to live with if you want to keep playing the game going forward. Besides which, at this point I think this esports-esque conception of AT as the pinnacle of balanced tactical brow-furrowed seriousness is already something of a memory; forget Knights, even just the plethora of Legio rules(and build-your-own) and traits - with no doubt many more to come - have introduced some clear imbalances. Nothing on the level of a typical GW game of course, AT is still the best modern ruleset and one of their best of all time, but there are clear better and worse options now not merely situationally but absolutely. I don't see any reason that would have to get radically worse with the inclusion of Xenos engines.
The books so far have contained what they do because the setting is currently the Heresy, there's absolutely nothing preventing them from deciding to nip backwards and do a few books covering the Crusade, or forwards to detail a (hopefully less spectacularly dumb)version of War of the Beast, or the Interregnum, or the Apostasy, or the Tyrannic Wars, or entirely new events of their own devising if & when they decide to expand things.
Literallly every time I've ever seen the designers get asked that question(xenos yadda yadda), they've explicitly stated that they wanted the focus of AT to be on the Horus Heresy and the titans in that particular conflict. Frankly I'd rather have them bring back Epic 40K before adding xenos anything to Titanicus. There's a reason that the name of the game is Adeptus Titanicus: the Horus Heresy. It's not Adeptus Titanicus: Some Imperial Titans and a Bunch of Xenos Robots.
“Uhhhhh... This is a Horus Heresy game, not a warhammer game!” Always reads to me as a tremendously flimsy excuse to not have to worry about model diversity rather than an actual creative choice. It’s not a bad idea when they have so little of the company’s resources, but pretending it’s about creative integrity rather than “the only faction signifiers we can afford right now are Aquila and Eye shoulderpads” seems a bit dishonest.
Hell, one can only hope people who’ve painted up a heretic house won’t be too put out if the game gets the go-ahead to do bigger releases and they find themselves playing as a chaos Titan house with insufficient visual spikes and leering daemon faces.
zedmeister wrote: To be honest, if they're canny, they'll release infantry and tanks under the Space Marine (as in Epic Space Marine) brand. But using the same engine. They can do the classic "Codex Titanicus" bridge rules that include mixed campaigns and forces and call it Epic Battles.
That way, people can pick and choose without needing to learn a new system. So if you want pure Titans (Adeptus Titancius), pure Infantry and Tanks (Space Marine) or combined (Epic) then you're set. Also, if you want to include a Reaver Titan as a support unit for your legion battlegroup, you can. Or maybe you want to include a Legion Falchion Titan Killer company alongside your maniple, you can.
The problem before is that as more infantry and normal vehicles got added to the game, they simplified titans more and more to better fit with them, taking away from the titanicus side.
A titan game doesn't need model diversity outside of, well, titans. Hey a game that focusses on titans, let's make it not that is exactly the argument it is. Battlefleet gothic didn't need more tanks...
zedmeister wrote: To be honest, if they're canny, they'll release infantry and tanks under the Space Marine (as in Epic Space Marine) brand. But using the same engine. They can do the classic "Codex Titanicus" bridge rules that include mixed campaigns and forces and call it Epic Battles.
That way, people can pick and choose without needing to learn a new system. So if you want pure Titans (Adeptus Titancius), pure Infantry and Tanks (Space Marine) or combined (Epic) then you're set. Also, if you want to include a Reaver Titan as a support unit for your legion battlegroup, you can. Or maybe you want to include a Legion Falchion Titan Killer company alongside your maniple, you can.
The problem before is that as more infantry and normal vehicles got added to the game, they simplified titans more and more to better fit with them, taking away from the titanicus side.
Exactly, I don't mind a splash of battlefield asset stratagems and if that comes to include a handful of tanks or infantry or planes then so be it, but the focus should still be on titans.
If anything, the core matched play should focus around objectives held by tiny little assets that may as well be just markers that can get scooped like titan hunters and hopefully more delicate than titan hunters, who are currently as resilient as a bunker for some reason. I don't think a few tanks or armigers or a handful of skitarii or marines would ruin AT, but they should be a supporting element only like the current battlefield asset stratagems and not like a company strength force.
zedmeister wrote: To be honest, if they're canny, they'll release infantry and tanks under the Space Marine (as in Epic Space Marine) brand. But using the same engine. They can do the classic "Codex Titanicus" bridge rules that include mixed campaigns and forces and call it Epic Battles.
That way, people can pick and choose without needing to learn a new system. So if you want pure Titans (Adeptus Titancius), pure Infantry and Tanks (Space Marine) or combined (Epic) then you're set. Also, if you want to include a Reaver Titan as a support unit for your legion battlegroup, you can. Or maybe you want to include a Legion Falchion Titan Killer company alongside your maniple, you can.
The problem before is that as more infantry and normal vehicles got added to the game, they simplified titans more and more to better fit with them, taking away from the titanicus side.
Right. If nu-Epic ever happens, we'll be looking at a new system with greatly simplified Titans built for it. It won't be a bolt-on to a game that by design features lots of crunch and detail around the Titan component. Which I believe the designers have also said.
zedmeister wrote: To be honest, if they're canny, they'll release infantry and tanks under the Space Marine (as in Epic Space Marine) brand. But using the same engine. They can do the classic "Codex Titanicus" bridge rules that include mixed campaigns and forces and call it Epic Battles.
That way, people can pick and choose without needing to learn a new system. So if you want pure Titans (Adeptus Titancius), pure Infantry and Tanks (Space Marine) or combined (Epic) then you're set. Also, if you want to include a Reaver Titan as a support unit for your legion battlegroup, you can. Or maybe you want to include a Legion Falchion Titan Killer company alongside your maniple, you can.
The problem before is that as more infantry and normal vehicles got added to the game, they simplified titans more and more to better fit with them, taking away from the titanicus side.
I'm pretty sure it went the opposite way. Adeptus Titanicus was simple, universal charts and D6s, and a card for each variant Titan. By the time we got to Titan Legions the Imperator had three different cards, four different tokens (Void shields, hellstorm ammo, two-sided plasma, and damage), and four different kinds of D6 (scatter dice, aiming dice, artillery dice, regular dice).
Crablezworth wrote: Wish I could see it in a different paint scheme, this one is too optimus prime on acid.
Oh that's what it reminds me of. It's irritating in the same way Michael Bay Transformers are irritating Right general shape but just too much stupid gak going on on every square inch of surface trying too hard to give an illusion of mechanical functionality.
Crablezworth wrote: Wish I could see it in a different paint scheme, this one is too optimus prime on acid.
Oh that's what it reminds me of. It's irritating in the same way Michael Bay Transformers are irritating Right general shape but just too much stupid gak going on on every square inch of surface trying too hard to give an illusion of mechanical functionality.
The knee is a perfectly stable weapons platform, I won't hear anymore of it! Harumph!
I guess we're just lucky it doesn't have the crotch gun.
Togusa wrote: I was cleaning up my house this past weekend.
My hobby table was a mess, covered in half built models, paint pots, resin dust, half cut sprue. I decided to clean it up, and after a three hour job I found a box neatly packed under it with all my AT stuff in it, still sealed up.
Went down to my FLGS later in the day, and discovered that they're preparing to open back up for in person gaming!
The owner kept telling me about some new titan and one thing lead to another...well, now I am finally building my stock of models. Did GW happen to say when we might see this new Warmaster Titan?
They don’t give out those kinds of details on the previews but the general window for the previewed stuff is within 3 months.
The fact that we already have the command terminal published leads me to believe it may be sooner rather than later within that bracket but no guarantees.
Thanks! I don't mind waiting, I've got a bunch of stuff to work on in the interim and the weather is finally turning more to spring here so I'll be able to get stuff primed outside probably about the time this model comes out!
Nurglitch wrote: By the time we got to Titan Legions the Imperator had three different cards, four different tokens (Void shields, hellstorm ammo, two-sided plasma, and damage), and four different kinds of D6 (scatter dice, aiming dice, artillery dice, regular dice).
Don’t forget the garrisoned infantry tokens and order tokens.
AT IV is much simpler by comparison and, even if the Imperator marched to war once again, I doubt the core mechanics would be adjusted too much since you could easily deal with the towers, assuming you even wanted to make them separate components, by turning the “special” result into “roll again” with each result being a different tower gun or the main dome.
The Warmaster is featured in March’s White Dwarf (WarCom)
Slayer of Gods
Welcome to the Warmaster Titan’s White Dwarf debut. In this article, this truly monstrous Heavy Battle Titan is the star of two narrative missions that you can refight, representing some of the first engine wars into which the Warmaster was unleashed.
If you can’t wait to see your mighty new god-engine duking it out with other Titans on the battlefield, make sure you pick up this month’s issue.
Warmaster has the alternate head though that's good. Is the gun the same? the bronze version looks like it has a crosshatch pattern rather than the vertical lines that plasma weapons usually have.
JWBS wrote: Warmaster has the alternate head though that's good. Is the gun the same? the bronze version looks like it has a crosshatch pattern rather than the vertical lines that plasma weapons usually have.
Same arm weapons from the looks of it. It has them on the cover the loyalist legio book too it seems.
Yep, nice to see the Plasma Blastguns for the shoulder weapons and the head from the book cover in a standard shot (so we know it's not just a photoshop), so seems like at least 3 shoulder weapon options and 3 heads. Oh, and this was pretty much a given, but also obviously has the Loyalist carapace armour decoration, wonder if there will be plain versions as well?
I'm guessing the shoulder weapons likely only consist of the extra barrels\front pieces to stick onto the mount with the rest not being modelled, so could see more, Vulcan Mega-bolters for instance would only require a very small piece. edit - Although looking at the plasma blast guns again, when they are rotated, more of the rear of the weapon is visible, so perhaps they are fully modelled.
13th definitely seems like a probable pre-order date, possibly alongside Cursed City?
Though all I really want to know now is, when do we get the 28mm Warmaster!
Tavis75 wrote: Though all I really want to know now is, when do we get the 28mm Warmaster!
Very unlikely. They stated that the Warlord was already pushing the limits of what was possible with Resin. I'd suspect that the Warmaster would breach that unless they come up with some new resin or method of casting and support. Besides, deployed into a large 30K game, 2 Suzerain Plasma Destructors will pretty much obliterate anything on the board in a single round! They'd be to D-Weapons what D-Weapons are to S10 weapons.
Tavis75 wrote: Though all I really want to know now is, when do we get the 28mm Warmaster!
Very unlikely. They stated that the Warlord was already pushing the limits of what was possible with Resin. I'd suspect that the Warmaster would breach that unless they come up with some new resin or method of casting and support. Besides, deployed into a large 30K game, 2 Suzerain Plasma Destructors will pretty much obliterate anything on the board in a single round! They'd be to D-Weapons what D-Weapons are to S10 weapons.
The comment on the FW Facebook page was "That would be a huge model, but who knows what the future might hold.", which I read as "28mm Warmaster Titan officially confirmed".
It seems like it should be possible, the Warlord is pretty sturdy (if it's built well) and the Warmaster is far chunkier, especially around the legs, much bigger surface areas on the joints by the looks of it and generally thicker resin, plus the lower legs look like they almost have some sort of second support at the back coming down to the foot from the knee. The biggest issue would likely be the guns, as they look pretty hefty, though they have some pretty big pieces behind the elbow, so probably well balanced, it would just be a downward pull.
I guess it might be a bit of a struggle to build with superglue and no pinning, but you'd hope for a model like that FW could make the assumption that someone buying it knows what they're doing, considering I would expect it to be upwards of £2,000.
As you say, for actual use in a game it would be fairly impractical but could have a use for a very large game, or for the people who play AT at 28mm scale, but definitely see it as more of a modelling project\display piece, which TBH even the Warlord is really.
Tavis75 wrote: The comment on the FW Facebook page was "That would be a huge model, but who knows what the future might hold.", which I read as "28mm Warmaster Titan officially confirmed"
That's their standard response to most requests so who knows. Personally, I highly doubt it but happy to be proved wrong.
Tavis75 wrote: Though all I really want to know now is, when do we get the 28mm Warmaster!
Very unlikely. They stated that the Warlord was already pushing the limits of what was possible with Resin. I'd suspect that the Warmaster would breach that unless they come up with some new resin or method of casting and support. Besides, deployed into a large 30K game, 2 Suzerain Plasma Destructors will pretty much obliterate anything on the board in a single round! They'd be to D-Weapons what D-Weapons are to S10 weapons.
The comment on the FW Facebook page was "That would be a huge model, but who knows what the future might hold.", which I read as "28mm Warmaster Titan officially confirmed".
It seems like it should be possible, the Warlord is pretty sturdy (if it's built well) and the Warmaster is far chunkier, especially around the legs, much bigger surface areas on the joints by the looks of it and generally thicker resin, plus the lower legs look like they almost have some sort of second support at the back coming down to the foot from the knee. The biggest issue would likely be the guns, as they look pretty hefty, though they have some pretty big pieces behind the elbow, so probably well balanced, it would just be a downward pull.
I guess it might be a bit of a struggle to build with superglue and no pinning, but you'd hope for a model like that FW could make the assumption that someone buying it knows what they're doing, considering I would expect it to be upwards of £2,000.
As you say, for actual use in a game it would be fairly impractical but could have a use for a very large game, or for the people who play AT at 28mm scale, but definitely see it as more of a modelling project\display piece, which TBH even the Warlord is really.
I think the 'limit' is what you can build with superglue. I'm not sure where I saw it, but I seem to recall that the official position is that all of the kits need to be able to be completely built using only items that GW sell. Certainly the warlord instructions tell you to "Use Citadel Superglue to glue the resin pieces together", which gave me a brief chuckle as I reached for the JB Weld. I absolutely would not trust that model with just superglue and no pinning, but built properly with a good epoxy and pins in the major load-bearing joints, it's pretty solid.
I wouldn't read too much into the social media response. It's likely that whoever answered that question has no idea whether the design studio are working on a 28mm version or not. That sounds like their usual "we don't have an answer so say something upbeat about how cool it would be" response.
Looking forward to picking one up (AT scale!) when they release. It's also nice to see the volcano cannon warbringer, though as has been said, seeing the same head design suggests that it's maybe not a new plastic sprue. There's the new Mars Delta pattern head for the full size version that would have made sense to include if they were doing a new sprue. But on the other hand, the Lucius pattern head for the Warlord that they (used to) make in full size never made it to the AT version, so who knows.
Crablezworth wrote: Really hoping it has the card terminal and cards in the box, dare to dream.
Based on past experience, they might do another "All the Titans" thick card set that will include one Warmaster along with the others.
Or a Heavy Titan set with say 2 warlords 2 warbringers and a warmaster. I'm at least hoping for warmaster and warbringer weapon card decks like the other 3 have. They could even preview a couple new weapon load outs in them as well.
Tavis75 wrote: Though all I really want to know now is, when do we get the 28mm Warmaster!
Very unlikely. They stated that the Warlord was already pushing the limits of what was possible with Resin. I'd suspect that the Warmaster would breach that unless they come up with some new resin or method of casting and support. Besides, deployed into a large 30K game, 2 Suzerain Plasma Destructors will pretty much obliterate anything on the board in a single round! They'd be to D-Weapons what D-Weapons are to S10 weapons.
The comment on the FW Facebook page was "That would be a huge model, but who knows what the future might hold.", which I read as "28mm Warmaster Titan officially confirmed".
It seems like it should be possible, the Warlord is pretty sturdy (if it's built well) and the Warmaster is far chunkier, especially around the legs, much bigger surface areas on the joints by the looks of it and generally thicker resin, plus the lower legs look like they almost have some sort of second support at the back coming down to the foot from the knee. The biggest issue would likely be the guns, as they look pretty hefty, though they have some pretty big pieces behind the elbow, so probably well balanced, it would just be a downward pull.
I guess it might be a bit of a struggle to build with superglue and no pinning, but you'd hope for a model like that FW could make the assumption that someone buying it knows what they're doing, considering I would expect it to be upwards of £2,000.
As you say, for actual use in a game it would be fairly impractical but could have a use for a very large game, or for the people who play AT at 28mm scale, but definitely see it as more of a modelling project\display piece, which TBH even the Warlord is really.
I think the 'limit' is what you can build with superglue. I'm not sure where I saw it, but I seem to recall that the official position is that all of the kits need to be able to be completely built using only items that GW sell. Certainly the warlord instructions tell you to "Use Citadel Superglue to glue the resin pieces together", which gave me a brief chuckle as I reached for the JB Weld. I absolutely would not trust that model with just superglue and no pinning, but built properly with a good epoxy and pins in the major load-bearing joints, it's pretty solid.
I wouldn't read too much into the social media response. It's likely that whoever answered that question has no idea whether the design studio are working on a 28mm version or not. That sounds like their usual "we don't have an answer so say something upbeat about how cool it would be" response.
Looking forward to picking one up (AT scale!) when they release. It's also nice to see the volcano cannon warbringer, though as has been said, seeing the same head design suggests that it's maybe not a new plastic sprue. There's the new Mars Delta pattern head for the full size version that would have made sense to include if they were doing a new sprue. But on the other hand, the Lucius pattern head for the Warlord that they (used to) make in full size never made it to the AT version, so who knows.
Yeah, you'd have to be a little crazy to just use superglue on a $1500+ resin model. Or just literally never touch the thing once it hits the shelf. Heck I use epoxy on any resin as big or bigger than the FW contemptor--and even then, I use pins for joints.
Once the Warmaster AT kit is released I expect we'll see a bit of a race to a 3D printed copy that can be scaled up to 28 mm. 3D printed plastic is so much better suited for giant kits than solid-cast resin. It's lighter weight, stronger, and more responsive to glues (especially if you're printing in ABS). I wouldn't want to assemble a legit FW Warlord or Warmaster, but I'd certainly be down to print one!
Prometheum5 wrote: Once the Warmaster AT kit is released I expect we'll see a bit of a race to a 3D printed copy that can be scaled up to 28 mm. 3D printed plastic is so much better suited for giant kits than solid-cast resin. It's lighter weight, stronger, and more responsive to glues (especially if you're printing in ABS). I wouldn't want to assemble a legit FW Warlord or Warmaster, but I'd certainly be down to print one!
Forgeworld design their kits in mind to make them easily scalable for multiple systems. It really wouldn't surprise me to see a 40k Warmaster at some point.
I have no need for a Warmaster, but I'm looking forward to other things that may come alongside it! Catching up some with transfers would be too much to hope for, right?
.
.
.
Yeah, thought so.
The AT video game is getting a single player campaign release on march 26th, this also means the price may increase as it will no longer be early access. It's decent for the price but up till now you've only been able to play with skirmish mode or pre made scenarios so really hoping this adds more to it.
Really though...you can find alt heads if the one for this or that Titan doesn't float your boat. I found an alt Warbringer head on Etsy that I dig more than the one in the kit or the one we've seen in art and 28mm.
Point being it would be nice to have the whole engine be utterly daemonic in nature, not an otherwise normal chassis that has a few extra bits bolted on to it.
H.B.M.C. wrote: That titan is so nice it tempts me to get into AT.
And a friend of mine - the one who got me into this whole mess to begin with, so, so many years ago - just got into AT. So tempting...
lord_blackfang wrote: If you don't use the head from the Jes Goodwin sketch you're a skub
Get 2?
The starter box is a crazy good value
Automatically Appended Next Post:
zedmeister wrote: For corrupted Titans, I'm personally hoping for an old school Chaos biomechanical horror like the Mhara Gal:
I'd love all 4 gods having their own vibe in terms of glyphs/decorations in addition to that biomech horror look
I think they need like a two tier approach, one that's purely aesthetic like the glyphs and stuff and one that goes further and shows a truly corrupted titan that might include unique weapons/weargear.
I figure we'll start with minor corruptions on things like armour with the same "frame" underneath and then steadily see more and more warped titans until we are at full melted flesh and metal monsters.
It really depends how soft or fast the team want to make the Chaos s tuff and how they want to split it out.
In the end I think it would be a fantastic move as it will show GW's willingness and confidence in the line outside of marine mirror match situations and the current roster of titans is getting quite diverse. I'd worry if they don't start with some Chaos/Xenos soon then those factions will be plagued with having such a huge options gap between them and the Imperial forces that they aren't as fun as they should be.
I'd love all 4 gods having their own vibe in terms of glyphs/decorations in addition to that biomech horror look
I think they need like a two tier approach, one that's purely aesthetic like the glyphs and stuff and one that goes further and shows a truly corrupted titan that might include unique weapons/weargear.
Oh, I agree. I hope they go back to the Realm of Chaos style. All followers of the powers had the biomechanical look, but it was all slightly different.
I love all my titans but I really want the differences to represent just how far down the rabbit hole they've gone. The venomcrawler from 40k has some really nice looks to it(faces & whatnot in the armour) and I might think of working one up into a corrupted something or other.
With no article last month and it not being posted on the usual Tuesday this week, I was starting to think we'd been forgotten about!
Wonder if we'll see these released alongside the Warmaster. I think that and Cursed City are the only things from January's preview still to be released, so fingers crossed...
xttz wrote: With no article last month and it not being posted on the usual Tuesday this week, I was starting to think we'd been forgotten about!
Wonder if we'll see these released alongside the Warmaster. I think that and Cursed City are the only things from January's preview still to be released, so fingers crossed...
They've given up on the Specialist Games Tuesday postings. Not had Flight Plan for a while, though we've had a few Underhive Informants on different days of the week
Automatically Appended Next Post: Nice weapons! Been looking forward to the Volkite weapons
3 attack at S5, effective against knights.....Just use turbo laser. Knights don't lose void shield like TItan, and you still need a 4+ armor roll to even make them lose 1 structure point. Using the new volkite against knights is a waste.
Chopstick wrote: 3 attack at S5, effective against knights.....Just use turbo laser. Knights don't lose void shield like TItan, and you still need a 4+ armor roll to even make them lose 1 structure point. Using the new volkite against knights is a waste.
Chopstick wrote: 3 attack at S5, effective against knights.....Just use turbo laser. Knights don't lose void shield like TItan, and you still need a 4+ armor roll to even make them lose 1 structure point. Using the new volkite against knights is a waste.
That beam though, you're not rolling to hit.
That's only for the warlord's weapon, Did you know warlord have another weapon that use also their reactor and wipe out 2+ knights (or the entire banner) on average with range cover the entire battlefield? As oppose to.....3 S6 hit that deal 1 structure point on 3+, even if all 3 of your armor roll is 6, you deal 3 structure points, not enough to even kill a single questoris.
Unless I'm reading something wrong, volkites look much better versus Titans than Knights.
The voidbreaker trait agrees with you.
The beam trait is quite nasty as it inflicts automatic hits and if you destroy one knight then it carries on to the next one. Only downside is that its reactor-draining and the following target(s) suffer one less hit.
EDIT: Yup, Chopstick is correct. Its for the Warlord only. Makes sense as it has the more powerful reactor.
Chopstick wrote: 3 attack at S5, effective against knights.....Just use turbo laser. Knights don't lose void shield like TItan, and you still need a 4+ armor roll to even make them lose 1 structure point. Using the new volkite against knights is a waste.
That beam though, you're not rolling to hit.
That's only for the warlord's weapon, Did you know warlord have another weapon that use also their reactor and wipe out 2+ knights (or the entire banner) on average with range cover the entire battlefield? As oppose to.....3 S6 hit that deal 1 structure point on 3+
I think VMB/VE might be a pretty good combo on a shield-stripping Warhound. Although there's some overlap, each weapon does certain things better than the other.
gorgon wrote: I think VMB/VE might be a pretty good combo on a shield-stripping Warhound. Although there's some overlap, each weapon does certain things better than the other.
Not really, the VMB outshines the Volkite in pretty much everything. Native six shots with exploding sixes is on average better than the maximum of five that the Volkite outputs if you hit with everything. Voidbreaker doesn't trigger on every hit, just on the fact if there were any hits it adds two dice to be saved. When the shields are gone, no bonus and just +1 Str over the VMB, which is going to hit about three times more. Neither are good at breaking armour, so what they really want to do is pile on as much hits as they can and there the Volkite just can't compete with the VMB which can still potentially burst up to 12 hits. Str 4 isn't any problem either, I've lost count of how many engines I've killed with VMB's. Simply going close for +1 to hit, amassing damage bonuses (flanking, coordinated strike, maniple bonus for Ferrox or Lupercal, legio rules...) and stratagems can turn it into a killing machine. It's also dirt cheap. I have a hard time thinking about any scenario where the little volkite would be beneficial over VMB.
The Warlord variant on the other hand, if aggressively costed low, could be a nice alternative to the macro-gatling for a midfield brawler. The Beam option makes it so you get 5 automatic hits on a shielded target, giving you some reliability before firing that pimped-up Sunfury for the kill.
For some reason the article also, wrongly again, exhorts the virtue of shooting knights with small arms. No, just no. You kill knights by nuking them till they glow with big guns.
gorgon wrote: I think VMB/VE might be a pretty good combo on a shield-stripping Warhound. Although there's some overlap, each weapon does certain things better than the other.
Not really, the VMB outshines the Volkite in pretty much everything. Native six shots with exploding sixes is on average better than the maximum of five that the Volkite outputs if you hit with everything. Voidbreaker doesn't trigger on every hit, just on the fact if there were any hits it adds two dice to be saved. When the shields are gone, no bonus and just +1 Str over the VMB, which is going to hit about three times more. Neither are good at breaking armour, so what they really want to do is pile on as much hits as they can and there the Volkite just can't compete with the VMB which can still potentially burst up to 12 hits. Str 4 isn't any problem either, I've lost count of how many engines I've killed with VMB's. Simply going close for +1 to hit, amassing damage bonuses (flanking, coordinated strike, maniple bonus for Ferrox or Lupercal, legio rules...) and stratagems can turn it into a killing machine. It's also dirt cheap. I have a hard time thinking about any scenario where the little volkite would be beneficial over VMB.
The Warlord variant on the other hand, if aggressively costed low, could be a nice alternative to the macro-gatling for a midfield brawler. The Beam option makes it so you get 5 automatic hits on a shielded target, giving you some reliability before firing that pimped-up Sunfury for the kill.
For some reason the article also, wrongly again, exhorts the virtue of shooting knights with small arms. No, just no. You kill knights by nuking them till they glow with big guns.
It's plain to see the author doesn't play AT, as you pointed out they get the voidbraker rule wrong. It's cool for the reaver to get 4th carapace option. but honestly these weapons don't seem very impressive. I think we all wanted to know when the warmaster would drop.
gorgon wrote: I think VMB/VE might be a pretty good combo on a shield-stripping Warhound. Although there's some overlap, each weapon does certain things better than the other.
Not really, the VMB outshines the Volkite in pretty much everything. Native six shots with exploding sixes is on average better than the maximum of five that the Volkite outputs if you hit with everything. Voidbreaker doesn't trigger on every hit, just on the fact if there were any hits it adds two dice to be saved.
Yeah...you're right. It's two, not two per. That's what I get for not referencing the actual rule.
Seems like maybe they're building a larger release (for AT anyway). The WM, the loyalist book, transfers, and volkite weapons have all been previewed.
Who cares what the 'actual' rules are and which gun is better. The rule of 'Cool' wins here, and these are cool weapons.
See how much they cost points wise, what the rules actually are, but even if I don't like the rules, I'll get them anyways and use them as something else. Cool wins.
TheSecretSquig wrote: Who cares what the 'actual' rules are and which gun is better. The rule of 'Cool' wins here, and these are cool weapons.
See how much they cost points wise, what the rules actually are, but even if I don't like the rules, I'll get them anyways and use them as something else. Cool wins.
I care, I play the game. FW's interpretation would actually make the weapons have a place in the game, but currently they don't function in a way that makes them viable, one faq/errata would fix that and not just for these new titan weapons, but for the existing knight one as well.
Any news on restock of cerastus or the Psi titan. Think Psi titan was due to the warlord kit shortage (both varients were hard to come by). Cerastus is weird though, i swear they were only in stock about a week.
I did ask circa 6 weeks ago, but just got a stock response.
Fraggle wrote: Any news on restock of cerastus or the Psi titan. Think Psi titan was due to the warlord kit shortage (both varients were hard to come by). Cerastus is weird though, i swear they were only in stock about a week.
I did ask circa 6 weeks ago, but just got a stock response.
There's some cerastus in stock in canada if you can stomach the shipping, couple ebay stores have them and so does meeplemart
Fraggle wrote: Any news on restock of cerastus or the Psi titan. Think Psi titan was due to the warlord kit shortage (both varients were hard to come by). Cerastus is weird though, i swear they were only in stock about a week.
I did ask circa 6 weeks ago, but just got a stock response.
TheSecretSquig wrote: Who cares what the 'actual' rules are and which gun is better.
I'd wager quite a few people do.
Indeed. One of the great things about AT has been that all weapons have had a role that wasn't directly overlapped by something strictly better. Megabolters being strictly better than Volkites in their intended role feels bad, when they could be fixed with a pretty simple alteration to their rules.
It's never a simple fix for weapon rule in this game. With everything being already printed at this points. All it'll do is adding more confusion. Acactus terminal on the webstore still show their original value, and you have to know the FAQ existed to find it.
Fraggle wrote: Any news on restock of cerastus or the Psi titan. Think Psi titan was due to the warlord kit shortage (both varients were hard to come by). Cerastus is weird though, i swear they were only in stock about a week.
I did ask circa 6 weeks ago, but just got a stock response.
Fraggle wrote: Any news on restock of cerastus or the Psi titan. Think Psi titan was due to the warlord kit shortage (both varients were hard to come by). Cerastus is weird though, i swear they were only in stock about a week.
I did ask circa 6 weeks ago, but just got a stock response.
There's some cerastus in stock in canada if you can stomach the shipping, couple ebay stores have them and so does meeplemart
Agreed on the psi titans, hope they come back in stock.
Thanks, i wasnt very clear in the first post and meant the Mechanicum versions via Forgeworld.
Them and the Psi Titan been out of stock for ages. Forgeworld customer service never seem to give me a straight answer about when things may be available. Hopefully they will cast up more knights for when the new weapons are available.
The plastic warlord kit is back available (was out of stock on UKGW website) so hopefully Psi returns as well.
Chopstick wrote: It's never a simple fix for weapon rule in this game. With everything being already printed at this points. All it'll do is adding more confusion. Acactus terminal on the webstore still show their original value, and you have to know the FAQ existed to find it.
Shieldbreaker at least would be an easy errata. Instead of "if a voidbreaker weapon hits..." change it to "for each hit by a void breaker weapon..."
Acastus original rules were a terrible mistake. They should have dropped blast instead of all the support banner and other limits though.
Hope these guns come out in the next week or so along with the warmaster, like the week after elves?
Yeah, Voidbreaker is trivial to fix given that the rule itself isn't written in the cards or terminals but only in the main rulebook. The Acastus debacle was a different beast entirely.
Having to know FAQ's exist is also a pretty damn low bar in this internet age, more so when we consider that unlike the sprawling madness of 40k or AoSFAQ's, it's one document for all the erratas and clarifications for the whole of AT. That's not asking much.
Shieldbreaker at least would be an easy errata. Instead of "if a voidbreaker weapon hits..." change it to "for each hit by a void breaker weapon..."
Please. Would actually mean that these weapons would be considered. Especially useful at breaking shields of the Warmaster or a Titan camping next to a Void Shield relay.
Looking forwards, its possible that the Asterius will be a FW resin kit along with a slim terminal, which could easily update that variant without having to replace the current Acastus hardstock terminal pack.
The current Acastus hardstock terminal is suspicious. The Porphyrion kit comes with two missile rack options; Ironstorm and Helios, but only includes rules for the Ironstorm. Yet the Asterius has volkite weapons instead of autocannons, yet there is no rules for them either. Clearly this would have been seven weapons crammed onto a terminal with only space for five...
Keeping with the trend of the Atropos, Magaera and Styrix, should the Asterius have similar abilities such as Blessed Autosimulacra and Ionic Flare Shield too? I'm only asking this because the Asterius shares the same armour design of those knights, so I will defer to others more knowledgeable judgement on this one...
But whatever happens, the Asterius ought to be announced sooner rather than later...
"Basically, volkite weapons destroy void shields at close ranges. Both the eradicator and the destructor use three dice per attack, with a range of 20” for the former and 24” for the latter. They have the Voidbreaker (2) trait, meaning that if at least 1 hit is scored, the target has to roll an additional 2 shield saves."
I posted on the forgeworld facebook a screenshot of the voidbraker rule and simply underlined one word "weapon". I think honestly with the amount of money they're bringing in, they can afford to throw a contract for a couple articles to a writer that at least plays the game. As other have pointed out, it's not the sprawling content monster that is 40k.
Can they though? As I understand it, it costs roughly 2x the cost to hire a worker as you pay them (offices, equipment, benefits, etc) and that'll be what, 30k of profit lost just to fix a few typos? It's not like doing so will drive new sales equal to the investment, or any new sales at all.
Nurglitch wrote: Can they though? As I understand it, it costs roughly 2x the cost to hire a worker as you pay them (offices, equipment, benefits, etc) and that'll be what, 30k of profit lost just to fix a few typos? It's not like doing so will drive new sales equal to the investment, or any new sales at all.
I mean contract, with everyone working remotely anyway they can hire someone with skin in the game to handle engine kill.
Nurglitch wrote: Can they though? As I understand it, it costs roughly 2x the cost to hire a worker as you pay them (offices, equipment, benefits, etc) and that'll be what, 30k of profit lost just to fix a few typos? It's not like doing so will drive new sales equal to the investment, or any new sales at all.
I mean contract, with everyone working remotely anyway they can hire someone with skin in the game to handle engine kill.
As I understand it, GW employs fans to produce their games. It's not like it's rendering the product worthless; a quick FAQ and no harm is done.
I think we all wanted to know when the warmaster would drop.
Given that the Warmaster is featured in the current issue of White Dwarf I would be surprised if its not "Coming Soon" on Sunday.
If they leave it any later then they might as well have done the article in next months issue instead.
There's "some" delays on releases though while wd was written more like october. Possible it got delayed. March was supposed to be lumineth month yet they come out in april.
Nurglitch wrote: Can they though? As I understand it, it costs roughly 2x the cost to hire a worker as you pay them (offices, equipment, benefits, etc) and that'll be what, 30k of profit lost just to fix a few typos? It's not like doing so will drive new sales equal to the investment, or any new sales at all.
I mean contract, with everyone working remotely anyway they can hire someone with skin in the game to handle engine kill.
As I understand it, GW employs fans to produce their games. It's not like it's rendering the product worthless; a quick FAQ and no harm is done.
It's reducing the value and meaning of a timed article that slips dates and has reduced value because the accuracy of the information it conveys is poor. It would seem engine kill isn't being written by a fan, in other words.
I'm one of the people who isn't that bothered by game rules and is happy with any new release that looks cool - but the errors on the WarCom article are just sloppy. They should know by now that the community will spot any errors almost straight away. Even if the social media person who writes the article isn't really too hot on the rules, it's not exactly hard to run the article past somebody who is - "Here, can you look this over carefully and tell me if I've ballsed up any of the rules before we publish?" It would take, what, 5 minutes?
There's "some" delays on releases though while wd was written more like october. Possible it got delayed. March was supposed to be lumineth month yet they come out in april.
I'm still hoping that we're missing some key detail from the new weapon cards, like the Rapid trait or it having +1/+2 to hit.
They could also throw in Volkite related rules in the upcoming book, with some Legios getting upgraded versions like others do with other weapon types.
/pic630920.jpg)
