schoon wrote: My guess is that the Volkite weapons will Akhtar in the Loyalist Legios book.
Assuming you meant “appear” there I’m not sure they will. I mean, there’s no actual new rules there that we are aware of so they could just publish the weapon card, or even pack it in with the kit from Forge World.
Chopstick wrote: With the voidbreaker change to each hit, Knight Styrix banner will be the best shield stripper unit in the game.
I don't even think they'd be the end of the world either given how fragile knights are and the range is pretty short. At least forgeworld is aware they need to faq it now, or atleast aware they got it wrong rules as written.
Chopstick wrote: With the voidbreaker change to each hit, Knight Styrix banner will be the best shield stripper unit in the game.
I don't even think they'd be the end of the world either given how fragile knights are and the range is pretty short. At least forgeworld is aware they need to faq it now, or atleast aware they got it wrong rules as written.
They'll be good unit, never said they'll be OP, currently they're overpriced.
Chopstick wrote: With the voidbreaker change to each hit, Knight Styrix banner will be the best shield stripper unit in the game.
I don't even think they'd be the end of the world either given how fragile knights are and the range is pretty short. At least forgeworld is aware they need to faq it now, or atleast aware they got it wrong rules as written.
They'll be good unit, never said they'll be OP, currently they're overpriced.
Ya, tho I'd like to try running a couple dual claw.
beast_gts wrote: I'm expecting too much for the upcoming Precept Maniple Battleforce box to be under £100, right? (given there's £195 worth of titans in there)
Yeah, probably expecting too much. If memory serves, the last version basically gave us the Reaver for free? I’d expect £150ish, before any online discount you might be able to find?
beast_gts wrote: I'm expecting too much for the upcoming Precept Maniple Battleforce box to be under £100, right? (given there's £195 worth of titans in there)
the last one was £80 and that has, what, £140 worth of models? May be around £120-£130 mark
beast_gts wrote: I'm expecting too much for the upcoming Precept Maniple Battleforce box to be under £100, right? (given there's £195 worth of titans in there)
the last one was £80 and that has, what, £140 worth of models? May be around £120-£130 mark
"This 176-page hardback book contains background information for loyalist Titan Legions and Knight Houses, revised rules for forming your battlegroups, and a huge number of sub-factions to draw your war machines from, including the mysterious Ordo Sinister Psi-Titans."
So they're revising battlegroups, interesting. Also has a re-print of psi titan rules which makes sense. 176 pages, it's looking pretty thick. Really hoping there's more artwork and or photography of games.
Also it seems they're making the rulebook available on its own. Not sure if the revised changes to battlegroups will be added, it looks like the hard back one in the starter box.
They're also doing a cool boxed battlegroup with a warlord, warbringer, reaver and two warhounds. Dare it be too much to hope for it to come with 5 card stock terminals? Probably.
They talk about the new transfers but the pic is wrong, it's the normal boxed transfers.
There's likely an article coming on this guy mid week, probably engine kill I would guess. "keep your eyes on Warhammer Community to learn more about this legendary machine later this week"
No sign of warbringer nemesis's belicossa volcano cannon, making me think it may be forge world.
beast_gts wrote: I'm expecting too much for the upcoming Precept Maniple Battleforce box to be under £100, right? (given there's £195 worth of titans in there)
the last one was £80 and that has, what, £140 worth of models? May be around £120-£130 mark
£100 according to Element’s website.
The one listed on Element's website seem to be the previous battlegroup (not available anymore - 1 Warlord, 1 Reaver, 2 Warhounds), which was £100 rrp. I would guess with £195 in value, we'll see something closer to £135-£140. The lower the price the better of course.
Unless the Legio book is any cop the rest will be a pass.
The rule book on its own is a bit puzzling as one still needs the other bits and bobs for the game to function, so one is still better off just getting the starter set. It also looks like the edition from the first rule set which isn't as up to date as the Starter's softback version.
The Warmaster is a welcome addition to the game but just not for me. It will be too big and too expensive.
The princeps box is disappointing. Its a dreadful option for beginners as the current starter set already offers plenty for a decent game as well as all the rules and accessories, as well as throwing in a support banner of knights. Its also overkill for an "experienced commander" looking to expand their force; Chances are they already have a volcano-lord and the hounds are already included in the Starter set while still being good value even when sold separately. Same goes for the melta reaver. Its also redundant if said experienced commander is a knight player. Would have been a better to include a Sunfury-Lord, Warbringer and the recent Cerastus Variants. That would have come in at around £110 and still have put smiles on our faces.
SamusDrake wrote: Unless the Legio book is any cop the rest will be a pass.
The rule book on its own is a bit puzzling as one still needs the other bits and bobs for the game to function, so one is still better off just getting the starter set. It also looks like the edition from the first rule set which isn't as up to date as the Starter's softback version.
The Warmaster is a welcome addition to the game but just not for me. It will be too big and too expensive.
The princeps box is disappointing. Its a dreadful option for beginners as the current starter set already offers plenty for a decent game as well as all the rules and accessories, as well as throwing in a support banner of knights. Its also overkill for an "experienced commander" looking to expand their force; Chances are they already have a volcano-lord and the hounds are already included in the Starter set while still being good value even when sold separately. Same goes for the melta reaver. Its also redundant if said experienced commander is a knight player. Would have been a better to include a Sunfury-Lord, Warbringer and the recent Cerastus Variants. That would have come in at around £110 and still have put smiles on our faces.
...that's an oddly specific list of grievances, I have to say. This is about titans, which are there in a nicely varied bunch. This is also a full army, unlike your example that doesn't have the three minimum engines required for a maniple. Volcano-lords are great if you just change one arm for another weapon, given how Apoc launchers are about the best thing you could have in many scenarios. For experienced commanders who already have some stuff, this is also an efficient way to pick something they still miss from one army and then use the rest for another Legio (if the price is right). Really, all of these are just subjective musings when what matters is that this is an army in a box, one might find that useful for them or not.
The boxed army all just comes down to price, but if, by some miracle, they've included the card stock terminals and it still offers some savings it might be a decent route. I agree the second starter being so well priced it's hard to beat that as a jumping off point given you get all the stuff you need to play. I mean they don't even sell the dice on their own so you almost have to get the starter.
Other thing occured to me in terms of rulebook, they sorta need to move a few pages from ryza into it because ryza introduced the 3 factions and their separate abelites which seems relevant to all legios, custom or not.
Eh, faction abilities are rather lightweight extra. It won't really bother me if they are used in any given match or not, so their addition to the core rulebook isn't a very pressing concern in my opinion.
Sherrypie wrote: Eh, faction abilities are rather lightweight extra. It won't really bother me if they are used in any given match or not, so their addition to the core rulebook isn't a very pressing concern in my opinion.
It's not a big thing agreed but it is a core change to the rules. Something of an incongruity with those who have ryza and those who don't, without even getting into custom legios.
...that's an oddly specific list of grievances, I have to say. This is about titans, which are there in a nicely varied bunch. This is also a full army, unlike your example that doesn't have the three minimum engines required for a maniple. Volcano-lords are great if you just change one arm for another weapon, given how Apoc launchers are about the best thing you could have in many scenarios. For experienced commanders who already have some stuff, this is also an efficient way to pick something they still miss from one army and then use the rest for another Legio (if the price is right). Really, all of these are just subjective musings when what matters is that this is an army in a box, one might find that useful for them or not.
With all due respect this sounds like a great deal for those who want a discount on buying all the previous titan kits in a single box but...
The current starter set already provides a mandatory maniple along with an additional titan and supporting banner of knights. That takes care of an army-in-a-box and provides all the additional components one will ever need for those units without purchasing additional material. I doubt very much that this new set will come close to its savings.
This was a simple one; just ditch the warhounds and include a single A4 page with legit maniple rules to use a Lord, Bringer and Reaver together. The rules for any maniple only require a third of a page - the rest is a fancy illustraition. Its not like they couldn't take an existing maniple and applied the substitute-a-titan rule from a custom legion. Chuck it in a future expansion book later down the line when this set becomes discontinued, or use it for filler in White Dwarf.
The only "design" put into this set was to dump all the existing titan kits into a single box to save on packaging. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong but this will no doubt end up yet another "expensive bargain" that nobody asked for at £140. Meanwhile, that Warbringer variant is long overdue...
Somebody commented on the Forgeworld FB post that the photo of the transfer sheets was wrong, they acknowledged the error and said they'd get it updated but it doesn't appear to have been changed yet. From the description they're definitely the Legio-specific transfer sheets, which is good - it's always frustrating if you miss out on something like that when it's a limited print run. I only just managed to get a Legio Metalica transfer sheet before they disappeared the first time.
Cheers for the prices, Marshal, but I take it thats in Australian dollars? Its just that it says $160 for the Warmaster, but on the GW site( AUS ) a Warlord is $180?
Anyway, has anyone seen any other source (Facebook or whatever) confirm if the stand-alone rule book is the one from the starter, or even more up-to-date?
SamusDrake wrote: So...the Warmaster is £95? Loyalist Legios is £30? While the Princeps set is...urgh...Sherrypie is gonna say "told you so you schmuck"...£115?
Have I got this right?
Well I certainly won't mind GW selling 255 e of value for 150 e in a box that gives one a full army at once. It's almost like it's a good deal
Trying to work the Maniple price out of Monopoly Money and into Honest Sterling...
Cursed City is £125/$199.
So....yeah, maybe around £115ish? That’s a pretty amazing saving, given it’s got £195 worth of Titans within.
Of course, it remains to be see what sort of discount online peeps provide. Element seems to be a steady 15% off AT stuff, Darksphere around 25% for delivery. So £86.25 on Darksphere, which is pretty bloody difficult to pass up, no?
Get a couple and you’ve real flexibility once you start investing in additional weapon systems.
Though the Darksphere route can (if my £115 is accurate and assuming the same discount) not only the Maniple but the starter set for £153.75, and that’s a pretty decent selection covering a decent range of in-game Maniple types.
Always lurking in the shadows, ready to clobber poor unsuspecting forum-goers with sensible opinions
"I, Damaramu...will ever...regret this!"
I think that was from some ancient anime from yesteryear, but it certainly sums up this situation.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Trying to work the Maniple price out of Monopoly Money and into Honest Sterling...
Cursed City is £125/$199.
So....yeah, maybe around £115ish? That’s a pretty amazing saving, given it’s got £195 worth of Titans within.
Of course, it remains to be see what sort of discount online peeps provide. Element seems to be a steady 15% off AT stuff, Darksphere around 25% for delivery. So £86.25 on Darksphere, which is pretty bloody difficult to pass up, no?
Get a couple and you’ve real flexibility once you start investing in additional weapon systems.
Though the Darksphere route can (if my £115 is accurate and assuming the same discount) not only the Maniple but the starter set for £153.75, and that’s a pretty decent selection covering a decent range of in-game Maniple types.
Sigh. If Wayland is doing 20% on this set then...I have no choice. I've got the Warlord stuff from the old rule set and I suppose this is meant to be.
And I thought was getting off lightly with just the Warhammer Underworlds starter set at £35...
The Bringer arms at least have sockets but not so confident about the carapace weapon. You may need to remove two "engines" at the back to remove the quake cannon, so definitely look into that part.
SamusDrake wrote: The Bringer arms at least have sockets but not so confident about the carapace weapon. You may need to remove two "engines" at the back to remove the quake cannon, so definitely look into that part.
The gun itself just drops straight in. The tricky bit is the ammo hoppers on the back.
Ah yes, it was something like that where in a video someone had them using either pegs or magnets, and they were removable to allow the upper cannon to sit in. They never magnetized the cannon itself.
They don’t “need” to be removable at all. The main carapace weapon can drop in regardless.
I will say though that the peg hole for the deck gun is almost exactly 10mm in diameter if I remember correctly and the whole thing can be magnetised with some creative trimming.
MajorWesJanson wrote: We have see like 8 different pictures of the warmaster by now, but what does the back look like? Patio? Two patios? Warlord style? Reaver style?
Yep, I'm interested to know, I'm imagining more Warlord style. Reactors towards the top, probably with rear vents like the Warbringer\Reaver as I can't see any evidence of vents on the top. Then a door below them and from there I reckon it has a patio that extends around most of the lower body, just above the stabilisers you can see that the armour appears to extend up above the level of where the stabilisers will end, and I suspect there is the patio behind that, the armour even has a battlement look to it around there. I also reckon there might be open areas with platforms on the top between the anti-air turrets as there looks to be space and it also has the battlement style armour.
Spent the morning giving thought to how I'd use the contents of the new Princeps box, and it turns out I'd be better off getting the Starter set as it fits our collection and play style.
I had calculated that even if one donates the Warlord to their local gaming group, one would still be getting £15 discount on the set...hmmm.
MajorWesJanson wrote: We have see like 8 different pictures of the warmaster by now, but what does the back look like? Patio? Two patios? Warlord style? Reaver style?
I only own a basic maniple (2 Warhounds, Reaver, and warlord) so I feel like this maniple is a good deal for me, especially if I can get another 15% off or so!
Looks to me like the Warmaster in that image has different weapons on the AA turrets. Maybe just an art thing as seems strange to have options for a weapon that has no in game effect (unless the art is based on the 28mm version, where weapon options for the AA turrets would have a use).
Also, lascannons in both knees rather than one lascannon and one salt shaker.
Looks like a nice tome. Of course, my loyalties lie with Legio Audax, but I'm working on a Praesagius punching bag...er, I mean maniple...and this looks like a great resource for them and in general.
Reprints of transfer sheets is definitely GOOD news. It's not the GREAT news that NEW transfer sheets would be. But it's a positive step.
Its a good book to recommend if getting into the game now, not as much if one already has the previous books. Probably handy to have almost everything in one book?
SamusDrake wrote: Its a good book to recommend if getting into the game now, not as much if one already has the previous books. Probably handy to have almost everything in one book?
Yep, looks like 90%+ reprinted material, but maybe with enough tweaks\fixes and extra stuff to make it just about worthwhile with the convenience factor as well.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Sprewsandbrews say it’s priced at £110, so better value than I reckoned in my previous post.
Okay, I'm not one to knock good news but starting to wonder if this is a slightly late April Fools...?
Seriously, its £85 savings we're talking about here. The previous version of this set - minus the Warbringer - was a straight £100. They throw in a £55 model for only £10 more?
My original plan was to buy some Warhounds alongside the Warmaster to fill out my second legio. Spending £50 extra to get a Reaver, Warlord and another Warbringer is getting too tempting
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Sprewsandbrews say it’s priced at £110, so better value than I reckoned in my previous post.
Okay, I'm not one to knock good news but starting to wonder if this is a slightly late April Fools...?
Seriously, its £85 savings we're talking about here. The previous version of this set - minus the Warbringer - was a straight £100. They throw in a £55 model for only £10 more?
This is Games Workshop, right?
It’s a game where the make their money on the add-ons, and has otherwise a fairly high starting price. So giving people a little bit of what they fancy to kick off with does make sense.
I mean, compared to Conquest, Imperium and the other starter sets it’s not the best savings.
Suffice to say, like a dirty little consumer Lady Of Negotiable Affection, if I dive in, I’m going to get spare weapons. That means Forgeworld, and a fairly hefty spend to get at least one of every option. Plus the remaining weapon sprues.
That’s possible because from the get go they’ve kinda encouraged magnetising so you can swap your load out. Hehehe. I said load.
So they take a slight hit here, and I get into it, then spend unending cash at later dates. And when people see it being played at the club, those people might be more willing to invest, because it looks great, plays great, and the start up price is pretty decent with that set.
It's a trick and very effective one. If I am getting 250 worth of Titans for 150e it means that I am going to spend 150e more this month than I intended.
It’s a game where the make their money on the add-ons, and has otherwise a fairly high starting price. So giving people a little bit of what they fancy to kick off with does make sense.
I mean, compared to Conquest, Imperium and the other starter sets it’s not the best savings.
Suffice to say, like a dirty little consumer Lady Of Negotiable Affection, if I dive in, I’m going to get spare weapons. That means Forgeworld, and a fairly hefty spend to get at least one of every option. Plus the remaining weapon sprues.
That’s possible because from the get go they’ve kinda encouraged magnetising so you can swap your load out. Hehehe. I said load.
So they take a slight hit here, and I get into it, then spend unending cash at later dates. And when people see it being played at the club, those people might be more willing to invest, because it looks great, plays great, and the start up price is pretty decent with that set.
Naturally theres the old loss-leader chestnut at play here but...once again, they are already knocking it out of the park with the starter set. Between the starter and the princeps sets they are probably sitting on a load of reaver and warhound sprues? Hmmm...
I'm assuming that this weekend's pre order was originally scheduled for Christmas when they usually do a battle force set, which this year they were about...£125 each for the AoS and 40K kits? Maybe the drastic discount was to make up for the late arrival of the princeps kit...
Still, no matter. Just got to wait another 3-4 months to see what they release next for the game. Hopefully Gorgon will then get some new scout titans to torment that new Warmaster...
Just confirmed UK prices with my FLGS who can order the sets in on Friday for delivery next week.
Rules Book £20
Warmaster £95
Legio Book £30
Battleforce £110
SamusDrake wrote: Still, no matter. Just got to wait another 3-4 months to see what they release next for the game. Hopefully Gorgon will then get some new scout titans to torment that new Warmaster...
Would be nice to get Rapiers! Although my Spidey-Sense says Corrupted Titans might be next in association with the Traitor legios book. That's something that FW could handle with resin like the Psi-Titan...no plastics manufacturing required. Not sure how much more we'll get in plastic this year given the continuing COVID delays and backups.
The book is worth it because it's basically 1d4chan's compendium of all the rules in one place. Just have all 50 loyalist stratagems in one book alone is useful, add to that all the maniples. And they're also for the first time putting weapons stats in a book not just the cards.
Crablezworth wrote: The book is worth it because it's basically 1d4chan's compendium of all the rules in one place. Just have all 50 loyalist stratagems in one book alone is useful, add to that all the maniples. And they're also for the first time putting weapons stats in a book not just the cards.
It would be nice if they included the data cards for all the titans and knights as well, would give them a chance to make an acastus 2.0 as well.
I don't expect corrupted titans with the chaos compendium. That's more a new book release. I'm still thinking the belicosa warbringer will be a plastic kit coming along with codex traitor legios since they also need to do the other 2 arm weapons and could include the Mars delta head.
judgedoug wrote: bit of bad news, seems like, at least in the USA, GW has rescinded trade orders for the Battleforce and are making them direct/webex only.
judgedoug wrote: bit of bad news, seems like, at least in the USA, GW has rescinded trade orders for the Battleforce and are making them direct/webex only.
Perfect way to generate instant ill will
Tell me about it. I went from insta-buy through my favorite Huge Trade Account Retailer With Big Discounts For Repeat Customers to "gosh if I suddenly find myself with $185 and nothing to do with it maybe I'll order it"
Ah well, it won't be the end of the world for me if they don't sell it through online retailers in the UK, I have all the titans I need (except Warmaster ofc), only reason to get the maniple battleforce is the ridiculous saving, if they aren't offering that I just won't bother. Still I hope this isn't the case, and obviously this sucks hard for US buyers that want this box.
From what I understood the maniple is still about 100 euros discount over buying the contents separately. If I can't get it through FLGS (who sells at RRP anyway) then I am going to get it from GW.
It'll be a dumb ass move if it happens in the UK, although its not the first time GW have recended orders from FLGS and made them "Web exclusive". My FLGS has 4 new players, all buying the new Battleforce from them. So that's x4 lots of profit from these not going to a local store, IF GW do this in the UK.
This, at a time when local stores which have not been able to open their doors for months desperately need the business.
gorgon wrote: At the expense of something else, sure. Not really a secret that their manufacturing capacity has been stretched.
GW's manufacturing capacity is nowhere near stretched and never has been, as nearly all of their products are cheap and easy to make, they're simply producing everything in tiny amounts, as always, so people rush to buy as much as possible as fast as possible.
gorgon wrote: At the expense of something else, sure. Not really a secret that their manufacturing capacity has been stretched.
GW's manufacturing capacity is nowhere near stretched and never has been, as nearly all of their products are cheap and easy to make, they're simply producing everything in tiny amounts, as always, so people rush to buy as much as possible as fast as possible.
Not a UK flag yet apparently you work in GW’s manufacturing facility?
gorgon wrote: At the expense of something else, sure. Not really a secret that their manufacturing capacity has been stretched.
GW's manufacturing capacity is nowhere near stretched and never has been, as nearly all of their products are cheap and easy to make, they're simply producing everything in tiny amounts, as always, so people rush to buy as much as possible as fast as possible.
Not a UK flag yet apparently you work in GW’s manufacturing facility?
Come on, It's obvious. Just look at Indomitus or Cursed City or Sisters of Battle army box for examples, literally just a bunch of cardboard and plastic, and yet they produced juuust enough for it to sell out in minutes. No way it wasn't planned, since given GW's history of most box sets selling out nearly instantly you'd think they would've caught on they gotta make more, if they honestly wanted to keep it in stock for more than a ten minutes. But they clearly refuse to.
gorgon wrote: At the expense of something else, sure. Not really a secret that their manufacturing capacity has been stretched.
GW's manufacturing capacity is nowhere near stretched and never has been, as nearly all of their products are cheap and easy to make, they're simply producing everything in tiny amounts, as always, so people rush to buy as much as possible as fast as possible.
If you read their publicly posted financial reports to the shareholders, their production was stretched before Corona. That's why they invested millions in a brand new factory (and land) at their HQ in the UK and also in a bigger warehousing system so that they could sift and sort and store far more stock (I assume so that they could do bigger bulk shipments overseas in one go). When Corona hit their new factory was just coming online; but at the same time they had several months of shutdown at the start of 2019 (during which time almost all GW stock was stripped from any retailer that was open and trading). Follow that up with Indomitus and a new edition year; increased demand through the whole pandemic and reduced staff in the warehouse and production facilities.
GW is 100% overloaded. Heck they added a "short stock" listing to their website and have had many many kits run out of stock over the year (some hardly get back in and they are out again). GW doesn't profit from not having stock to sell; they want stock to sell, but they cannot produce it fast enough. It will likely remain so until the UK can leave corona safe working practice
This 291-piece plastic kit builds one Warmaster Heavy Battle Titan. It includes two arm-mounted Suzerain-class plasma destructors, one carapace-mounted revelator missile launcher, and a choice of apocalypse missile array, plasma blastgun, turbo laser destructor, inferno gun, melta cannon, and Vulcan mega-bolter for the two shoulder hardpoints.
The battleforce box seems to come with terminals and cards, hopefully is the nice terminals. Same thought for the warbringer, if it's the thin card stock with the unpoked holes no fun.
Mr_Rose wrote: Nova cannon fire shells the size of Titans. Fitting one to a Titan might prove problematic.
But I am very interested to see what options there are for magnetising the revelator launcher on the Warmaster.
None, without a ton of work. It's built into the piece that makes up the top carapace.
For other arms, the warmaster is basically the intermediate step between the Warlord and Emperor. I can easily imagine the Plasma cannon on the Imperator being redesigned to match the Sunfury and Suzerain in style. A radial of 6 plasma coils around a centeral barrel would fit the progression and give it a more circular profile like the old Epic model. The other Emperor arms were the Hellstorm cannon which could be scaled down to the Warmaster as a Mega Gatling cannon, say at S 9 to fit the reaver to warlord gatling progression. Warmonger Emperor had a missile arm, but the revelator carapace mount sort of covers that. There is the Vengeance Cannon which was a twin barreled defense laser, so a Twin Belicosa on the Warmaster would be appropriate, or a heavier single barrel at S14. For the carapace, maybe a sort of siege mortar, like a shorter ranged Quake cannon with barrage?
Reviews up for Loyalist Legions on Sprues & Brews + Goonhammer. Some changes to Legio rules, Vox Blackout is now 3CP instead of 1CP, engine upgrades available, lots more lore - seems really nice.
Hopefully we're not waiting long for the Traitor one!
Anyone know how much it would cost to shop something like the Maniple box from UK to Aus. Comparing prices from local GW and something like Alchemist Workshop, it seems a no brainer to try and import it unless shipping is something stupid
FrothingMuppet wrote: Anyone know how much it would cost to shop something like the Maniple box from UK to Aus. Comparing prices from local GW and something like Alchemist Workshop, it seems a no brainer to try and import it unless shipping is something stupid
It will be against their terms with GW to ship overseas
Vortex missiles! 20pt upgrade for Warp Missiles, replace Warp with Vortex but, crucially, are always Limited (1) and this can’t be changed (for example with the custom Legio rules).
Mr_Rose wrote: Vortex missiles! 20pt upgrade for Warp Missiles, replace Warp with Vortex but, crucially, are always Limited (1) and this can’t be changed (for example with the custom Legio rules).
MajorWesJanson wrote: I'm really excited to see some of the titan upgrades going generic. Always annoying to have like 50 points left over with nothing to spend it on.
Yeah it's been a long time coming, it will also help diffuse some of he jealousy/hate that custom legios got.
Mr_Rose wrote: Vortex missiles! 20pt upgrade for Warp Missiles, replace Warp with Vortex but, crucially, are always Limited (1) and this can’t be changed (for example with the custom Legio rules).
Great excuse to make use of these:
They're dirt cheap on ebay
I've got 2, so watch out Knight players. Got the Warhammer nagic ones too and dreaming of Vortex (5")....
Mr_Rose wrote: Vortex missiles! 20pt upgrade for Warp Missiles, replace Warp with Vortex but, crucially, are always Limited (1) and this can’t be changed (for example with the custom Legio rules).
Is that confirmed? Couldn't find that in the goonhammer review,
Mr_Rose wrote: Vortex missiles! 20pt upgrade for Warp Missiles, replace Warp with Vortex but, crucially, are always Limited (1) and this can’t be changed (for example with the custom Legio rules).
Is that confirmed? Couldn't find that in the goonhammer review,
Marshal Loss wrote: Got my Metalica transfers, Marshal Loss is going to play some loyalists!
Welcome to Metalica! I'm wondering whether I should get a second sheet, just in case. I probably won't ever use up my first one, but if I pass it up and end up needing more transfers once it's no longer available I'll be irritated with myself.
I've got a Warmaster, the battleforce and the new book on the way from my favourite indie store. I'm not sure what I'm going to do with the battleforce, my Metalica collection is already overkill - but it could be even more so!. Alternatively I might be tempted to use the titans to start another Legio.
One little detail of interest, like the Warlord, it looks like it has the sockets for pistons that run from the body to the shoulder (they’re on the pieces with the side doors), but not the pistons themselves, which only appear on the 28mm version of the Warlord. So definitely looks like it’s been designed at 28mm scale.
Chopstick wrote: So does the Gryphonicus change also happen in the hardback rulebook, or they're just too lazy to reprint it? I think it's the latter.
Of course you do - if there's a negative position to take, you'll take it.
I imagine it'll depend on whether the individual rulebook is a new printing, or whether it is stock from earlier printings. If a new one, then I'd hope we'd see any FAQ or errata from the rulebook applied to it.
The most interesting thing to me with this release is that both the GW store listing and the box art quite prominently say Warmaster Titan 'with Plasma Destructors'. Seems to be a pretty clear suggestion that there are other main arm guns in the works.
Dysartes wrote:
I imagine it'll depend on whether the individual rulebook is a new printing, or whether it is stock from earlier printings. If a new one, then I'd hope we'd see any FAQ or errata from the rulebook applied to it.
There's a 'review' of the new book up on Titan Owners' Club, where they say that it's the exact same hardback from the original 2018 release. (Review in quotes there since there's not much for them to say about it aside from 'it's the same book as before').
Tavis75 wrote:One little detail of interest, like the Warlord, it looks like it has the sockets for pistons that run from the body to the shoulder (they’re on the pieces with the side doors), but not the pistons themselves, which only appear on the 28mm version of the Warlord. So definitely looks like it’s been designed at 28mm scale.
Well spotted! A 28mm version will be an absolutely huge kit, I imaging easily double the price of a Warlord. I wonder how many they'd sell - the Warlord has been out for 5 years or so, and the certificate numbers just recently broke 1000, so they've been moving Warlords at about 200 per year. But if the Warmaster is double the price, and (in my opinion) doesn't look as good... Though having said that, it's definitely growing on me. I remember thinking the Reaver was ugly when Forgeworld first released them (what, 10 years ago?) and now I love them.
Well spotted! A 28mm version will be an absolutely huge kit, I imaging easily double the price of a Warlord. I wonder how many they'd sell - the Warlord has been out for 5 years or so, and the certificate numbers just recently broke 1000, so they've been moving Warlords at about 200 per year. But if the Warmaster is double the price, and (in my opinion) doesn't look as good... Though having said that, it's definitely growing on me. I remember thinking the Reaver was ugly when Forgeworld first released them (what, 10 years ago?) and now I love them.
One thing to consider is that when they released the Warlord, they said it was pushing the limits of what resin is capable of. I'd suspect that the Warmaster would breach that unless they come up with either a lighter, stronger resin or some kind of metal support skeleton to keep it from collapsing under its own weight.
Marshal Loss wrote: Got my Metalica transfers, Marshal Loss is going to play some loyalists!
Welcome to Metalica!
Thanks!
Mr_Rose wrote: Isn’t the rule book in the starter set updated? I expect they’d at least be using that version.
The book in the starter set is updated, but this one isn't. It's literally the one from the OG rules set, just repackaged. From one of the reviews:
This is the same book that was in the original Adeptus Titanicus Rules Box, and I don’t even mean a reprint, this is the exact same book with a sticker replacing the product code with a new one!
Bellerophon wrote: But if the Warmaster is double the price, and (in my opinion) doesn't look as good... Though having said that, it's definitely growing on me.
Saw this one lately, I thought it a fairly unique take
I think it's probably just because they have a lot of rulebooks left lying around from the old "rules set" (that came with the templates, etc), and this gives them a way to get rid of some of them for people who don't want to buy an entire starter set and just want the rulebook (which hasn't been available in the past). I don't think a revised rule set is needed/on the way beyond what we already received in the starter set, but it's not impossible
That Warlord volkite gun looks really cool, I want one regardless of how good the rules are. I still haven't picked up any of the FW guns, really need to at some point.
Nothing I'd like but its been a good month for AT all the same, and certainly the "titan-fix" needed right now. Quite similar to the Warbringer release...
Going forward it would be nice to see something in the medium size. We now have three large titans with heavy fire power and four close-combat knights.
Titans could do with a melee solution, while knights are now back to square one by relying on support titans for firepower.
Here’s a comment from Hennsteele of Cult of Paint on magnetisation of the Warmaster:
the arms are an easy magnet, 6x2, recesses already there. The armpit weapons you’d need to do a little trimming but nothing hard. And the revelator launcher just sits in the top, no need for glue or magnets.
Whoever mentioned about the "new" hardback rulebook being the original released rulebook... Thank you!!
Ordered all the new releases in a blind rush as the website went up for pre-orders and ordered a 'New' copy of a book I already own Spoke with GW online chat and had it cancelled and refunded off the order.
Had a quick compare with the Store images, and whilst the index page is actually a different page number to the one I already possess, suggesting a possible reprint at some time, all the other page numbers are the same! ...and of course the reviewers are all saying... "Same book!?"
...I think I've (almost) ended up with 5 copies of the rulebook now. One in the Grandmaster version, one in the rules&templates-only version, 2 updated softback in the new boxed versions and now this 'NewOld' release
FW on FB wrote:We got a bit over excited in our This Week in Warhammer video yesterday and showed off some volkite weapons for Adeptus Titanicus a smidge too soon. They're actually coming in June, so you'll be able to start deflagrating your enemies soon.
ImAGeek wrote: That’s quite the difference... I was expecting next week or so, not 2 months out.
My uneducated guess is that a mold broke before they had a stockpile of them ready.
They probably looked at the numbers of maniple boxes lunatics like us pre-ordered at the weekend, and realised two more months of production would be smart.
Battle bling just previewed some designs for warmaster arms, I'm guessing the other weapons rules are in the loyalist book or are these just alternatives to the plasma arms? (count as basically)
Wonder how long before we see another warmaster box.
Speaking of weapons, I wonder if we’ll see upscaled versions of the Neutron Beam Cannons. They have the shock pulse rule which cause vehicles to snap fire in 30k. Not sure how you’d bring that to Titanicus, but perhaps they could cause auto criticals instead of normal damage with a chance to inflict damage to the firing Titan if the target resists the attack?
xttz wrote: They probably looked at the numbers of maniple boxes lunatics like us pre-ordered at the weekend, and realised two more months of production would be smart.
That's probably closer to the truth than we realise. Dark Sphere have the precipt box pre-order now on Wave 2 with dispatch on the 26th April! If I've read their stock levels right, I think they've blown through their stock of near 90 units
TheWaspinator wrote: Is the Precept Maniple Battleforce GW store exclusive? I'm not seeing it for preorder at the usual places in the US.
I've seen some claims online that (some?) US retailers have been told it's direct only which doesn't fit with all the UK/EU retailers still being under the impression that they can order and sell it
I suspect what may be the case is that the US stock hasn't arrived in time so the only way to get it (on release) will be to direct order, at which point the buyer will get a 'sorry this is delayed' email
whether the independent US stores will get a change to get their hands on them when the do arrive or whether they'll allow direct sales to use up the entire shipment who knows
TheWaspinator wrote: Is the Precept Maniple Battleforce GW store exclusive? I'm not seeing it for preorder at the usual places in the US.
I've seen some claims online that (some?) US retailers have been told it's direct only which doesn't fit with all the UK/EU retailers still being under the impression that they can order and sell it
I suspect what may be the case is that the US stock hasn't arrived in time so the only way to get it (on release) will be to direct order, at which point the buyer will get a 'sorry this is delayed' email
whether the independent US stores will get a change to get their hands on them when the do arrive or whether they'll allow direct sales to use up the entire shipment who knows
Just had a note from my FLGS (UK). GW have delayed their orders that they were supposed to have received this week. Owner has had this before whereby they sell more at Pre-Order on the GW Web site than they accounted for, so to ensure they can send those orders out, they delay / cancel orders placed by FLGS.
TheSecretSquig wrote: Just had a note from my FLGS (UK). GW have delayed their orders that they were supposed to have received this week. Owner has had this before whereby they sell more at Pre-Order on the GW Web site than they accounted for, so to ensure they can send those orders out, they delay / cancel orders placed by FLGS.
TheSecretSquig wrote: Just had a note from my FLGS (UK). GW have delayed their orders that they were supposed to have received this week. Owner has had this before whereby they sell more at Pre-Order on the GW Web site than they accounted for, so to ensure they can send those orders out, they delay / cancel orders placed by FLGS.
Seems this is what's happened in the UK.
Typical...
Just got a shipping confirmation from Element Games for a Warmaster plus maniple box, so there's some stock out there at least.
My FLGS says their allocation has been shipped, with the usual post-Brexit caveat that UPS might just dump it in the ocean if they don't feel like going through the customs process.
And a complex mutation system for Corrupted titans
For my wild guess I'll say that Base mutations are ones that must be modelled, like extra limbs, while Additional mutations are like regular upgrades like ammo types, repair bonuses and so on.
Very cool. Hopefully the latter drop with the Traitor book (and soon!).
Also pleased to see after the Defence of Ryza labelled Magna a "minor Legio" that they are again, thanks to a copy and paste, described as a Primus-tier Legio in the Loyalist Legions book.
LL book is a worthy purchase, really looking forward to the Traitor iteration now.
Hmm. Looking at those excerpts…
Jackal is probably a scout type. Like the Warhound but lighter and more feral, if you assume the name is significant like that.
Imperator is not new and probably unmistakable.
Nemesis, though, that’s slightly confusing in that context: Does that mean just the Warbringer, or a new class just called Nemesis? Or even a subclass that they expect to be generally addressed, like scout or battle, that describes specific characteristics?
lord_blackfang wrote:Loyalist book namedropping new titans
Spoiler:
That typo though. Ouch.
Given that this is a compilation book with summary tables and whatnot, I'm not looking forward to the typical Forgeworld standard of proofreading.
But I'm definitely looking forward to having more than a paragraph of background per Titan Legion.
I just hope the book fixes the biggest and most annoying imbalance in AT since launch: the ratio of commas to full stops in fluff text.
Mr_Rose wrote:Hmm. Looking at those excerpts…
Jackal is probably a scout type. Like the Warhound but lighter and more feral, if you assume the name is significant like that.
Imperator is not new and probably unmistakable.
Nemesis, though, that’s slightly confusing in that context: Does that mean just the Warbringer, or a new class just called Nemesis? Or even a subclass that they expect to be generally addressed, like scout or battle, that describes specific characteristics?
I hope Jackal is the name of an actual smaller type. It's a good name for a mini-hound. Well, better than Fido, anyway.
Someone in a pub (or possibly Goonhammer) told me 'Nemesis' refers to a Titan that carries a weapon usually intended for the class above it. So the Warbringer is a Nemesis Titan because it's a Reaver chassis that lugs around a Warlord-sized weapon. Not sure if that's accurate, though.
I’ve head that before too, in which case I’m looking forward to my Nemesis Warlord with top-deck Suzerain class plasma cannon.
Also, the non-Nemesis Warbringer, assuming such a thing is likely.
beast_gts wrote: Nemesis, Death Bringer, Eclipse & Nightgaunt were Warlord sub-types
That's encouraging, because if New Century AT has tweaked the term 'Nemesis' to mean something different to the old days--so far, an entirely new Titan (the Warbringer)--it may also use 'Jackal' to refer to an entirely new Titan as well. The way the excerpt is worded certainly suggests it: 'Warhound type AND Jackal type'.
SamusDrake wrote: Forget where I read it but one of the Warhound variants has stronger shields. Could be the Jackal.
From Lexicanum:
The Wolf Class Titan configurations always operate in packs of two, specializing in finding and hunting down enemy forces. The Mastiff Class Titan pattern of Warhounds are not as nimble or as well-protected as the Wolf, being equipped and configured to act as solitary vanguards. Mastiffs specialize in flanking enemy positions to sow confusion with well-planned hit-and-run attacks. The Jackal Class Titan pattern of Warhounds are similar to the Mastiff, being used in the same role but having heavier Void Shields so that it may better engage foes at a closer range. Because of this the favored weapons of Jackal Princeps are the Inferno Gun and Vulcan Mega-bolter.
Looking at those pre-built AT I Warlords, seems like the Nemesis is actually what we’d recognise as the “standard” warlord today, with the other classes trading firepower and protection for speed and manoeuvrability. Almost to the point of making Reavers and Warhounds redundant, in fact.
So… they only had one model kit back when AT first came out, didn’t they?
The original Nemisis was a more well armed Warlord Variant because they only had one model. Over the next few decades (Christ, I'm old!), the fluff has been re-written so many times that "Nemisis" can now mean the original Warlord variant, a separate chassis somewhere between an Warlord and an Emperor (mentioned in one of the black books i think), or any Titan with oversized weapons geared towards killing other Titans (the Warbringer Nemisis) or maybe dedicated anti-Titan weapons (the Nemesis quake cannon). Though I think by this point, any fluff for AT has been adapted by so many people you just have to roll with it!
I don't know how big the Warbringers back cannons are compared to the Warlord arm versions, but that might be an indication of the size that a Nemisis chassis could be. If it is such a thing.
Chopstick wrote: Ok so the +1 long range of Warmaster Plasma Blastgun is not a typo, talking about overpowered weapon...
A lot of the warmaster weapons are different actually. Point costs, number of shots, range all varies from the warhound or reaver versions.
Grampus wrote: I don't know how big the Warbringers back cannons are compared to the Warlord arm versions, but that might be an indication of the size that a Nemisis chassis could be. If it is such a thing.
Near identical in size. Mounting point and ammo feeds are different, otherwise the same.
Warmaster Variant shoulder weapons:
Apocalypse Missile Array: Front arc, -2 Dice vs Reaver
Plasma Blastgun: +1 acc at long, +10 points vs warhound
Turbolaser Destructor- +10 points vs Warhound. Oddly, Warmaster and Warhound are 16"/32" short and long, while the Turbolaser Destructors on the reaver and Warlord are 18"/32"
Vulcan Megabolter: +10 points vs Warhound
Inferno Gun: +5 points vs Warhound
Melta Cannon: 8"/16" vs 12"/24", -1S, -5 points ve Reaver
Nah, the new text replaces a bunch of older stratagems with the same name as they are upgraded, but doesn't preclude using others. Also says there'll be more in future expansions, because of course there will. There's a good post about it on B&C by a fella who works with the law: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/369675-loyalist-legions-book/?p=5690005
lord_blackfang wrote: Google says the Jackal is just a particular Warhound loadout sadly....
Jackal, Wolf & Mastiff are / were sub-types of Warhounds in the original AT.
The Nemesis class used to be a sub-class of Warlord, not it’s a distinct class unto itself.
Nemesis is still a subclass. We have only seen a Nemesis Warbringer though. Nothing about the normal Warbringer yet. We havent seen anything about the Nemesis Warlords that are both referred to as upgunned warlords and small emperors in various points, but that description would actually fit the Warmaster quite well. Anyone sees a Warmaster deployed, and oh its just a variant on the Warlord, with a different pattern. Not an entirely separate class of titans that the Mechanicum has been keeping in their back pocket for dire emergencies. Possibly the Apocalypse titan is also based on the frame of the Warmaster, just with a different weapons loadout.
MajorWesJanson wrote: Anyone sees a Warmaster deployed, and oh its just a variant on the Warlord, with a different pattern. Not an entirely separate class of titans that the Mechanicum has been keeping in their back pocket for dire emergencies.
I mean, sure, in the same way someone seeing an Abrams might think it's a funny looking Sherman.
MajorWesJanson wrote: Anyone sees a Warmaster deployed, and oh its just a variant on the Warlord, with a different pattern. Not an entirely separate class of titans that the Mechanicum has been keeping in their back pocket for dire emergencies.
I mean, sure, in the same way someone seeing an Abrams might think it's a funny looking Sherman.
Joe Guardsman or Sammy Astartes are likely more concerned with whether the Titan is helping them exterminate xenos or bring a world into compliance than whether or not its an "Anvillis pattern Nemesis warlord" or some secret titan type. Take a Lucius and a Mars warlord. They are built on the same basic frame and have comparable loadouts, but look far more distinct than Bismarck vs Iowa
No I'm pretty sure even in your assumed future where soldiers somehow don't pay attention to their own hardware despite worshipping it like a literal god they still will put more weight in one being 25% taller than in having curvier armour plates.
lord_blackfang wrote: No I'm pretty sure even in your assumed future where soldiers somehow don't pay attention to their own hardware despite worshipping it like a literal god they still will put more weight in one being 25% taller than in having curvier armour plates.
Depends on the troops. Your average Imperial Guardsman will quite likely never see a single titan in his life. And if he does, there's a good chance that he'll devolve into the same syndrome that afflicted Allied troops in Western Europe, where every German tank was a Tiger, and every German gun was an 88.
On the other hand, those that have seen Titans more than once or twice can probably tell them apart quite easily.
They've clarified Voidbreaker to be as crap as we feared...
Also this:
Q. The Warmaster’s shoulder plasma blastguns have a +1 in their Long range rather than the -1 of the Warhound plasma blastguns. Is this a mistake? A. No, this difference is intentional; a raft of greater reactor controls and parameters enable the Warmaster to increase the effective range of the plasma blastgun when housed within its shoulders
SamusDrake wrote: Disappointing, but at least the Seneschal's banner can now take the Acastus. Not great but it is something.
I mean, it is not a lot, but I am actually super happy about the Seneschal change. In my fluff the head of my Knight house uses an Acastus, so now I can actually do that again.
And to the voidbreaker comment above, yeah, that is a shame. Really relegates the Volkite weapons to highly niche uses. Probably only the Warlord one is worth deploying at all, and even that is marginal.
And to the voidbreaker comment above, yeah, that is a shame. Really relegates the Volkite weapons to highly niche uses. Probably only the Warlord one is worth deploying at all, and even that is marginal.
Still hoping that there's some key detail missing from the writeup on those weapons; with a combination of extra traits like Blast, Rapid, or Shieldbane it's another story.
I mean, it is not a lot, but I am actually super happy about the Seneschal change. In my fluff the head of my Knight house uses an Acastus, so now I can actually do that again.
That sounds pretty cool. Did you come up with a name for your House?
Chopstick wrote: So the most damaging shoulder weapon get a bonus to hit is intentional? That's some genius balancing right there.
It is also +10 points vs the warhound version, and competing for reactor heat with the main arm plasma.
Also, considering the base Titan is 1040pts with the current kit options, plus whatever Maniple you’re taking because it’s an Auxiliary, you may simply not have an extra 80pts to get twin plasmas in a lot of games.
Edit: should give the Volkites Shieldbane as well. Or at least a higher Voidbreaker value.
Starting to think they need to expand the bands of cover past -2 (50% obscurement) if they're going to be throwing plus 1's to hit around like candy. Especially considering the very strong wargear that fureans and ignatum can bring on top of this tuff.
Right how the only way to get better than -2 is with a trait or stratagem.
I mean, it is not a lot, but I am actually super happy about the Seneschal change. In my fluff the head of my Knight house uses an Acastus, so now I can actually do that again.
That sounds pretty cool. Did you come up with a name for your House?
Sure did! House Chesapeake!
Hope that comes through, never posted an image here before.
Crablezworth wrote: Starting to think they need to expand the bands of cover past -2 (50% obscurement) if they're going to be throwing plus 1's to hit around like candy. Especially considering the very strong wargear that fureans and ignatum can bring on top of this tuff.
Right how the only way to get better than -2 is with a trait or stratagem.
Wouldn't really say they are that common, except for a few select Legios that have them. -2 is plenty effective as well as really common on decently dense areas of well made tables. It's also not like that one single blob of doom called Warmaster that takes up half the points of your opponents army couldn't be crippled by hitting it with Blind Bombardment and such tricks all day long.
Traits and stratagems should be the territory where you go to get beyond -2. Normally, just get out of sight instead.
I mean, it is not a lot, but I am actually super happy about the Seneschal change. In my fluff the head of my Knight house uses an Acastus, so now I can actually do that again.
That sounds pretty cool. Did you come up with a name for your House?
Sure did! House Chesapeake!
Hope that comes through, never posted an image here before.
Crablezworth wrote: Starting to think they need to expand the bands of cover past -2 (50% obscurement) if they're going to be throwing plus 1's to hit around like candy. Especially considering the very strong wargear that fureans and ignatum can bring on top of this tuff.
Right how the only way to get better than -2 is with a trait or stratagem.
Wouldn't really say they are that common, except for a few select Legios that have them. -2 is plenty effective as well as really common on decently dense areas of well made tables. It's also not like that one single blob of doom called Warmaster that takes up half the points of your opponents army couldn't be crippled by hitting it with Blind Bombardment and such tricks all day long.
Traits and stratagems should be the territory where you go to get beyond -2. Normally, just get out of sight instead.
I don't disagree, until gw confuses a - with + on a card they printed. They claim in the faq if wasn't a mistake, we'll see. They also may or may not have made a mistake with the warbringer nemesis carapace weapons the new book, not sure if its an intentional change but haven't seen the warbringer cards from the battlegroup box to see if they've been updated. If gw is going to be hit and miss with some stuff it might be the better option, especially with so many things having a 90 arc now.
I mean, it is not a lot, but I am actually super happy about the Seneschal change. In my fluff the head of my Knight house uses an Acastus, so now I can actually do that again.
That sounds pretty cool. Did you come up with a name for your House?
Sure did! House Chesapeake!
Spoiler:
Hope that comes through, never posted an image here before.
I'm not going to lie, I completely read that as House Cheapskate until I saw the first reply...
I mean, it is not a lot, but I am actually super happy about the Seneschal change. In my fluff the head of my Knight house uses an Acastus, so now I can actually do that again.
That sounds pretty cool. Did you come up with a name for your House?
Sure did! House Chesapeake!
Spoiler:
Hope that comes through, never posted an image here before.
I'm not going to lie, I completely read that as House Cheapskate until I saw the first reply...
So did I, and wondered if it was 3D printed. But very very nice looking model
I don't disagree, until gw confuses a - with + on a card they printed. They claim in the faq if wasn't a mistake, we'll see. They also may or may not have made a mistake with the warbringer nemesis carapace weapons the new book, not sure if its an intentional change but haven't seen the warbringer cards from the battlegroup box to see if they've been updated. If gw is going to be hit and miss with some stuff it might be the better option, especially with so many things having a 90 arc now.
I thought it was a typo on the card as well, but it is consistent with the weapon chart in codex loyal legios.
I don't disagree, until gw confuses a - with + on a card they printed. They claim in the faq if wasn't a mistake, we'll see. They also may or may not have made a mistake with the warbringer nemesis carapace weapons the new book, not sure if its an intentional change but haven't seen the warbringer cards from the battlegroup box to see if they've been updated. If gw is going to be hit and miss with some stuff it might be the better option, especially with so many things having a 90 arc now.
I thought it was a typo on the card as well, but it is consistent with the weapon chart in codex loyal legios.
Sure but this is gw, whose to say one sunk cost wasn't just followed by another (ie they may have messed up in the book first and were forced to double down on the cards rather then re-print the book). Evidence for this? The warbringer's guns are both wrong in the book too, and the latest cards weren't updated to the new change (90 arc from corridor arc).
The warbringer getting 90 arc for carapace is sorta iffy, it makes sense physically because it does swivel left/right but considering the new book just made the upgrade that turns corridor into 90 arc a universal piece of wargear its sortof another knock against warlords being that warbringers now get this essentially for free. Not sure if this was intentional either because the warbringer cards in the battlegroup box still show corridor arc.
Digging into the Loyalist Legios book for possible hints about new Titans, I'm annoyed to find that the writer(s) seem to use 'type' and 'class' interchangeably.
My vague understanding of older fluff--which may be mistaken--is that type used to be a broad designation: Scout, Battle or Emperor, much like 'destroyer, cruiser or battleship'. Meanwhile, class referred to a particular design or chassis. The Imperator class and Warmonger class were both Emperor-type Titans.
Then again, my Battlefleet Gothic may be showing, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
In any case, the fluff in Loyalist Legios mixes up 'class' and 'type' all over the place. One paragraph calls Reavers a type, and another calls it a class. So whenever the Jackal, Nightgaunt, Rapier and Nemesis are mentioned, it's hard to tell what they're talking about. Seems odd for FW to be so loose with the terminology. I thought they were all about the nitty-gritty details?
Still, given that every named Titan model so far has been a distinct chassis, rather than simply a different weapons configuration a la the Knights, it seems reasonable to suppose that the same will hold for the Jackal, Rapier and friends.
(Incidentally, which ancient bloody tech-priest decided that five Titan names should all start with 'war'?)
Meanwhile, my fears about the comma / full stop ratio have once again come true. Every effing paragraph! The fluff would be at least 200% more engaging and lively if a few of those interminable sentences were split.
The proofreading also upholds the typical shining FW standards. Just skimming through the Christmas Amazo... er... Legio Solaria section, it twice calls them 'Solaris'. Come on guys, that's a simple global find-and-replace; don't you even do a style sheet check? And the House Procon Vi text on p65, second paragraph, says 'less' when it should be 'lest'.
Oh, and the Natrix Shock Lance weapon rules summary gives its short range modifier as '1'. Not +1 or -1. Just 1. It's pretty obvious what it's meant to be, but... sheesh.
(EDIT: Turns out the FAQ has fixed this. Which just goes to prove the old universally acknowledged truth that anyone pointing out proofreading errors will overlook something themselves... ahem.)
I don't really trust anything oddball in that section to be a genuine updated rule, especially the 90-degree arc on the Warbringer carapace, because typos are common in summary tables. To quote Andy Chambers circa 3rd edition 40K: "I hate summaries--they always, always do this!"
Whinging aside, it's an excellent compilation/reference book, and the extra fluff on each Legio is great to see.
Zenithfleet wrote: I don't really trust anything oddball in that section to be a genuine updated rule, especially the 90-degree arc on the Warbringer carapace, because typos are common in summary tables. To quote Andy Chambers circa 3rd edition 40K: "I hate summaries--they always, always do this!"
I really wish someone had asked him two follow-up questions:
A, Why do they always do this?
B, How can you change the way they're produced so they don't always do this?
Zenithfleet wrote: I don't really trust anything oddball in that section to be a genuine updated rule, especially the 90-degree arc on the Warbringer carapace, because typos are common in summary tables. To quote Andy Chambers circa 3rd edition 40K: "I hate summaries--they always, always do this!"
I really wish someone had asked him two follow-up questions:
A, Why do they always do this?
B, How can you change the way they're produced so they don't always do this?
Having worked as an editor/proofreader, I can try answering for him.
Short answers:
A) The density of information and the amount of cross-checking involved makes errors more likely to slip through.
B) You need quality editing and proofreading processes. Unfortunately, that takes time, money and staff that even large organisations increasingly can't be bothered with these days.
Longer explanation in the spoiler tags for TL/DR purposes:
Spoiler:
Summary tables contain a large amount of information from many other sources: dozens of different pages within the same document, several hard-copy books, multiple webpages, or some other thing. When the writer creates the summary, they're going back and forth between many pages/documents. If working from hard copy, they have to make sure they read and type in the right number or word from the right source, every time. If working from electronic sources, they have to make sure not to accidentally copy-paste to the wrong place, or paste in the same thing twice because they thought they hit Ctrl+C and didn't, etc.
Obviously the answer is proofreading, right? But errors are more likely to slip past a proofreader if they're in a summary table. There's much more cross-checking involved than there is in a typical page of text.
If I were to proofread a page of fluff on Legio Robotnik, I could rely mostly on my own knowledge of spelling and grammar to catch misspelled words, punctuation mistakes and so on. Only if a number or unusual name appeared--like a sentence saying Robotnik has 150 Titans on Planet Mobius--would I need to stop and check it against some other page or source, or my own master list of numbers and names, to make sure it's 'Mobius' rather than 'Moebius' and that the value '150' is correct. "Hang on, they said 140 in the box on the previous page. Writer! Which number is the right one?"
However, for a summary table, I'd have to check every single number and word against its original source.
Just looking at the Reaver weapon table in the Loyalist Legios book, there are 10 rows, each containing 17 entries (if you include each numerical value in the 'repair weapon' column). That's 170 things to cross-check in less than a page of space. There's no shortcut. It's slow and tedious work. And it's easy to make a mistake, because numbers are easier to mix up than words, and because your eye is constantly moving between the document you're checking and multiple sources.
(If you're a fan of the game and have all the weapon stats memorised, errors might instantly leap out at you. But most editors and proofreaders aren't experts or devotees of whatever they're editing and proofreading this week, even if they're employed in-house rather than freelancing. Even if they are, they'd still double-check everything just to be on the safe side rather than trusting their memories.)
Because of this, errors are both easier to make and harder to spot in a summary table than in a typical page of text.
To compensate, you need quality editing and proofreading. But that's easier said than done.
Quality editing processes, in practice, mean two or more rounds of checking. Ideally you need a different person to check the document each time--you need a fresh pair of eyes to spot anything that the first checker missed. You also need to do at least one round of this checking on actual printed material. It's amazing how obvious errors go unnoticed if you're looking at a screen.
Unfortunately, because editing and proofreading happens near the end of the publishing process, there's constant pressure on editors to get it done faster and cut corners--especially if the writers missed their own deadlines. Managers are always trying to speed things up and employ fewer people to do the same work. Why have two different people check a document if we can get by on one? Why do we have to print something out, mark up the errors and then make all the same changes onscreen--why not just do all the proofing on a screen to save time? Why even bother giving the editors the Word files before they're laid out--can't they just check it in InDesign? In fact, do we even need to pay people for this? Can't writers be trusted to write a bloody sentence? Can't the marketing and communications people just run a spell check? And so on.
It's bad enough in large organisations that have a tight release schedule to meet. A small organisation can see the time, staff and money required as a luxury it can't afford.
Incidentally, the worst proofreading from GW publications I've ever seen was in Fanatic magazines (for the specialist games before they were called specialist games). But Fanatic wasn't much more than two guys in a cow shed, so it's understandable.
I think those are all fine points when it comes to summary tables. I still think nothing beats having the people who write on it also play it. This has been a sore point with gw's engine kill articles, there have been errors you know simply wouldn't occur with someone who has even a cursory experience with the game. The article about the new volkite weapons comes to mind where they had to fix most of the article because the author wrote it all with a misunderstanding of voidbraker's mechanics. Writing about something is a bit like photography, it helps to already be familiar with the subject matter. I like photographing skateboarding, but as someone who doesn't skateboard I'd be useless to any skateboard publication, it's like speaking a different language. "That shot of the backslide heel flip pop shove it was great" "the what now?". Especially if asked do anything past photographing a skateboarder, like writing about the tricks he landed.
I'm happy they got an faq out so fast but honestly they suck at writing stratagems. They've decided to use each and any interchangeably when describing stratagem use but also want us to instinctively know any means "once per game" and each means "every turn", and they're basically synonyms without more context. All of this added to the fact that they clearly know how to write a sentence like "once per game" but have chosen to only do so sparingly for no reason. This book was a chance to rectify and fix that, it didn't. Like others have pointed out the fluff takes a hit to with them constantly switching between the terms class and type to where it's obvious even they don't know which one they're referring to either.
I was reading the new book and noticed there's no Tempestus, seems strange to not have them in this book since the Traitor book will presumably have Tempestor idk where Tempestus are supposed to be in that case.
JWBS wrote: I was reading the new book and noticed there's no Tempestus, seems strange to not have them in this book since the Traitor book will presumably have Tempestor idk where Tempestus are supposed to be in that case.
I think only ignatum stayed loyalist, tempestus and mortis went traitor
JWBS wrote: I was reading the new book and noticed there's no Tempestus, seems strange to not have them in this book since the Traitor book will presumably have Tempestor idk where Tempestus are supposed to be in that case.
I think only ignatum stayed loyalist, tempestus and mortis went traitor
Some of Tempestus went traitor, some stayed loyal, IIRC.
Tempestus still stands as a loyalist legio, and the traitorous element of Tempestus is now known as Tempestor. GW sells a transfer sheet for Tempestus and they describe them in terms that indicate they're loyalist, so it's not like they've been forgotten about, leaving them out of this book is like deciding to skip the entries for Ignatum or Mortis.
I think that Mortis went over wholesale and the Tempestus leadership took most of the Legio with them into treachery and heresy, but there were some maniples and individual Tempestus Titans that remained loyal to the Emperor.
So you’ll probably find Tempestus in the Traitor Legios book. Those guys might “now” be known as Tempestus and the traitors as Tempestor but the game is set during the Heresy, when all this was still shaking out.
Not that there’s anything preventing you taking Tempestus rules for a Loyalist battle group; you just can’t take stratagems and Titans expressly listed as traitor-only.
JWBS wrote: I was reading the new book and noticed there's no Tempestus, seems strange to not have them in this book since the Traitor book will presumably have Tempestor idk where Tempestus are supposed to be in that case.
They'll be in the Traitor book as Legio Tempestus. Per HH: Conquest, "Legio Tempestor" is only used in some post-008.M31 archives. There's been no concrete distinction between the two in decades.
Tempestus was meant to be a Traitor Legion far before it was given a Loyalist element, so it's only appropriate. The opposite side of the coin is Metalica, for example, who only appear in the Loyalist book but historically have a strong Traitor element (see e.g. Codex: Eye of Terror).
As far as I know before they introduced the allegiances in the ryza book, it's my belief you could play a lot of the legios as either loyalist or traitor but would have to decide for purposes of stratagems, could be mistaken however. Now I'm not sure because of the loyalist/traitor/blackshield stuff introduced in ryza that may not be the case.
Crablezworth wrote: As far as I know before they introduced the allegiances in the ryza book, it's my belief you could play a lot of the legios as either loyalist or traitor but would have to decide for purposes of stratagems, could be mistaken however. Now I'm not sure because of the loyalist/traitor/blackshield stuff introduced in ryza that may not be the case.
You still can. Per the Loyalist book:
The Titan Legions and Knight Households presented in this book are those that were predominantly loyal to the Emperor. As such, only three allegiances are presented below: Loyalist
Titan Legion (available to a Legio battlegroup) and Questoris Imperialis or Questoris Mechanicum allegiance (both available to a Knight Household battlegroup). If players wish to use Legio or Household rules presented in this book with other allegiances presented elsewhere, they are welcome to do so, so long as they clearly inform their opponents before a game begins.
Was just explaining, lorewise, why Tempestus would show up in the Traitor book and not the Loyalist one, why Metalica would show up in the Loyalist book and not the Traitor book, etc
Ah cool, thanks for posting the reference to the latest book, good to konw that still works. Did the split off from mortis get a new name too or just tempestus?
Crablezworth wrote: Ah cool, thanks for posting the reference to the latest book, good to konw that still works. Did the split off from mortis get a new name too or just tempestus?
By Mortis you mean Metalica? No, the Traitor portion is still just Legio Metalica/Iron Skulls. The Tempestus/Tempestor one isn't clear cut. There wasn't a Legio Tempestus that split into a Legio Tempestus and a Legio Tempestor: there was a single Legio Tempestus that is sometimes called Tempestus and sometimes called Tempestor (both Loyalist & Traitor). Per the latest lore, which I referenced above, Tempestor is just a label attributed to the Legion occasionally post-008.M31. People often think that the Traitor portion is meant to be Tempestor and the Loyalist portion is meant to be Tempestus but that's incorrect. Either way, the Storm Lords were introduced as/primarily intended to be Traitors.
Nope, they were not created from scratch. Again, Conquest makes this clear - the world that Tempestus/Tempestor inhabit on 40k (per the novel Titanicus), Orestes, was one of Tempestus' domains during the GC/HH (as was Estaban III, which was the Traitor Stormlords' base), and we know that there were some loyalists who survived by virtue of not being on Mars.
Crablezworth wrote: I think those are all fine points when it comes to summary tables. I still think nothing beats having the people who write on it also play it. This has been a sore point with gw's engine kill articles, there have been errors you know simply wouldn't occur with someone who has even a cursory experience with the game. The article about the new volkite weapons comes to mind where they had to fix most of the article because the author wrote it all with a misunderstanding of voidbraker's mechanics. ...
I'm happy they got an faq out so fast but honestly they suck at writing stratagems. They've decided to use each and any interchangeably when describing stratagem use but also want us to instinctively know any means "once per game" and each means "every turn", and they're basically synonyms without more context. All of this added to the fact that they clearly know how to write a sentence like "once per game" but have chosen to only do so sparingly for no reason. This book was a chance to rectify and fix that, it didn't. Like others have pointed out the fluff takes a hit to with them constantly switching between the terms class and type to where it's obvious even they don't know which one they're referring to either.
Good point about the Engine Kill articles. Marketing and Communications strikes again. "Go promote this and pretend you're an Enthusiast!" "Well, it's a living..."
However, when it comes to the AT rules themselves--such as the strategems--we have the opposite problem: the language is vague and confusing because the writers play the game. They know what they mean when they say 'any phase' and don't realise that readers may not get it.
This sort of thing happens all the time, in every type of writing. In such a case it's useful to have editors and proofreaders who aren't familiar with the material--just like a newcomer to the subject or the game. They should be asking the dumb questions like, "I'm confused--what do you mean by 'any'?" The writers inevitably say, "Huh? We thought that was obvious..." but if it's not obvious to the editor or beta reader, it probably won't be to the actual intended market either.
(For an example of the hilarity that happens when the rules writer knows what they mean and assumes everyone else does too, look up the old Deathblow rule for the original Warhammer Quest. People are still arguing about it a quarter of a century later.)
Of course there's also been a different problem since the core AT rules designer left. Later rules writers apparently didn't quite know what they were doing when adding extra stuff to AT. I very much doubt the Acastus rules were devised while Hewitt was still there. I'm cautiously optimistic that they've got a better handle on things now, though.
On a related note, I wish they'd put the points value for each Titan Upgrade in bold as part of the upgrade name, rather than burying it in the first sentence. They don't seem to have quite settled on whether to call it 'Wargear' or 'Upgrades' either. Ugh, I hate seeing fancy expensive hardback full-colour books produced with shoddy proofreading. It besmirches the honour of the Legio Biblos, it does.
(edit) Oh, I see, its double layered. Too me a long time to figure it out.
I knew we shouldn't trust Astorum! Sneaky ninjas. Never trust anyone with 'Warp' in their name (or if you can't see where it keeps its brain, as Mrs Weasley would say).
Crablezworth wrote: I think those are all fine points when it comes to summary tables. I still think nothing beats having the people who write on it also play it. This has been a sore point with gw's engine kill articles, there have been errors you know simply wouldn't occur with someone who has even a cursory experience with the game. The article about the new volkite weapons comes to mind where they had to fix most of the article because the author wrote it all with a misunderstanding of voidbraker's mechanics. ...
I'm happy they got an faq out so fast but honestly they suck at writing stratagems. They've decided to use each and any interchangeably when describing stratagem use but also want us to instinctively know any means "once per game" and each means "every turn", and they're basically synonyms without more context. All of this added to the fact that they clearly know how to write a sentence like "once per game" but have chosen to only do so sparingly for no reason. This book was a chance to rectify and fix that, it didn't. Like others have pointed out the fluff takes a hit to with them constantly switching between the terms class and type to where it's obvious even they don't know which one they're referring to either.
Good point about the Engine Kill articles. Marketing and Communications strikes again. "Go promote this and pretend you're an Enthusiast!" "Well, it's a living..."
However, when it comes to the AT rules themselves--such as the strategems--we have the opposite problem: the language is vague and confusing because the writers play the game. They know what they mean when they say 'any phase' and don't realise that readers may not get it.
This sort of thing happens all the time, in every type of writing. In such a case it's useful to have editors and proofreaders who aren't familiar with the material--just like a newcomer to the subject or the game. They should be asking the dumb questions like, "I'm confused--what do you mean by 'any'?" The writers inevitably say, "Huh? We thought that was obvious..." but if it's not obvious to the editor or beta reader, it probably won't be to the actual intended market either.
(For an example of the hilarity that happens when the rules writer knows what they mean and assumes everyone else does too, look up the old Deathblow rule for the original Warhammer Quest. People are still arguing about it a quarter of a century later.)
Of course there's also been a different problem since the core AT rules designer left. Later rules writers apparently didn't quite know what they were doing when adding extra stuff to AT. I very much doubt the Acastus rules were devised while Hewitt was still there. I'm cautiously optimistic that they've got a better handle on things now, though.
On a related note, I wish they'd put the points value for each Titan Upgrade in bold as part of the upgrade name, rather than burying it in the first sentence. They don't seem to have quite settled on whether to call it 'Wargear' or 'Upgrades' either. Ugh, I hate seeing fancy expensive hardback full-colour books produced with shoddy proofreading. It besmirches the honour of the Legio Biblos, it does.
(edit) Oh, I see, its double layered. Too me a long time to figure it out.
I knew we shouldn't trust Astorum! Sneaky ninjas. Never trust anyone with 'Warp' in their name (or if you can't see where it keeps its brain, as Mrs Weasley would say).
Well ya they had a chance to do some house cleaning here but are also sorta held back by the other books. For one, there's a whole class of stratagems that work more like upgrades/wargear and are generally assigned to a titan in the strat phase turn one, which would be redundent if they just made them wargear and limited the access or amount you can buy it.
You're right about the engine war articles, it seems odd they couldn't find one person to write copy who also plays titanicus. I've said before, they could easily contract out to passionate people, give the goonhammer guys a monthly contract to write engine war articles for gw, they already knock it out of the park.
What's extra funny is they could have fixed voidbraker to work like they thought it did, which would actually make it worth taking, but they faq'd it to work exactly as it does.
Tempestor are probably being saved for the Traitor book just because they were the 'original' Traitor Legio in the rulebook.
I'm interested in seeing how their colour scheme is depicted. If I recall the pictures we have of it (the three-tone blue camo) come from Imperial Armour and they've never been shown with new/updated Titanicus art.
Arbitrator wrote: Tempestor are probably being saved for the Traitor book just because they were the 'original' Traitor Legio in the rulebook.
I'm interested in seeing how their colour scheme is depicted. If I recall the pictures we have of it (the three-tone blue camo) come from Imperial Armour and they've never been shown with new/updated Titanicus art.
The art we have for Tempestus comes from Conquest, one of the HH black books. You're correct that we haven't received any art since then though.
Boo, resin instead of a proper alt sprue. We are still missing the melta and gatling arms and Mars delta head. On the plus side, they could still do a plastic sprue with those and a more interesting carapace mount, like the new warlord volkite or a sonic disruptor.
Spoke with 
