Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Splog wrote:

 Pacific wrote:

P
Many thanks for coming out of lurking to make this post Floofybirb

Some really interesting stuff there.

Are you able to clarify what the point 4 means, about Space Marine?

I’m pretty sure this means that although there are no plans or any design work done to introduce infantry, the scale was selected/tested so that infantry could be added.

Yeah, that. When/if they do Space Marine, it won't break the scale or existing rules. They will complement titans instead of becoming the new focus. As to Imperators the game seems to use some variety of true LOS and he seemed very concerned they had scaled everything such that it would be tall enough to see over everything and strong enough to remove what it sees. On that note, don't remove dead models! They can be used as cover unless they tip over. Please be careful as their power cores may still be active and remove a large chunk of everything around them, including scenery.

Yeah, when infantry get added, it’ll be “Adeptus Titanicus – infantry expansion” not “Epic infantry wars! Now with Titans.”

I also want to say FW should make an Imperator in AT scale, just so they can finally write that “Resin Imperator Titan Now On Sale!” headline they’ve wanted to do since the first Warhound was released…

Yeah - even if it were unplayable rules-wise, I'd still want an Imperator for my collection!

For those interested in a szie comparison of the old plastic Imperator titan.

On its own...



... and alongside a Primaris Marine and the new Warlord titan (identical base size):



I used this picture for reference:

 zedmeister wrote:

AT Facebook Group:

So the old Imperator titan could still "count as" a Warlord - maybe some fancy variant. But without the castle structures atop of it it would qualify as a Reaver, so...

Stumbled across this on FB today, hadn't seen this image before. These are the full contents of the rules box. The battlefield assets sprue will be particularly interesting. I believe the next open day is around july 15 so no too long before we see more stuff hopefully including the warhounds sprue.

That's a nice big box.

Grr, want another knight castellan, but this comes out soon too. Right in the wallet.

Hope the terrain boxes are relatively cheap, i want to make full cities to play in.

only 2 Questoris knight terminal? and 6 Titan? But you get 6 knight and 2 titan in the box game.

Chopstick wrote:
only 2 Questoris knight terminal? and 6 Titan? But you get 6 knight and 2 titan in the box game.

I believe a questoris knight terminal operates 3 knights together as a squad, they don't operate solo.

Yeah they said the knight terminals are 1 per squad, and I believe the idea of the game is that it's about titans and knights are only supposed to be little support models to fill points and maybe scratch at a warhounds legs (if it's already damaged) so I doubt you'll need more than 2 groups.

Should be more info at the upcoming Forgeworld open day in July , one thing a lot of people haven't picked up on is that seminars are back this year so I think we'll see a fair bit unveiled. Warhammer World also has one weekend cleared as TBA this year whilst all other events are shown up until 2019....so could be launch weekend given its start of September .

Chopstick wrote:
only 2 Questoris knight terminal? and 6 Titan? But you get 6 knight and 2 titan in the box game.

That particular box contains no Titan models at all; it’s just the rules. So it’s probably more like two for each class of Titan so two people can share the box and get a decent game in.

The rules box is nice, but I'm more curious about the "big box."

Which I suspect will be this plus miniatures and terrain.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Yeah, when infantry get added, it’ll be “Adeptus Titanicus – infantry expansion” not “Epic infantry wars! Now with Titans.”

I also want to say FW should make an Imperator in AT scale, just so they can finally write that “Resin Imperator Titan Now On Sale!” headline they’ve wanted to do since the first Warhound was released…

With the way they've talked about long term plans it really doesn't seem like infantry, tanks, etc will make an appearance for a while. At that point, it seems more likely they'd do a new edition or an all together separate rule set.

 aka_mythos wrote:
With the way they've talked about long term plans it really doesn't seem like infantry, tanks, etc will make an appearance for a while. At that point, it seems more likely they'd do a new edition or an all together separate rule set.

Well it it sells like hotcakes and the demand is there, plans will change.

Remember, most of this stuff was going to resin originally.

 Thargrim wrote:

Spoiler:

Stumbled across this on FB today, hadn't seen this image before. These are the full contents of the rules box. The battlefield assets sprue will be particularly interesting. I believe the next open day is around july 15 so no too long before we see more stuff hopefully including the warhounds sprue.

That's a pretty awesome box for people who already own Adeptus Titanicus / Epic-scaled Titans and who may not be interested in the new minis. Or as a companion to the Big Box so you can share the contents with two players. I'm actually really pleasantly surprised about this!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
With the way they've talked about long term plans it really doesn't seem like infantry, tanks, etc will make an appearance for a while. At that point, it seems more likely they'd do a new edition or an all together separate rule set.

Well it it sells like hotcakes and the demand is there, plans will change.

Remember, most of this stuff was going to resin originally.

The AT system pretty clearly isn't designed to handle infantry and such easily. It's a system focused on the details of titan combat.

If you're talking about an Epic relaunch in this scale, then sure, that could follow eventually.

 gorgon wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
With the way they've talked about long term plans it really doesn't seem like infantry, tanks, etc will make an appearance for a while. At that point, it seems more likely they'd do a new edition or an all together separate rule set.

Well it it sells like hotcakes and the demand is there, plans will change.

Remember, most of this stuff was going to resin originally.

The AT system pretty clearly isn't designed to handle infantry and such easily. It's a system focused on the details of titan combat.

If you're talking about an Epic relaunch in this scale, then sure, that could follow eventually.

I'm not sure that's entirely obvious. I mean, we don't really know enough about the game to know how conventional forces could be shoe-horned into it, and GW is pretty comfortable with stuff in a game playing by different rules. A single terminal sheet for a platoon of tanks or infantry might work depending on what those are supposed to do for Knights and Titans.

Remember that James Hewitt, who originally wrote the game, did say that it is designed to expand into tanks an infantry as a possible future option.

 zedmeister wrote:
Remember that James Hewitt, who originally wrote the game, did say that it is designed to expand into tanks an infantry as a possible future option.

Source?

Because the designers at Warhammer Fest said this, per Penddraig:

The Specialist Games team have also suggested that if the game is successful then we will see an expansion into 40k with Eldar Phantoms and Ork Gargants being included in future expansions but for the moment – the focus is on Heresy. What was clarified many times is that this is a game of titans. The emphasis is on God-Engines fighting each other as per the original game. There are no plans at all to expand into infantry, vehicles etc as the old Epic as the feeling is that it devalues the role and use of the titans. They have not ruled out a later version of epic as a separate game but there are no plans for the moments.

Honestly they'd have to re-design it to work other units in in large numbers. Basically AT won't have tanks; closest we might get is static defence towers/walls and such and legions of knights underfoot of the titans.


I think we'll see them move to the Chaos and then to the moder ntimes with xenos long before they consider expanding into full Epic sized conflicts. Even then an epic class game might well come under its own name; rules system and might thus only borrow the titan models.

 gorgon wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:
Remember that James Hewitt, who originally wrote the game, did say that it is designed to expand into tanks an infantry as a possible future option.

Source?

Because the designers at Warhammer Fest said this, per Penddraig:

The Specialist Games team have also suggested that if the game is successful then we will see an expansion into 40k with Eldar Phantoms and Ork Gargants being included in future expansions but for the moment – the focus is on Heresy. What was clarified many times is that this is a game of titans. The emphasis is on God-Engines fighting each other as per the original game. There are no plans at all to expand into infantry, vehicles etc as the old Epic as the feeling is that it devalues the role and use of the titans. They have not ruled out a later version of epic as a separate game but there are no plans for the moments.

Me, in the OP:

However, he is writing the rules engine so that they are able to add in vehicles or infantry without requiring a whole new set of rules to be written. He described the jarring effect of Titans and Infantry needing two sets of rules in previous games and it's something that he definitely wants to avoid.

I spoke to James Hewitt during the 2016 Open Day and that's what he said. If and how the rules have changed since he wrote them, I don't know

Huh. Interesting.

I suppose if Knights can be handled as units, we could see large formations of tanks and infantry within the ruleset. Personally, I think a new Epic would do it better with more streamlined Titan rules, etc. but that's just me.

I'd also prefer more streamlined titan rules... that's why I'm not sure about this game. AT to Epic feels like the difference in gameplay between Star Wars Armada (few big ships with lots of fiddly rules to them) and BFG (lots of ships with more streamlined rules).

Almost like playing a skirmish game with titans, instead of a large battle...

The thing is with this game I figured the way it looks on the table is like a section (city block) during a much larger scale battle. It's not meant to encompass an entire battle across a city, moreso a confrontation between the titans as they close in on each other. So in a sense it is more like armada or a skirmish game. There are a lot of mechanics and things at play with the titans (because it is a skirmish with titans). This is why I don't want them to try and turn it into epic later on, because the game would become bloated/convoluted and bogged down by all the little stuff, with too much micro managing little units when you should really be focusing on the titans which are the core of the game.

What expansions this game should need IMO is cerastus knights, lucius warlord, many more weapon arm options, terrain/objective kits, mechanicus/manufactorum themed terrain packs. There is a ton of stuff they can add on to this game that keeps it focused on the titans as it should be. And because the leg/body armor for the reavers/warlords is on it's own sprue they could easily release warped/chaos mutated upgrade sprues for the reaver and warlord titans. Plus the titans have magnet slots sculpted into the plastics where they should be. So they've thought this out pretty well for the long term.

If you know what you are doing assembling these models a warlord model should last you a long time cause you can swap its arms out. And because there are fewer models you can lavish detail and transfers and personalize titans the way you would an imperial knight.

I want some plastic Dominus knight on the field. Imagine a squad of Valiant pierce a Titan legs with the Harpoon

This could easily be expanded with legions, not the tanks and such but the theme, take the world eaters for example, Ursus claws on warhounds or mutated emperors children knights like house raven became in vengeful spirit.

Not really, because the Legions didn't have personal Titans but nominally allied Legios, each of which have their own theme. Legio Audax is only a 'World Eaters themed Legio' because of its atypically close allegiance to that single Legion.

Cyrixiinus wrote:
Not really, because the Legions didn't have personal Titans but nominally allied Legios, each of which have their own theme. Legio Audax is only a 'World Eaters themed Legio' because of its atypically close allegiance to that single Legion.

The "theme" of the legions is pretty well documented to have rubbed off on the non legion forces serving with them, its not a stretch really, Legio Audax is just the most "famous" example of it,


And thats all the excuse I need for something as cool as this....

In terms of auxiliary forces in general, then yes Audax is just a prominent example. In terms of Titan Legions it is more like an anomaly. Even if a Legions theme has rubbed of onto a Titan Legio, that is not a Legion army. The other example would be Xestobiax; a Legio Xestobiax army is still not a Thousand Sons army. The point I am trying to make is that Titan Legios are not part of the Astartes Legions, so adding a Titan Legio that is closely aligned to a Legion is still not expanding Titanicus to the Legions.

In other words, I may be arguing over the semantics of your first post rather than the intent.