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.

This could be great - though a dogfighting game has to be really good to match up against X-wing. The last 40k plane game didn't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not AI, the 28mm skies of blood or whatever.

drbored wrote:
Neat. I was wondering when GW was going to copy X-Wing.

Not sure if serious, given AI came out before X-Wing. By a good five years in fact.

 Crimson wrote:

 greyknight12 wrote:
Not to derail the thread, but every time I see another specialist release I wonder why it’s not battlefleet gothic...especially with this one. I wasn’t even really aware this game even existed the first time around. Battlefleet Gothic on the other hand is still played and even has a recently released video game version.
Maybe it’s in the best interests of my wallet, though.

Yep. It actually deals with something completely different than other 40K universe games. Both AT and AI are basically just 40K vehicles in a different scale.

I think that characterisation is pretty unfair. In model terms, sure(now anyway, fliers and titans were hardly commonplace in 40K when these games were first conceived - for some of us they never will be), but AT and AI are entirely different games, and importantly they're both good games. BFG is also a good game, but it's not like they're putting off doing BFG to release garbage.

 Yodhrin wrote:

I think that characterisation is pretty unfair. In model terms, sure(now anyway, fliers and titans were hardly commonplace in 40K when these games were first conceived - for some of us they never will be), but AT and AI are entirely different games, and importantly they're both good games. BFG is also a good game, but it's not like they're putting off doing BFG to release garbage.

It really doesn't matter if it is a good game if the models are not interesting. Same models in a different scale is not interesting.

 Crimson wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

I think that characterisation is pretty unfair. In model terms, sure(now anyway, fliers and titans were hardly commonplace in 40K when these games were first conceived - for some of us they never will be), but AT and AI are entirely different games, and importantly they're both good games. BFG is also a good game, but it's not like they're putting off doing BFG to release garbage.

It really doesn't matter if it is a good game if the models are not interesting. Same models in a different scale is not interesting.

To you maybe but for mine I find them more interesting than the 28mm versions that never fit in with 40k gaming in the first place. Really hope that the Xenos races are released pretty sharpish (ie. they don't keep it as HH) as I am eager to get my hands on the Eldar flyers again, even more so for the CH.

 Crimson wrote:
Both AT and AI are basically just 40K vehicles in a different scale.

Technically true, but they both take the 40k vehicles that don't belong in 40k and give you a chance to see those battles with the scale and mechanics that make them work. 40k may theoretically have titans, but you never want to use them and AT is not at all duplicating the 40k game experience. Same with AI.

Interesting, this really seems out of the blue. I remember seeing AI around when it was new, but never really read the rules or played it.

Interesting that they also mention BFG, but that it is a few years in the distance. I'm not sure if I remember this correctly, but I recall FW saying that BFG would be one of the first games released after Blood Bowl but it would be set in the HH. I wonder if they decided to scrap that and push it back because so many people wanted Xenos in the game from launch?

AI is definitely more interesting the me than AT, so I may give it a look depending on how big of a game board it needs and how long the games take.

 greyknight12 wrote:
Not to derail the thread, but every time I see another specialist release I wonder why it’s not battlefleet gothic...especially with this one. I wasn’t even really aware this game even existed the first time around. Battlefleet Gothic on the other hand is still played and even has a recently released video game version.
Maybe it’s in the best interests of my wallet, though.

Andy Hoare said in the seminar that they think to do BFG, they’d either have to not do anything for blood bowl, Necromunda and AT for about a year, or basically hire a whole new team, but it is something they really want to do at some point.

I’m not really sure why Aeronautica Imperialis is different though.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 greyknight12 wrote:
Not to derail the thread, but every time I see another specialist release I wonder why it’s not battlefleet gothic...especially with this one. I wasn’t even really aware this game even existed the first time around. Battlefleet Gothic on the other hand is still played and even has a recently released video game version.
Maybe it’s in the best interests of my wallet, though.

Andy Hoare said in the seminar that they think to do BFG, they’d either have to not do anything for blood bowl, Necromunda and AT for about a year, or basically hire a whole new team, but it is something they really want to do at some point.

I’m not really sure why Aeronautica Imperialis is different though.

Depends on how much of the original ruleset they are reusing, and the approach they go with for the models: reuse the originals, new resin kits, or potentially plastic. And if one of the latter two, how many of the fliers involved have digital versions they can run through their debiggifyer process. Tau fliers, thunderhawk, voss lightning, and xiphon are all new enough to be digital, but things like the thunderbolt, marauder bomber, and chaos and eldar planes are all pre digital kits.

 BrookM wrote:
Probably on the same small scale as the previous edition, but hopefully with plastic aircraft this time around and (imho) retooled rules to make it faster in pacing.

The previous edition was pre digital sculpting, so they could either retool to digital - which I think likely - or use the old masters.

I would expect them to use AT-scale. If they use the old masters, it's close enough as would effectively make no difference. The crossover potential is just too lucrative to ignore, however.

Would definitely buy into this, I never got the chance to play the old AI so I hope this release is a success.

 Crimson wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

I think that characterisation is pretty unfair. In model terms, sure(now anyway, fliers and titans were hardly commonplace in 40K when these games were first conceived - for some of us they never will be), but AT and AI are entirely different games, and importantly they're both good games. BFG is also a good game, but it's not like they're putting off doing BFG to release garbage.

It really doesn't matter if it is a good game if the models are not interesting. Same models in a different scale is not interesting.

I think it is. In a game of 40k, a Titan provides nothing of interest. It stands there and every 30 minutes you roll a lot of dice. There's no tactical interest, notyhing for it to do. With aircraft, you get one or two planes flying unreasonably low doing strafing runs. Do them in Epic scale as different games and all of a sudden you've got entirely new tactical challenges and more modelling opportunities. No-one is modelling a 40k Warlord titan the way they're converting the Epic ones - resculpting heads and weapons, walking or running poses with only one foot on the ground, etc. Likewise with AI you can now employ proper dogfighting tactics using pairs or trios of planes, you can have more interesting ground attack scenarios involving initial waves to clear the ground defences before the heavy bombers come in, and interceptors fighting escorts. There's no way you can do 633 Squadron or the Dambusters raid in 40k.

Exalted.

Smaller planes on a regular sized table gives way more room to manoeuvre and do proppa fighter ace stuff, instead of flying off the table every two turns.

As an example, in Epic 40,000, aircraft were treated rather abstractly - you placed your incoming planes on a table edge, moved them in a straight line across the board and they carried out their mission (strafing, bombing, landing troops) before flying off the opposite edge (unless they'd landed). AA fire could shoot them down or drive them off.

Once they'd carried out a mission, they had to spend a turn re-arming (on a little card airstrip you kept at the side of the table). If they'd been driven off by flak, they had to spend an additional turn repairing. However, as well as using your planes for attack, you could use them in defence, as interceptors. Or send them off to attack the enemy airfield - if you caught any planes repairing or re-arming you could destroy them on the ground (like in Red Tails).

That's how I see it happening in AT, whereas in AI you'd play out those missions in more detail (as more than one game; an initial long-range interception, then the actual ground attack mission itself with local air support and AA), but the ground targets would be static markers with some sort of AA attack.

 Crimson wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

I think that characterisation is pretty unfair. In model terms, sure(now anyway, fliers and titans were hardly commonplace in 40K when these games were first conceived - for some of us they never will be), but AT and AI are entirely different games, and importantly they're both good games. BFG is also a good game, but it's not like they're putting off doing BFG to release garbage.

It really doesn't matter if it is a good game if the models are not interesting. Same models in a different scale is not interesting.

The fact that they can't seem to keep AT stuff in stock for more than a day during the first couple of months of release would suggest quite a number of people would vehemently disagree with you on that one. Unsurprisingly I'm one of them, others have explained why above.

 BrookM wrote:
Exalted.

Smaller planes on a regular sized table gives way more room to manoeuvre and do proppa fighter ace stuff, instead of flying off the table every two turns.

Or renting a small hall and building a battlefield out of 40 tables and then having to use poles to move stuff around


40K is a great game, but I do agree that certain things just don't scale well with it in a practical sense. Titans are cool, aircraft and tanks are too; but you're not really able to throw down 20 lemonruss or a 10 unit air bombardment force etc... It's not just a space issue either, most people just don't want to buy that many models at the size and cost of 40K. It takes ages to build and paint, is a pain to transport and in the end you imght only get to use them once or twice a year in an Apoc game if you are lucky.

That's where Epic should come right in to fill the gap - same for Warmaster (heck warmaster would be able to bring back the rank and file system for AoS giving not just a different scale of battle, but a different nature of grand armies and wars)

Forge World have run games of both Adeptus Titanicus and Aeronautica Imperialis using 40k miniatures on a large floor space (I remember the latter at GD2010). Looks good, if very impractical for a regular game night.

Warmaster is a flat-out superior set of rules than Warhammer, regardless of the scale of the miniatures. The authors agree, hence Black Powder, Hail Caesar, etc.

This was a very pleasant surprise for me. I have always been sad about missing out on BFG, AI and AT. With two of three of them coming back, I'm hopeful that BFG will make that come back as well!

Sweet! I am in. I never thought I would buy GW again, but they have lured me back with Blood Bowl and now this!

For those who need to know what AI is all about, I have a review and explainer about it on my blog.

https://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2017/02/review-aeronautica-imperialis-forgeworld.html

There is a lot of AI content there if you browse around. I loved this game!

Edit: Most of my stuff is scratch built.