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.

 Imateria wrote:


For at least 1 game I'm going to play a Warhound with double flamers.

At S7 the Inferno gun is much more powerful than what it was in 40k/HH rules. It can actually melt titans now.

There are only 2 different tiles on those Forge World slides aren't there? (Not counting the work in progress one), pretty sure the ones titled tile 1 and tile 3 are the same tile, just that one of them has a few buildings from the Civitas Imperialis set placed on it (and is rotated compared to the first picture).

Tavis75 wrote:
There are only 2 different tiles on those Forge World slides aren't there? (Not counting the work in progress one), pretty sure the ones titled tile 1 and tile 3 are the same tile, just that one of them has a few buildings from the Civitas Imperialis set placed on it (and is rotated compared to the first picture).

Can you give us a link to what pictures you are referring to?

Tavis75 wrote:
There are only 2 different tiles on those Forge World slides aren't there? (Not counting the work in progress one), pretty sure the ones titled tile 1 and tile 3 are the same tile, just that one of them has a few buildings from the Civitas Imperialis set placed on it (and is rotated compared to the first picture).

That is a good point. I initially thought that as well. If you take a very close look at the buildings, the one on tile 1 seems to have less depth than the one on tile 3. The one on tile 3 seems about 70-75% deeper. Now this can be an optic trick. Both tile 1 and 3 have definitely the same base. Apart from that specific building all the rest seems pretty much the same. On the demo picture the depth seem to be the same though.

I would not understand FW showing them as separate tiles if they were just the same with added civitas imperialis components. We'll see once they are made available.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

puzzledust wrote:

Can you give us a link to what pictures you are referring to?

They are under the spoiler in my previous post https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/3690/716640.page#10117032

Mendi Warrior wrote:

Tavis75 wrote:
There are only 2 different tiles on those Forge World slides aren't there? (Not counting the work in progress one), pretty sure the ones titled tile 1 and tile 3 are the same tile, just that one of them has a few buildings from the Civitas Imperialis set placed on it (and is rotated compared to the first picture).

That is a good point. I initially thought that as well. If you take a very close look at the buildings, the one on tile 1 seems to have less depth than the one on tile 3. The one on tile 3 seems about 70-75% deeper. Now this can be an optic trick. Both tile 1 and 3 have definitely the same base. Apart from that specific building all the rest seems pretty much the same. On the demo picture the depth seem to be the same though.

I would not understand FW showing them as separate tiles if they were just the same with added civitas imperialis components. We'll see once they are made available.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

puzzledust wrote:

Can you give us a link to what pictures you are referring to?

They are under the spoiler in my previous post https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/3690/716640.page#10117032

Oh I'm sorry, I missed that. On the Warhammer Fest Blog it says "These boards have been designed to be fully compatible with the Civitas Imperialis kits, letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings."
After seeing your image, I really don't see that at all. They look like they are just randomly put on the board and don't fit in with the rest of the design. That makes it an easy pass for me.

Chopstick wrote:

 Imateria wrote:


For at least 1 game I'm going to play a Warhound with double flamers.

At S7 the Inferno gun is much more powerful than what it was in 40k/HH rules. It can actually melt titans now.

Originally, before 2nd edition Epic, that weapon was a multi-melta, not a flamethrower.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

puzzledust wrote:
On the Warhammer Fest Blog it says "These boards have been designed to be fully compatible with the Civitas Imperialis kits, letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings."
After seeing your image, I really don't see that at all. They look like they are just randomly put on the board and don't fit in with the rest of the design. That makes it an easy pass for me.

All the detail matches or complements the buildings. The "platform" areas are edged with details that are identical to the wall pieces on the sprues. They don't slot exactly into place, but then, most buildings have some paved ground around them.

puzzledust wrote:

Oh I'm sorry, I missed that. On the Warhammer Fest Blog it says "These boards have been designed to be fully compatible with the Civitas Imperialis kits, letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings."
After seeing your image, I really don't see that at all. They look like they are just randomly put on the board and don't fit in with the rest of the design. That makes it an easy pass for me.

I am afraid I don't understand your point.

If you refer to the demo picture, there is nothing preventing you from putting the civitas imperialis buildings in other combinations. To me they seem indeed fully compatible with civitas imperialis buildings. And if indeed tile 3 is exactly equal to tile 1 + added civitas imperialis buildings on top of the corner building, I would think that they fit perfectly with the rest of the design. The tiles are representing an urban area and the more buildings you have, the more cover your titans and knights have, and the more strategic your moves are. There are also advanced rules with stray shots and destruction of buildings.

As far as I am concerned the pass would rather depend on their price (not known yet) than on their integration/compatibility with civitas imperialis buildings which imho is absolutely brilliant.

I believe this is referred to as future proofing yeah ?

You would imagine they'd be £80 line the 40k RoB boards (for a 2x2 square. So £320 for a 4x4 board

 xttz wrote:

 Krinsath wrote:

On the actual game, I've read 5mmx1mm magnets will work for the Warlords, which is handy since that's the same size I already get for Flames of War. Looking at the Knights though it seems like there's a possibility for magnets there too. Has anyone already done so and if so, what size magnets did you go with?

I magnetised all my knight weapons at the wrist using leftover magnets from my 40k admech. Not sure if they were 2mm or 3mm and I'm not at home right now to check, but they did line up perfectly with the part you would normally glue onto the weapon. For the chainswords I snipped off the top 1mm or so of plastic so they didn't hang down too far like this:

I just checked and they are 2mm magnets.

Mendi Warrior wrote:

puzzledust wrote:

Oh I'm sorry, I missed that. On the Warhammer Fest Blog it says "These boards have been designed to be fully compatible with the Civitas Imperialis kits, letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings."
After seeing your image, I really don't see that at all. They look like they are just randomly put on the board and don't fit in with the rest of the design. That makes it an easy pass for me.

I am afraid I don't understand your point.

If you refer to the demo picture, there is nothing preventing you from putting the civitas imperialis buildings in other combinations. To me they seem indeed fully compatible with civitas imperialis buildings. And if indeed tile 3 is exactly equal to tile 1 + added civitas imperialis buildings on top of the corner building, I would think that they fit perfectly with the rest of the design. The tiles are representing an urban area and the more buildings you have, the more cover your titans and knights have, and the more strategic your moves are. There are also advanced rules with stray shots and destruction of buildings.

As far as I am concerned the pass would rather depend on their price (not known yet) than on their integration/compatibility with civitas imperialis buildings which imho is absolutely brilliant.

I was under the impression there would be slots for the Civitas Imperialis kits to "lock in" to the terrain. Which is what "letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings" seems to imply. I'm not seeing that in the picture. Ideally the slots would even have ruble underneath them so when you knock down a building and remove it from the board you are left with a small pile of rubble. IMHO that would be really cool and was what I was hoping for. What I had hoped for is more flat areas with various slots you could lock in your buildings. That being said, I'm not liking the fact that there is very little room for the titans to move. Do the rules allow you to step up onto the higher terrain?

Anyway, it's just my opinion and and I have the right to pass on something for any reason do I not?

 xttz wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 Krinsath wrote:

On the actual game, I've read 5mmx1mm magnets will work for the Warlords, which is handy since that's the same size I already get for Flames of War. Looking at the Knights though it seems like there's a possibility for magnets there too. Has anyone already done so and if so, what size magnets did you go with?

I magnetised all my knight weapons at the wrist using leftover magnets from my 40k admech. Not sure if they were 2mm or 3mm and I'm not at home right now to check, but they did line up perfectly with the part you would normally glue onto the weapon. For the chainswords I snipped off the top 1mm or so of plastic so they didn't hang down too far like this:

I just checked and they are 2mm magnets.

I assume you drilled or did you just glue the magnets to the ends of both pieces?

puzzledust wrote:

I was under the impression there would be slots for the Civitas Imperialis kits to "lock in" to the terrain. Which is what "letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings" seems to imply. I'm not seeing that in the picture. Ideally the slots would even have ruble underneath them so when you knock down a building and remove it from the board you are left with a small pile of rubble. IMHO that would be really cool and was what I was hoping for. What I had hoped for is more flat areas with various slots you could lock in your buildings. That being said, I'm not liking the fact that there is very little room for the titans to move. Do the rules allow you to step up onto the higher terrain?

I now understand your point, thanks for clarifying. I saw it differently, to me the "specially designed fittings" are the "built" areas on the tiles (e.g. the squared building serving as basis for a gigantic skyscraper, or the storage building on which you add a tower, ...). The piles of rubble are a very good idea, definitely something I would model. I don't know if there are specific elements in the rules for stepping up onto higher terrain, nor what would be considered "higher terrain".

puzzledust wrote:
Anyway, it's just my opinion and and I have the right to pass on something for any reason do I not?

Absolutely, I never put this into question.

Mendi Warrior wrote:

puzzledust wrote:

I was under the impression there would be slots for the Civitas Imperialis kits to "lock in" to the terrain. Which is what "letting you stack your buildings directly onto specially designed fittings" seems to imply. I'm not seeing that in the picture. Ideally the slots would even have ruble underneath them so when you knock down a building and remove it from the board you are left with a small pile of rubble. IMHO that would be really cool and was what I was hoping for. What I had hoped for is more flat areas with various slots you could lock in your buildings. That being said, I'm not liking the fact that there is very little room for the titans to move. Do the rules allow you to step up onto the higher terrain?

I now understand your point, thanks for clarifying. I saw it differently, to me the "specially designed fittings" are the "built" areas on the tiles (e.g. the squared building serving as basis for a gigantic skyscraper, or the storage building on which you add a tower, ...). The piles of rubble are a very good idea, definitely something I would model. I don't know if there are specific elements in the rules for stepping up onto higher terrain, nor what would be considered "higher terrain".

puzzledust wrote:
Anyway, it's just my opinion and and I have the right to pass on something for any reason do I not?

Absolutely, I never put this into question.

Cool, no worries! Hopefully you can step up onto some of those building foundations in the rules as that will allow a little more room to move about. Good point about modeling in your own rubble. I guess I'll wait and see the final product and how they say it all works.

Any building that is less than half the height of your Titan, can be moved over freely. At least in thr basic rules. So those foundations would be open terrain for a Warlord and a Reaver, but some of them might give a Warhound issues, and Knights probably have to go around some.

How's the height measured?

 Xanthos wrote:
Any building that is less than half the height of your Titan, can be moved over freely. At least in thr basic rules. So those foundations would be open terrain for a Warlord and a Reaver, but some of them might give a Warhound issues, and Knights probably have to go around some.

Knights can freely move through all terrain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nurglitch wrote:
How's the height measured?

Titans all have a scale value. A Titan can step over terrain if it's hight in inches is no more than half the scale value and the width of the terrain is less than the width of the base. The real problem comes when you realies a Warlord is scale 10 but only 5 or so inches high.

That's not really a problem. It just means the warlord can walk through buildings that are shorter than it is without getting stuck in the rubble, which I have no trouble believing.

For those who've read the rules or, better yet, played the game, do the rules seem conducive to adding "Epic" style infantry and tanks at a later date or are they laser focused on Titans to the detriment of others potential unit types? I don't have much interest in AT but the idea of playing Epic 40k intrigues me.

 warboss wrote:
For those who've read the rules or, better yet, played the game, do the rules seem conducive to adding "Epic" style infantry and tanks at a later date or are they laser focused on Titans to the detriment of others potential unit types? I don't have much interest in AT but the idea of playing Epic 40k intrigues me.

You're not going to play full Epic with infantry and manage Titans with the level of rules presented in AT. Red posted above a quote from the rulebook where they've future-proofed in the ability for the current rules to refer to 'Units' beyond Titans and Knight Banners, so maybe Superheavy tanks in the future, but I don't think infantry and regular armor are on the same level.

 Prometheum5 wrote:

 warboss wrote:
For those who've read the rules or, better yet, played the game, do the rules seem conducive to adding "Epic" style infantry and tanks at a later date or are they laser focused on Titans to the detriment of others potential unit types? I don't have much interest in AT but the idea of playing Epic 40k intrigues me.

You're not going to play full Epic with infantry and manage Titans with the level of rules presented in AT. Red posted above a quote from the rulebook where they've future-proofed in the ability for the current rules to refer to 'Units' beyond Titans and Knight Banners, so maybe Superheavy tanks in the future, but I don't think infantry and regular armor are on the same level.

TBH I think anything lesser then a bane blade would basicly just be useless as something other then cannon fodder.

IMHO going full on epic would proably force them to simplify the game a fair bit. not saying they can't just that with the way record sheets etc are handled, going full epic might be a headache

Fw does have a range of Ordinatus minoris in 28mm scale that seem logical to add

I'm looking at you Capitol Imperialis

So I'm curious whats everyone think'll be the best way to deploy a titan maniple? the Axiom proably the best?

Vorian wrote:
You would imagine they'd be £80 line the 40k RoB boards (for a 2x2 square. So £320 for a 4x4 board

Yep, that's what I've been expecting, they look similar in complexity and size to the basic FW city tiles, so I'd expect them to be around that sort of price rather than closer to some of the larger and more complex tiles like the crashed Thunderhawk etc.

bortass wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 Krinsath wrote:

On the actual game, I've read 5mmx1mm magnets will work for the Warlords, which is handy since that's the same size I already get for Flames of War. Looking at the Knights though it seems like there's a possibility for magnets there too. Has anyone already done so and if so, what size magnets did you go with?

I magnetised all my knight weapons at the wrist using leftover magnets from my 40k admech. Not sure if they were 2mm or 3mm and I'm not at home right now to check, but they did line up perfectly with the part you would normally glue onto the weapon. For the chainswords I snipped off the top 1mm or so of plastic so they didn't hang down too far like this:

I just checked and they are 2mm magnets.

I assume you drilled or did you just glue the magnets to the ends of both pieces?

There's nothing to drill really, 2mm magnets are the same width as the arms. I snipped off excess plastic where I could, particularly on the chainswords:

Kind of OT, but even looking at my partially built Warlord, I can’t quite believe the game is finally out!

I am excited! My copy arrived yesterday. Tonight after work the fun begins! XD

 Zethnar wrote:
That's not really a problem. It just means the warlord can walk through buildings that are shorter than it is without getting stuck in the rubble, which I have no trouble believing.

IDK. The old Titan weapon included "Rubble claws" (presumably to make walking on tons of steel and ceramite rubble a less risky proposition). It even mentions stuff like this in Abnett's "Titanicus". What I'd like to see (and it may well be the case, I don't know), is some sort of penalty. Like, walking your Titan straight through a building represents some hazard, or at least a temporary negative effect on performance.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/08/21/21st-aug-adeptus-titanicus-part-9-a-trip-down-memory-lanegw-homepage-post-4fw-homepage-post-1/

Interesting article if anyone is interested in how this whole Epic thing began