GW Adeptus Titanicus news and rumours - Plastic Direwolf Kit!

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.

**Yodhrin**

If you're not wedded to GW changemod, Vanguard's 6mm range has some really nice wee not-techpriests and not-Skitarii.

**JWBS**

changemod wrote:
I think the timing of the imperator Titan will be very hard to predict, because we have no way of knowing how much backburner work and feasibility studies have been done on it, in either scale. In some ways a 40k scale imperator is ludicrous, but on the other hand the company know that the Warlord was profitable, if there is a market for an imperator they could Impose a huge price ticket on it, and it would certainly hit the cool factor a lot of designers would love to have under their belt. A Titanicus scale one is much more feasible and practical, and they’ll likely have at least fielded the idea and done a little concept work by now.

Plus, from some artwork we know they’ve at least decided what a modern imperator looks like.

Should we expect it soon? Not really, no. Can we accurately predict how much they’ve looked into the idea? Probably not.

I’m not sure from what I’ve seen of the game how well it would fit in from a gameplay perspective... But as a display piece I imagine it’d fly off shelves.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

RazorEdge wrote:
Let's <removed> GW for Tiny Marines!

I wish they’d do a few Admech guys as scenery. Tech priests to stand on a warlord’s balcony perhaps. maybe some secutarii for basing purposes. Just anyone who’d fit in thematically and give a sense of scale by comparison.

Though yes, if they did epic figures they’d probably prioritise marines instead.

Do you mean this? https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b0/29/9f/b0299fc7e6855e794141fe64b3b1e946.jpg I'm hoping for some further refinement if so. All the other classes have significantly changed since the Titan Legions. This Imperator looks pretty much the same as that old ass one (which I loved, but want to see an update).

**angryboy2k**

I must be the only person in the world who thinks the Imperator is a terrible model. I don't think it ever looked good, and the years haven't done it any favors. :(
I'd rather see a dozen different knight variants any day of the week.

**GoatboyBeta**

Back in the day the Imperitor was amazing. But like the old plastic Warlord it has not aged well. Unfortunately its not had the chance for a full makeover like the rest of the Imperial machines so recent artwork has stuck with a tweaked version of the old design. While its certainly possible for GW or FW to make a Titanicus scaled version(I'd guess in size it would be somewhere between the 40k models for Dominus and Cerastus class Knights),I'm not going to hold my breath.

Personally I'm much more interested in the talk of new types of Titans. Not being constrained to reimagining old designs, GW/FW have a lot more freedom to be creative in both the models and there rules.

**cole1114**

I'd rather get lucius versions of models before getting an imperator. I vastly prefer lucius titans to mars ones, the boxier look is just... satisfying.

**Tavis75**

MajorWesJanson wrote:
The carapace turbolasers for the reaver are a new design. The rest of the weapons already exist for the 28mm models. But now any further warlord arms or carapace guns are going to be new designs.

The AT Reaver Volcano cannon is actually a new design, a 28mm version exists but it is different to the version on the new Reaver sprue, which has more in common with the Warlord Volcano cannon.

Wondering now when we're going to see these things released, obviously the weapon sprue and Reaver probably won't be until after Christmas, but they suggested that the Knights, Warlord and scenery would be out this month which suggests a pre-order for all of it this weekend (or possibly next weekend even though that technically means it wont be out till next month).

Planning on picking up a couple of pairs of Knights and some of the scenery tiles (can't decide whether to get two for now and hope for some other variants soon or go for four so I can do a full battlefirled straight away, and paint them all at one for consistency, my choice may depend on if they bundle as a 2-pack or 4-pack with a discount), may also get a full Warlord so I can get a few of the weapon variants now.

Also, it's not mentioned in the article but I assume there will also be command terminals for the knights released as they won't be much use without them, but strange that that isn't mentioned.

**robbienw**

I like they they have done the reaver volcano cannon different from the 40k version. It looks much more similar to and in keeping with the look of the turbolasers, laser destructors and the Warlord volcano cannon.

**Imateria**

angryboy2k wrote:
I must be the only person in the world who thinks the Imperator is a terrible model. I don't think it ever looked good, and the years haven't done it any favors. :(
I'd rather see a dozen different knight variants any day of the week.

You're not the only one, I hate the look of the Imperitor and am rather glad they've said they have no intention of making one.

**Sherrypie**

Somewhat accurate depiction of events spotted from Facebook:

**ekwatts**

So I bought a Reaver a while back to paid with an Epic Armageddon force, since the scaling issues weren't really half as bad as anyone previously thought, but rather than use the included oval base, I mounted it to an 80mm round base. Would this be an issue if I decided I wanted to jump in to playing actual Adeptus Titanicus?

**TigerMafia**

LOL, very accurate. Very glad they came to their senses, or at the very least clarified it for us if that was the plan all along. The difference in reaction was like night and day in another community I'm part of. People who were on the fence about this game lost any interest they had this Monday. And then when yesterday's announcement came, and they made it clear that the weapon sprues would come out separately, 2 people went from uninterested to actually taking the plunge.

Also, what pattern is that second Warlord head on the new sprue? Not the Mars-Beta (btw, love that they made it) but the other one. And the Reaver looks mean as hell. Very excited for this.

**JWBS**

Imateria wrote:
angryboy2k wrote:
I must be the only person in the world who thinks the Imperator is a terrible model. I don't think it ever looked good, and the years haven't done it any favors. :(
I'd rather see a dozen different knight variants any day of the week.

You're not the only one, I hate the look of the Imperitor and am rather glad they've said they have no intention of making one.

Was it not mentioned on that "maybe we'll make a" wishlist? Where they said a new titan between knight/warhound, one between warhound/reaver, and they basically went all the way up the scale to Imperator? i really don't see why the hell they wouldn't make an Imperator. Locistically, comercially, gamewise, lorewise, no problems at all fitting an Imperator into AT at some point.

**Sherrypie**

ekwatts wrote:
So I bought a Reaver a while back to paid with an Epic Armageddon force, since the scaling issues weren't really half as bad as anyone previously thought, but rather than use the included oval base, I mounted it to an 80mm round base. Would this be an issue if I decided I wanted to jump in to playing actual Adeptus Titanicus?

Eh, not really. If your friends aren't too rigid, just go with that as is (the Reaver doesn't need a fire corridor and the templates just show how a 90 degree angle fits on an oval) or if the size becomes a rules issue, just have a paper cutout with you and hover the proper size over the Reaver to clarify.

**JWBS**

GoatboyBeta wrote:
Back in the day the Imperitor was amazing. But like the old plastic Warlord it has not aged well. Unfortunately its not had the chance for a full makeover like the rest of the Imperial machines so recent artwork has stuck with a tweaked version of the old design. While its certainly possible for GW or FW to make a Titanicus scaled version(I'd guess in size it would be somewhere between the 40k models for Dominus and Cerastus class Knights),I'm not going to hold my breath.

Personally I'm much more interested in the talk of new types of Titans. Not being constrained to reimagining old designs, GW/FW have a lot more freedom to be creative in both the models and there rules.

I reckon it'd probably even be Errant/Paladin sized tbh. Maybe Dominus, but 40K Cerastus are pretty huge, so certainly not Cerastus big IMO. https://i.ytimg.com/vi/FKlySm4JBeU/maxresdefault.jpg https://i.redd.it/ifbqx4qrdlez.jpg

**Mysterio**

GW or FW will eventually make an AT/New-Epic Imperator - it may take a while, and it may be after they (hopefully) bring back Epic Proper, but I've no doubt they'll get around to it some day!

**zedmeister**

Mysterio wrote:
GW or FW will eventually make an AT/New-Epic Imperator - it may take a while, and it may be after they (hopefully) bring back Epic Proper, but I've no doubt they'll get around to it some day!

Indeed. Even though they say it's unlikely, there'll be at least one designer itching to sculpt one. I wouldn't be surprised if some concept art hasn't already been sketched up.

**Tavis75**

TigerMafia wrote:
Also, what pattern is that second Warlord head on the new sprue? Not the Mars-Beta (btw, love that they made it) but the other one. And the Reaver looks mean as hell. Very excited for this.

That head is based on the original Warlord titan head (from the old version of AT), a 28mm version of it has been spotted at shows along with the extened carapace sections that are also in this kit (there's a picture of it a few pages back), but it hasn't been released yet so no official title for it. I wonder now if the versions seen were just upscaled prototype versions of the parts in this new warlord kit, rather than something designed for a proper 28mm release.

**Mendi Warrior**

ekwatts wrote:
So I bought a Reaver a while back to paid with an Epic Armageddon force, since the scaling issues weren't really half as bad as anyone previously thought, but rather than use the included oval base, I mounted it to an 80mm round base. Would this be an issue if I decided I wanted to jump in to playing actual Adeptus Titanicus?

As Sherrypie said, this shouldn't be much of an issue. Unless maybe if you go for tournament games.

One easy solution I see is to magnetize the oval base and round base, with the oval base going under the round one of course.

**Eumerin**

Tavis75 wrote:

The AT Reaver Volcano cannon is actually a new design, a 28mm version exists but it is different to the version on the new Reaver sprue, which has more in common with the Warlord Volcano cannon.

Are you talking about the reaver sprue in the news link? People keep talking about a volcano cannon on the sprue, but I'm not seeing it. I see the carapace weapon in the upper left-hand corner of the sprue. And I see the barrels of the melta weapon just below the center-right of the sprue. Where's the volcano cannon?

**Nostromodamus**

Volcano Cannon is centre-right. Melta Cannon is top-right.

**Eumerin**

Nostromodamus wrote:
Volcano Cannon is centre-right. Melta Cannon is top-right.

The stuff at the top right is only the outer layer of the melta cannon. There are supposed to be two barrels poking out of the end of the melta, and those aren't visible in the upper right pieces. So it appears to me that the two barrels in the middle center-right are glued together, and then the parts in the upper right are assembled around them.

**JWBS**

Eumerin wrote:
Nostromodamus wrote:
Volcano Cannon is centre-right. Melta Cannon is top-right.

The stuff at the top right is only the outer layer of the melta cannon. There are supposed to be two barrels poking out of the end of the melta, and those aren't visible in the upper right pieces. So it appears to me that the two barrels in the middle center-right are glued together, and then the parts in the upper right are assembled around them.

No I think if you look at the top right, the very small piece labelled (30) is the end of the melta (the circles being on the other side). Middle right gun certainly seems to be a volcanoe (look at piece 19 - the "vein" running along the bottom, and the little nodule on the underside of the "arm end". These would be invisible if encased in the melta bits. You can see how the melta is constructed and attached to the arm, then view it on the pic of the new reaver. The middle right gun (18 & 19) is not part of the melta.

**Carlisimo**

I think the barrel ends stick out of the back of piece 30, all the way in the upper right corner of the sprue.

**JWBS**

Eumerin wrote:
Nostromodamus wrote:
Volcano Cannon is centre-right. Melta Cannon is top-right.

The stuff at the top right is only the outer layer of the melta cannon. There are supposed to be two barrels poking out of the end of the melta, and those aren't visible in the upper right pieces. So it appears to me that the two barrels in the middle center-right are glued together, and then the parts in the upper right are assembled around them.

Compare https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/catalog/product/920x950/99560108137_TitanBelicosaVolcannoCannon01.jpg to middle right gun.

**Eumerin**

Alright, I'll accept that it's a second gun. Though that's as much to do with piece 20 (which is an attachment point for one of the arms; the melta attachment point is clearly visible with the melta pieces, which means that this one must connect to something else) as anything else.

It does make sense, given that the first reaver had two arm guns and a melee weapon. I don't know why they didn't advertise it. But at the same time, they also didn't advertise the carapace weapon that's mounted on the model.

**Imateria**

JWBS wrote:
Imateria wrote:
angryboy2k wrote:
I must be the only person in the world who thinks the Imperator is a terrible model. I don't think it ever looked good, and the years haven't done it any favors. :(
I'd rather see a dozen different knight variants any day of the week.

You're not the only one, I hate the look of the Imperitor and am rather glad they've said they have no intention of making one.

Was it not mentioned on that "maybe we'll make a" wishlist? Where they said a new titan between knight/warhound, one between warhound/reaver, and they basically went all the way up the scale to Imperator? i really don't see why the hell they wouldn't make an Imperator. Locistically, comercially, gamewise, lorewise, no problems at all fitting an Imperator into AT at some point.

No, as far as I remember the last talk regarding Imperator's was around the game launch and they said "no plans". I can't help feeling that on a 4x4 the Imperator would be a bit big.

**Fajita Fan**

It’d be half again taller than a Warlord, roughly 28mm Imperial Knight-ish plus the spires. I gave half a thought to building one with a Knight and all my AT terrain sprues but I don’t have much interest. I’d much rather kitbash some Nids, Eldar, or Necrons.

**Overread**

Imperator is big and likely would easily start to hit the near £100 model bracket. So I figure we won't see one for a long while yet, AT needs a lot more of its core game out, perhaps even as far as Chaos and Xenos before GW can consider building something that big and expensive.

**H.B.M.C.**

Hi! Stupid question: These new sprues are plastic?

Since when are FW doing plastic expansions? And why did Necromunda get them? I hate resin...

**Chopstick**

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Since when are FW doing plastic expansions? And why did Necromunda get them? I hate resin...

Since the budget allows them to. The other specialist game get the minimized budget treatment because GW simply didn't want to waste money. Anything that is not mainline 40k, Aos is a waste of money.

However for AT once GW realized that the "Titan Owner Club" and the "Titan Owner Wannabe Club" are rich and huge demographic they decided to invest more, and they hit the jackpot.