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.

It's pretty standard in giant robot games these days. Giga-Robo, GKR: Heavy Hitters, Pacific Rim: Extinction all let you personalize your robot with pilots and stuff.

They mentioned it already, with the Titan's machine spirits being a thing - perhaps your Titan is impetuous and champing at the bit to fire up it's reactors and charge into the midst of things, or it might be more cautious based on a bad experience it had in the past.

It definitely sounds like that might be the way it's going. It does sound really cool, although I think necessarily makes the prospect of a full Epic game relaunch that much less likely if they do follow that route.

How is it less likely if they give the Titans personalities? It's a bit of information overload if you put it up on the board with all the rest of a decent-sized Epic army, but it's not like GW can't have detailed Titan rules for dueling and whatnot, and less detailed rules for use of the models in an Epic game. Kind of like Shadespire and Age of Sigmar.

 Nurglitch wrote:
How is it less likely if they give the Titans personalities? It's a bit of information overload if you put it up on the board with all the rest of a decent-sized Epic army, but it's not like GW can't have detailed Titan rules for dueling and whatnot, and less detailed rules for use of the models in an Epic game. Kind of like Shadespire and Age of Sigmar.

Even in your own example the two games are completely and totally different. One isn’t a “basic” and an “advanced”. They’re unrelated entirely outside of the fluff department.

Maybe it's because I don't play either, but can't you use the models inter-changeably? Maybe Warhammer 40k and Kill team are a better example.

 Nurglitch wrote:
Maybe it's because I don't play either, but can't you use the models inter-changeably? Maybe Warhammer 40k and Kill team are a better example.

Nope. Shadespire is a board game with fixed warbands where every single model is a named character and has its own stats, weapons, abilities and even upgrade cards. They have made rules for using the Shadespire warbands in AoS but you can't do it the other way around.

Okay, so it still seems reasonable to me to produce miniatures that players can use in more than one game, and that miniatures for a revived Adeptus Titanicus could be used in a revived Epic no problem.

 Pacific wrote:
It definitely sounds like that might be the way it's going. It does sound really cool, although I think necessarily makes the prospect of a full Epic game relaunch that much less likely if they do follow that route.

I don't think this would effect the possibility of having a full epic release really. you'd just make titan rules simpler in Epic and leave Adeptus Titanicus as a stand alone game. I think the only thing that's really gonna effect the potential for an Epic release is how well Titanicus sells.

They could easily do what they did the first time round. Start with space marines, keeping to Horus Heresy. Maybe later add other factions that were around during that time in supplements if it's still selling well. If its successful enough bring out a second edition that brings it to the 40k timeline and slowly add the rest of the factions.

Or they could go the Necromunda route. Here's a new rule book with a different playstyle set in the 40k timeline. We'll release supplements with additional forces from time to time.

 Sasquatch wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
It definitely sounds like that might be the way it's going. It does sound really cool, although I think necessarily makes the prospect of a full Epic game relaunch that much less likely if they do follow that route.

I don't think this would effect the possibility of having a full epic release really. you'd just make titan rules simpler in Epic and leave Adeptus Titanicus as a stand alone game. I think the only thing that's really gonna effect the potential for an Epic release is how well Titanicus sells.

They could easily do what they did the first time round. Start with space marines, keeping to Horus Heresy. Maybe later add other factions that were around during that time in supplements if it's still selling well. If its successful enough bring out a second edition that brings it to the 40k timeline and slowly add the rest of the factions.

Or they could go the Necromunda route. Here's a new rule book with a different playstyle set in the 40k timeline. We'll release supplements with additional forces from time to time.

I totally agree that they should have Titanicus be more complex than epic. FW knows what sells !30k! so it would be wise to start there and expand with differering rulesets, but same models.

We basically know the rules for AT already, they are more complex than they would be in epic.

 Nurglitch wrote:
How is it less likely if they give the Titans personalities? It's a bit of information overload if you put it up on the board with all the rest of a decent-sized Epic army, but it's not like GW can't have detailed Titan rules for dueling and whatnot, and less detailed rules for use of the models in an Epic game. Kind of like Shadespire and Age of Sigmar.

Hopefully we'll get that. I have no interest in AT. Epic Armageddon however is still my favourite wargame GW has done. AT is unlikely to get me invest. New Epic? That could get expensive! Assuming pricing is any sensible for building big armies.

 Sasquatch wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
It definitely sounds like that might be the way it's going. It does sound really cool, although I think necessarily makes the prospect of a full Epic game relaunch that much less likely if they do follow that route.

I don't think this would effect the possibility of having a full epic release really. you'd just make titan rules simpler in Epic and leave Adeptus Titanicus as a stand alone game. I think the only thing that's really gonna effect the potential for an Epic release is how well Titanicus sells.

The point I was trying to make (not very clearly!) is that if you have fairly complex rules governing the play of individual miniatures at a skirmish level, this won't translate well to a larger, multi-company level game which focuses on the larger scale of combat. Ask anyone who has tried to play large scale games of something like Necromunda or Infinity, while it can be fun its also exhausting and takes a much greater amount of time to play than can be expected of the average gamer's play in an evening.

Conversely, having very small miniature quantities in a game that designed for larger volumes of combatants has the opposite problem; a game that's over very quickly, and doesn't play at the level that allows much tactical input by the player.

So I can't see GW releasing a set of rules: "Use these if you are just using Titans/Knights". "Use these rules for them if you're planning on playing with our soon to be released set of 6/8mm scale infantry and tanks for a larger battle".

This is aside from the fact that a new 'Epic' would mean a mass of new production lines (remember that Epic was essentially the third main system at one point, alongside WHFB and 40k) if it was done in any way comprehensively. And despite GW being much more customer-focused and less belligerent over recent times, there is no way they're going to write a set of rules for miniatures that have been OOP for years, or for miniatures being produced by third parties(!)

Fortunately this won't matter to the current Epic playing community as the rules are already out there. And it absolutely won't exclude the possibility of using the AT miniatures for the current incarnations of the Epic game, so there would be cross-use of the new Titan miniatures. I think that's pretty much what everyone will be planning to do.

Um "stand alone game" refers generally to separate game right? Don't see why that would mean rules would have any common things except from fluff point of view(ie volcano cannon is unlikely to become poor titan killer but good horde killer between games).

And btw if no new epic models not much help for new players to get into epic. Ebay prices have gone up annoyingly lot :-/

 Pacific wrote:

 Sasquatch wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
It definitely sounds like that might be the way it's going. It does sound really cool, although I think necessarily makes the prospect of a full Epic game relaunch that much less likely if they do follow that route.

I don't think this would effect the possibility of having a full epic release really. you'd just make titan rules simpler in Epic and leave Adeptus Titanicus as a stand alone game. I think the only thing that's really gonna effect the potential for an Epic release is how well Titanicus sells.

The point I was trying to make (not very clearly!) is that if you have fairly complex rules governing the play of individual miniatures at a skirmish level, this won't translate well to a larger, multi-company level game which focuses on the larger scale of combat. Ask anyone who has tried to play large scale games of something like Necromunda or Infinity, while it can be fun its also exhausting and takes a much greater amount of time to play than can be expected of the average gamer's play in an evening.

Conversely, having very small miniature quantities in a game that designed for larger volumes of combatants has the opposite problem; a game that's over very quickly, and doesn't play at the level that allows much tactical input by the player.

So I can't see GW releasing a set of rules: "Use these if you are just using Titans/Knights". "Use these rules for them if you're planning on playing with our soon to be released set of 6/8mm scale infantry and tanks for a larger battle".

This is aside from the fact that a new 'Epic' would mean a mass of new production lines (remember that Epic was essentially the third main system at one point, alongside WHFB and 40k) if it was done in any way comprehensively. And despite GW being much more customer-focused and less belligerent over recent times, there is no way they're going to write a set of rules for miniatures that have been OOP for years, or for miniatures being produced by third parties(!)

Fortunately this won't matter to the current Epic playing community as the rules are already out there. And it absolutely won't exclude the possibility of using the AT miniatures for the current incarnations of the Epic game, so there would be cross-use of the new Titan miniatures. I think that's pretty much what everyone will be planning to do.

No you made your point clearly in your earlier post and your right the rules won't scale well. You would need another rule set if you were to release Epic and potentially new moulds for everything. Though they could just break out the old moulds to get themselves started. That doesn't mean it won't happen it just means there would have to be a good reason for GW to commit. And as I've said they can dip one toe at a time with this to test the waters. Start with marines in the same setting with simpler rules and expand from there if there is the sales.

Money talks and if this is a massive success you can bet your arse we'll get epic. It just may take some time.

Tastyfish wrote:
They mentioned it already, with the Titan's machine spirits being a thing - perhaps your Titan is impetuous and champing at the bit to fire up it's reactors and charge into the midst of things, or it might be more cautious based on a bad experience it had in the past.

If that is so, it is certainly along the right angle (for the path I hope to take with my AT armies).

But I was under the impression that the Machine Spirit's variable behaviour was governed by a damage-induced roll on a table, rather than something generated as part of Force Construction; Am I labouring under false pretences?

Mind you, said table could be used as part of the pre-game game; adding some flavour and character to these ancient machines, with their millennia of buggy code and hardwired tantrums...

All but speculation... any thoughts on when the next tidbit of official news might fall from the GW table?

Macrossmartin wrote:

All but speculation... any thoughts on when the next tidbit of official news might fall from the GW table?

If nothing else, Warhammer Fest is about a month away on May 12th. That's likely to be the next big reveal.

I like the Machine Spirit rules concept, and agree with other posters that it makes mass titan-v-titan conflict challenging without lots of players.

I'm fine with just a few of the big guys on each side, as it makes it possible to add smaller units without too much complexity.

On the other hand, I could see some epic convention games with lots of players (and their Titans ).

Oh yes, just give every player control over a maniple of titans, or better yet (if attendance allows for it), give every player a single control board, have them set up in maniples and play the game!

There is an event at Adepticon with full sized titans playing upscaled AT that is usually 5v5. That, but on a tabletop and actually affordable would be great fun.

While Epic is close to my heart (it was what got me into table-top gaming), and as much as I love the old AT, it wasn't titans that got me into Epic. It was the fact that I had titans, tanks, and infantry fighting around 3D terrain. Sure I love titans as much as everyone. I also love a lone tactical stand popping off a missile at a nearby Titan. I love the sight of Land Raiders moving through buildings. I love titans stepping on infantry. I want it all, not part of it. Epic's hayday was during 2nd edition, when pretty massive armies were sweeping the tables at my local gaming shops. I remember watching a game with six gargants on one side, nevermind all the infantry and battlewagons. That to me, is what that scale should be all about.

While I appreciate GW for going back to its roots, I will be really disappointed if they only do AT and not plan incorporating the rest of Epic. I guess it will be decided by how well it sells. I am sure the initial splash will be exciting, but if its a one-off, then no, I don't think it will be any better than having Dreadfleet or something on my shelf.

KTG17 wrote:
While Epic is close to my heart (it was what got me into table-top gaming), and as much as I love the old AT, it wasn't titans that got me into Epic. It was the fact that I had titans, tanks, and infantry fighting around 3D terrain. Sure I love titans as much as everyone. I also love a lone tactical stand popping off a missile at a nearby Titan. I love the sight of Land Raiders moving through buildings. I love titans stepping on infantry. I want it all, not part of it. Epic's hayday was during 2nd edition, when pretty massive armies were sweeping the tables at my local gaming shops. I remember watching a game with six gargants on one side, nevermind all the infantry and battlewagons. That to me, is what that scale should be all about.

While I appreciate GW for going back to its roots, I will be really disappointed if they only do AT and not plan incorporating the rest of Epic. I guess it will be decided by how well it sells. I am sure the initial splash will be exciting, but if its a one-off, then no, I don't think it will be any better than having Dreadfleet or something on my shelf.

I agree with just about everything you've said except the 'Dreadfleet' thing!

Having rules for both Machine Spirits and Princeps could be really interesting lots of very different Titan commanders and crews in the fluff

KTG17 wrote:
While Epic is close to my heart (it was what got me into table-top gaming), and as much as I love the old AT, it wasn't titans that got me into Epic. It was the fact that I had titans, tanks, and infantry fighting around 3D terrain. Sure I love titans as much as everyone. I also love a lone tactical stand popping off a missile at a nearby Titan. I love the sight of Land Raiders moving through buildings. I love titans stepping on infantry. I want it all, not part of it. Epic's hayday was during 2nd edition, when pretty massive armies were sweeping the tables at my local gaming shops. I remember watching a game with six gargants on one side, nevermind all the infantry and battlewagons. That to me, is what that scale should be all about.

While I appreciate GW for going back to its roots, I will be really disappointed if they only do AT and not plan incorporating the rest of Epic. I guess it will be decided by how well it sells. I am sure the initial splash will be exciting, but if its a one-off, then no, I don't think it will be any better than having Dreadfleet or something on my shelf.

From the very, very few tidbits we've got so far, AT is sounding a good deal more complex/involved than it's previous incarnations. So it may be that it doesn't end up including infantry.

BUT....that of course doesn't mean that we don't see Epic return. Consider the difference between Shadespire, and AoS. Or Battle for Calth and Horus Heresy. Same models, very different rules, very different scale of conflict.

Me, I think I'd like to see some elements of Epic 40,000 introduced, specifically the concept (if not the execution) of choosing your army by Batallion. Just think it could be a fun mechanic.

 Nurglitch wrote:
Scale isn't really a great hill to die on. In the Dan Abnett-written Titan comics the Imperious Dictatio is huge, with companion-ways throughout, and enough space for a stowaway Termagant to hide. By comparison the official FW model has only a few small compartments, and even Blackadder's amazing Lucius-pattern Warlord isn't particularly roomy inside.

The two outliers are the painting of the Warlord titan used on the cover of the collected edition of the Titanicus comic, and Mark Gibbons' Reaver. Both of those are massive - the Reaver towers over the ruins of Imperial architecture, and the Warlord is taller than a mountain, with gun barrels with a 30' (yes, feet) bore!



By the way, that's a Mars-pattern Warlord, as per the Epic Armageddon rulebook. Yes, the matching Warhound and Reaver Forge World put out were Lucius Pattern, but not the Warlord.

Are we sure that the second pic isn’t of the Titan walking into one of those miniature villages you get from time to time?
Only being the Imperium it’s actually a miniature city….

The image of the Warlord does not imply it is larger than a mountain specifically. A rocky outcrop is not a mountain.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Are we sure that the second pic isn’t of the Titan walking into one of those miniature villages you get from time to time?
Only being the Imperium it’s actually a miniature city….

So that's what happened to the Squats...

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:
The image of the Warlord does not imply it is larger than a mountain specifically. A rocky outcrop is not a mountain.

Note the tiny ladder near its gun barrels. That thing is huuuuuuuuge.

OK, perhaps not towering over a mountain, but still, the gantry and hatchway on the gun makes the whole thing massively oversized (compared to the windows on the cockpit or the hatches on the carapace and torso of the miniature).