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.

 zedmeister wrote:
Warhound! Here's the full vid

When I lick through to that vid on YT I'm also presented with this as a suggested vid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUhisi2FBuw . He starts by saying what an ingenious design it is, I think it's ironic, given the many mentions in this thread. Either that or the YT tracking algorithm can see my Dakka history

I couldn't wait for warhounds so I had started kitbashing a Renegade one, blessed by the Dark Gods (work-in-progress far from finished), I must check the size though.

I'm warming to the new Reaver model. At first I didn't think it was skeletal enough but having looked back at the old 1988 version it's funny how basic it was!

I also like the Warhound a lot more than I expected, it was never my favourite titan but this one looks a lot more imposing and ED209 like than I expected

I think the old metal Reaver is one of the best model designs GW has ever done. In any scale, for any game. The new one is nice too.

 KTG17 wrote:
I've actually never played with or against a Knight in 40k, so how do they compare in strength to Land Raiders?

Use pre-8th edition, as I think those rule reflect the model closer to how they would function. Land raider have thicker armor than a Knight, but a Knight can take more beating than a land raider. The knight have the Ion shield to make up for it lack of armor, it's strong enough to block any lascannon shot from the Landraider before it can get in close combat. In which it can easily cleave the land raider in half with its weapons.

Even with no CC weapon, the Knight would have no trouble stomp the LR to oblivion with its feet.

Most of the Knight gun are not very effective against LR armor,.

I hate to keep harping on about IKR, but thinking about the lack of Warlord weapons available, and thinking about that extra sprue in IKR that added so much value to an already high value set (that sprue goes f or crazy prices on Ebay, even individual components from it sell for a tenner a pop), I have to hope we will see something similar for AT. A two warlord set, with the proper upgrades required. And we haven't talked about the Reaver weapons in comparison to the warlord ones. Look at the different load-outs in official GW pics. Four different options for 3 weapon mounts (as opposed to Two for Four on Warlords) This seems good

That Warhound model is exceptional.

Good thing there are many of them in my Legio!

I must say that that plastics team at GW has done quite a job on this.

Can't wait to start modeling - a Reaver breaking through a wall - a Warhound bounding over wreckage...

 KTG17 wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:
Once again, there is nothing that necessitates you couldn't just as easily play on a larger table in your own games. You only get predictable games if you don't put effort in them on your own part.

Well I could play on the floor too, but I do not want to. I actually have a 6x4 table, but that is only recently. I played for most of my life on a 4x4 board. Most tables I see at hobby shops are divided up 4x4 too. I think that should be the standard size games should be based on. Sure you can go bigger, but not everyone has that much space.

4' x 4' is the standard for AT, so no worries there. Going larger is an option for those who want that.

 KTG17 wrote:

Well, if they had gone the route that AT could easily be expanded on to include those other Epic units, there would be more to build, play, and explore with the game, right? How many Titan on Titan battles do you think you will have will a single Warlord on each side before you are over it? I mean seriously.

There would, yes, but that does not necessarily mean that the game is better for it. I play a variety of games for different needs, this game ought to fill the need of micromanaging my killer robots in a satisfyingly crunchy way without bogging it down too much. I don't especially see why the latter is relevant, as even if the game is playable with only two warlords, that isn't the main game. My friend is also going to get the GME so even our first matches should already have half a dozen miniatures per side on the field. The 1 v 1 Warlord clash is mostly relevant for demonstration purposes.

 KTG17 wrote:
Someone mentioned that Knight game Renegades. I never bought it, and immediately thought it looked boring because of the limited number of models. Now, I am sure the game involves micro-managing a Knight and there might be some interest in some players to try that out, but seriously how many on Dakka have or are even playing it regularly, or even able to find others to play it? What is more interesting? Playing a game with one type of unit? Or a mix of units? And I don't mean trying it out over a weekend, but investing in the game and making a hobby out of it. I played At/SM1 for YEARS. I played SM2/TL for YEARS. Why? Because the game captured my imagination by incorporating a wide number of units and different ways to play them. I could win games an infinite number of ways. That is what keeps people playing.

The IKR is mostly bluffing and damage control, really. I tried it out with a few dreadnoughts and used centimeters instead of inches, worked pretty well. Not the most satisfying thing ever, as the system is pretty throw-away reason to sell knights on a discount (unlike in Betrayal at Calth, that actually has a strong game in it with the discounted miniatures). It is not a good game with only two knights, but gets better if you go to three or four per side (still not good, but playable for the damage system alone).

If we are talking about a game with longevity, my hope is that AT will attain that status by indeed adding stuff like other titan variants, xenos races and such things to it over the years. It would be weird for GW to not do that, if they committed enough to a whole new scale of miniatures. As we remember, 8 mm scale was chosen as something they'd be comfortable producing marines and other infantry in if need be and have them be compatible with the titans. Expecting that at the very initial release of a strictly titan focused game is a bit of a stretch, though.

 KTG17 wrote:

Specialist Games studio struggles to get more space and production time. They don't really have too many hands to work on the project, given that it took two years for one man to create what we have here (modelwise).

I can appreciate that, I really can. I was involved with playtesting for Epic A back in the day, and face palmed a lot of decisions Jervis was suggesting because he didn't seem to understand what players ultimately wanted. He created a release schedule that had Chaos, CHAOS, being released like 3-4 years out after the EpicA rulebook.

Yeah, Jervis is an... interesting person. He does live in a bit of a different world than most gamers. *cough* that article on tournament play *cough*

 KTG17 wrote:
If GW wanted this to be successful, rather than coming out and saying, 'Hey this is Titan only and that's how they designed it', they should have looked farther ahead and think about how they could incorporate Epic into it, and even tell players that those updates could be down the road, depending how the game does. Imagine if this set, rather than coming out with 2 Warlords and 6 Knights, came out with a 2 Reavers, 4 Warhounds, and some infantry and Land Raiders. Its not that the set is expensive, ITS WHAT YOU CAN DO WITH IT. How many games can you get out of it? If its Titans only, and your entrance fee is pretty steep, getting newbies to sign on is going to be difficult. But showing how much game is in the box and the different ways to play and win is going to make the set far more appealing. 3-5 Titans per side does not sound like a game that is going to be played a lot.

I on the other hand think that being honest about that is exactly what they should do and have done. If you design a game with a purpose, it will most likely fulfill that purpose better than a general "put things here" game would, as has been demonstrated many times in all sorts of games from rpgs to boardgames to wargames. There is an obvious problem with that line of thinking too: if you have something, people will start screaming about why there aren't some other options, like has been demonstrated with the latest Kill Team release. For some reason people expect that EVERYTHING must be immediately available, no matter the logistics or design times or financial risks involved. By starting with a restricted set, you can gauge out how the system is received and what to do. Expanding isn't difficult, even at this point. But I want my game to be solid and that is easier with a restricted start, so I'm fine with this initial step.

 KTG17 wrote:
I don't doubt some people are going to love getting this game. I also doubt they will play it very much. And if it dies, and GOD KNOWS I DO NOT WANT IT TO, that means GW probably wont expand on it, and that is the tragedy.

The Horus Heresy started battling it out in 6mm, and it was glorious. I just can't believe that since Epic 40k, GW just can't get their act together on this. The mass of players rejected Epic 40k, they rejected Epic A, and they will ultimately reject this. And its not the scale that's the problem, its either the arrogance in the rules design or not convincing players to support it long term.

There is no arrogance: there is focus. They want to make a good game of titans, thus they made a game about titans. It's time Games Workshop started producing more than one game again and that is a good time to be livin'. And why wouldn't it be supported? They've got more designs coming in the pipeline and expansions will come if people just start playing. I'm reasonably confident that the player base has grown enough from the eighties that it will sell profitably even while remaining a marginal game compared to AoS and 40k proper. Just buying the rules is supporting the game, from a player side, even if you were to just play it with your old Epic minis.

 KTG17 wrote:
I am really not trying to come across as a cry baby. Epic is what got me into gaming. I have a huge appreciation for this scale. But I want to see people playing AT for the next 2-3 years. I just don't see that happening now, and that's why I am so disappointed.

And I will be buying the GM edition. I have to. I have everything ever released for Epic whether its a box set, White Dwarf, Journal, or whatever. :(

You aren't, I can see why you come from the angle you do. I kept playing hundreds of matches of BFG and Blood Bowl in the dark day when they languished without any support (well, BFG still does and is still awesome) and would've been absolutely thrilled to have them resurface in a big way. Blood Bowl did. AT can. I know I will add it to my repertoire to be played through the years, if the rules leaks thus far are anything to go by. Thinking about that combinantion campaign with BFG engagements, Kill Team commando raids, 40k battles, Titanicus clashes and what not happening via a hex map, it will be glorious

We'll just have to be vocal, though nice, towards GW and the expansions may come in some form eventually.

 TalonZahn wrote:
There are pre-orders up on EBay, including S&H from the UK, that cost the same as buying it in the US from somewhere like Frontline....

Well I'll just wait for general release and buy stuff with discounts plus ebay discount to get as close as I can to reasonable pricing. At least for the big guys. Knights came in right where I thought they would.

 reds8n wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/08/08/8th-aug-adeptus-titanicus-war-on-a-new-scalegw-homepage-post-4fw-homepage-post-1/

There you are!

I'm going to drown my opponents in those lovely beasts.

They're killing it with these models. KILLING IT!

Really glad GW have learned from the original 40k Knight release in the way they design there sprue layouts for big kits.

I wonder if alternate carapace sprues in the future could bring back the Lucius pattern Titans?

Da Butcha wrote:
Not to divert from the conversation about prices*, but I'm more worried about a game play issue:

How are we supposed to be using these cardstock terminals? I know you have weapons cards for the weapons on each Titan, but how do they attach to the terminal? Do we just lay them on top? Aren't they going to slip off when you pick it up?

And the 'pegs' used to track damage, shield strength, and plasma. What's keeping them in the holes in a cardstock terminal? Are they going to wear larger holes in the terminal and pop out?

I'm entirely on the fence about the price of this game, but I'm NOT looking forwards to dropping substantial cash on the game only to discover that I have to use blu-tac on my stuff.

*And, on the topic of pricing, it really seems like the Grand Master edition is what is giving people fits. The Rule Set comes with the rulebook, ruler, dice, templates, Terminals, weapons cards, the 'other' cards, transfers, and evidently, Objectives (from the WD), for $60. That seems like a great deal. The 40K rulebook is $60 by itself. I know this one is smaller, but you get all that other stuff. Then just buy the individual Titans/Knights you want and grow your army the way you grow a 40K army. People don't always buy a 2000 point army in one go, so why are people feeling they HAVE to on this one?

I do agree that a box with, say, the Rules Set content, and one Warlord, for perhaps $100-125 might have been a better way to entice people into the game, and provided a more appealing entry point, especially since it would have given you kind of 'two options' for a 'starting force' (the Grand Master, and some other edition). But I don't see a particularly bad value on the Rule Set, and then you can buy Titans, and scenery, as you wish.

I am very unhappy that the scenery is SO unlike the Sector Mechanicus and Sector Imperialis stuff. I don't think it looks bad, but why do Titans fight in pristine areas, and everybody else in bombed out ruins? I would have liked to see scenery that looked like smaller versions of the stuff we use in 40K and Kill Team (less modular, of course).

You are not supposed to lift and move the terminals around when playing, the cards on them will not be an issue in any way. Many boardgames have similar boards that cards are placed upon and its never a problem.
The small "knobs" you move around to show shields and what not will hardly wear down the cardstock, also something that is not uncommon in boardgames. Im guessing the holes are a bit bigger then the little cogs themselves, they are just a rather elegant way to keep track of things.

Personally, I find the terminals to be perfect! Keeps a bunch of ugly tokens from cluttering the playarea and reduced bookkeeping to a very manageable and simple minimum!

At around 7:35 in the video Chris Drew gives explanations about extra sets of weapons and possible extra set of ? panels. Not sure if he refers to alternate carapace panels though.

I know the price is will still be pretty steep, but I wanted to mention to all my fellow Dakkanauts in the US ( and Canada I believe) that Ebay has a 15% off coupon today, and you may be able to preorder a copy of GM edition at discount with a further 15% off. The code is Pronto15.

For those turned off by the price, but may have/want the models around, this is what I’m planning to do for now:

I’m planning to buy the rules box set, but until I have the funds (and the will), I’m planning to use my Warden/Paladin as Reavers, my Armigers as Warhounds, and (if I get one) a Knight Castellan/Valiant as a Warlord. I don’t have any suggestions for Knights, but I think they’re around Space Marine for size?

This lets me get in and play and purchase the models at my leisure. As an added bonus, my current models are doing double duty - I can use them for 40K or AT.

Hopes that helps a least a couple people who were planning to pass to reconsider their involvement with this game.

The look of the warhound kit has brought some of my enthusiasm back. Does GW sell any paint that matches the krytos color? I'm not sure sybarite green is close enough.

It's interesting to see the twists and turns this thread has taken since the prices were confirmed as our community (myself included) progresses through the stages of grief (modified Kubler-Ross model). It seems that many of us are now somewhere between bargaining and acceptance.

Personally I am in the testing phase (seeking realistic solutions) having accepted that I will not be buying the GME . Without going into a drawn out diatribe of why, the short of it is it's too high an inital buy in for an unproven system that seems primed to only be adopted by a small subset of our community.

With that said here is what I am considering;

Option 1 - Forget AT, and don't look back, instead focus on core games and the other skirmish games already released that I have already invested in and also still working on.
Option 2 - Take a wait and see approach and gauge the adoption rate after a couple of months and GW's follow through on supporting the system
Option 3 - Make small buy in, i.e. The rules set plus two boxes of knights ($ 130 USD RRP) to be able to build and play.
Option 4 - Forget the game for now, but buy a Warlord and maybe a box of knights ($110 to $145 USD RRP) to statisfy the modelist itch now and keeping the option of getting into the game at a later date assuming sufficent level of adoption by local gaming community and ongoing GW support.

Are there any other options people might suggest?

Option 5 - Proxy the models?

Let me first say I really like the look of the new warhound, but



THAT will always be the warhound to me! I really hope GW/FW releases one of those even if its a commander or lmited edition or something!

 Overread wrote:
Let me first say I really like the look of the new warhound, but



THAT will always be the warhound to me! I really hope GW/FW releases one of those even if its a commander or lmited edition or something!

I agree 100%. The new models look good, but are missing a lot of character of the originals. At the very least I wish the reaver and warhound were updated to fit the warlord aesthetic a little more for a more coherent look.

Just noticed this but..... there isn't weapon options model wise in the box BUT there are cards for them in the box, the warlord alone has carapace laser blasters and a sunfury Cannon card included, maybe more.

Either/Or agreed the original Warhound has a bit more character, a bit more - dare I say it - of that METAL era in it.

The Reaver is actually quite nice in that its actually kept its original look without changing much at all through its editions; like the guy in the video said its the everymans titan; a great little kit that really has lasted well.

I'm also glad that the titan's don't look too similar. They certainly have design similarities; but they are very distinct in appearance which I think not only gives character but a realistic edge to them. Built by different groups for different purposes etc.... rather than a very unified look. It works well when you consider their sheer size and variation between them there's no reason to have a similar appearance because nothing that fits on a reaver is going on a warlord and vis versa.



Twilight yes you are right, there is a weapons have magnet slots (seriously BIG and fantastic move by GW to do that!). Weapon packs are to be expected and I'd wager you want magnets on most of the models - Knights might likely be fine as chances are weapon variations for them will be on dedicated knight chassy instead of general weapon changes. But Warhounds, Reavers and Warlocks and anything else is going to want magnetic weapons for changing them up.


I REALLY want the triple barrel shoulder guns!

Yep, I suspect you may see a Necromunda-esque "Forgeworld resin weapon upgrade" release. As if I needed another huge turn off.

The reaver looks to come with weapon options so I'm guessing that keeping the core warlord kit simpler helped it get a cheaper price; weapon packs then become optional extras.

That said I don't think we know if it will be plastic or resin expansion kits - either way I'll still be after them.

I was going to say "I demand Vulcan Mega-Bolters for my Warhounds!" but, unless they are still good shield removers, maybe Plasm Blastgun/Turbo Laser-Destructors are the way to go, vs. my old school go to of Vulcan/Plasma Blastgun?

 Elbows wrote:
Yep, I suspect you may see a Necromunda-esque "Forgeworld resin weapon upgrade" release. As if I needed another huge turn off.

You will for rare & estoric weapons like warp missiles, but they specifically said recently that the common weapons would be covered by plastic upgrade sprues.

Despite that I won't be picking this game up unless they release an actual starter, I may pick up a Warhound and a Reaver to paint. Those are some nice looking models. I like the designs significantly more than the Warlord.

 Sabotage! wrote:
Despite that I won't be picking this game up unless they release an actual starter, I may pick up a Warhound and a Reaver to paint. Those are some nice looking models. I like the designs significantly more than the Warlord.

Yeah, I'm now in the same boat... not picking the game up though I doubt I'll be able to resist the allure of that Warhound!

I got some 15mm infantry for it to squish as well, fun times ahead!

Anyone got a scale shot of that new Warhound? Wondering how it compares in size primarily to a Armiger.

 Stormonu wrote:
Anyone got a scale shot of that new Warhound? Wondering how it compares in size primarily to a Armiger.

It must be much smaller. Armiger is at least Reaver sized.