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.

Please post all rule questions in the Games Workshop Board Games & Specialist/Legacy Games for the time being.

They can easily add more Legio s on the decal sheets included in the reaver and warhound boxes

 Breotan wrote:
Whatever happened to that modular scenery that was supposedly being developed for Dropzone Commander?

It was available for sale for a short time, but high prices and low sales saw it discontinued.

 BrookM wrote:
Please post all rule questions in the Games Workshop Board Games & Specialist/Legacy Games for the time being.

Created a new thread here.

Most excellent, many thanks!

Eumerin wrote:

 schoon wrote:
They seem to have underestimated the popularity of the game,
and now are playing catch up.

The popularity of titans, at least. It remains to be seen whether they'll still be popular once people start playing the game.

But assuming they are, then that would probably be the understatement of the year.

Given the near universal backlash at the pricing upon reveal amongst other things, you can see why they might have been tentative.

Dudeface wrote:

Eumerin wrote:

 schoon wrote:
They seem to have underestimated the popularity of the game,
and now are playing catch up.

The popularity of titans, at least. It remains to be seen whether they'll still be popular once people start playing the game.

But assuming they are, then that would probably be the understatement of the year.

Given the near universal backlash at the pricing upon reveal amongst other things, you can see why they might have been tentative.

Aye, plus the fact that it is a very small game in its model count at launch - just two models. With there being perhaps only four by the end of the year. Granted there's weapon variety in there, but that is still a very small launch by GW standards; even skirmish games by other companies launch with more models for a new game (at least if not more than double that number between two or more factions).

It's a lot of risk on a high value product. So its good that GW has underplayed their hand a bit and found hte demand so strong; hopefully this keeps up beyond the launch period.

Eumerin wrote:
The popularity of titans, at least. It remains to be seen whether they'll still be popular once people start playing the game.

But assuming they are, then that would probably be the understatement of the year.

This is only based upon my initial read through of the rules - haven't played it out yet - but the rules look pretty good. A game of maneuver.

It strikes me that terrain density on the table could have significant effects on the outcome of games.

My point being that I think the rules and game play should support long term viability rather than hamper it.

 schoon wrote:

This is only based upon my initial read through of the rules - haven't played it out yet - but the rules look pretty good. A game of maneuver.

It strikes me that terrain density on the table could have significant effects on the outcome of games.

My point being that I think the rules and game play should support long term viability rather than hamper it.

Good, that is what terrain should do. It's not called "the third army" for nothing.

 schoon wrote:

Eumerin wrote:
The popularity of titans, at least. It remains to be seen whether they'll still be popular once people start playing the game.

But assuming they are, then that would probably be the understatement of the year.

This is only based upon my initial read through of the rules - haven't played it out yet - but the rules look pretty good. A game of maneuver.

It strikes me that terrain density on the table could have significant effects on the outcome of games.

My point being that I think the rules and game play should support long term viability rather than hamper it.

Agreed. that said the crowd who think 40k is too complex are likely to HATE AT


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xanthos wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Is there an appropriate YMDC equivalent for AT yet? I have questions:

1. Princeps Seniores Personal Trait #3 ‘Swift Killer’ (p.55): when it says ‘before you make an attack’ does that mean before a specific weapon attacks, or when the unit is activated to attack?

2. Legio Gryphonicus, Legion Specific Wargear: Gravatus Plating: when it says to add one to its armour, I’m assuming that means increase the values needed to deal damage, so effectively applying a -1 modifier to all incoming attacks, rather than adding an extra hole on the command terminal?

thats my interpretation yes


BTW anyone else find it odd that the Legio Mortis is given such a prominant place in the books, but it's legio temptus given rules? Legio temptus I don't think even has transfers avaliable in the warlord box.

Yeah,I also noticed that, and found it puzzling. Tempestus has neither transfers nor artwork in the book. Mortis has artwork and transfers but no rules.
Gryphonicus of course has all three, but that is hardly puzzling, knowing FW. ;-)

Not that I'm complaining, I want to do Tempestus and already have my paint scheme figured out. :-p

My guess is they're saving Mortis for a supplement book as they know "has rules for Legio Mortis" will be a selling item in and of itself

BrianDavion wrote:
My guess is they're saving Mortis for a supplement book as they know "has rules for Legio Mortis" will be a selling item in and of itself

I could easily see a "Legio Titanicus" supplement with rules for the more common Legios, some scenarios and weapons, being quite popular.

 schoon wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
My guess is they're saving Mortis for a supplement book as they know "has rules for Legio Mortis" will be a selling item in and of itself

I could easily see a "Legio Titanicus" supplement with rules for the more common Legios, some scenarios and weapons, being quite popular.

I could too. It's a question IMHO weather or not they'll go that route or drip and drab it out via books focusing on certain battles etc. given this is forge world I expect they'll drip and drab it out. after all that's what they did for Horus Heresy

I have the feeling Mortis rules will buff warlords. They were known for having heavy titans and very few warhounds. But I absolutely want to see rules for Mortis and Krytos next..as far as the traitor legios go.

 Thargrim wrote:
I have the feeling Mortis rules will buff warlords. They were known for having heavy titans and very few warhounds. But I absolutely want to see rules for Mortis and Krytos next..as far as the traitor legios go.

well legio Grypfonicus has rules allowing you to subsitue any titan in a maniple for a reaver, maybe Mortis will allow for you to do so for a Warlord? thus enabling some truely sick things like a axiom maniple with 5 warlords.

Gryphonicus only lets you do it once though, so no all-Reaver maniples yet.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Gryphonicus only lets you do it once though, so no all-Reaver maniples yet.

ahh just once? missed that. Good eye. still even then I could see Mortis being similer. An Axiom maniple with 2 warlords, 1 reaver and 2 warhounds could be kiiinda handy. especially if you bought rh GME as then you'll only need to buy 1 reaver box and a warhound box to have a maniple

what was the Legio that used massed warhounds again?

Legio Audax

 Nurglitch wrote:
Legio Audax

wonder what their rules are gonna be, obviously they'll have the ursus claw

 Nostromodamus wrote:

 totalfailure wrote:
Miniature Market still has it available as well.

I’d be skeptical about that. MM sometimes takes orders and leaves you hanging for restocks.

While by no means a regular customer, I've never had any issues with the occasional order I've placed there.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Gryphonicus only lets you do it once though, so no all-Reaver maniples yet.

Surely you can take an Axiom with 1 Warlord & 2 Reavers, then replace the Warlord? edit I'm dumb, thought both Warhounds were optional

I think my go-to build will probably be a Gryphonicus Myrmidon with 1 Warlord 3 Reaver, then pad out with knights as needed. Can't wait for the Reaver release.

 totalfailure wrote:

 Nostromodamus wrote:

 totalfailure wrote:
Miniature Market still has it available as well.

I’d be skeptical about that. MM sometimes takes orders and leaves you hanging for restocks.

While by no means a regular customer, I've never had any issues with the occasional order I've placed there.

Many do. I suppose it's the nature of the industry now. I use TripleHelix, some delays (only a week or so, so I don't mind too muc).

I've not had any issues of note with MM. I once placed an order for an item that they ran out of stock on and they promptly refunded me the cost of that particular item; order placed on a Wednesday and refund issued a day later when the warehouse didn't have any to ship. Not seeing where it was a sale or anything weird, though I did have to source that particular box from another vendor. I was leery when they showed 20+ GMEs available given the stories of so few being available, but now they're down to 5. Mine should be arriving from them tomorrow and between discount and rewards it was an appreciable savings; certainly enough to be worth a few days wait.

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?

More pics of the warhound sprues have emerged on Battle Bunnies http://battlebunnies.blogspot.com/2018/08/adeptus-titanicus-warhound-sprues.html.

The warhounds have 2 different heads, 2 different crotch armour plates, and 3 different armour plates for the legs. All come in pairs.

There are 4 different top armour plates (one pair traitors with 2 designs, 1 pair loyalists with 2 designs).

Legs are in one bit but there are differences in how they are positioned (different angles) and I would not be surprised if you can use left as right and vice-versa.

What are peoples thoughts on the FW Realm of Battle tiles that are coming out for AT? Was quite tempted by them as an easy (though probably not cheap) way to get some decent scenery, but looking at the ones being previewed on the Warhammer Community page they look very busy and full of stuff, for instance, one of them seems to have a building that takes up half the tile and both of them have all sorts of quite large details around that makes me wonder whether they'd be awkward to play on.

Obviously, as they've been designed for AT I assume that some thought has gone into their layout to make them suitable so maybe I'm misjudging. Has anyone who's already played any games of AT got any thoughts on them? Or has anyone actually played on them at one of the demo games?

Maybe there are also some more open tiles coming, as obviously the preview is only of 2, whereas I'd assume there will be at least 4 to allow for the standard 4x4 battlefield and I've seen what look like other tiles in some of the preview shots, such as the one with rail tracks for the train and another that just appears to be hills, but obviously they could just be scratch-built terrain rather than tiles.

Tavis75 wrote:
What are peoples thoughts on the FW Realm of Battle tiles that are coming out for AT? Was quite tempted by them as an easy (though probably not cheap) way to get some decent scenery, but looking at the ones being previewed on the Warhammer Community page they look very busy and full of stuff, for instance, one of them seems to have a building that takes up half the tile and both of them have all sorts of quite large details around that makes me wonder whether they'd be awkward to play on.

Obviously, as they've been designed for AT I assume that some thought has gone into their layout to make them suitable so maybe I'm misjudging. Has anyone who's already played any games of AT got any thoughts on them? Or has anyone actually played on them at one of the demo games?

Maybe there are also some more open tiles coming, as obviously the preview is only of 2, whereas I'd assume there will be at least 4 to allow for the standard 4x4 battlefield and I've seen what look like other tiles in some of the preview shots, such as the one with rail tracks for the train and another that just appears to be hills, but obviously they could just be scratch-built terrain rather than tiles.

They look nice but frankly I can find better things to spend my money on.

From the demo games I've played and looking at the rules it definitely seems like a gmae where the more terrain the better.

Mendi Warrior wrote:
More pics of the warhound sprues have emerged on Battle Bunnies http://battlebunnies.blogspot.com/2018/08/adeptus-titanicus-warhound-sprues.html.

The warhounds have 2 different heads, 2 different crotch armour plates, and 3 different armour plates for the legs. All come in pairs.

There are 4 different top armour plates (one pair traitors with 2 designs, 1 pair loyalists with 2 designs).

Legs are in one bit but there are differences in how they are positioned (different angles) and I would not be surprised if you can use left as right and vice-versa.

Also looks to be two of each weapon, so no red headed stepchild Warhound forced to tote the big flame weapon.

They previewed 4 different ones, I think it was during last May Warhammer Fest.



They are gorgeous, very tempting (but my wallet says a big no).

No experience playing on those yet. They would provide lots of opportunities for manoeuvering and using cover.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


Also looks to be two of each weapon, so no red headed stepchild Warhound forced to tote the big flame weapon.

Absolutely, this confirms what I suspected https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/3630/716640.page#10114392

More components, nice for basing or conversions. Thinking "the Guns of Navarone" reboot scenario play there

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Mendi Warrior wrote:
More pics of the warhound sprues have emerged on Battle Bunnies http://battlebunnies.blogspot.com/2018/08/adeptus-titanicus-warhound-sprues.html.

The warhounds have 2 different heads, 2 different crotch armour plates, and 3 different armour plates for the legs. All come in pairs.

There are 4 different top armour plates (one pair traitors with 2 designs, 1 pair loyalists with 2 designs).

Legs are in one bit but there are differences in how they are positioned (different angles) and I would not be surprised if you can use left as right and vice-versa.

Also looks to be two of each weapon, so no red headed stepchild Warhound forced to tote the big flame weapon.

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

 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:

 Imateria wrote:

Tavis75 wrote:
What are peoples thoughts on the FW Realm of Battle tiles that are coming out for AT? Was quite tempted by them as an easy (though probably not cheap) way to get some decent scenery, but looking at the ones being previewed on the Warhammer Community page they look very busy and full of stuff, for instance, one of them seems to have a building that takes up half the tile and both of them have all sorts of quite large details around that makes me wonder whether they'd be awkward to play on.

Obviously, as they've been designed for AT I assume that some thought has gone into their layout to make them suitable so maybe I'm misjudging. Has anyone who's already played any games of AT got any thoughts on them? Or has anyone actually played on them at one of the demo games?

Maybe there are also some more open tiles coming, as obviously the preview is only of 2, whereas I'd assume there will be at least 4 to allow for the standard 4x4 battlefield and I've seen what look like other tiles in some of the preview shots, such as the one with rail tracks for the train and another that just appears to be hills, but obviously they could just be scratch-built terrain rather than tiles.

They look nice but frankly I can find better things to spend my money on.

From the demo games I've played and looking at the rules it definitely seems like a gmae where the more terrain the better.

They are custom designed to hold the Civitas Imperialis cities. If they aren't ridiculously expensive I'm getting them (so I'm not). Reason being if there are rules for blowing up buildings then you can easily remove the city piece and leave a foundation.