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.

I'm a lurking epic player...haven't given GW a dime since 5th edition 40k, and I went all in on AT18. Not Uber wealthy....I think there are a lot of people with fond memories of the original AT that just had to buy...if nothing else, the titians are great upgrades for the epic armies...

Hi!

This.

As a long time epic player, I could care less about the actual rules for this game. I want the models to join my enormous collection since their size appeals to me (I'm using them for my Heresy epic legions).

I suspect there is quite a large amount of epic players investing in this game to add these models to their collections. How much they are contributing to overall sales can be debated, but there seem to be quite a bit of us out there.

6 GM boxes, 24 reavers and 24 warhounds so far. I have not bought GW products in this fashion since Epic's Golden Age in the 90's. I know several individuals (epic fans like me), who have invested on a similar scale.


Epic players are definitely interested as well as buying.


Primarch1

Been lurking this forum for a while and decided to join you all tonight on Dakka. This thread in perticular has been a damn good read since AT has been released.

I can't really afford this game at the moment, and so have been limited to just Knights and a copy of Horizon Wars, so the news of the Cerastus Knights has been very welcome.

Bit on the fence as to whether the AT Ruleset would be any good in a Knights-only game? I get the feeling it needs at least the Reaver titans to play?

tneva82 wrote:

 Fajita Fan wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
2 questions i still have. Does new box have old weapon sprue as well and if not does it come separately as well. Ie if i want all weapon sprues for all titans can i buv net full box or should i buy original plus new weapon sprue

I think we can assume the new box has just the new sprue for the same price. Why on earth they want to sell two separate SKUs and print different box art makes no sense to me but that’s what GW does.

This may be like the Land Raider situation where it’s best to buy the original LR and the Crusader upgrade sprue because you can no longer buy the LR lascannon sprue it you get the Crusader box.

That's the safe assumption but another could be it's the "complete" box so has them all for some increase in price.

And yes if it's going to be that the new box has no original weapon sprue and it doesn't come out on it's own(I tried to ask on FB but no comment so far) then I won't be buying the new box ever. I want all weapon options for all titans so in this case if I were to buy new box I would miss on missiles(this in particular hurts) and volcano cannons. I rather would indeed then buy the new weapon sprue and old box. Which would be bit pity as I would love to get even just 1 weapon sprue for now and Mortis COULD do with 2nd warlord. But price of not getting full weapon options would be too much to pay.

Well we'll find out whether the new box comes with old weapons ala 40k knights or not soon enough(I guess within 2 weeks).

I'll just never understand why they want to print different boxes for the same model with different gun sprues which just adds to costs. Look at the IG and SM tank ranges.

 Fajita Fan wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Fajita Fan wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
2 questions i still have. Does new box have old weapon sprue as well and if not does it come separately as well. Ie if i want all weapon sprues for all titans can i buv net full box or should i buy original plus new weapon sprue

I think we can assume the new box has just the new sprue for the same price. Why on earth they want to sell two separate SKUs and print different box art makes no sense to me but that’s what GW does.

This may be like the Land Raider situation where it’s best to buy the original LR and the Crusader upgrade sprue because you can no longer buy the LR lascannon sprue it you get the Crusader box.

That's the safe assumption but another could be it's the "complete" box so has them all for some increase in price.

And yes if it's going to be that the new box has no original weapon sprue and it doesn't come out on it's own(I tried to ask on FB but no comment so far) then I won't be buying the new box ever. I want all weapon options for all titans so in this case if I were to buy new box I would miss on missiles(this in particular hurts) and volcano cannons. I rather would indeed then buy the new weapon sprue and old box. Which would be bit pity as I would love to get even just 1 weapon sprue for now and Mortis COULD do with 2nd warlord. But price of not getting full weapon options would be too much to pay.

Well we'll find out whether the new box comes with old weapons ala 40k knights or not soon enough(I guess within 2 weeks).

I'll just never understand why they want to print different boxes for the same model with different gun sprues which just adds to costs. Look at the IG and SM tank ranges.

GW wants to keep the combined price of the Warlord below a certain value, which means they can't just put all the weapons in one box.Otherwise it won't meet their estimated income targets based on investment in the model itself. So breaking it into different warlords with different weapon sprue makes sense. Yes its another box, but it means that GW can keep the overall price of that box below a target threshold.

Also a warlord in a box is far more attractive to most customers, remembering that many people (honestly the majority) won't use magnets (even though GW has even put the slots into the model for them). AT will have more magnets than most, but still many people build fixed models. So having a big shiny box with a whole warlord inside is far more interesting to the casual customer than an upgrade pack for a model that already comes with a full compliment of weapons

SamusDrake wrote:


Bit on the fence as to whether the AT Ruleset would be any good in a Knights-only game? I get the feeling it needs at least the Reaver titans to play?

No, due to being so small and act as support unit, Knights banner ignore a lot of AT core rule, like facing, pivoting, firing arc, managing shield, reactor, body part damage, repair,.... You'll be better off playing Imperial Knight : Renegade, or make up your own rule for Knight-only games.

Has anyone tried a knights-versus-warlord game yet? How did it go?

MarkNorfolk wrote:
Has anyone tried a knights-versus-warlord game yet? How did it go?

Not that but I played game with 15 knights on one side. Found out while knights have no trouble taking down knights(they took down 2 reavers and warhound) they have habit of dying themselves in the process. Occupational hazard to have pray fall over or explode in face!

Chopstick wrote:


No, due to being so small and act as support unit, Knights banner ignore a lot of AT core rule, like facing, pivoting, firing arc, managing shield, reactor, body part damage, repair,.... You'll be better off playing Imperial Knight : Renegade, or make up your own rule for Knight-only games.

Thank you for confirming my suspicions!

Funny you mention Imperial Knight: Renegade, as I thought the rules could be somewhat bended into a "travel edition" with the AT scale Knights. There is certainly a £40 box game GW could make here with the Knights!

I've been on the fence since August, but I would need at least two reavers to make it worth while. Had played around with the idea of having 1 Warhound and 3 Knights( on each side ), but even then I get the feeling the game would still be too watered down.

For the time being, though, Horizon Wars fits the bill. Using P3 Mech stats for the Knights seems to work well and one can get the HW core rules for about £13 on Amazon.

For a comparison of costs and why the "AT is so expensive" crowd are wrong.

For a 2000pts 40K army and rule books you're looking at £500+.

A resin Warhound is £376.

For AT, the rulebook, Warlord, 2 Reavers, 2 Warhounds and 3 Knights are £230.

With a 20% discount AT drops to £184 and thats for a full Axiom maniple with a Knights Banner so around 165-1700pts depending on load out, which is a bout the size of games that get played. Thats a lot of value for a game thats arguably more fun than 40K.

It might compare more directly with River Horse's Pacific Rim: Extinction, or Weta Workshop's GKR: Heavy Hitters, or Privateer Press' Monsterpocalypse, or GigaRobo.

 Imateria wrote:
For a comparison of costs and why the "AT is so expensive" crowd are wrong.

For a 2000pts 40K army and rule books you're looking at £500+.

A resin Warhound is £376.

For AT, the rulebook, Warlord, 2 Reavers, 2 Warhounds and 3 Knights are £230.

With a 20% discount AT drops to £184 and thats for a full Axiom maniple with a Knights Banner so around 165-1700pts depending on load out, which is a bout the size of games that get played. Thats a lot of value for a game thats arguably more fun than 40K.

AT isn't expensive for what it is - a specialist game of Titan management and tactics. Although the £65 price tag of the Warlord Titan makes one wince with dispair( at first ), it is the largest unit you can get for the game and is designed with weapon swapping in mind with magnets. And if you are coming from the "Titan owners club" it sure makes more sense than the 40K scale version. Last I looked it was about £1300...my word! In that context £65 seems like an absolute bargin!

The other titans and Knights are decently priced too, especially the Reaver which I predicted being at least £40.

The Grand Master edition gave a saving of about £55, which cannot be faulted, but for the wider GW audience it was released at the same time as the Kill Team starter set and so the big question was that of getting one's money's worth - £175 for a new game which was yet to be tested(not to mention a scale that limits the minis to AT alone), or £80 for a revised edition of an existing game which includes fabulous content, and backed by a magnificent marketing campaign? £95 is a lot of difference, even if you do have generous disposable income.

What AT lacks is a reasonable starter set that most GW customers would be more willing to take a chance on. If GW revised their Grandmaster edition and swapped out the two Warlords for two Reavers, and sold it for about £100 - £120, then I think a lot more of us would jump on board. I did e-mail GW if they would consider a Ruleset + 1 Reaver + 3 Knights starter boxset, and they seemed to think it was a good idea and have passed it on to the design team for consideration. How far that goes is anybody's guess, but we can only hope...

With that said, Wayland now has more Warhounds in stock...I'm having them!

I tell people the only reason to get the GME is for a discount on terrain and I’m only using the terrain as basing material. If you’re not planning to use their terrain just get individual titans.

 Fajita Fan wrote:
I tell people the only reason to get the GME is for a discount on terrain and I’m only using the terrain as basing material. If you’re not planning to use their terrain just get individual titans.

The GME combined costs as much as the 2 warlords and 2 sets of knights. The terrain and rules set are effectively free. Even if you don't use the terrain, you are getting more command terminals, weapon cards, and dice as well.

The box was cool but I wish I had just gotten my titans. I don’t have much interest in the Knights other than converting them.

SamusDrake wrote:

The Grand Master edition gave a saving of about £55, which cannot be faulted, but for the wider GW audience it was released at the same time as the Kill Team starter set and so the big question was that of getting one's money's worth - £175 for a new game which was yet to be tested(not to mention a scale that limits the minis to AT alone), or £80 for a revised edition of an existing game which includes fabulous content, and backed by a magnificent marketing campaign? £95 is a lot of difference, even if you do have generous disposable income.
!

You don't need the starter set to play KT, KT cost very low or next to nothing for any existing 40k players. All of the Specialists Game do require you to invest some amount of money to play. Both Bloodbowl and Necromunda have a much lower entry cost than AT. The problem is AT is not 40k. You are expecting people to pay quite a lot for a self-contained game they may or may not find any players to play with, while they could spend it on 40k and easily find a game.

Also, the problem with the GM box is not the price, it's what inside. You are paying for the most expensive box ever, but what you get is a rather lacklusting experience.

A better GM box would be Reaver + 2 Warhound or 1 Warlord + 1 Reaver +1 Warhound on each side.. You get a maniple, and some option for the Reaver and Warhound. But for all we knew by the time they made the GM box, the Warhoud kit had not been made yet, and very likely that the Reaver were also made too late to include in the GM box. A Titan and 3 knights is (currently) not a legit Maniple.

The problem is AT is not 40k.

You seem to have a peculiar hang up on this.

It isn't a problem.

You can say ANY game that isn't 40K isn't 40K. Bloodbowl, Necromunda, Malifaux, Infinity, Warmachine etc.... It's all not 40K and yet many of them still work.

The only issue AT has is that its buy-in is a bit on the steep side to get a single titan. However you're buying a big and very detailed model. Plus I'm sure once they flesh out a few more Knight variants then many will get into the game with a Reaver and box of knights and work up to a mighty Warlord.

Chopstick wrote:

You don't need the starter set to play KT, KT cost very low or next to nothing for any existing 40k players. All of the Specialists Game do require you to invest some amount of money to play. Both Bloodbowl and Necromunda have a much lower entry cost than AT. The problem is AT is not 40k. You are expecting people to pay quite a lot for a self-contained game they may or may not find any players to play with, while they could spend it on 40k and easily find a game.

Also, the problem with the GM box is not the price, it's what inside. You are paying for the most expensive box ever, but what you get is a rather lacklusting experience.

A better GM box would be Reaver + 2 Warhound or 1 Warlord + 1 Reaver +1 Warhound on each side.. You get a maniple, and some option for the Reaver and Warhound. But for all we knew by the time they made the GM box, the Warhoud kit had not been made yet, and very likely that the Reaver were also made too late to include in the GM box. A Titan and 3 knights is (currently) not a legit Maniple.

Agreed on the first point( I personally only bought the KT manual ) yet it was still a clash of two major game releases, although GW still managed to sell very well on both. I couldn't comment on AT itself as I've currently no experience with the game save for youtube playthroughs.

On the third...the GM set seemed to be aimed towards gaming clubs and youtube channels to help promote the game. When you look at it, logically, the game's units are split into two types; Titans and their support knights. The GM edition had both of these core elements and were thus easy enough to demonstrate in channel videos. Then there is the concept of the Warlord being the largest unit in the game while the Questoris Knight being the smallest, which clearly shows the intended scale of the game. I reckon as we move into the new year we might see a "starter set" to allow one to try the water, so to speak...

 Overread wrote:
You can say ANY game that isn't 40K isn't 40K. Bloodbowl, Necromunda,.... It's all not 40K and yet many of them still work.

And both of them (Blood Bowl, Necromunda) get the minimized budget treatment, so if they flop, the damage is minimal. (Although, through some miracle of being the 1st revived Specialist Game, BloodBowl did get greenlit on Plastic Ogre and Troll, not so much on their later release).

Guy was asking earlier why the other Specialist Game didn't get the same treatment as AT, and I'm just pointing out that GW made a bold move that pay off with AT for all the trouble that involve, through luck, good call or good marketing research, whatever reason you prefer.

SamusDrake wrote:

Chopstick wrote:

You don't need the starter set to play KT, KT cost very low or next to nothing for any existing 40k players. All of the Specialists Game do require you to invest some amount of money to play. Both Bloodbowl and Necromunda have a much lower entry cost than AT. The problem is AT is not 40k. You are expecting people to pay quite a lot for a self-contained game they may or may not find any players to play with, while they could spend it on 40k and easily find a game.

Also, the problem with the GM box is not the price, it's what inside. You are paying for the most expensive box ever, but what you get is a rather lacklusting experience.

A better GM box would be Reaver + 2 Warhound or 1 Warlord + 1 Reaver +1 Warhound on each side.. You get a maniple, and some option for the Reaver and Warhound. But for all we knew by the time they made the GM box, the Warhoud kit had not been made yet, and very likely that the Reaver were also made too late to include in the GM box. A Titan and 3 knights is (currently) not a legit Maniple.

Agreed on the first point( I personally only bought the KT manual ) yet it was still a clash of two major game releases, although GW still managed to sell very well on both. I couldn't comment on AT itself as I've currently no experience with the game save for youtube playthroughs.

On the third...the GM set seemed to be aimed towards gaming clubs and youtube channels to help promote the game. When you look at it, logically, the game's units are split into two types; Titans and their support knights. The GM edition had both of these core elements and were thus easy enough to demonstrate in channel videos. Then there is the concept of the Warlord being the largest unit in the game while the Questoris Knight being the smallest, which clearly shows the intended scale of the game. I reckon as we move into the new year we might see a "starter set" to allow one to try the water, so to speak...

Or they could do battlegroup boxes, say 3 reaver/warlord hulls and 2 of each weapons sprue at a relative markdown. Maybe even add the command terminals and a weapons card set. Then a scout group with a couple boxes of warhounds and some knights.

Chopstick wrote:


Also, the problem with the GM box is not the price, it's what inside. You are paying for the most expensive box ever, but what you get is a rather lacklusting experience.

A better GM box would be Reaver + 2 Warhound or 1 Warlord + 1 Reaver +1 Warhound on each side.

Everyone will have his/her own definition of the "perfect" GME. To me the "perfect" GME set would have been one with version 1 and version 2 of the warlord, so as to have more available weapons (WYSIWYG - although you can proxy many of these and worst case you have the cards).

I have yet to play a game as I'm still very much into the building/modeling/painting phase but from what I read and saw there are quite a few people who describe their experiences as quite different from lacklustre. In my case, I bought the GME (actually 2 of them) because I wanted the models and the rules and I felt the inbuilt discount was nice (depending on how you split the content - 2 civitas imperialis boxes or 1/2 civitas imperialis sector box - you are looking at £255 or £242.5 in value for £175).

Looking at 1 Reaver + 2 Warhounds on each side + 1 Rule set would be £175 before any discount. Apply a roughly similar discount as to the GME and you get £125 (not "the most expensive ever", much less of a price shock). Or alternatively throw in some terrain and/or knights valued around £67.5 - 80 and you get something pretty much comparable in terms of cost to the actual GME.

Looking at 1 Warlord + 1 Reaver + 1 Warhound on each side + 1 Rule set would be £275, I am afraid the price tag would have been £195-200 or more should some terrain and/or knights had been included "for free" making it an even more "most expensive box ever" and provoking an even bigger shock than the one experienced. Of course, coverage in terms of titan classes would have been better.

As this pretty much involves personal preferences, it is imho an endless debate.

I am pretty sure we'll see some battlegroup/maniple boxes at some point.

My personal preference in terms of bundling things together would be to see both command terminals and weapons cards included with the actual models (as in "included for free") but as the command terminals are bigger than the reaver's and warhounds' boxes, this won't happen at the individual model level, it could maybe for knights. We'll see.

I would have preferred more LOS blocking buildings in the GM box, If I am honest its the scenery that lets it down for me personally.

Chopstick wrote:


You don't need the starter set to play KT, KT cost very low or next to nothing for any existing 40k players. All of the Specialists Game do require you to invest some amount of money to play. Both Bloodbowl and Necromunda have a much lower entry cost than AT. The problem is AT is not 40k. You are expecting people to pay quite a lot for a self-contained game they may or may not find any players to play with, while they could spend it on 40k and easily find a game.

Also, the problem with the GM box is not the price, it's what inside. You are paying for the most expensive box ever, but what you get is a rather lacklusting experience.

A better GM box would be Reaver + 2 Warhound or 1 Warlord + 1 Reaver +1 Warhound on each side.. You get a maniple, and some option for the Reaver and Warhound. But for all we knew by the time they made the GM box, the Warhoud kit had not been made yet, and very likely that the Reaver were also made too late to include in the GM box. A Titan and 3 knights is (currently) not a legit Maniple.

"having minis you can use in 40k" isn't necessarily a selling point. I don't know a single person who ever said "I'd buy this game, but I can't use these minis in 40k".

As for a "legit Maniple", that's only of relevance if you insist in playing Matched Play to the exclusion of all else. Mind you, I've found that the best demo experience comes from fielding two Reavers a side; the Warlords are too big and slow on their own to be much fun to teach the game with.

On the "its not 40K" issue, it might be a case of "Epic" scale being abscent for such a long time that a new generation of players has grown up since and they are puzzled at this "new" scale system where the minitaures don't fit in with the regular 28mm scale. Thats really the point of what I was trying to say about the Kill Team boxed game being released at the same time as Adeptus Titanicus. I have seen a lot of negative feedback about the 8mm scale being "pointless" and I wonder if thats from the younger players who may not be aware of the classic Epic games such as AT, Titan Legions and "Space Marine".

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

Or they could do battlegroup boxes, say 3 reaver/warlord hulls and 2 of each weapons sprue at a relative markdown. Maybe even add the command terminals and a weapons card set. Then a scout group with a couple boxes of warhounds and some knights.

Now that is a magnificent idea you have there.

 Rayvon wrote:
I would have preferred more LOS blocking buildings in the GM box, If I am honest its the scenery that lets it down for me personally.

The problem with the scenery is that, to me, it feels out of scale with the Titans. It’s detailed so that it looks like huge buildings, but when you place them next to a knight (and compare the 40k knight with infantry) each cube which makes up the buildings is only really the size of a small house.

I honestly think the new 40k city terrain is a better fit for AT, if you want to represent titans marching through the streets of a city of skyscrapers.

I don't want the scenery or the book. If they made a bundle of one Warlord, one Reaver, two Warhounds, a box of Knights, and a small discount (£10) I'd buy a couple of those (if they weren't GW exclusives).

JWBS wrote:
I don't want the scenery or the book. If they made a bundle of one Warlord, one Reaver, two Warhounds, a box of Knights, and a small discount (£10) I'd buy a couple of those (if they weren't GW exclusives).

If you don't want to play AT then the GM box was obviously not aimed at you.

 Imateria wrote:

JWBS wrote:
I don't want the scenery or the book. If they made a bundle of one Warlord, one Reaver, two Warhounds, a box of Knights, and a small discount (£10) I'd buy a couple of those (if they weren't GW exclusives).

If you don't want to play AT then the GM box was obviously not aimed at you.

Goes without saying.

Neronoxx wrote:

 Overread wrote:
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.

Head Designer was on stream saying they plan to bring new titans to life before they do xenos, and xenos before epic. So, take that as you want.

NIce, other GW/FW Staff says Epic beforce Xenos.

So, as I have lost this thread a couple of times...are we still looking at spending $220 on two Warlords just so we can switch weapons around between the two?