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.

Idly shopping on Darksphere....

2 x Pokeyboi Knights, 3 x questor Knights, and a set of Warhounds. £105.00

Man it's tempting! Fleshes the existing collection out nicely.

Order placed, but with Element. Remembered I owe a mate some Crystals from them!

 schoon wrote:
I listened to the recording and took notes...

-Legio Audax ONLY uses scout Titans, but more than Warhounds

I figured it'd go that way. Which is cool.

-Knights charge in a straight line - helps balance

Excellent. I also heard that they hinted Knights' charge bonus dice will be clarified to be per unit, not per model. This is what I wanted to see...some balancing before Knight Houses get all their cool rules and upgrades. I'm ready for the book now!

Is there any news on the terrain expansion? Once I finally get into Titanicus (it's cost prohibitive for me right now), I'm actually planning on spending more on the terrain than on the Titans proper. I love the feel of a playing out a series of battles on a vast cityscape, and GW did a fantastic job on the terrain models for this game.

They’re covering all Legions from “top tier” down, yet we have heard nothing about Audax, Ignatum (one of the triad, even), Xestobiax or Sinister yet? Granted the latter two will need special treatment but I refuse to believe the Fire Wasps aren’t a popular Legio.

 Nostromodamus wrote:
They’re covering all Legions from “top tier” down, yet we have heard nothing about Audax, Ignatum (one of the triad, even), Xestobiax or Sinister yet? Granted the latter two will need special treatment but I refuse to believe the Fire Wasps aren’t a popular Legio.

Their comment about Audax suggests they're thinking about or even working on them. Suturvora is another one that could have been covered by now. But I think they're also trying to group them into campaign books that make sense. Audax, Suturvora (which worked with the WBs), and Lysanda (which worked with the UMs) would work nicely in a supplement set during the Shadow Crusade, for instance. Xestobiax and Sinister for a Prospero-focused book. Etc.

 ah64pilot5 wrote:


Oh I know it will get spammed, at least to an extent,,, but this is Adeptus Titanicus...not Adeptus Knightcus.... lets have more titans first,,, more options for them first,,, then expand out the knights. I know they are the big thing GW has going for 40k and all,,,, but how about maybe Lucius patterns of Warhounds first... or sprues with other options...more knights later... or for that matter,,,lets bring in the super heavies.....just my two cents worth....

But thats what they have done. Save for the release of the Lancers the focus has been on the Titans; Reavers, Warhounds, Warlord and Reaver variants, weapon sprues, decal sheets and even the first expansion Titandeath. Even when it came to a Titan-Knight maniple in WD, it was basically an all-titan maniple with Knights bolted on.

Last August GW released a game of Titans and Knights. The first two units released were the Warlord and Questoris, demonstrating that an effective force struck a balance between a "battleship" and it's supporting "Gunboat squadron". The Titan is large and powerful but without support it is vulnerable and without mobility. Simplifying things, its like the Galactica and its Vipers to protect it or accomplish a mission beyond its range.

Although we should keep the game-issue focus on the gameplay itself, the price of 2-3 Titans is as far as some of us are willing to go. I personally have a Venator maniple of a Reaver and two Warhounds and feel that, coupled with two Knight banners, is enough and time to move onto a second force - so that someone else can play. Not everyone has access to a game club, nor friends willing to spend on a game they have not tried first. Knights are not only affordable units but save money by not requiring weapon cards and only need a single marker on their terminal. Their rules are simpler and suitable for beginners...maybe to the point where GW could make a "first strike" with 10 Knights, far less components and a slimmed down rule book.

In summery I'd say that after an eight month wait that its high time the Knights were given some love.

SamusDrake wrote:

In summery I'd say that after an eight month wait that its high time the Knights were given some love.

I think that's a really strange perspective. While I'm not surprised that knights are a part of the game, I was initially surprised that knights were included in the game's inaugural release. The game is named Titanicus after all. You, however, seem to think that knights are a centerpiece of the game, deserving of priority focus. You used the words "high time" as if you were offended that knights hadn't been a greater focus. I think that viewpoint is what those of us who aren't really fans of knights are so surprised by.

 Norchack wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:

In summery I'd say that after an eight month wait that its high time the Knights were given some love.

I think that's a really strange perspective. While I'm not surprised that knights are a part of the game, I was initially surprised that knights were included in the game's inaugural release. The game is named Titanicus after all. You, however, seem to think that knights are a centerpiece of the game, deserving of priority focus. You used the words "high time" as if you were offended that knights hadn't been a greater focus. I think that viewpoint is what those of us who aren't really fans of knights are so surprised by.

He's not saying that at all. He's saying that they have been neglected as an aspect of the game, and as the lower bound of the game need to be explored in the greater depth afforded to the big battleship Warlords.

Yup.

Adeptus Titanicus is closer to a Naval Game than a Land Game. Some are nippy and fast, others ponderous but full o’dakka.

Knights are indeed your wee gunboats. And really quite deadly if your opponent is careless enough to ignore them.

Without them, the game would be a bit dull.

 gorgon wrote:
Xestobiax and Sinister for a Prospero-focused book. Etc.

Yes, please!

 Nurglitch wrote:

 Norchack wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:

In summery I'd say that after an eight month wait that its high time the Knights were given some love.

I think that's a really strange perspective. While I'm not surprised that knights are a part of the game, I was initially surprised that knights were included in the game's inaugural release. The game is named Titanicus after all. You, however, seem to think that knights are a centerpiece of the game, deserving of priority focus. You used the words "high time" as if you were offended that knights hadn't been a greater focus. I think that viewpoint is what those of us who aren't really fans of knights are so surprised by.

He's not saying that at all. He's saying that they have been neglected as an aspect of the game, and as the lower bound of the game need to be explored in the greater depth afforded to the big battleship Warlords.

That is a more sensible statement. I don't think I agree with it, but at least it's not hyperbolic and easily misunderstood.

 CoteazRox wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
Xestobiax and Sinister for a Prospero-focused book. Etc.

Yes, please!

As an Audax guy, I have no use for Warlords and such. But if (when) Ordo Sinister psi-titans arrive...that might spark some purchases from me toward a loyalist force. Left hand of doom FTW.

 Norchack wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:

In summery I'd say that after an eight month wait that its high time the Knights were given some love.

I think that's a really strange perspective. While I'm not surprised that knights are a part of the game, I was initially surprised that knights were included in the game's inaugural release. The game is named Titanicus after all. You, however, seem to think that knights are a centerpiece of the game, deserving of priority focus. You used the words "high time" as if you were offended that knights hadn't been a greater focus. I think that viewpoint is what those of us who aren't really fans of knights are so surprised by.

I addressed that in the same post...

"Last August GW released a game of Titans and Knights. The first two units released were the Warlord and Questoris, demonstrating that an effective force struck a balance between a "battleship" and it's supporting "Gunboat squadron". The Titan is large and powerful but without support it is vulnerable and without mobility. Simplifying things, its like the Galactica and its Vipers to protect it or accomplish a mission beyond its range."

So, yes, it is high time to address the Knights because from the start they were clearly part of the game. The GME was the game released and featured those two units, working together. Why would we assume the Knights are not an important part of the game otherwise just because of the name? If they weren't they wouldn't be in the game at all and the first models would have been the Warlord and Warhounds. Or maybe the Reavers - who knows.

The Questoris, at least, could have had far better support during those eight months. Would it have hurt GW/FW to have released an upgrade sprue for them? The Qs are very popular amongst players - more recognisable than any of the titans - and a sprue of rocket pods, power fists and additional copies of the weapons found in the core set, supported by additional rules in WD, would definitely would have gone down well.

Just to be clear though, where AT is concerned, the Qs are not the full game experience by a long shot. Whether I like it or not( actually, I approve and just cannot afford one, but would lose my mind if I did have one! ) the Warlord is the undeniable A-List star of the game. Although slow and lumbering compared to the rest, his weapon array is awesome( we need to hire Patrick Stewart to voice that ). Its just that most players will simply be more familar with the Knights due to their use in 40K. The average gamer doesn't spend £350 - £1275 on a titan for their games of 40K and I don't think you'll spot one in a local store as often...

On a personal level I don't begrudge the Titan-only players their fun, and even support it. Its just strange that now the Knights have their own expansion shortly after a Titan-focused expansion - along with a decent range of titans and weapons - are being frowned upon and suggested that it be held off even longer still. Its clear there are Knight fans interested in that part of the game and can only contribute to the growth of the game, keeping it around longer.

Anyway, moving forward, I hope we get some good news next week...all round.

Knights kit require less resource and time to make while also already having an extensive range. They are good release for GW to fill the schedule while they're making new titan.

 Norchack wrote:

Is there any news on the terrain expansion? Once I finally get into Titanicus (it's cost prohibitive for me right now), I'm actually planning on spending more on the terrain than on the Titans proper. I love the feel of a playing out a series of battles on a vast cityscape, and GW did a fantastic job on the terrain models for this game.

I would guess next month, maybe 6 weeks. They clearly have sprues, but not yet the real boxes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 gorgon wrote:
As an Audax guy, I have no use for Warlords and such. But if (when) Ordo Sinister psi-titans arrive...that might spark some purchases from me toward a loyalist force. Left hand of doom FTW.

They've mentioned in other talks that psi-titans are after Molech, but not exactly how far after.

Adding knights to this version is not a big deal. I don't understand all the fuss against it.

The older versions of Epic included TONs of variations of knights, both Chaos-only and Imperial. Why shouldn't this one? Hell, Titan Legions just had an Imperator (unless you count a card standee as a second one) and ten knights.

Knights are fun. It gives the game that combined-arms feel.

Mandragola wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

SnotlingPimpWagon wrote:
Grand master set coming back might actually spell me getting into the game. Ever since the knight bundles were undone, I dread looking at the sum underneath the cart, once I add everything I want. :(

Keep in mind it's only good deal if you want everything in it. 2 warlords(so not if you plan to play maniples without 2 warlords...), knights, terrain. Of course if all is good then it's good saving and better than the maniple box but if you aren't sure you need all the battlebox maniple with ruleset adds decent saving but not as much as the GME. But the maniple box has more all around force with 1 warlord, reaver and 2 warhounds.

This. I got the GME, the battle box and a plasma warlord. Now I have four warlords, which is possibly more than I need!

The battle box, plasma warlord and reaver 2 would be my recommended purchases, along with the rules set. You get 2 of each titan, a great mix of weapons and coincidentally you'll have all the right terminals.

The trouble with the GME is that it makes the batle box bad value, and otherwise that would be the most efficient way to buy titans. Dual-Bellicosa warlords are really not very good, and you definitely don't want three of them! If it came with one sprue of volcano cannons and one of plasma annihilators it'd be a totally different thing.

Dual volcano is actually good but albeit not for every titan. But missile you do want. Laser blasters suck

The Civitas Imperialis Sector terrain set is no longer listed on GW's website.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SamusDrake wrote:
Its just strange that now the Knights have their own expansion shortly after a Titan-focused expansion - along with a decent range of titans and weapons - are being frowned upon and suggested that it be held off even longer still. Its clear there are Knight fans interested in that part of the game and can only contribute to the growth of the game, keeping it around longer.

What's strange is the idea of fielding an army that does not include Titans in a game called Adeptus Titanicus. I don't think the rules should allow for it. I like that Knights are in the game; they should remain ancillary supporting units.

They're pretty commonly called 'Knight-Titans' and they're classed as Titanic is 40k.

Knights could use some extra rule that make playing them a little bit more interesting, instead of being just a moving beaststick that ignore half of the rule of the game. Maybe a dominus might get a mini command panel or something.

 Nurglitch wrote:
They're pretty commonly called 'Knight-Titans'.

Not correctly they aren't. They're correctly termed Knight Suits. This is a long running bone of contention and to my knowledge nobody has ever once found an incident where GW have used the term Knight Titan.

There's other things that are classed as Titanic in 40K as well, are they titans? Or do you think they're just using the word in the sense of something extremely large?

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:
They're pretty commonly called 'Knight-Titans'.

Not correctly they aren't. They're correctly termed Knight Suits. This is a long running bone of contention and to my knowledge nobody has ever once found an incident where GW have used the term Knight Titan.

It literally said 'Knight Titan' on the original box of the 40K Knight.



Considering that 'knight' is a terribly generic word and there are many things called 'knights' in 40K, calling the giant robots 'Knight Titans' is a completely sensible distinction.

Not anymore...






Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's almost like it was wrong and got corrected.

 Norchack wrote:

The Civitas Imperialis Sector terrain set is no longer listed on GW's website.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SamusDrake wrote:
Its just strange that now the Knights have their own expansion shortly after a Titan-focused expansion - along with a decent range of titans and weapons - are being frowned upon and suggested that it be held off even longer still. Its clear there are Knight fans interested in that part of the game and can only contribute to the growth of the game, keeping it around longer.

What's strange is the idea of fielding an army that does not include Titans in a game called Adeptus Titanicus. I don't think the rules should allow for it. I like that Knights are in the game; they should remain ancillary supporting units.

If this was being done with the core rule set( the official, definitive version of the game ) then I could understand, but its being done in an expansion where the rules are merely optional. Titandeath introduced weather rules that irked some players but were ultimately okay with them because it was just an option - not a core rule. However, if a new edition of AT was released where weather conditions, knight houses and epic units were part of the core game then we'd probably start to question if its the same game anymore. Such rules could potentially lead to a more complex game, leaving some players annoyed that the game they felt was once slim & fun is now overwhelmed with rules and...well, weather conditions!

So really, even with Doom of Molech, AT is still a game of titan battles with supporting knights.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Not anymore...

It's almost like it was wrong and got corrected.

You could certainly argue that. Or they just made it more consistent with other boxes which mention the type of the Knight, and the original wording might cause people to think the 'Titan' is a type of a Knight like 'Warden' and be confused as they don't find such in their codex. And regardless of why the words 'Knight Titan' were on the box, they were there, so your claim that "to my knowledge nobody has ever once found an incident where GW have used the term Knight Titan"was wrong. (Or at least is now wrong, as you have the knowledge.)

In any case, a lot of people bought that box, so they now think their knights are 'Knight Titans' and considering that language evolves and all this is completely made up anyway, you really can't say that they're wrong.

Yes I can, and will continue to do so.

Awesome. Nonetheless it's nice to have additional content regardless of the nomenclature.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Yes I can, and will continue to do so.

Same here!

I'm just glad that GW finally realized their mistake and corrected it!

Knights - too big for 40K, too small for Adeptus Titanicus. Whooda thunk?

I wouldn't mind if AT drew in things all the way down to Superheavies as part of the game, as several are specifically designed to hunt Titans and other large prey.

Also, I recently found out about an Adeptus Titanicus game on Steam and bought it (it allows for single player, so probably the only AT I'm likely to see for a while). Has anyone else played it? I found the first game sorta meh, but I was curious if anyone else here was more familiar with it?

 Stormonu wrote:
Knights - too big for 40K, too small for Adeptus Titanicus. Whooda thunk?

I wouldn't mind if AT drew in things all the way down to Superheavies as part of the game, as several are specifically designed to hunt Titans and other large prey.

Also, I recently found out about an Adeptus Titanicus game on Steam and bought it (it allows for single player, so probably the only AT I'm likely to see for a while). Has anyone else played it? I found the first game sorta meh, but I was curious if anyone else here was more familiar with it?

I'd say Knights are the limit of 28mm scale games and natural in 6-15mm games. They fit a game like Horizon Wars perfectly, which is similar to classic Epic 40K and Space Marine, yet the Titans - especially the Reaver - don't quite feel involved enough. I was quite surprised how well AT manages to cover both as the knights kept most of the titan rules yet adjusted for their squad-like behaviour.

I would assume that Armigers would only be of value in all-Knight battles, but large tanks would be interesting as they pack a punch and while fast they have turning limitations. That said, I think tanks in general would be better off in a separate game along with fliers and knights. AT is really a game of giant robots and the Knights seem to fit both visual and gameplay-wise.

Personally, If GW does decide to explore tanks then I would get the relevant expansion book and models, to then join you all in merry titan-slaying...