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.

No one had pic of the upgrade sprue for Questoris knight? I noticed they used the head of the Knight Preceptor, so maybe it will also had the Las-impulsor and multi-laser carapace.

Yea, we definitely need more sprue pics.

Did anyone else happen to go to the seminar and know if they mentioned when the Questoris upgrade sprue will be coming out and if it will also be sold separately?

I just bought two boxes of Questoris Knights and it would be slightly annoying to always be two add-on sprues short...

Jack Flask wrote:
Did anyone else happen to go to the seminar and know if they mentioned when the Questoris upgrade sprue will be coming out and if it will also be sold separately?

I just bought two boxes of Questoris Knights and it would be slightly annoying to always be two add-on sprues short...

They mentioned it would be sold separately too, no mention of release date though.

 ImAGeek wrote:

Jack Flask wrote:
Did anyone else happen to go to the seminar and know if they mentioned when the Questoris upgrade sprue will be coming out and if it will also be sold separately?

I just bought two boxes of Questoris Knights and it would be slightly annoying to always be two add-on sprues short...

They mentioned it would be sold separately too, no mention of release date though.

Has there been any more details on how big the sprue is and what it contains? As other people have said, duplicates for some of the existing weapons would be handy, although personally I'm expecting something the size of the 40k Chapter upgrade sprues with under a dozen components.

 xttz wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

Jack Flask wrote:
Did anyone else happen to go to the seminar and know if they mentioned when the Questoris upgrade sprue will be coming out and if it will also be sold separately?

I just bought two boxes of Questoris Knights and it would be slightly annoying to always be two add-on sprues short...

They mentioned it would be sold separately too, no mention of release date though.

Has there been any more details on how big the sprue is and what it contains? As other people have said, duplicates for some of the existing weapons would be handy, although personally I'm expecting something the size of the 40k Chapter upgrade sprues with under a dozen components.

If it doesn't include, at a minimum, a pair of each of the weapons from the core sprue, plus three rocket pods and three gauntlets - ie, what's required to actually choose a loadout when buying a single box, rather than "making do" - I genuinely don't see what the point is. I don't think, right now, I feel the need to represent every minor sub-class of Knight, but still only have the chance to build one of any given type from a box, especially now the first iteration of the Household list is out and pushes hard for monobuild Banners over mixed loadouts.

 ImAGeek wrote:

Jack Flask wrote:
Did anyone else happen to go to the seminar and know if they mentioned when the Questoris upgrade sprue will be coming out and if it will also be sold separately?

I just bought two boxes of Questoris Knights and it would be slightly annoying to always be two add-on sprues short...

They mentioned it would be sold separately too, no mention of release date though.

But will it be available in the US or just temporarily out of stock here?

 totalfailure wrote:
Disappointing to hear the Molech book was victim of the typical quality editing that seems to infest GW and the game industry in general these days. Is it too tough to have someone off of the design team proof the
book before you send it off to the printers, and again before the print run? This lazy, sloppy stuff is getting old, like Warlord leaving a half page of significant rules out of the recent Erewhon book....

Yeah, it's too bad to hear that once again, GW can't proofread their productions as well as tiny indie publishers. I have never had any other company I buy from have more errors and erratas needed than GW rules.

New knights are great looking, though!

Looking at the Acastus Terminals...90pts + weapons, so a minimum banner seems to be a single Acastus. SEVEN structure points!

Most of you will be more familar with the capabilities of the Acastus, but he seems a good support choice for those Titans that are slightly lacking in firepower. Cannot wait to field this chap!

New dice is welcome and looking good. Can't decide between them so probably end up getting both. Can never have enough dice!

 xttz wrote:


Has there been any more details on how big the sprue is and what it contains? As other people have said, duplicates for some of the existing weapons would be handy, although personally I'm expecting something the size of the 40k Chapter upgrade sprues with under a dozen components.

If they are including the upgrade sprue in future Questoris box sets then it would be smaller than the standard sprue( the three knights ) in order to keep the price the same. Personally, I think £20 is asking a little too much for the Questoris and Cerastus - especially when compared to the Warhounds - so it would be decent of GW to keep the price the same when including the upgrade sprue.

I've had shocking stuff from indies, from major fiction & non fiction publishers and from academic presses (especially irritating when you have to buy a book knowing it's missing part of an important chapter and are paying £195 for the privilege) etc

but GW does seem to suffer from more than it's fair share

SamusDrake wrote:
Looking at the Acastus Terminals...90pts + weapons, so a minimum banner seems to be a single Acastus. SEVEN structure points!

Most of you will be more familar with the capabilities of the Acastus, but he seems a good support choice for those Titans that are slightly lacking in firepower. Cannot wait to field this chap!

New dice is welcome and looking good. Can't decide between them so probably end up getting both. Can never have enough dice!

Their special rule Artilery give them BS 3+ (if they didn't move??) Weapon seem to be 4 shot main guns, 6 shot missile pod, and 2 shot lascannon. Boy those admech techpriest sure beat themselves over the head for not giving the poor big titans some more lascannon turrets, or missile pods lol.

Command roll is bad but thanks to their rule (it said "increase to 3+) i guess they get 3+ even if they're broken.

But no matter how much Structure points they had, a single Critical hit would still vaporize them.

Chopstick wrote:

But no matter how matter Structure point they had, a single Critical hit would still vaporize them.

Well, they are Knights after all. The Titans must have a "bitch, please" advantage over them.

Well that's hugely disappointing, according to Garro30K on Facebook it looks like xttz's suspicions were correct; the Knight upgrade sprue is three gauntlets, three missile pods, two extra nipple-meltas, and a couple of heads.

Oh well, just means GW get less of my money and that's more of my army I can't show off on the main FB page(they're irrationally hostile towards 3D printing).

it's fine

It'd be nice to have some extra like left hand version of the guns and the las-impulsor but hey, they're plastic so it's still wait better than resin.

Btw they still get the missile pod wrong, that is not the stormspear rocket pod.

And yike we still have no option to replace the crappy avenger gatling other than go full Gallant.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Well that's hugely disappointing, according to Garro30K on Facebook it looks like xttz's suspicions were correct; the Knight upgrade sprue is three gauntlets, three missile pods, two extra nipple-meltas, and a couple of heads.

Oh well, just means GW get less of my money and that's more of my army I can't show off on the main FB page(they're irrationally hostile towards 3D printing).

Ah, that is a bit naff I must say. Having to buy three boxes of Qs just to have at least 3 of the same weapon( never mind banners of six ) for a legal lance-banner is on the expensive side.

That said, they might include them in a resin kit with the unreleased Cerastus weapons( Boltcannon and Flammer ), under the name of "Knight Weapons". The Qs and Cs are already sharing the command terminal pack, so maybe thats what they have in mind...

Edit; I've made a mistake here - technically the Powerfist and Chainsword are both classed as a melee weapon. With the new upgrade kit - especially if it comes with the Questoris kit - it can indeed provide a legal lance-banner if it is equiped with those two melee weapons, and as they are cheap in points( 10 pts together ) the rocket pod can be affordable enough to provide ranged firepower. This would make them similar to the Cerastus Lancer.

In terms of the remaining Titan Weapons.

According to a member of the FB Titanicus Group, those as yet unseen are being worked upon, with an intended release across Summer.

Which is nice. Uncorroborated I’m afraid, but I’ve no particular reason to disbelieve his report.

The gauntlet is on the right arm? Where the guns go?

Dammit, I want to build proper errants. That sucks.

SamusDrake wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Well that's hugely disappointing, according to Garro30K on Facebook it looks like xttz's suspicions were correct; the Knight upgrade sprue is three gauntlets, three missile pods, two extra nipple-meltas, and a couple of heads.

Oh well, just means GW get less of my money and that's more of my army I can't show off on the main FB page(they're irrationally hostile towards 3D printing).

Ah, that is a bit naff I must say. Having to buy three boxes of Qs just to have at least 3 of the same weapon( never mind banners of six ) for a legal lance-banner is on the expensive side.

That said, they might include them in a resin kit with the unreleased Cerastus weapons( Boltcannon and Flammer ), under the name of "Knight Weapons". The Qs and Cs are already sharing the command terminal pack, so maybe thats what they have in mind...

Edit; I've made a mistake here - technically the Powerfist and Chainsword are both classed as a melee weapon. With the new upgrade kit - especially if it comes with the Questoris kit - it can indeed provide a legal lance-banner if it is equiped with those two melee weapons, and as they are cheap in points( 10 pts together ) the rocket pod can be affordable enough to provide ranged firepower. This would make them similar to the Cerastus Lancer.

Do people actually quibble about wysiwyg with these models? It makes no odds to me as I don't game and would build them how I thought looked best no matter what, but it seems to me to be the easiest thing in the world (standard practice even, given what I've heard about how bad gatling is on these minis) for people to say "These knights all have Thermal lance and chainswords" (or whatever the good conficuration is).

JWBS wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Well that's hugely disappointing, according to Garro30K on Facebook it looks like xttz's suspicions were correct; the Knight upgrade sprue is three gauntlets, three missile pods, two extra nipple-meltas, and a couple of heads.

Oh well, just means GW get less of my money and that's more of my army I can't show off on the main FB page(they're irrationally hostile towards 3D printing).

Ah, that is a bit naff I must say. Having to buy three boxes of Qs just to have at least 3 of the same weapon( never mind banners of six ) for a legal lance-banner is on the expensive side.

That said, they might include them in a resin kit with the unreleased Cerastus weapons( Boltcannon and Flammer ), under the name of "Knight Weapons". The Qs and Cs are already sharing the command terminal pack, so maybe thats what they have in mind...

Edit; I've made a mistake here - technically the Powerfist and Chainsword are both classed as a melee weapon. With the new upgrade kit - especially if it comes with the Questoris kit - it can indeed provide a legal lance-banner if it is equiped with those two melee weapons, and as they are cheap in points( 10 pts together ) the rocket pod can be affordable enough to provide ranged firepower. This would make them similar to the Cerastus Lancer.

Do people actually quibble about wysiwyg with these models? It makes no odds to me as I don't game and would build them how I thought looked best no matter what, but it seems to me to be the easiest thing in the world (standard practice even, given what I've heard about how bad gatling is on these minis) for people to say "These knights all have Thermal lance and chainswords" (or whatever the good conficuration is).

I don't give a gnat's fart about wysiwyg, but if I was just going to slap whatever on there why even bother with models, I could just use counters. I want to give them the correct weapons because it looks better.

Its nice to make the AT models look accurate to the 28mm models, or there is no point in having such finely detailed models. Its not like we are quibbling about accurately modelled grenades on a Space Marine. Accurate weapon arms and easy access to fielding multiples of a specific loadout should not be that hard to sort out when designing the models and accessories.

 Yodhrin wrote:

I don't give a gnat's fart about wysiwyg,

Ok.

but if I was just going to slap whatever on there why even bother with models, I could just use counters. I want to give them the correct weapons because it looks better.

Sounds to me that you care about WYSIWYG quite a bit...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Its nice to make the AT models look accurate to the 28mm models, or there is no point in having such finely detailed models. Its not like we are quibbling about accurately modelled grenades on a Space Marine. Accurate weapon arms and easy access to fielding multiples of a specific loadout should not be that hard to sort out when designing the models and accessories.

Yep. It is main gun on a model which is the size of a 28mm trooper.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Its nice to make the AT models look accurate to the 28mm models, or there is no point in having such finely detailed models. Its not like we are quibbling about accurately modelled grenades on a Space Marine. Accurate weapon arms and easy access to fielding multiples of a specific loadout should not be that hard to sort out when designing the models and accessories.

So people do complain? Or are you talking about an ideal? (My question was not "Would you like all the weapon options", my answer to that would be yes. I'm more curious as to whether the lack of options ATM sees people running sub-optimal configurations. I read the Titanicus reddit and it seems like most people there play wysiwyg).

/edit - that first sentence should be "So do people complain?"

Well, I have been looking to get into AT from the release and the very first thing that irked me was the weapons configuration options of a box of Knights, and how only one of each main weapon comes in a box. I figured the first set of releases of weapons options for the larger Titans would also see a kit of weapons released for Knights so that a single box of three Knights + an "accessory pack" would let a player field three of any right weapon arm, plus maybe left arm and back options, although those two options could be just as easily left for an additional box of Knight types, and things could be mixed/matched like Space Marine arms in 40k.

I could see myself proxying the stubber/meltagun options as they are pretty tiny, but the main weapon arms would have to be WYSIWYG for any force of mine, just as if I was building, say, a box of Assault Marines.

 Crimson wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

I don't give a gnat's fart about wysiwyg,

Ok.

but if I was just going to slap whatever on there why even bother with models, I could just use counters. I want to give them the correct weapons because it looks better.

Sounds to me that you care about WYSIWYG quite a bit...

You know that wysiwyg is a rules-first issue, right? It has nothing to do with the models' aesthetics, it's about supposedly making things easier to tell apart for your opponent during the game. I don't buy that at all, and in a game like Necromunda or Mordheim I'll make cool looking models first, and if anyone whinges about them having equipment that's not on the model or the reverse, I point them to the fully-detailed roster that's right there in front of them listing every detail of every model in my band.

I want the models to look as they should in regards to AT Knights & Titans because of the "cool looking models" part, I couldn't care less about any gameplay arguments for or against it. EDIT: And for clarity, in the games I have played, I used whatever weapons I pleased on the Titans, despite only having options from the default boxes at the time. That didn't stop me wanting to make them look "correct" as soon as the option was available.

WYSIWYG is not a rule, it just means the models have right gear regardless of the motivation for building them that way. Some care about it for gameplay reasons, some (like you and me) care about it for their personal aethetics OCD reasons.

 Crimson wrote:
WYSIWYG is not a rule, it just means the models have right gear regardless of the motivation for building them that way. Some care about it for gameplay reasons, some (like you and me) care about it for their personal aethetics OCD reasons.

I've literally never in ~25 years seen anyone advocate wysiwyg from anything other than a rules-based perspective until this very moment.

You just did yourself a few posts ago!

I don't know how you'd interpret my preference, but I field "cool-looking models" like you, but I always field them in-game with the weapons they're actually armed with. Doing it otherwise is ... icky.

 Crimson wrote:
You just did yourself a few posts ago!

No, I stated I desired to make the models the way I want them and the kit is frustrating that. What I'm saying is the actual term "WYSIWYG" has always, in my experience, specifically referred to making models accurate to their loadout for the purposes of gameplay/clarity for your opponent, and had nothing to do with aesthetics. The end result might be the same in this specific instance, but the reasoning behind either proposition is different, and will not result in the same outcome in all circumstances - as I pointed out with regards to Mordheim & Necromunda, where my desire to make models look good(to my own subjective taste, obviously) will run directly against WYSIWYG in most cases.

WYSIWYG will *always* result in "the models match the rules". My approach only has that result in this specific case because it happens to coincide with the results of my actual motivations.

That is an utterly bizarre definition. You said you wanted to put rule appropriate gear on your knights. That is going for WYSIWYG. Your motivation doesn't change that.