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.

Yes all plastic.

Which, slightly annoyingly, means we now have a plastic quake cannon available soon. Even if it is in an artillery configuration and missing the arm mount.
Oh well.

I wonder if they’re going to offer all the Warlord projectile weapons as options? Like a macro-Gatling howitzer or an annihilator plasma mortar….

 xttz wrote:
Yeah my main gripe with the Warbringer is the goofy head. Luckily I have a spare Warlord head from the weapons sprue which should look better.

The warlord and Reavers both have alternate heads. Maybe there is an alternate warbringer head in that kit? Also hoping for the lucius alpha head to show up for the warlord. They could easily do a third sprue for the warlord.

Anyone else get the feeling that the Warbringer may have the full complement of Reaver weapons in the kit, perhaps that's the reason for the slightly higher price.

BlackKnight wrote:
Anyone else get the feeling that the Warbringer may have the full complement of Reaver weapons in the kit, perhaps that's the reason for the slightly higher price.

possible

Racerguy180 wrote:

BlackKnight wrote:
Anyone else get the feeling that the Warbringer may have the full complement of Reaver weapons in the kit, perhaps that's the reason for the slightly higher price.

possible

Yeah, the one pictured has one gun from sprue A and one gun from sprue B and they surely didn't waste a mold production slot on recutting those.

That would make it a bit easier of a pill to swallow...

BlackKnight wrote:
Anyone else get the feeling that the Warbringer may have the full complement of Reaver weapons in the kit, perhaps that's the reason for the slightly higher price.

If so then that would be a decent price, along with the terminal. A complete plastic Reaver would be £50 while the Warlord would be £90...

 lord_blackfang wrote:


Yeah, the one pictured has one gun from sprue A and one gun from sprue B and they surely didn't waste a mold production slot on recutting those.

Why not? How many times have 40k heavy bolters or lascannons been put on unique sprues for units that can use them? I doubt they put both current Reaver sprues in this kit, not least because that would include two Reaver-specific heads.

More likely both arm weapons are on a new sprue with the new quake cannon & head, leaving the option for an alternative Warbringer sprue later.

AT sprues have, so far, been fairly uniform.

One for the chassis.
Two for the show
Three to get ready

No, wait, that’s Elvis. Mercy.

One for the chassis
One for armour plates
One for weapons.

Expressly so they can release armour and weapon variants, with a simple repackage.

So this could include both Reaver Sprues, or be as you’ve suggested.

It's probably a new sprue. Their costs are a fraction of what they were years ago. Just look at some of the limited things they've done in plastic.

When it was first revealed they said it comes with a Volcano Cannon and Laser Blaster, but other Reaver weapons would fit, so I’m assuming they cut a new sprue.

 Nostromodamus wrote:
When it was first revealed they said it comes with a Volcano Cannon and Laser Blaster, but other Reaver weapons would fit, so I’m assuming they cut a new sprue.

Probably a sprue with 2 arms, 1 or hopefully 2 heads, and the quake cannon. Then later they can do another sprue with a different carapace and head, and the other 2 reaver guns.

Can someone point me to details about this revised rulebook?

How revised are we talking here?

It d d mention it on the product preview article but seems to have been retconned.....

I just force-refreshed the article and it's still there:

"There’s also a set of Battlefield Assets to bolster your battlegroup, all the tokens and status markers you need, and a 96-page rulebook which has been updated with all of the latest errata, meaning you’ll be 100% up-to-speed with how the game works."

 xttz wrote:
Yeah my main gripe with the Warbringer is the goofy head. Luckily I have a spare Warlord head from the weapons sprue which should look better.

The head is definitely the weakest part of it, so hopefully there will be some variants in the kit (that will show up in 40k scale as well!), though I think overall I prefer the Warbringer to the Warlord mostly because it looks more like it could actually function, a number of the mechanical elements of the Warlord don't make a lot of sense and it seems it was designed by someone who knew it should have pistons, but didn't fully understand them (there are a pair on the arm that simply go between two points on the same piece of the arm).

Also really hoping for some variant carapace weapons in the future, I reckon a massive plasma gun with a pair of huge power cells replacing the ammo hoppers would look great! Actually, will be interesting to see if the ammo hoppers come with holes for magnets (like they do on the 40k version).

As for the sprue situation, it's definitely going to be completely new sprues, other than the weapons it shares nothing with the Reaver, so no way they'll be sticking Reaver sprues in just for the weapons. Would be nice if it had more than two of the Reaver weapons, but would have thought that would have been mentioned if it was the case.

I'm more curious if there're any adjustment to the weapon card and knight terminal.

Chopstick wrote:
I'm more curious if there're any adjustment to the weapon card and knight terminal.

I noted last year that when they put the free PDF terminals up for download that they were slightly redesigned with a 2020 copyright on the back, and that indicated a new boxed set in the works. I expect the terminals in the starter set will be identical to last year's free downloads.

Tavis75 wrote:

 xttz wrote:
Yeah my main gripe with the Warbringer is the goofy head. Luckily I have a spare Warlord head from the weapons sprue which should look better.

The head is definitely the weakest part of it, so hopefully there will be some variants in the kit (that will show up in 40k scale as well!), though I think overall I prefer the Warbringer to the Warlord mostly because it looks more like it could actually function, a number of the mechanical elements of the Warlord don't make a lot of sense and it seems it was designed by someone who knew it should have pistons, but didn't fully understand them (there are a pair on the arm that simply go between two points on the same piece of the arm).

Also really hoping for some variant carapace weapons in the future, I reckon a massive plasma gun with a pair of huge power cells replacing the ammo hoppers would look great! Actually, will be interesting to see if the ammo hoppers come with holes for magnets (like they do on the 40k version).

As for the sprue situation, it's definitely going to be completely new sprues, other than the weapons it shares nothing with the Reaver, so no way they'll be sticking Reaver sprues in just for the weapons. Would be nice if it had more than two of the Reaver weapons, but would have thought that would have been mentioned if it was the case.

My ideal scenario is that we get another Warbringer weapon sprue with a new carapace option (like that plasma gun) plus brand new arm weapons usable by Reavers too.

Although I have a funny feeling we'll just get a resin carapace volcano cannon & head for £20+...

 schoon wrote:
Can someone point me to details about this revised rulebook?

How revised are we talking here?

In the community article it said revised with errata, so I'd say its as much as we've already had.

Really hope they come up with a solution to the Acastus problem soon. Damn thing is too good at the points. The model is gorgeous and I want to field a bunch of them without being a complete tosser!

Maybe field them anyways and misuse them?

zedmeister wrote:Really hope they come up with a solution to the Acastus problem soon. Damn thing is too good at the points. The model is gorgeous and I want to field a bunch of them without being a complete tosser!

Agree on all counts!

Nurglitch wrote:Maybe field them anyways and misuse them?

Eh...what now?

Nurglitch wrote:
Maybe field them anyways and misuse them?

Just not cricket. I tend to agree a limit with my opponent - usually when one of us takes one the other does as well. They tend to dual out for a turn or two until one falls over in flames before the other is scragged by a Titan on Split Fire order

Omegon wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:Maybe field them anyways and misuse them?

Eh...what now?

Like buy them, paint them, field them, but don't use them to the maximum advantage. That way you can enjoy them, but they won't seem over-powered.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/02/05/shadow-and-iron-crusades-of-vengeancegw-homepage-post-4fw-homepage-post-1/

Psi titan and Ursus Claw!





Psi Titan is FW :(((, I hope the claw is plastic.

Psi tltan was never likely be full plastic. Looks warlord kit with resin head and one arm. No biggie

Claw is also likely fw. No biggie

Chopstick wrote:
Psi Titan is FW :(((, I hope the claw is plastic.

Don't get your hopes up, if it is an Audax only upgrade it will definitely be resin

The shield generator on the top looks like a new resin part as well. Pretty sure the claw can be made like that from the sprue.

Resin arms for the Usus Claws.

That Psi-Titan!