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.

via a great source on Faeit 212

Also there will be something like a revamp of Adeptus Titanicus. There will
be an expansion which introduce Planes and Ground Forces in AT.

This will be not actually a new Epic but it brings back 8mm Infantry and
Tanks of the Legiones Astartes.

Infantry and Armour will be FW-Resin, no plans for Plastic at this state.
It looks like they will use this as a test run to see how popular an actual
Epic return in the future could be.

http://natfka.blogspot.com/2021/11/rumors-revamp-of-adeptus-mechanicus.html

RazorEdge wrote:

via a great source on Faeit 212

Also there will be something like a revamp of Adeptus Titanicus. There will
be an expansion which introduce Planes and Ground Forces in AT.

This will be not actually a new Epic but it brings back 8mm Infantry and
Tanks of the Legiones Astartes.

Infantry and Armour will be FW-Resin, no plans for Plastic at this state.
It looks like they will use this as a test run to see how popular an actual
Epic return in the future could be.

http://natfka.blogspot.com/2021/11/rumors-revamp-of-adeptus-mechanicus.html

I want to believe it but I'm trying not to get my hopes up.

This would at least all be food for thought it one could mix and match, on it's own it's just silly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RazorEdge wrote:

via a great source on Faeit 212

Also there will be something like a revamp of Adeptus Titanicus. There will
be an expansion which introduce Planes and Ground Forces in AT.

This will be not actually a new Epic but it brings back 8mm Infantry and
Tanks of the Legiones Astartes.

Infantry and Armour will be FW-Resin, no plans for Plastic at this state.
It looks like they will use this as a test run to see how popular an actual
Epic return in the future could be.

http://natfka.blogspot.com/2021/11/rumors-revamp-of-adeptus-mechanicus.html

It's not likely gonna happen. It's literally called adeptus titanicus.

I think the people that want to believe that rumour haven't played AT. Titanicus is activation based, that's the problem with adding infantry and tanks. There' is no way to balance out that activating tank x is the same temporally as activating a warlord titan. The game already does a poor job with knights, it couldn't handle infantry or planes in a meaningful way outside of like a tiny support role, without losing its focus on titans. This game already want to pretend that an all knight force is both viable and in anyway fun for anyone to play with or against. It isn't,

There already is infantry, literally each base is its own activation inside the combat phase. That's sorta the problem even though they're on the cooler battlefield assets.

 Toofast wrote:


I want to believe it but I'm trying not to get my hopes up.

That's wise.

Faeit managed to write a short rumour about Adeptus Titanicus then still put "Adeptus Mechanicus" in the article link. That's how much effort they put into these posts.

 xttz wrote:


Details on the Iconoclast weapon cards at last.

I'm a little underwhelmed tbh. The warmaster has a 5+ basic weapon skill, so that big scary chainsword is going to be hitting on 4+ within 2". Not great for targeted attacks.

Doesn't it use BS if it is more than 2" away? So if it can position itself 2-4" away, it has 4 targetted attacks which hit on a 2+, and ignore voids. Meanwhile the victim may shoot back, but can't ignore the iconoclast's shields, nor use its own melee weapons. Pretty nasty, but a bit odd. Get too close and its accuracy drops.

Patriarch wrote:

 xttz wrote:


Details on the Iconoclast weapon cards at last.

I'm a little underwhelmed tbh. The warmaster has a 5+ basic weapon skill, so that big scary chainsword is going to be hitting on 4+ within 2". Not great for targeted attacks.

Doesn't it use BS if it is more than 2" away? So if it can position itself 2-4" away, it has 4 targetted attacks which hit on a 2+, and ignore voids. Meanwhile the victim may shoot back, but can't ignore the iconoclast's shields, nor use its own melee weapons. Pretty nasty, but a bit odd. Get too close and its accuracy drops.

I think it'd be a lot cooler if it could swap weapons with the warmaster, having to be so cc focused just seems baffling for something so expensive in points. Like no one is surprised when the dual cc reaver or warlord beats the crap out of its target, if it gets there. If it gets there is the main point, it's a bet you can take with like 1 titan in maybe a 1750-2000pts game, it's really not something you can throw half one's points into, especially given its just one model.




Here's a look at the traitor book

At least the reactor doesn't say iconoclast only.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
At least the reactor doesn't say iconoclast only.

I'd say silver lining achieved but that would have to come after confirmation the warmaster can take them

It'll probably go to a new edition as the game feels like its wrapping up with its compendiums, has too many awkward components, mounting up errata and needs to move on from it's original designer.

But to be clear about that last item; I do hope that James Hewitt gets to make a giant robot game as he has done so for fantasy football. Likewise I want GW to deliver a better Titan-Knight experience.

Pleased with Krytos' rework - Tempestus are still dull as dishwater, sadly. Minor changes to Mortis that won't have a major impact. Still hoping for Mordaxis to be made...less terrible.

 Crablezworth wrote:


Here's a look at the traitor book

This channel also did a review of the Iconoclast where you can see the two missing cards:

 Crablezworth wrote:

Patriarch wrote:

 xttz wrote:


Details on the Iconoclast weapon cards at last.

I'm a little underwhelmed tbh. The warmaster has a 5+ basic weapon skill, so that big scary chainsword is going to be hitting on 4+ within 2". Not great for targeted attacks.

Doesn't it use BS if it is more than 2" away? So if it can position itself 2-4" away, it has 4 targetted attacks which hit on a 2+, and ignore voids. Meanwhile the victim may shoot back, but can't ignore the iconoclast's shields, nor use its own melee weapons. Pretty nasty, but a bit odd. Get too close and its accuracy drops.

I think it'd be a lot cooler if it could swap weapons with the warmaster, having to be so cc focused just seems baffling for something so expensive in points. Like no one is surprised when the dual cc reaver or warlord beats the crap out of its target, if it gets there. If it gets there is the main point, it's a bet you can take with like 1 titan in maybe a 1750-2000pts game, it's really not something you can throw half one's points into, especially given its just one model.




Here's a look at the traitor book

Tempestus as traitors huh.

SamusDrake wrote:
It'll probably go to a new edition as the game feels like its wrapping up with its compendiums, has too many awkward components, mounting up errata and needs to move on from it's original designer.

But to be clear about that last item; I do hope that James Hewitt gets to make a giant robot game as he has done so for fantasy football. Likewise I want GW to deliver a better Titan-Knight experience.

I believe Mr. Hewitt's company is working on producing "Steel Colosseum" which isn't strictly giant robots as I understand it, but does involve robots.

JWBS wrote:

Tempestus as traitors huh.

Tempestus was split but the loyalists elements were largely wiped out on Mars early on, so they stuck them in the Traitor category for presumably bookkeeping purposes.

 xttz wrote:

This channel also did a review of the Iconoclast where you can see the two missing cards:

Can't see the Iconoclast getting that +1 to hit on the carapace gatling array very often... when it fight another Warmaster, and that's it.

Does "Fusion" on a 2" melee weapon only kick in when the target is up to 1" away?

The reactor card isn't "Iconoclast only". I assume the only distinctions between Warmasters and Iconoclast is the main weapons (melee or guns, no mixing), carapace weapon for some reason (so they aren't mixed in the Warlords or Reavers), and everything else is essentially the same. The shoulder weapons are the same for both models even if the weapon cards are linked to one or the other.

Ya, fusion would have to be 1 inch away. Ya the reactors seem to be the only cards that don't say iconoclast, not sure on the legalities of if that means they're compatible with the warmaster.

The gatling array would be nice to be able to take on the warmaster, damn shame.

Isn't Fusion d10 at 'Short' Range? The Drill has no Long Range, so it gets Fusion all the time.

MarkNorfolk wrote:
Isn't Fusion d10 at 'Short' Range? The Drill has no Long Range, so it gets Fusion all the time.

Half range, so if your weapon range is indeed 2 inches, 1 inch would be correct.

 Crablezworth wrote:

MarkNorfolk wrote:
Isn't Fusion d10 at 'Short' Range? The Drill has no Long Range, so it gets Fusion all the time.

Half range, so if your weapon range is indeed 2 inches, 1 inch would be correct.

Has that been changed in an errata somewhere? My rulebook says short range for fusion.

 xttz wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

MarkNorfolk wrote:
Isn't Fusion d10 at 'Short' Range? The Drill has no Long Range, so it gets Fusion all the time.

Half range, so if your weapon range is indeed 2 inches, 1 inch would be correct.

Has that been changed in an errata somewhere? My rulebook says short range for fusion.

Just checked, you are correct.

 Crablezworth wrote:
Ya, fusion would have to be 1 inch away. Ya the reactors seem to be the only cards that don't say iconoclast, not sure on the legalities of if that means they're compatible with the warmaster.

The gatling array would be nice to be able to take on the warmaster, damn shame.

While it's somewhat arbitrary that they aren't shareable like one might like, I'm not exactly sorry for not giving the super-duper plasma engine of death an excellent shield stripper gun as well. It is a similar situation with Reavers not getting plasma blastguns on their carapaces even though they had that option in Epic, for their reactors can handle the heat sustainably unlike Warhounds. Similarly, it doesn't come as a big surprise that the Warmaster's apoc missile launchers have reduced shots.

Arbitrary speaks to random, this is very deliberate on their part. Again, they could just not have released the sprue separately without having to codify it in the rules, they went one step further.

I agree the warmaster doesn't "need" the 12 shot S6 gun, but it is only 30 and corridor, but in my case being able to take that would also mean me taking a cool CC weapon instead of 2 plasma amrs, so if I could indeed do that I'd be rocking one less giant plasma gun of doom and some cool looking sword or drilly fist thing. Damn shame.

 Crablezworth wrote:
Arbitrary speaks to random, this is very deliberate on their part. Again, they could just not have released the sprue separately without having to codify it in the rules, they went one step further.

I agree the warmaster doesn't "need" the 12 shot S6 gun, but it is only 30 and corridor, but in my case being able to take that would also mean me taking a cool CC weapon instead of 2 plasma amrs, so if I could indeed do that I'd be rocking one less giant plasma gun of doom and some cool looking sword or drilly fist thing. Damn shame.

Agreed that I want to swap,arms, but 30 and corridor is not a restriction when you can take gyros and 30 is also the range of the plasma

 Arbitrator wrote:

JWBS wrote:

Tempestus as traitors huh.

Tempestus was split but the loyalists elements were largely wiped out on Mars early on, so they stuck them in the Traitor category for presumably bookkeeping purposes.

It's also in large part because Tempestus/Tempestor were first introduced as traitors back in 1988, so the traitor legios book is a far more natural home for them than the loyalist book is.

There many AT Articles on WarCom at last.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
Arbitrary speaks to random, this is very deliberate on their part. Again, they could just not have released the sprue separately without having to codify it in the rules, they went one step further.

I agree the warmaster doesn't "need" the 12 shot S6 gun, but it is only 30 and corridor, but in my case being able to take that would also mean me taking a cool CC weapon instead of 2 plasma amrs, so if I could indeed do that I'd be rocking one less giant plasma gun of doom and some cool looking sword or drilly fist thing. Damn shame.

Agreed that I want to swap,arms, but 30 and corridor is not a restriction when you can take gyros and 30 is also the range of the plasma

The range is why I wouldn't mind losing a plasma arm for a cc weapon and gaining it instead of the missiles. A big sword basically defensive, but send the message not to get too close.

https://www.goonhammer.com/adeptus-titanicus-traitor-legios-the-goonhammer-review/

Goonhammer have posted an in-depth review of the new book including a summary of what is changed for each legio

 xttz wrote:
https://www.goonhammer.com/adeptus-titanicus-traitor-legios-the-goonhammer-review/

Goonhammer have posted an in-depth review of the new book including a summary of what is changed for each legio

Was just about to post that link



So yeah I was mistaken about some of the mutations, some do require certain base mutations.


Looking at some of the examples they show, right off the bat, I think it's cool to create like custom daemonic titans, my concern is it getting out of hand.

So these were the upgrades/mutations for one of the warlords they showed off:

"Disruption Emitters (35 pts)
Shikarian Conduits (20 pts)
Mutations:
Base: Overwhelming Rage (15 pts)
Unholy Benedictions (15 pts)
Princeps Seniores: Distorted Form"

My concern isn't a cool evil titan, it's a whole battlegroup of them and the amount of trust and non visual information that gets lost in a largely visual game. It's weird to think that titans of legend were controversial before this, guess that's no longer and issue.

Another example is a reaver that almost doubles in points, and that's the other reality, you can use upgrades AND mutations.

"Toxin Nodes (20)
Mutations:
Base: Unholy Vigour (25)
Pestilence Cloud (15)
Chitinous Carapace (20)
Preternatural Regeneration (50)
Singular Purpose (15)"

So without getting into specifics, my global concern is there doesn't seem to be a lot of limiting principles here. So if people's rightful concerns with custom legios, was players just making new ones every game or just very strong legios, that's a bit of my concern here. Without limits, nothing seemingly prevents someone from doing custom traitor legio with a bunch of mutations.

It's not black and white, but looking at upgrades, both loyalist, traitor and universal, there's already the issue of sorta abstraction and the non visual nature of a lot of the upgrades. It's one thing for me or an opponent to say "all my titans have bastion shields". But its another still for either of us to come up with a system to track their use. What we mutually came up with was keeping a little blue token in the corner of each titans terminal which we removed after making use of the bastion shields. But like other than a vortex missile or some cool banner, a lot of them aren't necessarily something that needs to be converted or outwardly display itself.

So i guess what I'm saying mutations didn't start this, but I feel there's more of an expectation with mutations that the titan be somewhat converted. If mutations just become seen or used as "more upgrades" and not the inspiration to model a cool daemonic titan, well, I don't know if that's good for the game. Furthermore, not that every mutation has some obvious addition or conversion one can do to a titan but keeping track of this without a visual side like weapons seems daunting for both players. The other issue is nothing stopping people, like with custom legios, to change this up quite a bit game to game. So yeah, concern again would be conveniently having every player at a matched play event playing traitor and also conveniently the trend being that mutations are quite common.

The goonhammer review is worth reading but it doesn't really get into the ramifications of the traito book on the core game. I also don't want to seem like I'm saying the psi titan is bad, they're good, very good. But often not allowed at matched play events and with good reason. Even if this sees them allowed, that's sorta my problem from a list building perspective. Each traitor list gets to be min/maxed well oiled machine, while loyalist get... to run a very expensive psi titan. Yes there will likely be more psi titans released eventually, but it just seems like a discrepancy. Not sure what events are gonna do but hopefully we see some really cool actually modelled corrupted titans.

It looks like they went out of their way to make most mutations non-WYSIWYGable with esoteric forms like Shield, Aura, Cloud, etc.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
It looks like they went out of their way to make most mutations non-WYSIWYGable with esoteric forms like Shield, Aura, Cloud, etc.

Yeah and it's a mixed bag, the vibe is also that they're doing this specifically because there is no plan for any corrupted titan kit or upgrade set, hence the lack of visuals.

So the fear is every normal looking traitor titan rocking a handful of these. The issue is more on the fluff/spirit of the game side of things. My concern isn't really narrative players but matched play.