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.

MoD_Legion wrote:
So how do we call these new weapons, ruinator, runinator or runiator? It's spelled differently each time they use it. Quality GW writing again

Can’t wait for the Urinator!

 Malika2 wrote:


Can’t wait for the Urinator!

Why do I now get the feeling that you 3rd party guys are going to say "Hold my beer..."

 Malika2 wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
So how do we call these new weapons, ruinator, runinator or runiator? It's spelled differently each time they use it. Quality GW writing again

Can’t wait for the Urinator!

That's a Slaanesh upgrade

The matched play scenario in the core book is pretty bad, but I don't have much faith they've improved things. Engine war's problem is too many variables and way too much going on most of the time, a complex game doesn't mean the scenarios also need be, and imo that's AT's problem, it's nice that they're re-vising matched play I just don't trust GW to improve on things. Really hoping tho at least a resource it will be useful, but then again too I have my doubts. They still seemingly can't even figure out they may as well publish the rules for the weapons if they want people outside of the dire hards to buy them sight unseen.

 zedmeister wrote:
Nice. Not expected that book, but if it has some new ways to play, why not. Though, it'll have to work hard to beat the Open Engine War pack.

Gonna guess that the book will lift some stuff from that excellent deck.

IMO match play needs to have a pretty straightforward scoring system but also would preferably like with engine war cards at least have the primary objective be the same for both sides. That was and is a huge improvement from the core matched play scenario, which is just too all over the place. The problem with engine war cards is even with the cards all out in front of you, that many variables changing from game to game isn't everyone's cup of tea, also a barrier to having AT feel like a unified game, sandboxes are great but they make for terrible organized play, you really need to clamp things down and focus. The upside of the engine war cards as always is you can if both players agree just drop stuff like secondary's or some of the battlefield/planetary effects. Some are cool and simple, others are a bit too crunchy and a lot to read on a little card. I also don't think matched play benefits from a bazillion different deployment maps just for the sake of it, a lot of the triangular one's should be dropped, if only because of parralax (the same effect that causes people to argue about scatter dice) and terrain issues like large piece bisecting the deployment zone diagonally causing people to deploy some models slightly outside their zone by accident.

For all of 30k's faults, having 6 core scenarios/missions is one of the better things about it, I don't think 30k would be made better with a card system of generating missions with endless variables. 30k's missions/scenarios aren't great but at least there aren't a million of them, a tournament can easily focus on only a few of the 6 or build their mission packet around the stuff that tends to work better (objectives) and limit kill points/secondary's. AT's original matched play is a good example of what often felt like a vp lottery system, a lot of early battle reports you'd see, the disparity in score was often a bit silly, and some explanation too may have stuff like tertiary objectives stratagems or traits that give them. Simply put, drastically different amounts of victory points given out for essentially the same actions just can feel way too random, didn't help that both sides had different primary objectives quite often.

Will be interesting to see if they do anything to address custom legios/mutations/acastus

Maybe the missions will just be composed of the engine war cards but locked in as some events/tournaments have done and that may mean another printing of the cards. Hoping at least as a resource it will be useful, esp if it has faq/errata factored in, all weapons in one place and fixing stuff like the warbringer in loyalist having it's arcs wrong for carapace. Scannable weapons card pages too if they're not gonna bother printing the FW direct ones.

Another thing that would set the book apart is actually showing pictures of games and boards (doubtful but dare to dream). Discussing terrain density too hopefully is something that's made more important.

If they can just make the 3rd banner in a lance optional, I'll drink up and call it a night.

SamusDrake wrote:
If they can just make the 3rd banner in a lance optional, I'll drink up and call it a night.

Didn't wanna go there, but if they have to make tournament scenarios work for households too, it's another problem IMO and a concern like with custom legios/corruptions/acastus they may not wanna touch, so not sure how helpful the tournament packet side of the book will ultimately be if it doesn't address or limit the scope or some aspects of the current game. Like I'd also say psi titans don't seem terribly fun, and warmaster scale titans may not always work at the point levels matched play events are likely to go with. Lotsa doubt here they'll be able to clamp things down a bit. I'm not saying they need to ban half their game either, more just that even a paragraph referencing limiting the game in any way, even if its just a vague hand waving to "TO's making the ultimate choices on what may need to be limited for everyone enjoyment" or some other cop out, even just that slight admission would sate me somewhat for a game where a lot of the mission content basically asks players to re-create battles with different factions standing in as one another, historicals are much more practical in the context of like ww2 games where there aren't a bazillion factions. No doubt endless room for creativity in one off games, just organized play/tournaments is a different animal.

I have a preference for events that publish the missions/scenarios ahead of time so people can have practice games. Some AT events have fairly locked down missions even if they are using engine war cards, everyone is using likely the same one ore they're scanned into the packet.

When I see other events sorta bill themselves as a tournament but every table is playing a drastically different randomly generated mission from the engine war cards it just seems harder to take much it, what i mean is, without pulling some cards from the deck, it can lead to possibly a detriment to both opponents, the cards become a second enemy. Especially if the events don't have much limitations on stratagems, which is a whole other matter. Add to that some cards might gift both sides bonus strats for that game/round. Weird to look over at one board where both players are content to find out they're getting extra stratagem points this round, while you and ur opponent find out ur fighting on planet always night with increased chances of environmental damage...

We all come AT from different angles, it will be hard not to disappoint someone, but I may be giving GW too much credit in the effort department. Could easily disappoint most, hoping that's not the case.

 gorgon wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:
Nice. Not expected that book, but if it has some new ways to play, why not. Though, it'll have to work hard to beat the Open Engine War pack.

Gonna guess that the book will lift some stuff from that excellent deck.

Yeah, now that you mention it, I wonder if they'll convert the card deck into dice tables to roll on and include some extra options?

AT is a dead system in my area and my local clubs, I hope, but very much doubt this new book will bring any life back into it People have invested into this game, but scratch the surface and there’s very little variety in it.

This game needs a whole new faction that doesn’t use the same models. So Orks, Eldar etc. Everyone has their Battlegroup that they prefer to use. So whoever I’m playing, I know exactly what they’ll put on the table.

 Theophony wrote:

 Malika2 wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
So how do we call these new weapons, ruinator, runinator or runiator? It's spelled differently each time they use it. Quality GW writing again

Can’t wait for the Urinator!

That's a Slaanesh upgrade

Dr Doofenshmirtz holds sway over -inators!

Dr Doofenshmirtz is in charge of GW?

This makes perfect sense

 TheSecretSquig wrote:
AT is a dead system in my area and my local clubs, I hope, but very much doubt this new book will bring any life back into it People have invested into this game, but scratch the surface and there’s very little variety in it.

This game needs a whole new faction that doesn’t use the same models. So Orks, Eldar etc. Everyone has their Battlegroup that they prefer to use. So whoever I’m playing, I know exactly what they’ll put on the table.

Sounds like the game doesn't have variety because the players don't have variety. I play against only 2-3 people consistently and we're constantly changing/tweaking loadouts, using different titans from our collection for different maniples, etc.

When my friend plays his Vulpa titans it's an entirely different battlegroup than his Krytos titans.

 Overread wrote:
Dr Doofenshmirtz is in charge of GW?

This makes perfect sense

May also be the reason the Aus pay so much more for everything as they are punishing Perry's relatives for spoiling the plans.

 Rihgu wrote:

 TheSecretSquig wrote:
AT is a dead system in my area and my local clubs, I hope, but very much doubt this new book will bring any life back into it People have invested into this game, but scratch the surface and there’s very little variety in it.

This game needs a whole new faction that doesn’t use the same models. So Orks, Eldar etc. Everyone has their Battlegroup that they prefer to use. So whoever I’m playing, I know exactly what they’ll put on the table.

Sounds like the game doesn't have variety because the players don't have variety. I play against only 2-3 people consistently and we're constantly changing/tweaking loadouts, using different titans from our collection for different maniples, etc.

When my friend plays his Vulpa titans it's an entirely different battlegroup than his Krytos titans.

I feel like both are true to a degree. With 20(?) legios and umpteen maniple types, it's kinda on the players if the games are same-y or mirror match.

However, we know that GW fans have their fave factions, and that adding Ork and Eldar titans would almost certainly bring new players into the game.

Adding factions, they can't even be asked to make more weapons cards and proper card terminals for the titans we already have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheSecretSquig wrote:
AT is a dead system in my area and my local clubs, I hope, but very much doubt this new book will bring any life back into it People have invested into this game, but scratch the surface and there’s very little variety in it.

This game needs a whole new faction that doesn’t use the same models. So Orks, Eldar etc. Everyone has their Battlegroup that they prefer to use. So whoever I’m playing, I know exactly what they’ll put on the table.

It's not quite dead but a bit balkanized and played too irregularly for any sorta standards to form.

 TheSecretSquig wrote:
AT is a dead system in my area and my local clubs, I hope, but very much doubt this new book will bring any life back into it People have invested into this game, but scratch the surface and there’s very little variety in it.

This game needs a whole new faction that doesn’t use the same models. So Orks, Eldar etc. Everyone has their Battlegroup that they prefer to use. So whoever I’m playing, I know exactly what they’ll put on the table.

I don't mind them sticking with the Heresy era but for a game with only two armies to collect for its definitely lacking in variety. The limited options to build Knight houses ain't helping matters much, neither.

Variety is the spice of gaming.

AT has always had a slow-ish release schedule, with new stuff trickling out as opposed to flowing.

I don't find the Heresy Era games to be limiting in terms of variety. There are enough Maniple, Weapon, and Legio combinations to keep things fresh.

Would I love to see some Xenos in the game - sure - but I'm not finding it boring as is.

I wouldn't mind Xenos Titans being added but when the vast majority of people will be sticking to Imperials (or traitor Imperials anyway) I doubt it'd cause the giant splash of reinvigoration people expect it will.

There's not even models for Corrupted Titans yet, so no way are we getting Xenos before those.

 TheSecretSquig wrote:

This game needs a whole new faction that doesn’t use the same models. So Orks, Eldar etc. Everyone has their Battlegroup that they prefer to use. So whoever I’m playing, I know exactly what they’ll put on the table.

If they don't change lists they will just put their prefered list anyway. Eldar, imperial, doesn't matter. You would know what they put on table anyway

 schoon wrote:
Variety is the spice of gaming.

AT has always had a slow-ish release schedule, with new stuff trickling out as opposed to flowing.

I don't find the Heresy Era games to be limiting in terms of variety. There are enough Maniple, Weapon, and Legio combinations to keep things fresh.

Would I love to see some Xenos in the game - sure - but I'm not finding it boring as is.

I feel the weapons add more than the maniples and missions, just given the modularity of everything. I'm glad they fixed volkite, even if it brought other problems. Wish they'd do more updated weapons card packs.

 Arbitrator wrote:
I wouldn't mind Xenos Titans being added but when the vast majority of people will be sticking to Imperials (or traitor Imperials anyway) I doubt it'd cause the giant splash of reinvigoration people expect it will.

There's not even models for Corrupted Titans yet, so no way are we getting Xenos before those.

Well, I'd imagine that xenos wouldn't just be a random pre-order but part of a relaunch that moves the setting out of a HH focus. And that would spark interest. I tend to think a relaunch of sorts is happening soon, although I dunno that xenos Titans will be a part of that. If it happens, it'll probably have a SoT tie-in angle.

Personally I expect the next big thing for AT would be fully corrupted Chaos Titans. At the absolute least getting to advance the story a bit and having proper chaos vs imperial matchups.

Xenos I'd see coming after that or if we are lucky alongside.


The big risk is that GW just keeps it in the HH era and that game steadily ends up getting less popular because of the lack of variety of design styles whilst the Imperial side gets more and more titans and makes it even harder to release a viable Chaos or Xenos force because they'll have 5 models to the Imperials 50

 Overread wrote:
The big risk is that GW just keeps it in the HH era and that game steadily ends up getting less popular because of the lack of variety of design styles whilst the Imperial side gets more and more titans and makes it even harder to release a viable Chaos or Xenos force because they'll have 5 models to the Imperials 50

I think the counterargument there is that there are only six actual Imperial chassis so far. Three are core and make up the majority of maniple types, while two others are more specialized and the other almost too big for regular gaming. Give Orks Great Gargants, Gargants, and Stompas -- and maybe a FW Mekboy Gargant upgrade kit? -- and I think they'd be in pretty darn good shape as long as they had a good range of maniples. Then Gorka/Morkanauts in the Knight role. That's a solid investment in new plastics, but not a huge one either. Wouldn't be surprised if it's close from a production standpoint to what they spent on the two Warmaster kits.

And as far as more Imperials go, there are probably only two left per their original plan. I guess another resin Titan like the Dire Wolf could come from out of nowhere again.

They could easily stick to the HH for years to come if they wanted to. There are a good dozen other Titan chassis that have been mentioned in fiction, lore, and old editions of the game.

 schoon wrote:
They could easily stick to the HH for years to come if they wanted to. There are a good dozen other Titan chassis that have been mentioned in fiction, lore, and old editions of the game.

The trouble there is ensuring variety of rules.

The main three are your tactically flexible chassis, with the widest range of weapon options.

The Warmonger, Warbringer and Dire Wolf lack the range of options, but still fulfil specific roles.

Even if they double the number of chassis, it’s not necessarily good for the game if they end up competing against each other in terms of tactical role.

Epic Scale Heresy seems the next logical progression. Just like AT, with no model tied to a particular faction (barring the Psi-Titan of course) the outlay is strictly limited, as everything is shared. That’s enough to get the game off the ground and establish a spending player base - and the Titans can be slotted in (though ideally for me with different rules, as AT is quite book keepy, which would be a drag when also utilising infantry and tanks)

With Epic established? Then comes the time of the Xenos to further expand both systems.

The path of most resistance would be to create xenos Titans, tanks, and infantry AND Imperial tanks and infantry for a new game.

Least resistance would be xenos Titans for AT. Or an Epic game that's Imperial faction only.

I still don't want AT to become Epic, those are different games. In keeping with the original game, I'd love to see more variety within the framework that's already here. A really flexible set of daemon Titan bits would be incredible, and there's plenty of weird old special weapons to pull from if they wanted to continue to expand on what the plastic kits can do.

 gorgon wrote:
The path of most resistance would be to create xenos Titans, tanks, and infantry AND Imperial tanks and infantry for a new game.

Least resistance would be xenos Titans for AT. Or an Epic game that's Imperial faction only.

I'm sure GW is considering all of this and more.

They don't want any Epic game to cannibalize sales of 40k or 30k. They want to be able to have a path forward so that they can keep selling models for a long time to come for whatever game system they develop. They bothered to make Aeronautica with all the same scale of models as Titanicus, so what's the plan there?

There were several sources that suggested AT was a hot seller within GW, even beating sales of the ever-prominent Blood Bowl side game for a good while. Either that information was simply incorrect, or GW do have a big plan for the system that made so much money as a side game and are waiting for the right time to release it.

That said, speaking of releases, 40k and AoS will always take precedence over side games, and with Kill Team and Warcry the main games that GW are trying to push, with a side of Underworlds, the release schedule all the way through the holidays looks packed. We still need the rest of the Votann models, Astra Militarum which is getting a huge release, and World Eaters that are getting a whole bunch of models too. It'd be a miracle if all that released before the end of January. Then on the AoS side there's a lot of work that needs to be done to catch AoS battletomes up, with rumors of new Flesh Eater Courts and a lot of rumor engines pointing at a big Seraphon update. Couple that with Kill Team and Warcry boxes coming out every 2-3 months and a new season of Underworlds, zero news on the Aeronautica front, Necromunda getting more attention with Ash Wastes, and 30k still needing a big wave of plastic...

Yeah, Titanicus is gunna be on the back burner for a while. I'm not expecting anything for them until maybe middle of spring next year at the earliest.

If I had to bet, my chips would be on a new edition after a quiet period, just like some of the other specialist games got.