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.

I'm of the opinion that the team working on AT/HH/LI doesn't have access to 40K IP. That it's been walled off because it's the main studio's playground, and they don't want anything designed or written that might affect their plans.

That potentially provides answers to why we have 'Corrupted' Titans but no 'Chaos' Titans, including no mention of the Ruinous Powers and no upgrade sprue. I know this was presented as a design choice, but the fact is by their own novels there were Banelord Titans and more strolling around before the end of the Heresy.

Also explains no Xenos, obviously. And while those new walkers are reminiscent of certain 40K chaos kits, they're part of a new 30K faction and therefore get around the restriction.

So I don't think the 40K elements will be seen in AT unless the main studio were to take over development of the game.

Yeah it depends where that line is drawn too - are "chaos corrupted titans" fully a 40K only thing according to internal mandates - if so then yeah the HH and Specialist game team might just not be allowed to corrupt their own titans.

That's certainly why its all bound to the HH. That said they have done demons for HH in the past.


There could be multiple reasons and some might be logical, some might be interdepartmental and some might even just be "no one on the team wants to bother sculpting them so we've not done them"

 Overread wrote:
Yeah it depends where that line is drawn too - are "chaos corrupted titans" fully a 40K only thing according to internal mandates - if so then yeah the HH and Specialist game team might just not be allowed to corrupt their own titans.

That's certainly why its all bound to the HH. That said they have done demons for HH in the past.

There could be multiple reasons and some might be logical, some might be interdepartmental and some might even just be "no one on the team wants to bother sculpting them so we've not done them"

Note that 30K Daemons similarly stayed away from stepping on 40K Daemon IP. Again, this was presented as a design choice. But I don't think it was. We see Bloodletters and Bloodthirsters and many more very identifiable 40K Daemons in the novels, but the HH game avoids those names and presentations at every step even if those are the models that people are using. I just peeked at the entry for Ka'Bandha, and I don't see the word "Bloodthirster" anywhere on the page. That's literally what he is, and they would have used that term if there hadn't been a reason for avoiding it.

Just seems very clear to me they've been told 'hands off' except for certain SM items that can't really be avoided. And then when Primaris eventually become "the only", the wall will be complete and Rhinos, Predators, etc. will exist as HH properties.

 gorgon wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Yeah it depends where that line is drawn too - are "chaos corrupted titans" fully a 40K only thing according to internal mandates - if so then yeah the HH and Specialist game team might just not be allowed to corrupt their own titans.

That's certainly why its all bound to the HH. That said they have done demons for HH in the past.

There could be multiple reasons and some might be logical, some might be interdepartmental and some might even just be "no one on the team wants to bother sculpting them so we've not done them"

Note that 30K Daemons similarly stayed away from stepping on 40K Daemon IP. Again, this was presented as a design choice. But I don't think it was. We see Bloodletters and Bloodthirsters and many more very identifiable 40K Daemons in the novels, but the HH game avoids those names and presentations at every step even if those are the models that people are using. I just peeked at the entry for Ka'Bandha, and I don't see the word "Bloodthirster" anywhere on the page. That's literally what he is, and they would have used that term if there hadn't been a reason for avoiding it.

Just seems very clear to me they've been told 'hands off' except for certain SM items that can't really be avoided. And then when Primaris eventually become "the only", the wall will be complete and Rhinos, Predators, etc. will exist as HH properties.

In fairness this was the case before the whole hard-separation thing started. FW have always written Heresy Daemons with the idea of the Imperium having absolutely no clue what it's dealing with during the Heresy, which is why they've always referred to things with vague, non-specific names and terminology, unlike 40k where the Imperium has had millennia to grapple with these things and those in the know can assign designations and have a rough idea what's going on.

 Arbitrator wrote:
In fairness this was the case before the whole hard-separation thing started. FW have always written Heresy Daemons with the idea of the Imperium having absolutely no clue what it's dealing with during the Heresy, which is why they've always referred to things with vague, non-specific names and terminology, unlike 40k where the Imperium has had millennia to grapple with these things and those in the know can assign designations and have a rough idea what's going on.

Again, I suspect that's the studio's justification & workaround for a wall that's been there for a while now. I can't think of any good marketing reasons why you'd want to use generic unit entries rather than the names of the kits that the company wants to sell. Unless they planned to create their line of 30K daemons. But there are only a couple examples of them doing that, IIRC.

Back on topic, I just think xenos or proper Chaos Titans will basically never happen for AT until these games are under the main studio. Could be wrong...we'll see. There's still plenty of untapped kit possibilities for the game that don't step on IP though, including the missing 'tweener chassis and other Psi-Titan types. And hell, I'll take some more Dark Mech in the event that happens.

 Tastyfish wrote:
There was a long rumoured corrupted Titan frame wasn't there?

There were pictures of a third party kit composed of corrupted outer armor. You could attach it to the base frame of the titan.

Lifted from a Facebook Group with absolutely no attempt by me to verify.

We will still blame you if it's wrong though.

Its from the Australia preorder page so official.
No sheet for the other constructs yet though and also no info in the descriptions if there is any other pdf or book coming for AT

That's great news, something new for AT.

I was honestly hedging my bets on whether it was real or not.

Very cool. I find the Networked Anima special role very interesting.

A mob of units with the rule...

So they have Ork power fields lol. Good job innovating, you wild rebel Mechanicum!

From what I can make out here the Tenebrax (Which is the shooty version) has the same Networked Anima and Agile rules as the big Serperos but doesn't get shields.
The Scintillax and Errax both have all three rules but might be slightly different to the Serperos version. But could also be the formatting



https://www.chaosbunker.de/en/2024/12/07/review-legions-imperialis-dark-mechanicum-stalker-constructs/

Interesting they come as separate banners in AT, they just share a Command bubble

Chaos Bunker also has a review of the Serperos up too: https://www.chaosbunker.de/en/2024/12/07/review-legions-imperialis-dark-mechanicum-serperos-overlord-heavy-stalkers/

Shame they're not a bit bigger, but nice that the Serperos have a new Dark Mechanicum transfer sheet.

Glad they come with AT rules, but slightly underwhelmed by them. Not sure the construct shields will help overly much given how easily they can be damaged when you fail a shield save and with only 3 structure points each. I guess it's interesting that, unlike, the Knight chassis you'd happily just shoot these up with Vulcan MBs rather than wanting to use higher strength weaponry.

So do construct shields lose a point for each failed save die or 1 for each batch of saves that have any fails?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Has to be said, the big spiders have the height and volume of Cerastus Knights for only 2/3 the financial cost.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
So do construct shields lose a point for each failed save die or 1 for each batch of saves that have any fails?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Has to be said, the big spiders have the height and volume of Cerastus Knights for only 2/3 the financial cost.

Good point. I'd read it for each failed die as written, but that might not be the case. If it's per attack rather than per shot that would be better.

Yeah they're a decent cost for the size/number of them, but I'd personally been happy if they'd been bigger even if it meant a bit more expensive. I guess it leaves room for a larger version in the future though...!

I just hope someone makes printable spider legs for the titans and we're good!

Decently priced kits, but a couple of beefs...

1) I had the impression that Dark Mechanicum are traitors? Nothing on the terminals seems to place that limitation on them.

2) The Heavy Stalkers bring into question the price of the Cerastus knights, given that these are the same amount of plastic and boast even larger bases.

3) The terminals seem to be missing a way to keep track of the construct shield levels. Easily fixed by recording it with a D6, but even still.

4) The Thanatars seem a bit odd, given that they don't have AT terminals and don't really do much for other Legions Imperialis forces where the support formations are concerned. Would it not have been better to have released the Mech infantry kit first, given that they would fill compulsory slots?

...but on the other hand, they're very nice kits at a decent price.

Will these be available as a pdf download, or wedged into a campaign book?

I was hoping there would be an AT campaign book to go with them, but the terminals are it for now.

Against all better judgement, maybe next year might see the announcement of new titans and they'll introduce a new boxed game for Adeptus Titanicus to accomplish that.

There's the Networked Anima rule on all those command terminals. That's going to make commands very interesting for this force...

SamusDrake wrote:
I was hoping there would be an AT campaign book to go with them, but the terminals are it for now.

Against all better judgement, maybe next year might see the announcement of new titans and they'll introduce a new boxed game for Adeptus Titanicus to accomplish that.

I’m hoping for that. 2025, the possible year for a reworked Titanicus. With resin to plastics and new Titan classes

The crystal ball is very murky at the moment, but If I had to make some guesses of major releases for 2025...

Warcry 3rd edition.
Adeptus Titanicus 2nd edition.
Something happening in the TOW universe( Blood Bowl or Classic Quest? Mordheim? )
40K Quest or Space Hulk.

SamusDrake wrote:
The crystal ball is very murky at the moment, but If I had to make some guesses of major releases for 2025...

Warcry 3rd edition.
Adeptus Titanicus 2nd edition.
Something happening in the TOW universe( Blood Bowl or Classic Quest? Mordheim? )
40K Quest or Space Hulk.

Does AT need a new version? I was under the impression that it was pretty complete.

At really only needs a new version if they go all out with a new range of Titans. If its just what they have now plus one or two potential Mechanicus ones then a new edition isn't really needed over another expansion book.

If they go all out with, say, actual proper Chaos Titans then yeah new edition time. However GW seems really scared to bring actual Chaos corrupted models into 30K. They seem very steadfast in sticking to the Marines and Imperials (even then the 32mm game is bonkers stuck on Marines(

 Overread wrote:
At really only needs a new version if they go all out with a new range of Titans. If its just what they have now plus one or two potential Mechanicus ones then a new edition isn't really needed over another expansion book.

If they go all out with, say, actual proper Chaos Titans then yeah new edition time. However GW seems really scared to bring actual Chaos corrupted models into 30K. They seem very steadfast in sticking to the Marines and Imperials (even then the 32mm game is bonkers stuck on Marines(

It seems to me like they want to keep the two model ranges separate... with as little bleedthrough as possible (ie. A few Custodes and some Knights)...

Even when it doesn't seem to make sense (No Dominus Kinights in HH?)

GW I think has some management toughlines on their model ranges being separate. It's probably for sales forecasting and such.

You see the same thing between Old World and AoS. Even to the point they are re-using the old marauders and pulled the whole of Beastmen out of AoS and threw them into Old World (with a very oddly timed long gap between the move too). It will likely feel better when Old World 2.0 starts (we hope) and starts to replace old armies with totally brand new models instead of a mix of old and new that we have now.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:
The crystal ball is very murky at the moment, but If I had to make some guesses of major releases for 2025...

Warcry 3rd edition.
Adeptus Titanicus 2nd edition.
Something happening in the TOW universe( Blood Bowl or Classic Quest? Mordheim? )
40K Quest or Space Hulk.

Does AT need a new version? I was under the impression that it was pretty complete.

There's a few Titan chassis that are mentioned (Carnivore, Komodo, Rapier etc) and the old Slaaneshi Scout titans that had epic models but haven't been incorporated yet (Warhound weapon carapace perhaps with ccw arms).
The old names are generally from the real 1st ed where everything was Warlords but they go to show there is perhaps some scope for some things within the framework they have at the moment - like the Nemesis Warbringer.

A regular Warbringer (with 4x Reaver weapons) would be interesting as a budget Warlord as would something in the same area that ditched some of the levels of protection to have a Warlord sized reactor with Reaver movement.

Plus it would be nice to have some rules to add in some of the little stuff in the same way as Knight banners and all...

I wouldn't expect corrupted titans in 2025, those will likely take a bit longer until we also get corrupted stuff in LI so either legion specific stuff for the traitor legions or daemons as a faction.
And I don't expect either of those within the next 1-2 years.

A new AT edition could still happen but as other said I don't think AT needs one right now and realistically it would be worse than the current one if GW does it now just to do a new edition.