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.

Warhounds MUST have Vulcan Mega-Bolters and Plasma Blastguns!!!

Turbolaser destructors would be OK, but unless we get a true EPIC revival, Inferno Guns would seem to be...not worth taking.

 Mysterio wrote:


BUT...remember this thing?

I hope someone was punished for that.

whats the problem with the Eldar Phantom Titan? It looks nice enough for something as old.

Firstly, no. It is not nice enough. It's horrible in isolation and worse when you consider it departs so far from an established aesthetic for Eldar.

Secondly, it replaced this

Just to rub salt in the wound.

You'll notice which design FW followed when they made theirs, despite being technically superseded.

Exactly. The revenant 'upgrade" was even worse. Replaced my favourite warhammer model so far with one of the worst.
Look at this hideosness.

 .Mikes. wrote:

 Mysterio wrote:


BUT...remember this thing?

I hope someone was punished for that.

I am pretty shocked I've never seen that before. I wish I could go back, what a complete and total design and brand abomination. The fact it got greenlit is actually genuinely shocking to me, Jes Goodwyn must have been in a coma or locked in a dungeon that year... no way he lets that pass.

 MajorTom11 wrote:


I am pretty shocked I've never seen that before. I wish I could go back, what a complete and total design and brand abomination. The fact it got greenlit is actually genuinely shocking to me, Jes Goodwyn must have been in a coma or locked in a dungeon that year... no way he lets that pass.

The interesting (?) thing is that pretty much all the vehicles/tanks from that period are gorgeous. Arguably the best Epic has ever seen. For instance, the Eldar got their trademark curvy-winged Falcons, Scorpions, etc. in that release. (Previously they were wedge-shaped.) The modern-day Land Raider appeared for the first time, more or less. And everyone got multiple track and turret variants. Even Tyranids received variant sculpts for their slug-tanks. There have been a few improvements since then (the Epic Armageddon Eldar superheavy tanks were spectacular), but mostly, 3rd ed was the gold standard for Epic minis.

Yet most of the Titans were odd design choices that got a mixed reception as far as I know. The 'Battletech' Warlord, the boxier Gargants, and most of all those hideous Eldar Titans. (Which actually aren't bad models--they just don't look Eldarish.)

Getting back to the new AT: I'm really glad to see that they're doing a separate rules/templates pack for those of us who already have old minis. Good on them.

You haven't seen it before because it was likely partly to do with the last death throes of Epic as a selling game. They hired someone to do Eldar...a sculptor who apparently only knew how to use straight lines - like sketches from a 3025 Technical readout or something.

Really atrocious and short lived. As mentioned above the Revenant was far worse.

The Eldar aesthetic had already been established and it was beautiful (and would go on to be "their" aesthetic in the future)



Then someone turned the damn car around...and drove it recklessly up the wrong side of the highway.



Even some of the small units got the random cyber-grid detailing (look at the poor Wraithlords)



As shown above...what the actual feth:


All...the damn...straight lines. This sculptor never met a curve he didn't hate (I don't think the Imperator was real?)


And one more because...why not...ugh

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Brother Xeones wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.

IMO, it's because that method produces a really messy mesh result which would more than likely prove to create more work in the long-run. You wouldn't want to produce tooled molds off that kind of model, and cleaning up all the bad geometry would then take more time than if you'd started from scratch to begin with. It's one of those situations where the "shortcut" turns out to be a bigger headache than if you'd just done it properly the first time.

EDIT: I'd also be quite surprised if all of the proportions are 100% accurate to the 28mm scale models anyway. Usually small-scale detail gets "enhanced" to aid visiability and production reasons—you're modifying detail in order for hard plastic model production methods to function properly with it. Again, all of that means that a scan is less helpful.

Not these days. If you can grab a 3D asset from a videogame and run it through software to "solidify" it sufficiently that with a couple of tweaks it can be 3D printed, I don't see why the same process couldn't apply to a model sourced through photogrammetry. I really do struggle to see how fixing any small errors on the result of that would be more work than painstakingly hand-measuring every part and how every part relates to every other part in order to construct a 3D model from scratch.

I mean, we're at the stage now where you can stick a device on your iPad and use an app to create perfectly serviceable 3D copies of real world objects, so surely a proper professional setup can manage better results than that?

Not being in 3D design myself, I can't say for sure. The explanation I was given, was that the parts were badly misaligned on the big model, which became exxagerated on the smaller one, so they needed to essentially draw everything again, using the general measurements of the old masters instead of complete measurements or 3D scanning.
I did not ask him whether they had tried 3D scanning, so I have no idea if they did.

But it did sound as if several options had at least been considered.

Having built a few of the smaller titans, I can certainly agree that the dimensions are off. The Warhound is particularly badly misaligned, and they know it.

I did poke at them avout using the work that has already been done to redo the old 28mm titans, but couldn't get any kind of answer out of them...

Two years ago I asked Tony Cotrell the same question and was given a "well, the Warhound is old at this point...."

We'll just have to wait and see about the 28mm titans I guess. :-p

 Overread wrote:
I love tanks and big battles with loads of troops 0 but I also love big mech stomping games and I'd rather GW did one or the other not both. Plus they've scaled the titans up so they are much larger, so you'd not even get the same number of tanks and troops on the table to get that massive battle feeling.

I think keeping them separate lets GW explore the whole world of titans and knight scaled units in its own battlefield setting. It creates that idea that they are so far above regular troops that they don't even worry about them battling along.

Except with just them their awesomeness is lost. If everybody's special nobody's special. And fluff besides shows plenty of cases where they have to worry about them. They aren't invincible things.

Zenithfleet wrote:


Getting back to the new AT: I'm really glad to see that they're doing a separate rules/templates pack for those of us who already have old minis. Good on them.

I guess that could work as long as you don't intend to mix in any of the new models.

GoatboyBeta wrote:

Zenithfleet wrote:


Getting back to the new AT: I'm really glad to see that they're doing a separate rules/templates pack for those of us who already have old minis. Good on them.

I guess that could work as long as you don't intend to mix in any of the new models.

And assuming you can resist the urge to replace/update your old collection with the new minis.

Still, people with tight hobby budgets (like me) might just buy the rule pack first, to try out the game, and then invest in the new Titans one at a time. Probably more expensive in the long run, but at least you avoid a big outlay at the start.

To me it's a big improvement on the current Necromunda release model... not to mention the new edition of X-Wing from FFG, which apparently requires you to buy a new starter box just to get one or two vital decks of cards (e.g. the damage deck). I hope FW/GW don't pull any shenanigans like that here.

 Xanthos wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

Not these days. If you can grab a 3D asset from a videogame and run it through software to "solidify" it sufficiently that with a couple of tweaks it can be 3D printed, I don't see why the same process couldn't apply to a model sourced through photogrammetry. I really do struggle to see how fixing any small errors on the result of that would be more work than painstakingly hand-measuring every part and how every part relates to every other part in order to construct a 3D model from scratch.

Not being in 3D design myself, I can't say for sure. The explanation I was given, was that the parts were badly misaligned on the big model, which became exxagerated on the smaller one, so they needed to essentially draw everything again, using the general measurements of the old masters instead of complete measurements or 3D scanning.
I did not ask him whether they had tried 3D scanning, so I have no idea if they did.

Don't know about what kind of technology GW had achieved today, but an Imported model is never the same as the one you made. They are 1 piece, and lack the customisation with the only adjust that they can do is vector/surface editiing, let alone turn them into assembled piece, and then turn that into the mold.

 Elbows wrote:
All...the damn...straight lines. This sculptor never met a curve he didn't hate (I don't think the Imperator was real?)

Spoiler:

That version of the Imperator was real. And yes, there's nothing wrong with this iteration of Titans. Forge World was already selling them as full scale 40k models before they were incorporated into the Epic Armageddon line.

 Elbows wrote:
All...the damn...straight lines. This sculptor never met a curve he didn't hate (I don't think the Imperator was real?)

Nah, that Imperator was a conversion made by Warmaster Nice over on the Tactical Command forums.

 Breotan wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
All...the damn...straight lines. This sculptor never met a curve he didn't hate (I don't think the Imperator was real?)

Spoiler:

That version of the Imperator was real. And yes, there's nothing wrong with this iteration of Titans. Forge World was already selling them as full scale 40k models before they were incorporated into the Epic Armageddon line.

That Imperator must have been a pre-release leak because I never remember that going on sale, nor the Warhounds or Reavers - I think only the Warlord from that photo made it on sale. I guess it was released just before GW killed off the range

 Overread wrote:
That Imperator must have been a pre-release leak because I never remember that going on sale, nor the Warhounds or Reavers - I think only the Warlord from that photo made it on sale. I guess it was released just before GW killed off the range

Here's the Imperator Titan

The turrets were converted from Rhinos and Turbo Lasers from the Warlord Titan. Add in a ton of plasticard.

The Warhound and Reavers were the Forgeworld resin Lucius Pattern Titans. They were on general release for near 10 years.


Edit - looks like his original site is down. Here he is, selling it off

The Warhounds and reaver were Forgeworld minis. On sale for a while too. :-)

Edit: Ninja'd. :-p

 SonicPara wrote:
Bummed to see that the Warhound sculpt wasn't there, despite it apparently releasing later. It would be good to know what weapons they had settled on including on the sprue.

The display tables have me worried that the game will feature too many Warlords. Unless they are going to go bigger with an Imperator, it is a little weird to see the biggest boy around in so many numbers. Hopefully proper games will see more Reavers/Warhounds.

The Warlord's always been the poster boy of the Titan Legions, so I don't mind them being front and centre. Warhounds are more specialised, and Reavers are rarer background-wise (though I suspect that particular bit of background reflected the real world situation!)

Really, really excited about this game. I love the concept of land-battleships, resource management and the cinematic qualities that'll come up. While I'm excited for the prospect of xenos Titans, I'm perfectly content to start with classic mirror match-ups of loyalists/traitors for a year or two.

 Xanthos wrote:


Having built a few of the smaller titans, I can certainly agree that the dimensions are off. The Warhound is particularly badly misaligned, and they know it.

I did poke at them avout using the work that has already been done to redo the old 28mm titans, but couldn't get any kind of answer out of them...

Two years ago I asked Tony Cotrell the same question and was given a "well, the Warhound is old at this point...."

We'll just have to wait and see about the 28mm titans I guess. :-p

This plus the absence of the model that they confirmed is complete makes me think the 28mm version may be getting replaced soon. If the AT version is a CAD redesign and they showed it last weekend, it would be obvious in the same way people spotted the Thunderhawk update in artwork.

I'd forgotten about that Reaver.

Ick!

I see lots of posts concerning the miniatures (and thank you for those, BTW), but very little about paying the game.

Someone must have taken part in a demo game...

Can anyone share their experience concerning game play?

 schoon wrote:
I see lots of posts concerning the miniatures (and thank you for those, BTW), but very little about paying the game.

Someone must have taken part in a demo game...

Can anyone share their experience concerning game play?

This is the only thing we have so far beyond everything else in the OP:
http://battlebunnies.blogspot.co.uk/2018/05/adeptus-titanicus-demo-pod-tacticae.html

I was planning to go, but came down ill during the saturday and left before the pods opened. On Sunday all i did was pick up my entry.

I certainly hope we know someone who went though...

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Brother Xeones wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.

IMO, it's because that method produces a really messy mesh result which would more than likely prove to create more work in the long-run. You wouldn't want to produce tooled molds off that kind of model, and cleaning up all the bad geometry would then take more time than if you'd started from scratch to begin with. It's one of those situations where the "shortcut" turns out to be a bigger headache than if you'd just done it properly the first time.

EDIT: I'd also be quite surprised if all of the proportions are 100% accurate to the 28mm scale models anyway. Usually small-scale detail gets "enhanced" to aid visiability and production reasons—you're modifying detail in order for hard plastic model production methods to function properly with it. Again, all of that means that a scan is less helpful.

Not these days. If you can grab a 3D asset from a videogame and run it through software to "solidify" it sufficiently that with a couple of tweaks it can be 3D printed, I don't see why the same process couldn't apply to a model sourced through photogrammetry. I really do struggle to see how fixing any small errors on the result of that would be more work than painstakingly hand-measuring every part and how every part relates to every other part in order to construct a 3D model from scratch.

I mean, we're at the stage now where you can stick a device on your iPad and use an app to create perfectly serviceable 3D copies of real world objects, so surely a proper professional setup can manage better results than that?

Hmm, not meaning to pick on Yodhrin here, but I seem to run into a lot of posts like the above since dipping my toe in the digital sculpting pool. They remind me of my time as a graphic designer, when ignorant art directors insisted that artwork was 'all done by the computer' and their hours of changes and revisions 'could be done with the push of a button'. (Then you sit here and work on it for six hours, fathead...)

But no, I'm not calling anyone here an ignorant fathead... perhaps merely misinformed. You cannot obtain a workable digital sculpt, suitable for mass production, from any current scanning technology without spending days - literally - cleaning and fixing the geometry, because 3D scanners cannot understand what they are scanning. They have no way of assigning tolerances to connecting surfaces, or recognising where the model can have a low polycount (like internal surfaces on a multi-part, hollow plastic kit) and where they need a high count. (visible areas). That kind of understanding is still firmly in the realm of the human mind.

Yes, from a scanned object you can eventually obtain a 'watertight' model, suitable for 3D printing in most cases, but there is a multiverse of differences between a file that'll print from liquid resin, giving you an okay miniature, and one that'll print with the high precision needed for a plastic kit master.

Speaking from personal experience, I have always found it faster and easier to take callipers in hand, measure what I'm reproducing, and sculpt my digital model from raw polygons, rather than start with a messy, over-rendered file, that needs multiple repairs and fixes.

Think of it like this - which would you rather build and paint: A new kit that's fresh off the sprue, all clean and ready to go - or - a kit that someone else built, with glue everywhere, bad greenstuff conversions to remove, battle damage that looks like their new puppy chewed it, and undercoated with house paint? That's what it is like working with a scanned file or (God forbid) someone else's sculpt that you've been asked to "just tweak a bit, so we can use it."

As for 3D models from computer games - these are almost always unusable. The scale is totally wrong for shrinking to 28mm (or whatever) panel lines might be non-existent, etc, etc. You might use one to check you've copied the proportions of a tank, starship, etc accurately, but never as a production sculpt.

Whoever is sculpting the Warhound (and other Titans) is going about it in exactly the right way, and I am really happy they are being this demanding and careful.

My wallet does not share my feeling in this matter. But it won't be getting a vote...!

Macrossmartin wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Brother Xeones wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
That seems like an odd way to go about the conversion process, given they could have had a relatively accurate CG model by putting it through photogrammetry with a moderately priced DSLR camera rather than paying a guy a salary to manually measure everything.

IMO, it's because that method produces a really messy mesh result which would more than likely prove to create more work in the long-run. You wouldn't want to produce tooled molds off that kind of model, and cleaning up all the bad geometry would then take more time than if you'd started from scratch to begin with. It's one of those situations where the "shortcut" turns out to be a bigger headache than if you'd just done it properly the first time.

EDIT: I'd also be quite surprised if all of the proportions are 100% accurate to the 28mm scale models anyway. Usually small-scale detail gets "enhanced" to aid visiability and production reasons—you're modifying detail in order for hard plastic model production methods to function properly with it. Again, all of that means that a scan is less helpful.

Not these days. If you can grab a 3D asset from a videogame and run it through software to "solidify" it sufficiently that with a couple of tweaks it can be 3D printed, I don't see why the same process couldn't apply to a model sourced through photogrammetry. I really do struggle to see how fixing any small errors on the result of that would be more work than painstakingly hand-measuring every part and how every part relates to every other part in order to construct a 3D model from scratch.

I mean, we're at the stage now where you can stick a device on your iPad and use an app to create perfectly serviceable 3D copies of real world objects, so surely a proper professional setup can manage better results than that?

Hmm, not meaning to pick on Yodhrin here, but I seem to run into a lot of posts like the above since dipping my toe in the digital sculpting pool. They remind me of my time as a graphic designer, when ignorant art directors insisted that artwork was 'all done by the computer' and their hours of changes and revisions 'could be done with the push of a button'. (Then you sit here and work on it for six hours, fathead...)

But no, I'm not calling anyone here an ignorant fathead... perhaps merely misinformed. You cannot obtain a workable digital sculpt, suitable for mass production, from any current scanning technology without spending days - literally - cleaning and fixing the geometry, because 3D scanners cannot understand what they are scanning. They have no way of assigning tolerances to connecting surfaces, or recognising where the model can have a low polycount (like internal surfaces on a multi-part, hollow plastic kit) and where they need a high count. (visible areas). That kind of understanding is still firmly in the realm of the human mind.

Yes, from a scanned object you can eventually obtain a 'watertight' model, suitable for 3D printing in most cases, but there is a multiverse of differences between a file that'll print from liquid resin, giving you an okay miniature, and one that'll print with the high precision needed for a plastic kit master.

Speaking from personal experience, I have always found it faster and easier to take callipers in hand, measure what I'm reproducing, and sculpt my digital model from raw polygons, rather than start with a messy, over-rendered file, that needs multiple repairs and fixes.

Think of it like this - which would you rather build and paint: A new kit that's fresh off the sprue, all clean and ready to go - or - a kit that someone else built, with glue everywhere, bad greenstuff conversions to remove, battle damage that looks like their new puppy chewed it, and undercoated with house paint? That's what it is like working with a scanned file or (God forbid) someone else's sculpt that you've been asked to "just tweak a bit, so we can use it."

As for 3D models from computer games - these are almost always unusable. The scale is totally wrong for shrinking to 28mm (or whatever) panel lines might be non-existent, etc, etc. You might use one to check you've copied the proportions of a tank, starship, etc accurately, but never as a production sculpt.

Whoever is sculpting the Warhound (and other Titans) is going about it in exactly the right way, and I am really happy they are being this demanding and careful.

My wallet does not share my feeling in this matter. But it won't be getting a vote...!

And had I suggested that you could scan the model and go right to engraving the molds, you might have a point. I merely suggested that taking a scan as the baseline to work from would surely be less work - or at least less cost - than having a guy on a salary spend ages painstaking hand-measuring every part of the physical model and then CAD'ing each part from scratch based on those measurements.

I would hope that the first xenon addition would be Eldar because they have a similar spread of existing titan, knight and superheavy tanks. I note the list a few pages ago missed off the cobra and scorpion super heavies as well as the bright stallion, fire game and towering destroyer class knights. Adding in the 40k wraithknight, with some weapon variants, and they about match the imperial counterparts.

 Elbows wrote:


Then someone turned the damn car around...and drove it recklessly up the wrong side of the highway.

Spoiler:

I think there is something wrong with me, I like that version alot better than the standard one...

Sorry I didn't read the entire thread - just OP and some posts. Is there any chaos in this codex or is it solely for the emperor?

orkswubwub wrote:
Sorry I didn't read the entire thread - just OP and some posts. Is there any chaos in this codex or is it solely for the emperor?

No codex, its a separate game.