GW Adeptus Titanicus news and rumours

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.

**tneva82**

Albertorius wrote:
VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Yeah but the person wasn't saying that they couldn't be done right, they were saying that the ones that DID exist looked awful.

He was saying that he would imagine that if Gw moved on with epic the scale would be 8mm or bigger because "the 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint". I certainly read it as cause effect. But ok.

You can make mkiv marines in 6mm. Models that distinctly look like mk4 armour. It's been done.

**Kid_Kyoto**

Albertorius wrote:

Yes. Same as the original Warlord models were awful.

Them's fighting words

**tneva82**

Sasquatch wrote:
I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?

Actually competing with itself is valid concern. Money going from 40k to epic is USELESS and actually BAD. If all epic would manage is shift money from 40k to titan game that would be less profit for GW. More expenses, same sales. Not good.

What GW is interested in if it brings in NEW money. Any 40k money shifted to this game is pointless and won't help make money back. It's only if it increases amount of cash existing player spends or brings new players it profits GW.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

A chap posted an interesting point about what sort of game Epic should be.

What Epic 40,000 and Epic Armageddon got Right was the blast markers and unit suppression rules.

Those helped turn a ‘mere’ large scale engagement game into one that replicated the command experience.

Not saying it did so perfectly, but it played very differently to 40k. Yes, you could just shoehorn in the biggest of big guns. But reliable success came from knowing when and how to best suppress enemy formations.

Get something like that back for a hypothetical Epic scale game, and it’ll offer a different gaming experience to 40k.

**Rolsheen**

Hated Epic with a fiery passion, will be breaking down the door of my local GW on release day for this

**Racerguy180**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Xenos?

Xenos?

Forget Xenos! I want Homo Sapiens Rotundus!

Leviathans! Colossi! Goliath Mega Cannons! Land Trains! Overlord Gunships!

GW make it happen!

Don't get me excited.

Nostromodamus wrote:
gorgon wrote:
KTG17 wrote:
You guys got me pumped. Can't wait for this game.

Well, that's our job. Anything else we can do for you?

Maybe check the Rogue Trader thread, he might head there next to post about the lack of Zoats.

Edited for language - BrookM

YEAH, WTF? where my Zoats at?

**Vorian**

Chikout wrote:
The photos that KTG17 shared showed exactly why they decided to do adeptus Titanicus. With Necromunda and Bloodbowl a major complaint has been the slow release rate of the teams. Looking at bloodbowl they are struggling to balance the desire for new teams with people's needs for boosters.
Epic even if it was Horus Heresy focused would be a much bigger problem.
To have a functional game that can justifiably be called Epic, they would need titans, Knights, super heavies, regular tanks, and at least 3 infantry types. We are talking at least a dozen box sets to play the kind of game people would want.
It would be a massive investment by the studio and a huge risk.
By doing Adeptus Titanicus they have ave had just one man do the sculpting duties while letting the rest of the team work on their commitments to bloodbowl and Necromunda.

If the game blows up it, there is plenty of opportunities for expansion, whether by adding different races or by expanding into super heavies and flyers.
By explicitly not promising epic they will not buckle under the expectation of people KtG17.
Ps. I love epic and literally have 80% of the models in the pictures KtG17 shared but that does not stop me from being very very excited for this game.

Great explanation as to why Epic won't be for years (if at all).

They are soon going to be maintaining releases for Blood Bowl, Necromunda, AT and Battlefleet Gothic Heresy.

Even those games with their limited scope are seeing them bulge at the seams of their capabilities.

**Albertorius**

tneva82 wrote:
Albertorius wrote:
VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Yeah but the person wasn't saying that they couldn't be done right, they were saying that the ones that DID exist looked awful.

He was saying that he would imagine that if Gw moved on with epic the scale would be 8mm or bigger because "the 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint". I certainly read it as cause effect. But ok.

You can make mkiv marines in 6mm. Models that distinctly look like mk4 armour. It's been done.

That was my point, yes. I even linked some.

**Mymearan**

Grimzim wrote:
KTG17 wrote:

How many of you bought 40k Knight vs Knight game? Where those two knights were included in a game? Did that product fly off the shelves? How different is that game from this version of AT if you are only going to have limited units that are so large that many of the weapon ranges look ridiculous? And if you think the games should only involve Titans? Why be excited about the Knights? They are really just more mobile tanks. If you can have Knights, you can certainly have Shadow Swords and Baneblades. And if you can have those, why stop there? Why would you limit a scale that so many people what to see to a system that is only playable with a few units?

I know this version is a nod to the original AT, but don't forget that rules for tanks and infantry for AT came out almost immediately after AT came out in White Dwarf. Just because they weren't in the box set doesn't mean that didn't have a plan for them. And considering what I have seen from GW newer White Dwarf model, I don't see that happening this time around.

Look, I love the original AT, but it isn't what blew the doors open for Epic. It was the introduction of infantry and vehicles. If GW DOESN'T come up with a plan to introduce infantry and vehicles to this scale, no one is going to be playing this game in a year. It will just join the shelves with the other one-off box sets.

And also about ATII. No one cared about ATII. I was heavy into Epic at the time and even playing Epic40k and on the EpicA playtesting team. No one cared about that system. Everyone's focus was on the combined arms of infantry, vehicles, and Titans, which is where it should be.

And the larger the model, and it looks like the new Warlord is more than twice the size of the original (even bigger than the Imperator), the more space it takes up on the board. This means either its going to be really slow, or to keep the game interesting, have a pretty liberal movement rate that I am sure is going to be combined with short weapon ranges, because few people are going to want a game where each side can pelt each other from across the table in the opening round. But at that size and scale, these models should. So they will be given really ridiculously short weapon ranges to encourage movement and flanking attacks. Its just going to be silly.

Its amazing that the original AT came with 6 warlords, so 3 models per side right out of the box, with a variety or ways to arm them. This one comes with two, and a few cannon fodder. I would rather have smaller models and more of them in the set. But I expect I will be the only one to feel this way, so everyone chime in and tell me I am wrong....

I fully agree with your post and sadly I think this will not be the return of Epic. One of the things that made Epic great was the tactical possibilities that you had especially in regards to movement. I don't know how this could work in any similar way with this new scale unless we now play on 12 feet by 6 feet boards. This hugely sized models generate exactly the problems you describe and while it may look good on pictures it is not sensible for gameplay. True, the original epic models where too small but there are fan-made true-scale versions for epic and they are way smaller than what we get here. I'm not sure they will ever come up with infantry etc. as it would basically create a competitor to 40k (which possibly should not have gotten all those over-sized tanks / knights / whatever in the first place) at a smaller scale. I fully expect that we will see some more titans and several sets of upgrade kits from FW but then the game goes the way of the dodo...

The fan-made Warlords are only a few mm smaller than this one, so there's very little practical difference.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Zenithfleet wrote:
em_en_oh_pee wrote:

Crikey McJesus. I didn't realise the new models were that big.

So much for my plans to use them for Epic. They won't fit with my terrain. Dammit. Enthusiasm levels just fell off a cliff.

(Well, maybe the new Warlord could make a solid basis for an old Imperator...)

EDIT: And perhaps the new Knights could proxy as old Warlords. Hmm...

The old Warlords were like 3mm scale, so actually this new one is more in scale with your old Epic stuff

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grimzim wrote:

This was just loud thinking from my side and based on the fact that back then lots of models would be available both for 40k as well as epic. You could (almost) have played 40k with the small scale figures. Of course with 6mm models this was no real valid option (even though there have been fan made versions for e.g. Space Hulk in 6mm) but with this new scale? Not so sure. If the infantry models are now more like 10mm or even 15mm it would be very valid to play 40k with the smaller scale. Why buy an expensive Knight or even Titan in 28mm scale when you can get them much cheaper in this smaller scale? Of course this could be total nonsense what I‘m talking so don’t take it to serious.

New scale is actually 8mm, old scale was 6mm for infantry and about half that for Titans. So any new infantry and/or tanks won't be much bigger than the old stuff.

**schoon**

Though this post betrays my age, the reason that the original Adeptus Titanicus became (eventually) Epic 40K with all the other units was that it was popular.

So, here we are again, and I'm sure the eventual expansion of this game (or not) over time will hinge on the same thing.

**Kid_Kyoto**

schoon wrote:
Though this post betrays my age, the reason that the original Adeptus Titanicus became (eventually) Epic 40K with all the other units was that it was popular.

So, here we are again, and I'm sure the eventual expansion of this game (or not) over time will hinge on the same thing.

Plus a mass battle game means needs (and thus buying) more stuff.

AT needed 3 titans, Epic needed dozens of tanks, hundreds of troops AND 3 titans.

**Sasquatch**

tneva82 wrote:
Sasquatch wrote:
I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?

Actually competing with itself is valid concern. Money going from 40k to epic is USELESS and actually BAD. If all epic would manage is shift money from 40k to titan game that would be less profit for GW. More expenses, same sales. Not good.

What GW is interested in if it brings in NEW money. Any 40k money shifted to this game is pointless and won't help make money back. It's only if it increases amount of cash existing player spends or brings new players it profits GW.

Money going to epic is useless? Is the scale of the money wrong? maybe they should make the money 6mm again.

**tneva82**

Sasquatch wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Sasquatch wrote:
I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?

Actually competing with itself is valid concern. Money going from 40k to epic is USELESS and actually BAD. If all epic would manage is shift money from 40k to titan game that would be less profit for GW. More expenses, same sales. Not good.

What GW is interested in if it brings in NEW money. Any 40k money shifted to this game is pointless and won't help make money back. It's only if it increases amount of cash existing player spends or brings new players it profits GW.

Money going to epic is useless? Is the scale of the money wrong? maybe they should make the money 6mm again.

Customer spends 100$ on 40k.

Epic comes. Customer spends 50$ to 40k, 50$ to epic.

Where's the profit for GW? He would have got 100$ anyway. Now GW just needs to pay resources for TWO games.

Maximize sales, minimize expenses. That's how companies make money. If all you do is increasing expenses and just shifting same money into multiple things your sales stay same while expenses go up.

Thus GW has to figure do they think they get NEW money sufficiently. Either same customer going "oh I'll spend 100$ for 40k and 50$ for epic" or entirely new players who wouldn't have bought 40k stuff anyway but instead now buys epic. If they can get that(and in sufficient numbers to make it worthwhile. 1$ profit a year isn't likely going to interest GW) and they deem resources spent elsewhere wouldn't give even more profit they go ahead.

Seems they think they can get more out of this than just shuffling money from customers from 40k to epic.

**Albertorius**

Some people's (most people's) disposable budget is finite. So they have to prioritize what to buy. that is a valid concern.

Of course, for GW it would still be better if their customers split their budget among GW games than if they do it among GW and other companies' games.

**monarda**

em_en_oh_pee wrote:
Albertorius wrote:
Knockagh wrote:
If epic does make a come back I would imagine they will move the scale to 8mm at least. The 6mm infantry models looked awful and were impossible to paint. These Titan models look a joy to paint. Also moving both games to 8mm kills off people reusing models from the old versions of the game. Something that I’m sure GW will be keen to combat.

Seriously, that particular point has not been valid for years and years, now:

Those are not official models though. Old GW Epic infantry looked awful.

Where are those models from?

I'm not interested in the Epic debate, but I am interested in decorating the bases of my future titans with fleeing/stomped on/marching alongside marines. And even if the Warhound and Cerastus are out-of-scale with the new titans their wreckage might make interesting terrain features.

**Albertorius**

Those are "community casts", minis made by fans.

**Yodhrin**

Breotan wrote:
Necros wrote:
It's unfortunate that they changed the scale.

I'm going to disagree. 8mm instead of 6mm doesn't seem like much of a difference but you can easily see the size difference and the amount of detail the larger models are capable of. These things are going to be pure joy to paint and play.

As for Epic, the current range still exists and there's plenty out there for fairly cheap. As long as you like the Lucius pattern that is.

I remain unconvinced they have "changed" the scale so much as fixed it. People keep saying "8mm scale", but have FW actually confirmed that's the scale they're using or are we still just going on the remark that they printed off an 8mm Space Marine figure to check what sort of detail they could achieve? Because if the latter, a lot hinges on whether they meant "an 8mm scale Space Marine" or "a Space Marine that is 8mm tall". Again, if the latter, that suggests normal human infantry would be about...6mm.

tneva82 wrote:
Sasquatch wrote:
I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?

Actually competing with itself is valid concern. Money going from 40k to epic is USELESS and actually BAD. If all epic would manage is shift money from 40k to titan game that would be less profit for GW. More expenses, same sales. Not good.

What GW is interested in if it brings in NEW money. Any 40k money shifted to this game is pointless and won't help make money back. It's only if it increases amount of cash existing player spends or brings new players it profits GW.

The other bit of the calculus, and the one that GW forgot last time around as well, is KEEPING money that would otherwise be lost.

Is it a "good" thing if someone who was an enthusiastic 40K buyer(because lets be real, they don't care if you play, we're still just walking wallets in the end) diverts a portion or all of their spend to AT(or N17, or whatever else comes along from SGS) in a zero-sum fashion? On the face of it, no, but a business the size and scope of GW can't afford to have thinking that superficial. The value of the Specialist brands isn't just in their earning potential, it's also in their retention potential - people get bored, or frustrated, or burnt out with the main GW games, it's an inevitability that it will happen to most folk at some stage, but it's rare that they get entirely burnt out with GW's IPs. Give them another way to interact with those IPs that feels different, and while that may look like "cannibalising sales", in reality it's retaining sales that would otherwise have gone to other wargaming companies, or other hobbies entirely.

Some cannibalising is inevitable, there are going to be people who's main desire was always for whatever experience a new SG game offers but who "settled" for 40K or AoS, and who will merely transition their existing hobby spend from one to the other, but I'd argue that's almost certainly a price worth paying for GW to ensure all the folk who're trying out SG stuff for the novelty because they're bored with the main games remain firmly within the GW ecosystem, rather than wandering off to try Malifaux, or Infinity, or Dropfleet, or going all-in on a CMoN or Mierce or Mantic KS.

**Evil & Chaos**

I remain unconvinced they have "changed" the scale so much as fixed it. People keep saying "8mm scale", but have FW actually confirmed that's the scale they're using or are we still just going on the remark that they printed off an 8mm Space Marine figure to check what sort of detail they could achieve?

I understand AT's scale is a 1:4 ratio reduction from 40k.

Taking 40k as 30mm scale, that means AT is 7.5mm scale.

**Mysterio**

schoon wrote:
Though this post betrays my age, the reason that the original Adeptus Titanicus became (eventually) Epic 40K with all the other units was that it was popular.

So, here we are again, and I'm sure the eventual expansion of this game (or not) over time will hinge on the same thing.

Yes, exactly - or...that's the hope!

That way we can have Adeptus Titanicus AND a new version of EPIC, and then everyone (OK, mostly everyone) will be happy!

**KTG17**

Albertorius wrote:
em_en_oh_pee wrote:

Those are not official models though. Old GW Epic infantry looked awful.

Yes. Same as the original Warlord models were awful. Neither should be used to decide wether you need to move to change scale or not, because GW's plastic manufacturing ability is magnitudes better. But here we are, and people always say that the move is because 6mm infantry miniatures can't be done to look good.
Nevermind that this game won't have infantry.

Most of those old Epic infantry were made prior to 40k 2nd edition! We've come a long way since then. This would be like saying GW shouldn't bother with another version of 28mm 40k since the old Space Marines from the 2nd Edition box set sucked.

Mymearan wrote:

The fan-made Warlords are only a few mm smaller than this one, so there's very little practical difference...

The old Warlords were like 3mm scale, so actually this new one is more in scale with your old Epic stuff ...

New scale is actually 8mm, old scale was 6mm for infantry and about half that for Titans. So any new infantry and/or tanks won't be much bigger than the old stuff...

I think you are missing the point. I am not so concerned with the exact representation of the scale of the miniature. I mean, I hardly think 10 Space Marines can fit in a Rhino in 40k. But the actual size of the model is a problem to me. It just takes up too much room on a gaming table, let alone several. Aside from some novel ideas about what a titan can do, you are still suck with limited movement. You might as well just move all of your titans to the middle of the board and start rolling dice.

As far as all the anti-Epic talk, if GW releases some expansion of Horus era Marines to compliment this set as a start (and all they would need to do is include generic marines, land raiders, and rhinos) are you really telling me that is going to turn some of you guys off? 8mm Titans are ok, 8mm tanks and infantry are rubbish? Come on.

You would think that if you really liked a game, you would want to see GW give extended support for it. Isn't that a regular complaint on dakka? Are you hoping for years of new Titan classes and that's it? Is that going to keep the game fresh? If AT does prove to be popular, yet GW stops supporting it, are you going to be posting on here 'Well I am glad they stopped supporting this game because I didn't want to see infantry and tanks anyway!' Give me a break.

But we'll have to check back here after its released to get past the models and evaluate the game play. If the game play is unimpressive, interest in this game will die pretty quickly.

**bullyboy**

the 40K vs epic money debate is not really accurate though. There are many gamers who have most of what they need for 40K (not starting new armies etc) so their investment into 40K is considerably reduced even if they have the income to support it. A brand new game that still has the feel that is familiar may well bump up that expenditure once again.

I would be all over an epic version of 40K, it was my gateway drug into GW in the first place.

**KTG17**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

AT needed 3 titans, Epic needed dozens of tanks, hundreds of troops AND 3 titans.

What? No it didn't. Some games had no titans at all and in some cases might have only one on each side. Then in others you could field an entire army of just titans.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

bullyboy wrote:
the 40K vs epic money debate is not really accurate though. There are many gamers who have most of what they need for 40K (not starting new armies etc) so their investment into 40K is considerably reduced even if they have the income to support it. A brand new game that still has the feel that is familiar may well bump up that expenditure once again.

I would be all over an epic version of 40K, it was my gateway drug into GW in the first place.

I'll say this: GW has already all the money I will spend on 40k. So the only way they will get money directly from me is doing something else.

**Ashitaka**

I still have my up/down/blank and left/right/blank dice for allocating hits to titans.

Were those from AT or epic?

**Slinky**

Ashitaka wrote:
I still have my up/down/blank and left/right/blank dice for allocating hits to titans.

Were those from AT or epic?

I have those too

I only ever played epic when it was "Space Marine", so not sure if the dice were also used in AT or in later versions...

**Apologist**

KTG17 wrote:
I think you are missing the point. I am not so concerned with the exact representation of the scale of the miniature. [...]But the actual size of the model is a problem to me. It just takes up too much room on a gaming table, let alone several. Aside from some novel ideas about what a titan can do, you are still suck with limited movement. You might as well just move all of your titans to the middle of the board and start rolling dice.

While they are considerably larger models, the footprint of the base is little more than twice the size of the original beetleback Titans. The additional bulk comes mainly from height. I see where you're coming from, but having used all eras of Titans, the fan-made 'true-6mm scale' ones (i.e. those that are the same size as the upcoming plastics) don't affect the game beyond benefitting from taller buildings.

As far as all the anti-Epic talk, if GW releases some expansion of Horus era Marines to compliment this set as a start (and all they would need to do is include generic marines, land raiders, and rhinos) are you really telling me that is going to turn some of you guys off? 8mm Titans are ok, 8mm tanks and infantry are rubbish? Come on.

No, I think that's a false equivalence. I'm a huge fan of Epic, but Adeptus Titanicus has a different appeal for me – that of granularity and detail – than Epic, which I like smooth and streamlined. Metaphorically speaking, I like a cup of tea, and I like a pint of beer; but I wouldn't want to drink a mix of them. Now, that's being a little facetious, but the point stands.

You would think that if you really liked a game, you would want to see GW give extended support for it. [...]Are you hoping for years of new Titan classes and that's it? Is that going to keep the game fresh? If AT does prove to be popular, yet GW stops supporting it, are you going to be posting on here 'Well I am glad they stopped supporting this game because I didn't want to see infantry and tanks anyway!' Give me a break.

I think it's more a case of wanting Specialist Games to avoid over-reaching. To extend the metaphor above, I'd rather they used their limited resources to make a nice cup of tea than to try diversifying too early.

Eventually? Certainly I'd love to see Epic return. Immediately? I'd like a really good Titan game.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Don't recall them being used in AT.

Pretty sure there was a chart you rolled on. And nobody ever wanted a hit in the MIU!

**KTG17**

The titan dice showed up for the first time in Space Marine v2/Titan Legions. That was the only system that used them.

Personally, I think they are rather silly and a little time-consuming at times. I think the best rules for war engines as in Epic 40k. You has some variety in arming them and how they took damage but not too much. As a matter of fact, all the info fit on a single side of paper. I think that's the right balance. Gives them just enough flavor yet you don't get bogged down looking up rules or stats.

I think EpicA went too extreme in simplifying them.

**Ghool**

This will likely be the first GW game I have purchased in over 20 years.
Good on them for managing to squeeze even money from me, considering I don't much care for their aesthetic.

For Adeptus Titanicus? All right GW, take my money......

**Inquisitor Kallus**

tneva82 wrote:
Sasquatch wrote:
I'm a bit confused by the claims that games workshop won't remake Epic because it would compete with 40k. The only way it would be a direct competitor is if it used the same ruleset, and even if it did take a few people completely away from 40k what's the big deal? the money still goes in gw's pocket! By this logic anything in the 40k universe that gw sells is a competitor to 40k?

Actually competing with itself is valid concern. Money going from 40k to epic is USELESS and actually BAD. If all epic would manage is shift money from 40k to titan game that would be less profit for GW. More expenses, same sales. Not good.

What GW is interested in if it brings in NEW money. Any 40k money shifted to this game is pointless and won't help make money back. It's only if it increases amount of cash existing player spends or brings new players it profits GW.

#

Wrong........

Does everyone buy every 40k release? Do they collect every army? Some people only collect one army, others collect a few, it is very rare for people to collect every single thing put out for 40k. So, with this logical reasoning in place,. if some 40k players (or even a lot) put money into AT where for example, they wouldn't be buying new orks or whatever it means theyre making,...wait for it,.......more sales.

**Pacific**

gorgon wrote:
Epic fans are certainly allowed to stay well clear of AT if it doesn't float their boats.

But it's going to be a big hit for GW. The buzz was loud more than a year ago, which is what made them decide to delay the game to release the titans in plastic instead of resin. It's even louder now.

I think the vast majority of Epic fans are super-excited about this release. Wonderful new miniatures (that you can use for AT and Epic) it will help bring attention back to small scale 30/40k, which will mean more people learn about the existing Epic communities and will want to take part in those events.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
A chap posted an interesting point about what sort of game Epic should be.
What Epic 40,000 and Epic Armageddon got Right was the blast markers and unit suppression rules.
Those helped turn a ‘mere’ large scale engagement game into one that replicated the command experience.
Not saying it did so perfectly, but it played very differently to 40k. Yes, you could just shoehorn in the biggest of big guns. But reliable success came from knowing when and how to best suppress enemy formations.
Get something like that back for a hypothetical Epic scale game, and it’ll offer a different gaming experience to 40k.

I think even when it was first released Epic played very differently to 40k. The difference will be even more pronounced now.

The great thing here is that AT/Epic will give people who don't like the 40k ruleset (or perhaps those who prefer the smaller scale, and the different concept that brings) a way to still play games within the 40k universe.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:
schoon wrote:
Though this post betrays my age, the reason that the original Adeptus Titanicus became (eventually) Epic 40K with all the other units was that it was popular.
So, here we are again, and I'm sure the eventual expansion of this game (or not) over time will hinge on the same thing.

Plus a mass battle game means needs (and thus buying) more stuff.
AT needed 3 titans, Epic needed dozens of tanks, hundreds of troops AND 3 titans.

My thoughts are, will FW have the capacity to produce all of those miniature lines?
I think that's the main thing stopping a big re-release of Epic to follow AT.

Remember the last Epic releases (Armageddon and Epic 40,000) used lots of the existing miniature ranges to prop up the new releases. Do the casts for those still even exist, and if they do does that mean Squats will be making a comeback?