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.

 Yodhrin wrote:
The GSC and Skitarii sprues will have already paid for themselves by a wide margin though so will cost GW literally a few pence worth of power and plastic pellets to make, while every sprue in Titanicus is brand new.

That still leaves all the scenery sprues unaccounted for, doesn't it? And even if that 's the case, no sprue in the GME is exclusive of it either, so...

Furthermore, the question was "Which other kit comes with 11 full sprues and 6 half sprues, full rules, dice, cards, and other accessories?". Adding the caveat "but only, you know, non-amortized sprues" to the question after the fact is moving the goal posts around, I think (and not really important to the final customer).

Still, it was actually a question because I don't remember... how many sprues does the KT box include?

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:
Insidious thoughts there. Actually possible. Though it is Specialist Games and they had the kit made in China so it could of been a budget thing or not. The Warlord models themselves were made in the UK so who knows.

It could be that they didn't have the capacity for more or funds, or they wanted an inflated launch. Though I suspect we will see a Reaver and Warhound starter kit if they are serious about this, with rules for about $135ish USD. (I price the Warhounds at $75 because they are a box set of 2)

My biggest concern at the moment is the saturation bombing that is going on by GW. There's simply not time to buy, paint game with everything that is coming out. Blood bowl, necromunda, LoTR, new gorkamorka, kill team, 40k quest etc. Something is going to give eventually. Rather than a more steady release its like they want to get out everything now. That could have worrying consequences because you can't keep up this hectic schedule of new games.

You are not supposed to buy every game GW releases. Just stick with one or two that you hold dear. The only new stuff I have purchased was N17 due to nostalgia. Simply a great immersive skirmish game with lots of detail. The other game which I support is BB but my collection is so extensive from the 90s that there was no reason to spend a single Euro for anything so far.

Also don't forget in the past a lot of these games were running at the same time as well or within a limited window of each other. Others, like Blood bowl, have never really stopped and kept going well for years after GW stopped keeping it going; it even spawned a few big Kickstarters from other companies running a similar styled game

I was VERY much looking forward ti getting, until as many have said "I saw the price". I just got kill team and have several other boxed games, but I was expecting a price around or under $200.00 USD and over $300 for the boxed game with Titans, bldgs etc is just too much for me to part with in one go... Sorry GW you blew it on the pricing I think... My concern is that if Adep Titanicus doesn't sell they will thin it is due to lack of interest when I suspect that if it doesn't sell it is cause of the dang price!!!

Lord_Zaherial wrote:
I was VERY much looking forward ti getting, until as many have said "I saw the price". I just got kill team and have several other boxed games, but I was expecting a price around or under $200.00 USD and over $300 for the boxed game with Titans, bldgs etc is just too much for me to part with in one go... Sorry GW you blew it on the pricing I think... My concern is that if Adep Titanicus doesn't sell they will thin it is due to lack of interest when I suspect that if it doesn't sell it is cause of the dang price!!!

But it sold very well - GME sold out, and the Reaver is currently "Temporarily out of stock" due to demand.

ok, my toughts here.

if you look at the wepcard that are included in the rules box, there realy aint need for a big expensive warlord aslong as you stick to open play.
1 reaver and 2 hounds plus a box of knights and you have IMO a good army to start to learn the game.

the reavers have some solid weapons and the warhounds has some good utility.
and these titans are far cheaper then the warlord.

 FrozenDwarf wrote:
ok, my toughts here.

if you look at the wepcard that are included in the rules box, there realy aint need for a big expensive warlord aslong as you stick to open play.
1 reaver and 2 hounds plus a box of knights and you have IMO a good army to start to learn the game.

the reavers have some solid weapons and the warhounds has some good utility.
and these titans are far cheaper then the warlord.

and the Venator Maniple IMHO is a pretty solid Maniple for matched play. 1 reaver and 4 warhounds is pretty easy, then fill it out with some knights, your enemy might have trouble handling the target saturation.

BrianDavion wrote:

 FrozenDwarf wrote:
ok, my toughts here.

if you look at the wepcard that are included in the rules box, there realy aint need for a big expensive warlord aslong as you stick to open play.
1 reaver and 2 hounds plus a box of knights and you have IMO a good army to start to learn the game.

the reavers have some solid weapons and the warhounds has some good utility.
and these titans are far cheaper then the warlord.

and the Venator Maniple IMHO is a pretty solid Maniple for matched play. 1 reaver and 4 warhounds is pretty easy, then fill it out with some knights, your enemy might have trouble handling the target saturation.

I remember when the original got released in 1989 I think it was..So yea I've been around. But I just can't justify spending that much money on a game. I am retired and would love to have it since I hav been around since rogue trader but I just cant afford it. I guess GW has forgotten what got them to be able to charge what they do. I just cant afford what they charge for stuff these days(in one lump sum). I have a newish deathguard army and custodes army, when I say new, I mean since the new figs came out but thing have changed financially for me since I retired, I think myself as one of the founding members so to speak as far as GW goes in the US, I am guessing the hobby has passed me by price wise. So as much as I would love to have AT. I just don't see it in my future. I am sorry GW but you do expect loyalty from us but not us to you. I hate saying the last, but I think the hobby I have loved for the last 40ish years has passed me by...

Lord_Zaherial wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 FrozenDwarf wrote:
ok, my toughts here.

if you look at the wepcard that are included in the rules box, there realy aint need for a big expensive warlord aslong as you stick to open play.
1 reaver and 2 hounds plus a box of knights and you have IMO a good army to start to learn the game.

the reavers have some solid weapons and the warhounds has some good utility.
and these titans are far cheaper then the warlord.

and the Venator Maniple IMHO is a pretty solid Maniple for matched play. 1 reaver and 4 warhounds is pretty easy, then fill it out with some knights, your enemy might have trouble handling the target saturation.

I remember when the original got released in 1989 I think it was..So yea I've been around. But I just can't justify spending that much money on a game. I am retired and would love to have it since I hav been around since rogue trader but I just cant afford it. I guess GW has forgotten what got them to be able to charge what they do. I just cant afford what they charge for stuff these days(in one lump sum). I have a newish deathguard army and custodes army, when I say new, I mean since the new figs came out but thing have changed financially for me since I retired, I think myself as one of the founding members so to speak as far as GW goes in the US, I am guessing the hobby has passed me by price wise. So as much as I would love to have AT. I just don't see it in my future. I am sorry GW but you do expect loyalty from us but not us to you. I hate saying the last, but I think the hobby I have loved for the last 40ish years has passed me by...

i guess retirement can have its financial challenges, but i wouldent know since im barly halfway to that point personaly.
now, granted we do NOT know the price of a wardog BUT we know it will be less then a reaver and moust likely more then knights, so my GUESS is in the region of 40-50$

if you break it down, perhaps saving up 50$ over a set period of times to afford to buy say a wardog whit the goal beeing owning 3 wardogs, is that something your financinal situation allows you to do?
not all games of AT MUST be whit the big titans. 3 warhounds whit 50p of weponry is 690p add a knight box that costs 35$ and you have around 850p army for open play.

Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.

(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.

(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)

designed for titan on titan, 700-1250 games which is interesting because of your opponent brings 1250 and you bring 850 you get more Strategems that balance the game out.

Financially limited? Ehhhh go buy the rules and a Reaver. Voila started for 120 l, add some knights and you. Could get up there ish.

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.

(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)

but AT IS designed for games below 1000p.
in matched play, skirmish is spesificly ment for 700-1250p and takes less then 2H to play when you are familiar whit the rules.
heck, epic clash that is the higest point bracket in matched is 1750-2500p. wanna go above 2500p then you have to go narrative or open play.

not all of us want big armys. personly im getting 1 warlord, 1 reaver, 1 wardog and 1 box of knights. that is 1200p that will be my force for a loong time.

 Lysenis wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.

(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)

designed for titan on titan, 700-1250 games which is interesting because of your opponent brings 1250 and you bring 850 you get more Strategems that balance the game out.

Financially limited? Ehhhh go buy the rules and a Reaver. Voila started for 120 l, add some knights and you. Could get up there ish.

Titan vs titan is not that interesting...2 titans binging shields without much damage either way. You just demonstrated my point. You need multiple titans to game really work which isn't unsurprising. Same issue is with Battlefleet Gothic for example. 2 ships binking each other not getting result.


Generally games with too small armies are either a) neither side can cause significant damage(AT, BFG etc) or b) it's basically who goes first or who gets bit of bad luck who wins(40k, FB etc)

Games rarely(that's never) work with bare minimum units.

So look more like 3 titans and knights. Reaver and 2 warhounds is pretty much bare MINIMUM and we are talking about game where designers have mentioned multiple warlords in normal game...

tneva82 wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.

(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)

designed for titan on titan, 700-1250 games which is interesting because of your opponent brings 1250 and you bring 850 you get more Strategems that balance the game out.

Financially limited? Ehhhh go buy the rules and a Reaver. Voila started for 120 l, add some knights and you. Could get up there ish.

Titan vs titan is not that interesting...2 titans binging shields without much damage either way. You just demonstrated my point. You need multiple titans to game really work which isn't unsurprising. Same issue is with Battlefleet Gothic for example. 2 ships binking each other not getting result.


Generally games with too small armies are either a) neither side can cause significant damage(AT, BFG etc) or b) it's basically who goes first or who gets bit of bad luck who wins(40k, FB etc)

Games rarely(that's never) work with bare minimum units.

So look more like 3 titans and knights. Reaver and 2 warhounds is pretty much bare MINIMUM and we are talking about game where designers have mentioned multiple warlords in normal game...

Then add in terrain. I do suggest 2v2 as well but Reaver V warlord? Well better have that terrain set up. Did a demo with good sized terrain and it was a huge blast for me. I rushed a building with many full stride orders, then as we circled I spun around and next turn when he was first and had selected First Fire, I took a hit then backed up to avoid the rest of his shots and gaining his side. Was fun.

Oh and use different load outs. Yes it's not wysiwyg but it will be fine. Most people shouldn't care as you. Have it clearly labeled in your Titan Terminal

I was hoping to get the grand master box a few months down the road, but grabbed one upon finding out that it was a limited release.

I'm not sure what GW's goal is here with such a pricey starter. I realize that you get a ton of stuff for the dollar, but the issue isn't the value - it's the sticker shock.

GW made a smart choice with their starter sets for 40k. They're what, $80-ish US? That's a price people can stomach. Your average person can skip out on buying a video game they weren't really excited about and start that hobby they were always curious about. But $290 is a good chunk of the month's rent - depending on location. Hopefully they will put out some better starter deals down the road. Something like a few warhounds + knights or some other combination for below $80.

For me personally - what pushed me was the more detailed rules. I've been back into 40k for a rather short time and I'm already a bit bored with the simplicity.

SirWeeble wrote:
I was hoping to get the grand master box a few months down the road, but grabbed one upon finding out that it was a limited release.

I'm not sure what GW's goal is here with such a pricey starter. I realize that you get a ton of stuff for the dollar, but the issue isn't the value - it's the sticker shock.

GW made a smart choice with their starter sets for 40k. They're what, $80-ish US? That's a price people can stomach. Your average person can skip out on buying a video game they weren't really excited about and start that hobby they were always curious about. But $290 is a good chunk of the month's rent - depending on location. Hopefully they will put out some better starter deals down the road. Something like a few warhounds + knights or some other combination for below $80.

For me personally - what pushed me was the more detailed rules. I've been back into 40k for a rather short time and I'm already a bit bored with the simplicity.

So you are saying that getting 2/3rds of a full army is too much of a sticker shock?

Just checking because all you need on top of the GME is a Reaver and boom Myrmidon Maniple and as I have shown it is REALY hard to build that for under 1250 points. Add in knights and voila good sized force right out of 2 boxes.

Sure 80ish but lets go over what you get:

no rules

no codex

no ruler

no game components

no terrain

Just models worth about ish100ish to $150ish

vs

Full rules

All required game components

Model value of $290 on its own

some terrain included

Hmmmmmm seems there is a disparity there.

 Lysenis wrote:

SirWeeble wrote:
I was hoping to get the grand master box a few months down the road, but grabbed one upon finding out that it was a limited release.

I'm not sure what GW's goal is here with such a pricey starter. I realize that you get a ton of stuff for the dollar, but the issue isn't the value - it's the sticker shock.

GW made a smart choice with their starter sets for 40k. They're what, $80-ish US? That's a price people can stomach. Your average person can skip out on buying a video game they weren't really excited about and start that hobby they were always curious about. But $290 is a good chunk of the month's rent - depending on location. Hopefully they will put out some better starter deals down the road. Something like a few warhounds + knights or some other combination for below $80.

For me personally - what pushed me was the more detailed rules. I've been back into 40k for a rather short time and I'm already a bit bored with the simplicity.

So you are saying that getting 2/3rds of a full army is too much of a sticker shock?

Just checking because all you need on top of the GME is a Reaver and boom Myrmidon Maniple and as I have shown it is REALY hard to build that for under 1250 points. Add in knights and voila good sized force right out of 2 boxes.

It is understandable, though, because sticker shock does not stem from lack of seen value, but from the fact that to get anything you have to spend a lot at once. I wouldn't say spending 10000 euros on a luxury boat would be bad value, but it would be way too much for my financial level. Though I got the GME, I wouldn't mind them coming up with a starter kit for those who might want to get in for a tad lower price. Rules Set along with some slightly discounted reavers and knights without terrain would probably be half the price of GME and allow these people to get aboard, buying more later on when their dispensable income allows.

 Sherrypie wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:

SirWeeble wrote:
I was hoping to get the grand master box a few months down the road, but grabbed one upon finding out that it was a limited release.

I'm not sure what GW's goal is here with such a pricey starter. I realize that you get a ton of stuff for the dollar, but the issue isn't the value - it's the sticker shock.

GW made a smart choice with their starter sets for 40k. They're what, $80-ish US? That's a price people can stomach. Your average person can skip out on buying a video game they weren't really excited about and start that hobby they were always curious about. But $290 is a good chunk of the month's rent - depending on location. Hopefully they will put out some better starter deals down the road. Something like a few warhounds + knights or some other combination for below $80.

For me personally - what pushed me was the more detailed rules. I've been back into 40k for a rather short time and I'm already a bit bored with the simplicity.

So you are saying that getting 2/3rds of a full army is too much of a sticker shock?

Just checking because all you need on top of the GME is a Reaver and boom Myrmidon Maniple and as I have shown it is REALY hard to build that for under 1250 points. Add in knights and voila good sized force right out of 2 boxes.

It is understandable, though, because sticker shock does not stem from lack of seen value, but from the fact that to get anything you have to spend a lot at once. I wouldn't say spending 10000 euros on a luxury boat would be bad value, but it would be way too much for my financial level. Though I got the GME, I wouldn't mind them coming up with a starter kit for those who might want to get in for a tad lower price. Rules Set along with some slightly discounted reavers and knights without terrain would probably be half the price of GME and allow these people to get aboard, buying more later on when their dispensable income allows.

Not only are you saving in USD alone $140 (around 85 quid or so) but you have a near full tournament legal army and ALL components. . .

I get the sticker shock and it is HIGH but the for what it is, its amazing and GW failed to talk about that and that is hurting them more than anything.

A starter box is a bit harder. I would like one as well but the easiest would be a Reaver with Warhound box and Rules and unless they have a big sales expectation (as the hounds are a 2 in a box buy at armiger prices from what I have found) the base cost in USD is $195. Thats base MSRP. If they bundle it then it needs its own packaging which will be more so how much do you think they can cut from that?

We need a “Start Collecting” Titanicus - One Reaver, Two Warhounds + Knights in a box.

I hope they don't bring back the GME box, it won't help grow the playerbase. They need a start collecting that has the rules box contents, one reaver, 3 knights (built in discount so knights are free) and that's it, to keep the cost reasonable.

 Lysenis wrote:


So you are saying that getting 2/3rds of a full army is too much of a sticker shock?

Just checking because all you need on top of the GME is a Reaver and boom Myrmidon Maniple and as I have shown it is REALY hard to build that for under 1250 points. Add in knights and voila good sized force right out of 2 boxes.

Sure 80ish but lets go over what you get:

I explicitly said it **is** a good value, but the price is too still high. Like SherryPie said with an analogy about a boat. Doesn't matter if the boat is worth a million dollars, when you can't afford 10,000.

If they offered people a 'starter box' with just a few models, no rules, no dice, etc - they'd be more apt to buy it and buy the rules/dice/etc later. The reason people whined that the price was too high to begin with was because they didn't see "you get models, rules, cards, etc etc". They saw "you get 2 big models and 6 tiny models". If something like that was put out for $150-$180, people would be less hesitant to buy it. Then later on, they could pick up cards, panels, dice, etc at their leisure.

 Stormonu wrote:
We need a “Start Collecting” Titanicus - One Reaver, Two Warhounds + Knights in a box.

Thats a base price that will be roughly $165 and still no rules. Its a good set and you could discount it to maybe $130 maybe 140 to not totally lose out on the knights.

The only issue is that all you can play is a Venator list at that point and having placed the Warlord in the GME they made it FAR more likely you can run all 3 base Maniples with just buying the reaver and warhounds which most people would do because the Warlords ARE expensive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SirWeeble wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:


So you are saying that getting 2/3rds of a full army is too much of a sticker shock?

Just checking because all you need on top of the GME is a Reaver and boom Myrmidon Maniple and as I have shown it is REALY hard to build that for under 1250 points. Add in knights and voila good sized force right out of 2 boxes.

Sure 80ish but lets go over what you get:

I explicitly said it **is** a good value, but the price is too still high. Like SherryPie said with an analogy about a boat. Doesn't matter if the boat is worth a million dollars, when you can't afford 10,000.

If they offered people a 'starter box' with just a few models, no rules, no dice, etc - they'd be more apt to buy it and buy the rules/dice/etc later. The reason people whined that the price was too high to begin with was because they didn't see "you get models, rules, cards, etc etc". They saw "you get 2 big models and 6 tiny models". If something like that was put out for $150-$180, people would be less hesitant to buy it. Then later on, they could pick up cards, panels, dice, etc at their leisure.

A starter box would be fine but then they would of had to release more and have less to release later. This means they seem to support the game less. Reavers came out 3 weeks after launch. 3 weeks! That's spectacular for a brand new game. It means that they have a lineup and a time table. While you want a starter this game is not intended for everyone. Its intended for people willing to play a crunchy game. If you want to play the game you will buy the game. You dont HAVE to have a spectacular deal every time even though this is.

If the price is going to dissuade you from playing a fantastic game I am not sure it would be worth your time no matter the price.

I'd like to see a "Venator Maniple Starter box" 1 Reaver, 2 Warhounds (they're sold in packs of 2) data cards for a venator Maniple, the tokens, and a "quick start" soft cover book that gives the basic rules for about 150 bucks USD. that'd be a PERFECT starter

BrianDavion wrote:
I'd like to see a "Venator Maniple Starter box" 1 Reaver, 2 Warhounds (they're sold in packs of 2) data cards for a venator Maniple, the tokens, and a "quick start" soft cover book that gives the basic rules for about 150 bucks USD. that'd be a PERFECT starter

Yea. Thats 700ish points and with tokens and quick start rules that is about $150 in value so they could drop that to $130 and it would be a steal I think.

 Strg Alt wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:
Insidious thoughts there. Actually possible. Though it is Specialist Games and they had the kit made in China so it could of been a budget thing or not. The Warlord models themselves were made in the UK so who knows.

It could be that they didn't have the capacity for more or funds, or they wanted an inflated launch. Though I suspect we will see a Reaver and Warhound starter kit if they are serious about this, with rules for about $135ish USD. (I price the Warhounds at $75 because they are a box set of 2)

My biggest concern at the moment is the saturation bombing that is going on by GW. There's simply not time to buy, paint game with everything that is coming out. Blood bowl, necromunda, LoTR, new gorkamorka, kill team, 40k quest etc. Something is going to give eventually. Rather than a more steady release its like they want to get out everything now. That could have worrying consequences because you can't keep up this hectic schedule of new games.

You are not supposed to buy every game GW releases. Just stick with one or two that you hold dear. The only new stuff I have purchased was N17 due to nostalgia. Simply a great immersive skirmish game with lots of detail. The other game which I support is BB but my collection is so extensive from the 90s that there was no reason to spend a single Euro for anything so far.

I'm going to second not buying every game. GW really has released a staggering number of new products over the last couple years, but I think they are assuming that every player won't buy into every system (I certainly won't). I think the intent is you play one or a few of them. I know in my case I have really benefited from the new wave of games (or revitalized systems) they have put out. I play Blood Bowl and Necromunda, and I appreciate GW supporting both of them. By supporting games other than 40k and AoS they made someone who probably would be buying roughly one box of fantasy minis a year (and some bits from third party sellers) for a Mordheim band to someone who spends a couple hundred dollars a year on their products.

On the other hand If they hadn't done anything with Necromunda or Blood Bowl I really doubt I would buy any of their products, maybe I'd give KT a shot, but I doubt it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lysenis wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I'd like to see a "Venator Maniple Starter box" 1 Reaver, 2 Warhounds (they're sold in packs of 2) data cards for a venator Maniple, the tokens, and a "quick start" soft cover book that gives the basic rules for about 150 bucks USD. that'd be a PERFECT starter

Yea. Thats 700ish points and with tokens and quick start rules that is about $150 in value so they could drop that to $130 and it would be a steal I think.

If they released something like this for 130$, I would certainly pick it up to try the game out. If I don't end up liking it, I would have three really nice display models and wouldn't feel my money is wasted (I think the Reavers and the Warhounds are much nicer models than the Warlord).

 Lysenis wrote:
While you want a starter this game is not intended for everyone. Its intended for people willing to play a crunchy game. If you want to play the game you will buy the game. You dont HAVE to have a spectacular deal every time even though this is.

If the price is going to dissuade you from playing a fantastic game I am not sure it would be worth your time no matter the price.

That is a good point - it may be part of why they chose the price point that they did. They probably realized that only a subset of existing fans would even take the plunge - likely long time fans, people that remember EPIC, and older returning fans that are already bored with the candy-land-esque rules of 40k. It's quite possible they realized that new fans and "mommy, i want that toy!" demographics have 0 interest in it.

However, I think there were alot of existing fans that would have given it a chance if there had been a lower cost to enter - even if it meant paying more in the end by having a smaller starter set and separate rules/tools. Maybe that plan is still on the horizon though - who knows?

SirWeeble wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:
While you want a starter this game is not intended for everyone. Its intended for people willing to play a crunchy game. If you want to play the game you will buy the game. You dont HAVE to have a spectacular deal every time even though this is.

If the price is going to dissuade you from playing a fantastic game I am not sure it would be worth your time no matter the price.

That is a good point - it may be part of why they chose the price point that they did. They probably realized that only a subset of existing fans would even take the plunge - likely long time fans, people that remember EPIC, and older returning fans that are already bored with the candy-land-esque rules of 40k. It's quite possible they realized that new fans and "mommy, i want that toy!" demographics have 0 interest in it.

However, I think there were alot of existing fans that would have given it a chance if there had been a lower cost to enter - even if it meant paying more in the end by having a smaller starter set and separate rules/tools. Maybe that plan is still on the horizon though - who knows?

As I said a Venator Maniple starter for 150 would be the perfect entrypoint

tneva82 wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah and you can play 500 pts 40k games for super cheap. Of course if game isn't designed for that 500 pts game it's going to be pale imitation in terms of fun. I doubt very much AT was specifically designed to be played in 850pts or even close to it.

(oh and it requires finding another equally financially limited player)

designed for titan on titan, 700-1250 games which is interesting because of your opponent brings 1250 and you bring 850 you get more Strategems that balance the game out.

Financially limited? Ehhhh go buy the rules and a Reaver. Voila started for 120 l, add some knights and you. Could get up there ish.

Titan vs titan is not that interesting...2 titans binging shields without much damage either way. You just demonstrated my point. You need multiple titans to game really work which isn't unsurprising. Same issue is with Battlefleet Gothic for example. 2 ships binking each other not getting result.


Generally games with too small armies are either a) neither side can cause significant damage(AT, BFG etc) or b) it's basically who goes first or who gets bit of bad luck who wins(40k, FB etc)

Games rarely(that's never) work with bare minimum units.

So look more like 3 titans and knights. Reaver and 2 warhounds is pretty much bare MINIMUM and we are talking about game where designers have mentioned multiple warlords in normal game...

I agree. I also think what will put the nail in the coffin for this game is no introduction of infantry and tanks. I just dont give a gak what it does to the balance of the system, people will get board of moving a handful of models around a table.

I think the cost of the game really is a tad high, and think it would have been cheaper had they just made smaller models. Halfway between the original Warlord and the new one would have been perfectly fine.

I’ve been into Epic for most of my life, so I had no option other than to buy the GME. But even still, if a friend wanted to play any version of Epic and I have them all, I would prefer SM2/TL. It’s just more colorful and fun with a lot more variety. People who think Titans only is the way to go are missing out on how important variety is.

SirWeeble wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:
While you want a starter this game is not intended for everyone. Its intended for people willing to play a crunchy game. If you want to play the game you will buy the game. You dont HAVE to have a spectacular deal every time even though this is.

If the price is going to dissuade you from playing a fantastic game I am not sure it would be worth your time no matter the price.

That is a good point - it may be part of why they chose the price point that they did. They probably realized that only a subset of existing fans would even take the plunge - likely long time fans, people that remember EPIC, and older returning fans that are already bored with the candy-land-esque rules of 40k. It's quite possible they realized that new fans and "mommy, i want that toy!" demographics have 0 interest in it.

However, I think there were alot of existing fans that would have given it a chance if there had been a lower cost to enter - even if it meant paying more in the end by having a smaller starter set and separate rules/tools. Maybe that plan is still on the horizon though - who knows?

The initial cost for people with old models is cheap. Just buy the rules. Want a warlord and rules 170, want Reaver and rules 120. Build from there.

You are just asking for a deal every time. This isn't a "starter set" it's a game master edition

GW has never grasped the concept of a loss leader EVER!!! I wish they would learn the concept of pinning the ears back of the people that support them financially year in and year out... after over 30+ yrs I am more than disappointed in GW on this pricing!