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:
"40K and AoS have more depth"

Having more things to choose from is meaningless if they don't offer any actual variation. The main games offer dozens of armies and subfactions, sure, but in the end once you discard all the rules that have different names and wording but functionally do the same thing(usually conditional Mortal Wounds) and factor the outcomes over the course of a whole phase rather than cherry picking stat comparisons, all that "variation" flattens right down into a handful of archetypes, and one shooty horde is much like another, one elite melee army in the end the same as the rest.

Factor in the order of magnitude that AT has over the main two in terms of core mechanical complexity and choosing to play 40K or AoS over AT for "depth" is...genuinely hilarious.

Ohhhh I want to make an article on an actual turn. . . hmmmm


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

SirWeeble wrote:
I really don't think AT is nearly as expensive as 40k either

AT is a small skirmish game with only one faction instead of a mass battle having over dozen factions that "soup", so of course it's cheaper!

Even with 1 faction you need to buy at least 4 Warhounds, 3 Reavers, and 3 Warlords to make all Maniple variations.

It's cheaper sure but ehhhh

I have no idea if it's a total bust or not. I've spent more on this than I have on any other GW property in recent memory and I like the models quite a bit. By all reports (at least anything I've read) it is selling well too.

BUT the lack of Games Workshop attention for Titanicus leading up to and following the Reaver release is disconcerting. There are no Reaver painting videos from GW, and no Warhammer Community articles. Even the assembly guide included is oddly black & white instead of a full color guide like the Warlord and Knights got, and lacks the pictures instructing where the decals go. If the warhound release goes by with as little fanfare as the reaver release then I will have no high hopes for this game.

RobertDD wrote:
I have no idea if it's a total bust or not. I've spent more on this than I have on any other GW property in recent memory and I like the models quite a bit. By all reports (at least anything I've read) it is selling well too.

BUT the lack of Games Workshop attention for Titanicus leading up to and following the Reaver release is disconcerting. There are no Reaver painting videos from GW, and no Warhammer Community articles. Even the assembly guide included is oddly black & white instead of a full color guide like the Warlord and Knights got, and lacks the pictures instructing where the decals go. If the warhound release goes by with as little fanfare as the reaver release then I will have no high hopes for this game.

Yea, it is annoying. I am going to be asking them about that

RobertDD wrote:
I have no idea if it's a total bust or not. I've spent more on this than I have on any other GW property in recent memory and I like the models quite a bit. By all reports (at least anything I've read) it is selling well too.

BUT the lack of Games Workshop attention for Titanicus leading up to and following the Reaver release is disconcerting. There are no Reaver painting videos from GW, and no Warhammer Community articles. Even the assembly guide included is oddly black & white instead of a full color guide like the Warlord and Knights got, and lacks the pictures instructing where the decals go. If the warhound release goes by with as little fanfare as the reaver release then I will have no high hopes for this game.

Yeah they really should have done more tip of the day for legio armors, I did ask them via email for tempestus armor guide, also a more detailed guide on painting buildings. They acknowledged they'd pass it along. But instead they kept on doing kill team tips which is obviously the thing GW has been pushing the past few months.

Also wondering where the full color gryphonicus and mortis transfers are, those were previewed a long time ago. I hope they do a sheet for tempestus too it's weird they got rules but have no transfers and no artwork in the book...I know i've said this before but what a bizarre decision.

 Thargrim wrote:

RobertDD wrote:
I have no idea if it's a total bust or not. I've spent more on this than I have on any other GW property in recent memory and I like the models quite a bit. By all reports (at least anything I've read) it is selling well too.

BUT the lack of Games Workshop attention for Titanicus leading up to and following the Reaver release is disconcerting. There are no Reaver painting videos from GW, and no Warhammer Community articles. Even the assembly guide included is oddly black & white instead of a full color guide like the Warlord and Knights got, and lacks the pictures instructing where the decals go. If the warhound release goes by with as little fanfare as the reaver release then I will have no high hopes for this game.

Yeah they really should have done more tip of the day for legio armors, I did ask them via email for tempestus armor guide, also a more detailed guide on painting buildings. They acknowledged they'd pass it along. But instead they kept on doing kill team tips which is obviously the thing GW has been pushing the past few months.

Also wondering where the full color gryphonicus and mortis transfers are, those were previewed a long time ago. I hope they do a sheet for tempestus too it's weird they got rules but have no transfers and no artwork in the book...I know i've said this before but what a bizarre decision.

I completely agree, I almost mentioned the full color decals in my original comment and am glad to see I am not the only one who noticed their absence. This is making me hold back on applying decals right now. And the lack of a final word on scale (8mm is 1:200, but measurements suggest 1:267, and that's a 33% difference!) and no basing kits is making me hold off on basing my titans. (and I just hope we're getting a basing kit, and not scenic bases, cause then I am going to have to rip my titans off of their bases they are glued to now...) A little clarity on what's in the pipeline would go a long way towards making some good decisions!

Also, the other bizarre decision: gaming materials essential to the game (the cards) are in very short supply in the starter and rule boxes, and if you want more (which you absolutely do) then they are special order only (and ridiculously expensive, but that is par for the course for GW so I am not even mentioning that).

I really want this game to succeed though, and culminate into a new edition of Epic.

MongooseMatt wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:


The Ender 3 is the best way to start. About as good as as most $500 pri terms for $200 or less. Printed a sweet Shadowsword recently for kicks

Okay, you just got my attention

Ditto. Do tell.

RobertDD wrote:
I completely agree, I almost mentioned the full color decals in my original comment and am glad to see I am not the only one who noticed their absence. This is making me hold back on applying decals right now. And the lack of a final word on scale (8mm is 1:200, but measurements suggest 1:267, and that's a 33% difference!) and no basing kits is making me hold off on basing my titans. (and I just hope we're getting a basing kit, and not scenic bases, cause then I am going to have to rip my titans off of their bases they are glued to now...) A little clarity on what's in the pipeline would go a long way towards making some good decisions!

It's not 8mm, it never has been. Someone misinterpreted the comment "A marine would be 8mm at this scale" to mean the game is 8mm scale and the community has run off with that misconception. It isn't 8mm scale, because an 8mm marine would be representing an 8ft giant. A regular human would be 6mm high at AT scale.

The big problem with AT is that it relies on fairly complex kits that pretty much have to be painted in sub-assemblies for a good result, along with a new scale of terrain that few will have, and core models being drip-fed over the first couple of months. That results in a real lack of momentum to get people playing the game. Despite quite a few people at my local club buying in on day one I've yet to see a single game arranged because everyone wants to finish painting their Warlords before assembling them, and many are working on other projects first.

Compare it to Blood Bowl or Necromunda where you can have your full team assembled in one evening and play on a pre-made gameboard, that made these games far more accessible on release. AT is more like 30k,and needs some time (although not as much) for people to get things on the tabletop.

I hope GW have realised this and have prepared the right releases to follow up on this slow burn start. Say if they drop the Titandeath expansion around xmas with shiny new stuff like Cerastus Knights, Chaos titans or psi-titans. Then at the same time release a 'getting started' maniple boxed set of the core titans that gives a balanced starting force for under £100.

I’m annoyed the cardboard consoles and weapon cards aren’t included with each kit. Mine have unfortunately come all warped too.

Patriarch wrote:It's not 8mm, it never has been. Someone misinterpreted the comment "A marine would be 8mm at this scale" to mean the game is 8mm scale and the community has run off with that misconception. It isn't 8mm scale, because an 8mm marine would be representing an 8ft giant. A regular human would be 6mm high at AT scale.

I keep hearing this argument, but GW themselves have said it is war in a new scale (not war in a previously existing scale that was discontinued), and that it is 8mm, and they said so over and over again. If it is a misinterpretation, it is not just a single misinterpretation from a single remark by a single person at GW. GW has been saying 8mm, and NOTHING ELSE, for years now!
We really won't know for sure what size humans and marines will be in AT 2018 until we get to see some of those humans and marines, or maybe when we see some human sized features that allow us to extrapolate (but even that is risky).

xttz wrote:The big problem with AT is that it relies on fairly complex kits that pretty much have to be painted in sub-assemblies for a good result, along with a new scale of terrain that few will have, and core models being drip-fed over the first couple of months. That results in a real lack of momentum to get people playing the game. Despite quite a few people at my local club buying in on day one I've yet to see a single game arranged because everyone wants to finish painting their Warlords before assembling them, and many are working on other projects first.

Only the Warlord. I think the other kits can easily be assembled before they are painted (but I will admit that I painted parts of all three kits in sub-assemblies).
I did find that you almost have to apply parts of the legs on both Warlord and Titan to avoid getting them in a position where armor plates no longer fit.

xttz wrote:release a 'getting started' maniple boxed set of the core titans that gives a balanced starting force for under £100.

I don't see that happening for that price.

Fajita Fan wrote:I’m annoyed the cardboard consoles and weapon cards aren’t included with each kit. Mine have unfortunately come all warped too.

Yup, although I can see why they would want to leave that out, if they are supplying these kits for a future Epic system where they won't be needed.
This stuff should at least be readily available in cheap and sufficient supply. It is neither readily available, nor cheap, nor do you get enough.

RobertDD wrote:

Patriarch wrote:It's not 8mm, it never has been. Someone misinterpreted the comment "A marine would be 8mm at this scale" to mean the game is 8mm scale and the community has run off with that misconception. It isn't 8mm scale, because an 8mm marine would be representing an 8ft giant. A regular human would be 6mm high at AT scale.

I keep hearing this argument, but GW themselves have said it is war in a new scale (not war in a previously existing scale that was discontinued), and that it is 8mm, and they said so over and over again. If it is a misinterpretation, it is not just a single misinterpretation from a single remark by a single person at GW. GW has been saying 8mm, and NOTHING ELSE, for years now!
We really won't know for sure what size humans and marines will be in AT 2018 until we get to see some of those humans and marines, or maybe when we see some human sized features that allow us to extrapolate (but even that is risky).

You'll have links to them saying that to back up such an adamant position, right? Because I've seen one single solitary definitive "8mm scale" remark from a GW source, and that was the intro blurb on a WC article which ended up not being backed by the text of the article or the video it was featuring. I've seen lots of second and third hand reporting of remarks made by GW designers at events, and it's the fact that such reporting has managed to come up with both "8mm scale" and "8mm Marines" from the exact same remarks from a given event that's been causing the confusion in the first place. And the "war in a new scale" remark could just as easily be referring to AT not being in 40K scale as it could be a contrast with Epic.

Regardless, in the end what GW say matters less than the models they produce(people still refer to 40K as "28mm heroic scale", which is a farce given they haven't been 28mm by any measure for years now), and those support the "8mm refers to Marines" interpretation given they measure in at around 1:267 scale, in which a 7' tall Marine would be 8mm.

Fajita Fan wrote:
I’m annoyed the cardboard consoles and weapon cards aren’t included with each kit. Mine have unfortunately come all warped too.

I'll have cut plans for acrylic replacements soon. I'm changing them to work with magnets...

 schoon wrote:

Fajita Fan wrote:
I’m annoyed the cardboard consoles and weapon cards aren’t included with each kit. Mine have unfortunately come all warped too.

I'll have cut plans for acrylic replacements soon. I'm changing them to work with magnets...

That’s actually a really good idea. I could copy and laminate them then glue magnets to those...

RobertDD wrote:

I don't see that happening for that price.

Sure it can. One Warlord one Reaver and two Warhounds for £95 gives you a full axiom to start with at a decent price point. They could even throw in some command terminals or terrain and it would be less of a discount than the 40k Renegade sets.

The question is less of if discounted titan sets it can happen, but rather if it will happen in time to keep momentum up for this game system. If we have to wait two years i think it'll be too late.

 xttz wrote:

RobertDD wrote:

I don't see that happening for that price.

Sure it can. One Warlord one Reaver and two Warhounds for £95 gives you a full axiom to start with at a decent price point. They could even throw in some command terminals or terrain and it would be less of a discount than the 40k Renegade sets.

The question is less of if discounted titan sets it can happen, but rather if it will happen in time to keep momentum up for this game system. If we have to wait two years i think it'll be too late.

Except that you giving away the warhounds and part of the Reaver. That's not a decent price that's plain silly.

Why should it happen? The reavers are cheap, the warhounds will be just a bit more because there are two of them, what is there to accomplish with this? A huge need to manufacture more titans and use less production allotments for newer products? This isn't a GW main line they don't get a full factory just areas

 Lysenis wrote:

Except that you giving away the warhounds and part of the Reaver. That's not a decent price that's plain silly.

Why should it happen? The reavers are cheap, the warhounds will be just a bit more because there are two of them, what is there to accomplish with this? A huge need to manufacture more titans and use less production allotments for newer products? This isn't a GW main line they don't get a full factory just areas

That, or you're getting a Reaver and Warhounds for RRP with the expensive Warlord at half price. It's not like GW are working on tight margins here. How is it any different from the discount applied to boxes like Knight: Renegade, Tooth & Claw, or any of the Start Collecting sets?

 xttz wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:

Except that you giving away the warhounds and part of the Reaver. That's not a decent price that's plain silly.

Why should it happen? The reavers are cheap, the warhounds will be just a bit more because there are two of them, what is there to accomplish with this? A huge need to manufacture more titans and use less production allotments for newer products? This isn't a GW main line they don't get a full factory just areas

That, or you're getting a Reaver and Warhounds for RRP with the expensive Warlord at half price. It's not like GW are working on tight margins here. How is it any different from the discount applied to boxes like Knight: Renegade, Tooth & Claw, or any of the Start Collecting sets?

it'll happen but only after more titans etc come out I imagine

 xttz wrote:

 Lysenis wrote:

Except that you giving away the warhounds and part of the Reaver. That's not a decent price that's plain silly.

Why should it happen? The reavers are cheap, the warhounds will be just a bit more because there are two of them, what is there to accomplish with this? A huge need to manufacture more titans and use less production allotments for newer products? This isn't a GW main line they don't get a full factory just areas

That, or you're getting a Reaver and Warhounds for RRP with the expensive Warlord at half price. It's not like GW are working on tight margins here. How is it any different from the discount applied to boxes like Knight: Renegade, Tooth & Claw, or any of the Start Collecting sets?

You are talking about games where the models can be used in that game or elsewhere. Tell me, what game can AT18 be used with that you need more than 3 Warlords? More than 4 Reaver? GW does those sets to get rid of sprues and models no longer made or that are too many of. Many of those getting started boxes are just old sprues repackaged.

Short term box sets like Tooth and Claw are new and are usable for kill team, 40k etc.

 Yodhrin wrote:

RobertDD wrote:

Patriarch wrote:It's not 8mm, it never has been. Someone misinterpreted the comment "A marine would be 8mm at this scale" to mean the game is 8mm scale and the community has run off with that misconception. It isn't 8mm scale, because an 8mm marine would be representing an 8ft giant. A regular human would be 6mm high at AT scale.

I keep hearing this argument, but GW themselves have said it is war in a new scale (not war in a previously existing scale that was discontinued), and that it is 8mm, and they said so over and over again. If it is a misinterpretation, it is not just a single misinterpretation from a single remark by a single person at GW. GW has been saying 8mm, and NOTHING ELSE, for years now!
We really won't know for sure what size humans and marines will be in AT 2018 until we get to see some of those humans and marines, or maybe when we see some human sized features that allow us to extrapolate (but even that is risky).

You'll have links to them saying that to back up such an adamant position, right?

Andy Hoare in 2016:
https://recalcitrantdaze.blogspot.com/2016/05/warhammer-fest-2016-part-four-lord-of.html

Gw article form 2018:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/08/08/8th-aug-adeptus-titanicus-war-on-a-new-scalegw-homepage-post-4fw-homepage-post-1/

That should do as proof of the “for years” and “over and over again”. I can’t prove the “nothing else” part, but if you can disprove that I would like to see it. Also, there’s lots more, just Google Titanicus 8mm.

Please do not argue that that first article is not a direct source. It is a reporter reporting on his personal conversation with Andy Hoare from GW. That’s as close as news gets for me. (In 2016 GW was not publishing Adeptus Titanicus articles)

 Yodhrin wrote:
Regardless, in the end what GW say matters less than the models they produce(people still refer to 40K as "28mm heroic scale", which is a farce given they haven't been 28mm by any measure for years now), and those support the "8mm refers to Marines" interpretation given they measure in at around 1:267 scale, in which a 7' tall Marine would be 8mm.

I’m not arguing against your measurements, I’m sure you did a great job. The measurements are just inconsistent with the official word on scale. In fact, I’m thinking you’re probably going to be correct, and I ordered some old epic rhinos and marines to add to my bases.

The only thing that matters in the end is that my Titan bases don’t look horribly out of scale when GW inevitably start producing tanks and infantry for their new version of epic.

Why are people arguing about this? It's a different game for a different feel set in the Warhammer universe. I love the look and feel of giant titans battling it out (I'm collecting tall iced tea cans and electrical switch boxes for terrain). As far as scale goes who looks at Rhinos and Landraiders being scaled properly? Or demon princes? Or even 40k figure bodies?

Sadly enough I'm up to 4 Warlords, 12 knights, and 8 Reavers bought. Just wish I had more time to assemble...

RobertDD wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

RobertDD wrote:

Patriarch wrote:It's not 8mm, it never has been. Someone misinterpreted the comment "A marine would be 8mm at this scale" to mean the game is 8mm scale and the community has run off with that misconception. It isn't 8mm scale, because an 8mm marine would be representing an 8ft giant. A regular human would be 6mm high at AT scale.

I keep hearing this argument, but GW themselves have said it is war in a new scale (not war in a previously existing scale that was discontinued), and that it is 8mm, and they said so over and over again. If it is a misinterpretation, it is not just a single misinterpretation from a single remark by a single person at GW. GW has been saying 8mm, and NOTHING ELSE, for years now!
We really won't know for sure what size humans and marines will be in AT 2018 until we get to see some of those humans and marines, or maybe when we see some human sized features that allow us to extrapolate (but even that is risky).

You'll have links to them saying that to back up such an adamant position, right?

Andy Hoare in 2016:
https://recalcitrantdaze.blogspot.com/2016/05/warhammer-fest-2016-part-four-lord-of.html

Gw article form 2018:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/08/08/8th-aug-adeptus-titanicus-war-on-a-new-scalegw-homepage-post-4fw-homepage-post-1/

That should do as proof of the “for years” and “over and over again”. I can’t prove the “nothing else” part, but if you can disprove that I would like to see it. Also, there’s lots more, just Google Titanicus 8mm.

Please do not argue that that first article is not a direct source. It is a reporter reporting on his personal conversation with Andy Hoare from GW. That’s as close as news gets for me. (In 2016 GW was not publishing Adeptus Titanicus articles)

 Yodhrin wrote:
Regardless, in the end what GW say matters less than the models they produce(people still refer to 40K as "28mm heroic scale", which is a farce given they haven't been 28mm by any measure for years now), and those support the "8mm refers to Marines" interpretation given they measure in at around 1:267 scale, in which a 7' tall Marine would be 8mm.

I’m not arguing against your measurements, I’m sure you did a great job. The measurements are just inconsistent with the official word on scale. In fact, I’m thinking you’re probably going to be correct, and I ordered some old epic rhinos and marines to add to my bases.

The only thing that matters in the end is that my Titan bases don’t look horribly out of scale when GW inevitably start producing tanks and infantry for their new version of epic.

So, the article I already brought up, which doesn't actually state the scale outside of the intro blurb written by the WC person, and secondhand reportage from an event. And actually, yes, I will argue it's not a direct source, because other people attending those same events and conversing with those same GW staffers are the people who were reporting on Dakka and elsewhere that they scaled it to an 8mm Marine, or that exactly what they meant by their scale comments was ambiguous. When you have three different people providing three different interpretations, either they got three different answers or some of them interpreted what they were told incorrectly. Given measuring the actual Titan miniatures supports the interpretation that they made 8mm tall Marines and scaled the Titans accordingly, I'd say that interpretation of what Andy et al were saying at events is the safer bet.

Regardless, why would you continue to argue the scale is 8mm if it's actually not just because GW say so? All that's doing is continuing to provide more instances of "it's 8mm scale" when some unknowing newb follows your suggestion and hits up google, which could mislead them into buying or 3D printing something in the wrong size. It's like people who continue to insist 40K models are "28mm scale" when human and human-adjacent models have been ~30mm to the eyes and ~32mm to the top of the head for years now, it's just perpetuating a falsehood for no real reason.

EDIT: And the reason some folk are arguing about it, Fajita Fan, is that a few of us do enjoy ensuring things are in scale with each other. If the information about the game is correct, both the people who care and the people who don't are happy. If the information about the game is wrong, then it's no problem for the people who don't give a gak, but could result in people who do wasting time and money on stuff they won't want to use.

 Yodhrin wrote:

RobertDD wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

You'll have links to them saying that to back up such an adamant position, right?

Andy Hoare in 2016:
https://recalcitrantdaze.blogspot.com/2016/05/warhammer-fest-2016-part-four-lord-of.html

Gw article form 2018:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/08/08/8th-aug-adeptus-titanicus-war-on-a-new-scalegw-homepage-post-4fw-homepage-post-1/

That should do as proof of the “for years” and “over and over again”. I can’t prove the “nothing else” part, but if you can disprove that I would like to see it. Also, there’s lots more, just Google Titanicus 8mm.

Please do not argue that that first article is not a direct source. It is a reporter reporting on his personal conversation with Andy Hoare from GW. That’s as close as news gets for me. (In 2016 GW was not publishing Adeptus Titanicus articles)

So, the article I already brought up, which doesn't actually state the scale outside of the intro blurb written by the WC person,

A WC person is a GW person, right? So this is a direct quote from GW.

 Yodhrin wrote:
and secondhand reportage from an event.

No, first hand reportage.

 Yodhrin wrote:
And actually, yes, I will argue it's not a direct source,

Utterly bizarre argument.

 Yodhrin wrote:
because other people attending those same events and conversing with those same GW staffers are the people who were reporting on Dakka and elsewhere that they scaled it to an 8mm Marine, or that exactly what they meant by their scale comments was ambiguous. When you have three different people providing three different interpretations, either they got three different answers or some of them interpreted what they were told incorrectly. Given measuring the actual Titan miniatures supports the interpretation that they made 8mm tall Marines and scaled the Titans accordingly, I'd say that interpretation of what Andy et al were saying at events is the safer bet.

Seriously? You ask me for links, poopoo them when I provide them, and then you post this? You are not winning the argument, lol.

I’m gonna need some links myself, to writings from people who directly spoke or listened to Andy Hoare or other GW staffers, that substantiate these claims, ‘cause I’ve been following AT since rumors started, and I never read anything like that until people started measuring and doubting the scale in 2018.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Regardless, why would you continue to argue the scale is 8mm if it's actually not just because GW say so?

I am not arguing the scale is 8mm. I’m arguing GW is claiming the scale is 8mm, and has done so repeatedly and consistently over the course of several years.

 Yodhrin wrote:
All that's doing is continuing to provide more instances of "it's 8mm scale" when some unknowing newb follows your suggestion and hits up google, which could mislead them into buying or 3D printing something in the wrong size.

But if the scale ends up being 8mm then your claims have that exact same effect. This is exactly my frustration: what do we believe? Your measurements or the official word of GW? And before you answer, consider that there are miniature games that use a smaller real scale for their bigger models, so that things still look somewhat “in scale” without breaking the bank on the models, or make them unwieldy in play. This includes 40k, where the vehicles are often a bit smaller than they should be.

Note that I am actually betting on your measurements being correct, and the GW statements being wrong, and old and future new epic mixing reasonably well, scale wise. But it’s a bet without knowing for sure...

 Yodhrin wrote:
EDIT: And the reason some folk are arguing about it, Fajita Fan, is that a few of us do enjoy ensuring things are in scale with each other. If the information about the game is correct, both the people who care and the people who don't are happy. If the information about the game is wrong, then it's no problem for the people who don't give a gak, but could result in people who do wasting time and money on stuff they won't want to use.

This is the one part I agree 100% with.

The small human-sized doors on the terrain are around 6.5mm tall. A normal door is 6feet 8 inches for residental doors in the US. Maybe in the far flung future this has changed, but it's at least a place to start - assuming their normal doors are made for average humans to walk through - worldwide modern average is 5'4".

Abra-ca-math : a human in AT is 5.135mm tall. Maybe the average human in the 40k world is taller and if they were rounded up to 6mm that might come close to making sense.

Comparing the size of a skitarii vs a knight, it comes partway up it's lower leg. measuring that distance on a AT knight is about 6.5mm - which seems to match close to the vague definition of '6mm scale' if "eye level" is where we're measuring from. However, that would mean humans are the same height as the doors on the buildings.

An 8mm human would go up to just below a knights knee - which seems to match the lore height of marines - or close to it.

either way, based on the models it seems to be leaning more toward 6mm than 8mm. Of course if GW ever comes out with actual plastics for non-titans, they may just scale them to whatever scale looks best so we may just get 10mm marines and 8mm humans who can't fit through doors on GW's own terrain.

Seems to me that GW wasn't real concerned about the scale. Someone along the process said a space marine would be 8mm and someone in the marketing department wrote that down and it's been repeated over and over.

RobertDD wrote:

A WC person is a GW person, right? So this is a direct quote from GW.

It is, in the narrowerst most pedantic sense. What it isn't, though, is a direct quote from someone who's been involved with the development of the game and its history. It's a single line written by the PR guy (in between writing similar blurbs for 40k, AoS, Black Library, etc), who was probably not into GW games (or born!) when AT first came out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

RobertDD wrote:

A WC person is a GW person, right? So this is a direct quote from GW.

It is, in the narrowerst most pedantic sense. What it isn't, though, is a direct quote from someone who's been involved with the development of the game and its history. It's a single line written by the PR guy (in between writing similar blurbs for 40k, AoS, Black Library, etc), who was probably not into GW games (or born!) when AT first came out.

First-hand reportage would be a direct quote from Andy Hoare. What we got instead was that blog author's paraphrase based on what he remembered - not nearly as reliable. Yodhrin is quite right, not "bizarre" to state that it's not direct source, because ... it isn't.

How can the scale "end up as 8mm"? Are they going to come round and replace the miniatures they've already made? Or have the Conférence Générale des Poids et Mesures redefine the metre? If you want to know how big ground units will be, one of the RoB tiles has a crashed Leman Russ on it - someone can measure that when it comes out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SirWeeble wrote:
The small human-sized doors on the terrain are around 6.5mm tall. A normal door is 6feet 8 inches for residental doors in the US. Maybe in the far flung future this has changed, but it's at least a place to start - assuming their normal doors are made for average humans to walk through - worldwide modern average is 5'4".

The problem there is that ground scale =/= model scale (it never does, except perhaps in 2mm wargames or 1:2400 naval games on very big boards), so the buildings almost certainly are smaller than they "should" be. Otherwise you end up with buildings that are only 25' square.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

RobertDD wrote:

A WC person is a GW person, right? So this is a direct quote from GW.

It is, in the narrowerst most pedantic sense. What it isn't, though, is a direct quote from someone who's been involved with the development of the game and its history. It's a single line written by the PR guy (in between writing similar blurbs for 40k, AoS, Black Library, etc), who was probably not into GW games (or born!) when AT first came out.

I'm OK with questioning the liability of the source. I do that myself. But one would expect there to be some sort of editing team that oversees all publications. In my experience a corporate web site of a larger corporation is never a single person posting unsupervised.

But I don't know. All I am saying is: direct quote from GW: 8mm. Facepalm it all you want.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
First-hand reportage would be a direct quote from Andy Hoare. What we got instead was that blog author's paraphrase based on what he remembered - not nearly as reliable. Yodhrin is quite right, not "bizarre" to state that it's not direct source, because ... it isn't.

Firsthand reportage is a reporter reporting on something he heard or saw first hand.
A direct quote is a direct quote.

There is no form of reportage that's more direct than firsthand reportage. Anything closer to the source would no longer include a reporter, so it is, by definition, not reportage. Since GW did not publish AT articles before 2018 it is impossible to have a link to anything more direct than firsthand reportage. It is an impossible standard.

You can't have an argument where you call someone out for being wrong, demand links, and when given such links, proclaim they do not meet your impossible standards.

Meanwhile, crickets on all the links to the firsthand reportage of people that heard something else than 8mm...

GW has been saying 8mm, and NOTHING ELSE, for years now!
Even if they are wrong (and I totally suspect that they are, based on Yodhrin's measurements) that statement is absolutely true.

So local store noted reaver has sold out and are waiting for GW to cast some more. Pretty good for busted game.

Pretty annoying shortage in that every single maniple requires reaver unless I missed something.

tneva82 wrote:
So local store noted reaver has sold out and are waiting for GW to cast some more. Pretty good for busted game.

Pretty annoying shortage in that every single maniple requires reaver unless I missed something.

For now they do. Newer ones might not

Does anyone know if Adeptus Titanicus is going to get more factions and regular vehicles like epic 40k did?

 SolarCross wrote:
Does anyone know if Adeptus Titanicus is going to get more factions and regular vehicles like epic 40k did?

It is designed into the game but it's based in sales and community. I have heard rumors that Epic is about a year or so out

 SolarCross wrote:
Does anyone know if Adeptus Titanicus is going to get more factions and regular vehicles like epic 40k did?

that is prolly tied to lore.
cuz what realy exists in 30k?

eldar is prolly around, nids is munching on planets as usual, orks is ever present.
tau is prolly too young to have epxanded to a point where it would face humanity and necrons is still sleeping.

wishfull thinking from me would be that we will get some other support like the knight banners sutch as a baneblade squad, but it realisticly wont be a huge amount of them, this is still a game of and around titans.

if epic re surface, i hope it will be as a stand alone game where ATs titans can be used but to a mutch more limited scale(1-2 titans per avrage size force)
so if you want army vs army you go epic, if you want titan vs titan you go AT.