Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I will buy up tons of these to flesh out my old AI forces. I never had a proper Imperial force.

For those who never played the old AI, you can read up on it here. It looks like the gameplay is similar but replacing the free form movement with hexes. Even if I hate the new version, I still have the old one.

OLD AI REVIEW:
https://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2017/02/review-aeronautica-imperialis-forgeworld.html

There are also a ton of batreps on that blog if you want a feel for how it played/plays but they use expanded rules and aircraft.

I'll buy some imperial fighters if it turns out they scale up nicely with AT. I think they look a bit big because the fighters are absurdly large even in 40K scale, I can't find a single picture of them next to a titan though so it's hard to say!

No, the Forge World fighters are reasonably "normal", while the Citadel ones are a bit small.

this is the Thunderbolt next to a Warhound (both 40k sized).

For scaling, a Warhound is 12.1m long ( IA vol 3 1st edition), the Thunderbolt is 14.2m long (IA vol 1 1st edition p224) and an F-15 is 19.4m long (Wikipedia). Aeroplanes are big.

So is this the same scale as the old AI game? If so, I'll buy as many as is reasonable for the price because I loved AI and have a few incomplete squadrons. Always wanted to add Marauders but they sold out fast when the game died and cost a fortune on ebay (if you can even find them!).

If it's not the same scale I'll buy a box still, because AI was a great game and the models look great.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 aka_mythos wrote:
Anyone else want to play this at full 28mm scale?

Hells no It looks like they're downscaling this game a bit, the original AI required a decent sized table in spite of being 6mm, and it worked well because it gave the aircraft space to move. Trying to play it in 28mm would be a nightmare (either for needing absurdly big boards, or compressing all the action down).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
No, the Forge World fighters are reasonably "normal", while the Citadel ones are a bit small.

this is the Thunderbolt next to a Warhound (both 40k sized).

For scaling, a Warhound is 12.1m long ( IA vol 3 1st edition), the Thunderbolt is 14.2m long (IA vol 1 1st edition p224) and an F-15 is 19.4m long (Wikipedia). Aeroplanes are big.

In general FW tend to scale their things correctly. It's GW proper who make vehicles that are too small to actually fit people in, FW (as long as they are given free reign from the start) tend to make vehicles that are actually the correct size.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Hells no It looks like they're downscaling this game a bit, the original AI required a decent sized table in spite of being 6mm, and it worked well because it gave the aircraft space to move. Trying to play it in 28mm would be a nightmare (either for needing absurdly big boards, or compressing all the action down).

A few weeks ago I was trying to think of how to play a 40k dogfighting game at 28mm, and I was thinking that maybe it would be best to take a hint from BFG and say that the planes weren't to scale with the actual game and measure to the flight stand. Of course then it wouldn't exactly be a 28mm game.

On the other hand movement and weapon ranges are basically never to scale with 28mm games anyway.

 schoon wrote:
Has anyone been able to figure out of the aircraft scale is the same as it was with AI1, or is it bigger/smaller?

I've seen people saying that the scale is the same.

 stormwell wrote:

 schoon wrote:
Has anyone been able to figure out of the aircraft scale is the same as it was with AI1, or is it bigger/smaller?

I've seen people saying that the scale is the same.

It's a hex board so down the road as more stuff is released, it's possible that some of the larger aircraft might not be to scale.

GWs games are already somewhat flexible with respect to scale for certain vehicles anyway. I wouldn't fret too much.

It is not really a flying game unless there is a game mechanism that addresses vertical movement. It is the various angles of attack that makes flying cool. If you are just pushing airplane minis across a table without accounting for vertical movement it is more of a tank game on stilts like x-wing. I need to know more before calling tower for take-off. Holding short...

 Tokhuah wrote:
It is not really a flying game unless there is a game mechanism that addresses vertical movement. It is the various angles of attack that makes flying cool. If you are just pushing airplane minis across a table without accounting for vertical movement it is more of a tank game on stilts like x-wing. I need to know more before calling tower for take-off. Holding short...

There're speed and attitude, which still remain in this new edition if you look at the Aircraft card.

Also if you look at the aircraft minis base you can see 2 dial on it, one with double headed arrow, i guess is the attitude dial, and the other with 3 arrow is the speed dial.

 Tokhuah wrote:
It is not really a flying game unless there is a game mechanism that addresses vertical movement. It is the various angles of attack that makes flying cool. If you are just pushing airplane minis across a table without accounting for vertical movement it is more of a tank game on stilts like x-wing. I need to know more before calling tower for take-off. Holding short...

The old AI game had variable speed and altitude and fixed manoeuvres.

It looks like the new AI uses the same bases as the old one (more stylised, but functionally the same) with an altitude dial on the one side of the base and a speed dial on the other.

I wonder how pose-able the minis will be? like is there any pitch and attitude to how you can angle the model(for pictures)?

 Tokhuah wrote:
It is not really a flying game unless there is a game mechanism that addresses vertical movement. It is the various angles of attack that makes flying cool. If you are just pushing airplane minis across a table without accounting for vertical movement it is more of a tank game on stilts like x-wing. I need to know more before calling tower for take-off. Holding short...

In the old Aeronautica at the very basic level Altitude was just a form of invisible terrain - you can only shoot aircraft at the same level as you (hitting on a 5+) or one higher or lower than you (hitting on a 6+).

The other key area it came into were the manoeuvres, generally ascending cost you speed and descending gained it - a large Bomber that has come in slowly in order to get an accurate hit on it's target is going to struggle to pick up speed to outpace an incoming fighter with engine power alone, but using a powerdive could rapidly build up speed for it's escape moves. Alternatively a transport or bomber could start the mission quite high and fast with it's escorts below it knowing that any interceptors are going to be burning speed as they climb to catch them (if they could, not all aircraft can operate at Altitude 9 at the very edge of the atmosphere) - though in the transport's case this definitely comes at a cost, as you have to land by playing a straight move card that will set your speed and altitude to 0. Not all of them are capable of rapidly decelerating and losing altitude at the same time, so you might be safe for a turn or two, but after that your movements are very predictable without an ace pilot.

Fighters also have a minimum speed, and operating around that level can be a way of avoiding tailing if you're in a dogfight. Not only can you use your minimum speed to brake hard and let the opponent overshoot you, but if you've got different minimums then you might be able to lose a tail by climbing hard - shedding speed to gain altitude knowing that your pursuer either has to waste ammo on a tricky shot (most fighters only have ammo to shoot 3-4 turns out of 8-9 with their main guns, let alone those with missiles) or break off and try again from a different approach. Have a look at the cards on the previous page and see that the two reverse direction ones (half loop high or wing over) don't have the same speed and altitude costs.

It really was a very good game, and captured the feel of the open sky pretty well by turning it into an aspect of your movement rather than making the game about these 3D angles. Altitude and speed were more weapons you used to out-manoeuvre your opponent rather something that tracked your position in 3D space. The fact that the two were integrally linked was key.

Just spotted something very slick linked over on the Aeronautica Imperialis facebook group(the proper original one, not the one run by the Games Workshop Volunteer Copyright Police Force - if it has a year in its name, scroll on by folks), for anyone thinking of giving the original game a go or digging their copy out but who's a bit underwhelmed by the original simple maneuver cards: the OKB-14 blog has a redesigned version of the cards with precise cutouts for the hex bases, that can be printed off and stuck to a piece of cardstock or foamcore.

They might need a wee edit depending on the size of the new bases, but that shouldn't be much effort.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Just spotted something very slick linked over on the Aeronautica Imperialis facebook group(the proper original one, not the one run by the Games Workshop Volunteer Copyright Police Force - if it has a year in its name, scroll on by folks), for anyone thinking of giving the original game a go or digging their copy out but who's a bit underwhelmed by the original simple maneuver cards: the OKB-14 blog has a redesigned version of the cards with precise cutouts for the hex bases, that can be printed off and stuck to a piece of cardstock or foamcore.

They might need a wee edit depending on the size of the new bases, but that shouldn't be much effort.

Great find! Those are certainly better than the original ones.
I am very excited that we're getting a new version, been poking at the FW staff for years now, asking for its return.:-)

A few people have drawn up templates that include the hex cut out over the years, they definitely help a bit. Though I never had a huge issue with the original ones, the originals had arrows on them and the bases had arrows, so I'd just line up the arrows on the base with the arrows on the cards.

My real question is;
will there ever be support for Xenos? Reason #1 none of my gaming group has bought into Titanicus is, that fully half of us dont play imperial factions.

Aeronautica at least brings Orcs, but honestly I dont see it taking off if its impossible to have everyone participate.

 archont wrote:
My real question is;
will there ever be support for Xenos? Reason #1 none of my gaming group has bought into Titanicus is, that fully half of us dont play imperial factions.

Aeronautica at least brings Orcs, but honestly I dont see it taking off if its impossible to have everyone participate.

Space Marine, Orks, Eldar, Chaos and Tau are the other mainstay faction in the old game. It'd be natural to expect they'd come.

Although i can be pretty certain that the Imperial and Space Marine will get the most units and expansion.

 archont wrote:
My real question is;
will there ever be support for Xenos? Reason #1 none of my gaming group has bought into Titanicus is, that fully half of us dont play imperial factions.

Aeronautica at least brings Orcs, but honestly I dont see it taking off if its impossible to have everyone participate.

They have Orks. How much more clarification do you need? They've stated in the video that they have expansions planned.

Wow, at first glance this looks totally awesome!!

Is there a somewhat complete list of what old models were released for Aeronautica Imperialis anywhere? Google has come up empty for me, was hoping to find a page with pics of everything

Tastyfish wrote:

 Tokhuah wrote:
It is not really a flying game unless there is a game mechanism that addresses vertical movement. It is the various angles of attack that makes flying cool. If you are just pushing airplane minis across a table without accounting for vertical movement it is more of a tank game on stilts like x-wing. I need to know more before calling tower for take-off. Holding short...

In the old Aeronautica at the very basic level Altitude was just a form of invisible terrain - you can only shoot aircraft at the same level as you (hitting on a 5+) or one higher or lower than you (hitting on a 6+).

The other key area it came into were the manoeuvres, generally ascending cost you speed and descending gained it - a large Bomber that has come in slowly in order to get an accurate hit on it's target is going to struggle to pick up speed to outpace an incoming fighter with engine power alone, but using a powerdive could rapidly build up speed for it's escape moves. Alternatively a transport or bomber could start the mission quite high and fast with it's escorts below it knowing that any interceptors are going to be burning speed as they climb to catch them (if they could, not all aircraft can operate at Altitude 9 at the very edge of the atmosphere) - though in the transport's case this definitely comes at a cost, as you have to land by playing a straight move card that will set your speed and altitude to 0. Not all of them are capable of rapidly decelerating and losing altitude at the same time, so you might be safe for a turn or two, but after that your movements are very predictable without an ace pilot.

Fighters also have a minimum speed, and operating around that level can be a way of avoiding tailing if you're in a dogfight. Not only can you use your minimum speed to brake hard and let the opponent overshoot you, but if you've got different minimums then you might be able to lose a tail by climbing hard - shedding speed to gain altitude knowing that your pursuer either has to waste ammo on a tricky shot (most fighters only have ammo to shoot 3-4 turns out of 8-9 with their main guns, let alone those with missiles) or break off and try again from a different approach. Have a look at the cards on the previous page and see that the two reverse direction ones (half loop high or wing over) don't have the same speed and altitude costs.

It really was a very good game, and captured the feel of the open sky pretty well by turning it into an aspect of your movement rather than making the game about these 3D angles. Altitude and speed were more weapons you used to out-manoeuvre your opponent rather something that tracked your position in 3D space. The fact that the two were integrally linked was key.

Yeah- you couldn't really fight in the vertical, but energy management was critical, which is key. It's WW2/korea dogfighting, not modern. The couple of simple 2v2 games I played back when I bought it were great - and applying real-world tactics and formations worked well, which is alwatys a sign of a good system.

 RiTides wrote:
Wow, at first glance this looks totally awesome!!

Is there a somewhat complete list of what old models were released for Aeronautica Imperialis anywhere? Google has come up empty for me, was hoping to find a page with pics of everything

BRB + Tactica expansion.

The only thing they didn't release on that list above was the Hyperios Battery for space marines and the 'eavy Flak Kannon for the Orks. Everything else had a model.

Edit:

This thread has a good mix of images of the old models (Under the Epic section):
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/659902.page


2nd Edit:

I had forgotten about the Ork Bommers. Fun looking rust buckets:

https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Heavy_Bommer

Thanks for the super fast replies and resources, guys!!

That model list is perfect . Also really appreciate the pics links, but I'm surprised there isn't a more comprehensive one! Looks like this is an issue with FW in general... maybe I'll have to make one

So about how many models you need to reasonably play this? I said that I wasn't particularly interested, but if it can be played with just a handful of models I might give it a go.

 Crimson wrote:
So about how many models you need to reasonably play this? I said that I wasn't particularly interested, but if it can be played with just a handful of models I might give it a go.

Depend on the scenario, scenario usually have a "canon force" with fixed units for both side, and an "alternative force" where you can build your own force with point + some restriction (like taking transport, bomber etc..) Small fight ranging from 60-100 pts, while large battle could go above 200 points.

Depends on the faction, but you will probably want at least:

4 Fighters
1 Bomber
1 Transport (Unless they are transport 1, then you will want 3)
3 Ground Defenses

How long does a game usually take for you, Easy E? I'm guessing it might be faster now with hexes, too

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
Anyone else want to play this at full 28mm scale?

Hells no It looks like they're downscaling this game a bit, the original AI required a decent sized table in spite of being 6mm, and it worked well because it gave the aircraft space to move. Trying to play it in 28mm would be a nightmare (either for needing absurdly big boards, or compressing all the action down).

If you take the provided game board and scale it to 28mm its between 8'x8' and 9'x9'. At least around here people use a bunch of fold out 4'x8' tables so while pushing 2 together gives you something that isn't easiest to reach to the center I've played games on tables that big before and it isn't too bad.

28mm scale Aeronautica was a thing:


Games Day 2007

Forgeworld brought the movement cards printed on 2'x3' foamcore boards IIRC.


There was also a 40K mini-game a few years ago with splash releases of flyers. I never bought or played it, but it seemed pretty fun for small scale dogfighting.

Aeronautica is hands down the cleanest most fun ruleset to come from GW (though I haven't played AT, but heard it's good.) I think the hex movement will make things even cleaner and faster.

My hope for some additional rules improvements over the original are:
1) Thunderbolts were too good for 20 points compared to everything else.
2) High Maneuver wasn't actually that much of an advantage, certainly not what you traded off for it.
3) Arvus Spam, it was a beer and pretzels game, but we messed around with ways to break it. You could bring 4-5 arvus lighters and 4 thuds at 100 points, and force your opponent to show his moves while you shuffled around 4 point transports, and then move the fighters in for the kill. This also hurt Eldar vs. Chaos or Orks.
4) Better air to air options for Tau. They had 5 different transport/bomber options but only one middling fighter-attack aircraft. Tigershark should've been to the thunderbolt what a hammerhead is to a leman russ.
5) Cheaper Eldar. They were good, but not 50% more expensive than Imperial or 100% more than Ork Good. I think this has something to do with points 1 and 2.

Either, way. I'm stoked for the re-release and future supplements.