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.

What a relief, wallet is saved.

I feel like they're going out of their way to make the game less accessible at this point. Kinda glad I didn't take the plunge and went for Underworlds instead.

I imagine that it's honestly a reaction to the game not doing so well sales wise.

At the very least they seem not to have given up on it yet but if it was really flying off the shelves then chances are even things like the Arvus and Vulture might have been plastic.

 Jack Flask wrote:
I imagine that it's honestly a reaction to the game not doing so well sales wise.

At the very least they seem not to have given up on it yet but if it was really flying off the shelves then chances are even things like the Arvus and Vulture might have been plastic.

I tend to think they probably already planned for those to be resin. There's a long lead time from designing a model to manufacturing it for them to change their mind on making it plastic.

I reckon they always planned to make some stuff resin from FW, the same way some of the Blood Bowl stuff and AT stuff is resin.

Production capacity is overload now, AT got new expansion with 0 new kit.

FW resin, great so a handful will be $100... I was sorta laughing that mentioned the oop ground assets only to see the update and get excited thinking it was a new ground asset box with imperial/tau instead of ork.

Chopstick wrote:
Production capacity is overload now, AT got new expansion with 0 new kit.

The previous ground asset kit was a Chinese cast, so if they'd gone done that route it wouldn't have consumed their in house capacity. But maybe with covid the China cast has become more difficult for them to do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crablezworth wrote:
FW resin, great so a handful will be $100... I was sorta laughing that mentioned the oop ground assets only to see the update and get excited thinking it was a new ground asset box with imperial/tau instead of ork.

I'll be curious to see how much they'll cost, I really like the look of them, but if we're talking hundreds of dollars to get the set then I'll pass.

Even when the Game fails, they can later use the Airplane molds for Adeptus Titanicus Expansions or Epic.

Anyone got a scale picture between this and the old Forgeworld Epic aircraft?

 TheSecretSquig wrote:
Anyone got a scale picture between this and the old Forgeworld Epic aircraft?

 zedmeister wrote:

Why is this called a "Basilisk" Anti-Aircraft emplacement? Is that not the wrong name? I was under the impression "Basilisk" is the name of the self-propelled artillery platform as a whole, with the cannon mounted to a Chimera (or other chassis). The cannon itself isn't what the name refers to, while the weapon platform with the Manitcore and Hydra turrets just used the vehicle name, the canon from the Basilisk used the "Earthshaker" name when used as an emplacement .

Sound like a mixed up between the basilisk tank and the weapon it used, the earthshaker cannon

 Jack Flask wrote:
I imagine that it's honestly a reaction to the game not doing so well sales wise.

At the very least they seem not to have given up on it yet but if it was really flying off the shelves then chances are even things like the Arvus and Vulture might have been plastic.

I think GW gave up on AI about 5 pages into writing the first rulebook

If they'd given up on it, they'd just have stopped releasing stuff (especially when their release slate is too full because of covid)

that they're still putting stuff, out (and if these are really resin putting hand casting time into it which is really a major pinch point due to social distancing) they really are committed to ongoing support for the game

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
If they'd given up on it, they'd just have stopped releasing stuff (especially when their release slate is too full because of covid)

that they're still putting stuff, out (and if these are really resin putting hand casting time into it which is really a major pinch point due to social distancing) they really are committed to ongoing support for the game

I agree. Remember they still have to integrate with GW's overall release schedule and the first half of the year was hindered with a production shutdown and the second half mostly focused on the launch of a new 40k edition and many new Necron and SM kits. I'm not surprised the Specialist Games stuff got put on the back burner.

Now c'mon GW. Make the Tau terrain in 40k scale so I can buy too much of it.

 Irbis wrote:
Eh, no. You can see it still has straight, cylindrical tips of every single imperial autocannon, instead of angled end of lascannon.

Wow. You did what you always do: Come into a thread for the express purpose of going "No! That's wrong!", and even when shown with multiple pictures why your correction was inaccurate (and even given reasons why something in that scale won't have the same details as something made for a bigger scale), your only response is "Er. No!". You're incredible.

 Grimskul wrote:
I feel like they're going out of their way to make the game less accessible at this point.

I mean did you see the price of the giant Ork Bomber they just put out? Costs almost as much as a Start Collecting! for a single damned plane. They're out of their damned minds with these prices.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Now c'mon GW. Make the Tau terrain in 40k scale so I can buy too much of it.

 Irbis wrote:
Eh, no. You can see it still has straight, cylindrical tips of every single imperial autocannon, instead of angled end of lascannon.

Wow. You did what you always do: Come into a thread for the express purpose of going "No! That's wrong!", and even when shown with multiple pictures why your correction was inaccurate (and even given reasons why something in that scale won't have the same details as something made for a bigger scale), your only response is "Er. No!". You're incredible.

 Grimskul wrote:
I feel like they're going out of their way to make the game less accessible at this point.

I mean did you see the price of the giant Ork Bomber they just put out? Costs almost as much as a Start Collecting! for a single damned plane. They're out of their damned minds with these prices.

Yeah, I initially saw that Ork bomber and said "Hell yeah!". Then I saw the price (in Canadian no less, I know Australia's must be even worse) and said, "HELL NO!".

An awful shame, because I would LOOOVE to see that in 40k scale. Probably wouldn't be good rules-wise but I feel like Ork aircraft options are something they've missed a chance with.

 Jack Flask wrote:
I imagine that it's honestly a reaction to the game not doing so well sales wise.

At the very least they seem not to have given up on it yet but if it was really flying off the shelves then chances are even things like the Arvus and Vulture might have been plastic.

As someone who recently bought in and has big buyers remorse, this is what I'll say.

Absolutely stunning models. 10/10 for each one I've seen.
Game Play. 0/10. Literally it's just boring, dull and favors specific planes over others.

I cut while I had the chance and ended up picking up SW: Armada instead, which is way, way better.

 Togusa wrote:

 Jack Flask wrote:
I imagine that it's honestly a reaction to the game not doing so well sales wise.

At the very least they seem not to have given up on it yet but if it was really flying off the shelves then chances are even things like the Arvus and Vulture might have been plastic.

As someone who recently bought in and has big buyers remorse, this is what I'll say.

Absolutely stunning models. 10/10 for each one I've seen.
Game Play. 0/10. Literally it's just boring, dull and favors specific planes over others.

I cut while I had the chance and ended up picking up SW: Armada instead, which is way, way better.

I admit the AI game is pretty basic - but it's fine enough for a quick pick-up game at the local club. Requiring players to commit to a direction when choosing a maneuvere would add a lot, I think. And I love painting the models. So I played my 'more money than sense' card and splashed for the Mega-Bomber. Just because.

I play Star Wars: Armada too. Fantastic game.

MarkNorfolk wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Jack Flask wrote:
I imagine that it's honestly a reaction to the game not doing so well sales wise.

At the very least they seem not to have given up on it yet but if it was really flying off the shelves then chances are even things like the Arvus and Vulture might have been plastic.

As someone who recently bought in and has big buyers remorse, this is what I'll say.

Absolutely stunning models. 10/10 for each one I've seen.
Game Play. 0/10. Literally it's just boring, dull and favors specific planes over others.

I cut while I had the chance and ended up picking up SW: Armada instead, which is way, way better.

I admit the AI game is pretty basic - but it's fine enough for a quick pick-up game at the local club. Requiring players to commit to a direction when choosing a maneuvere would add a lot, I think. And I love painting the models. So I played my 'more money than sense' card and splashed for the Mega-Bomber. Just because.

I play Star Wars: Armada too. Fantastic game.

I don't even think it's fine for pick-up games, within a few intro games I was seeing the holes. It's not that the game is too basic, it feels like it hasn't been playtested. Some of the changes they made from the 1st game look like someone thought it would be a good idea without actually playtesting the effect. Not that the 1st game was perfect, it needed refinement, but we've got the opposite of refinement.

Just got one of the new Mega Bommers in the post. Fantastic model, with incredible detail (and just a tiny bit of mold slip in one out of the way area). It is HUGE, and it appears to have magnet holes for most of the turrets so they can pivot.

Bit weird that it can take 4 Big Bombs and comes with 8 (and attachment points for all of them) and it can take 2 pairs of rokkits and comes with 4 (and attachment points for all of them).

However, the included acrylic rod is soft. It bends under fairly light pressure (I bent it just removing the attachment to the sprue, or whatever). It bends back readily, but I've never seen acrylic rod that is flexible like this. I've emailed them, but does anyone know if this needs to cure, or if it is widespread?

You can bend thin acylic rod a bit, but too much and it snaps

I know I've had a couple of non GW/FW flying things with rod that was too thin and failed so I replaced it with something thicker,

but it's fairly obvious it's going to happen as the rod started to bend when the mini was put on them, so i'd see if it does that when the main body of the bomber if on it

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 TheSecretSquig wrote:
Anyone got a scale picture between this and the old Forgeworld Epic aircraft?

Any chance anyone can add the old Epic 40K, metal flyers to this picture for further comparison? Thanks!

callidusx3 wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 TheSecretSquig wrote:
Anyone got a scale picture between this and the old Forgeworld Epic aircraft?

Any chance anyone can add the old Epic 40K, metal flyers to this picture for further comparison? Thanks!

But they’re in the photo already; can’t you see those little specs to the right of the AI1 planes?

Da Butcha wrote:
Just got one of the new Mega Bommers in the post. Fantastic model, with incredible detail (and just a tiny bit of mold slip in one out of the way area). It is HUGE, and it appears to have magnet holes for most of the turrets so they can pivot.

Bit weird that it can take 4 Big Bombs and comes with 8 (and attachment points for all of them) and it can take 2 pairs of rokkits and comes with 4 (and attachment points for all of them).

However, the included acrylic rod is soft. It bends under fairly light pressure (I bent it just removing the attachment to the sprue, or whatever). It bends back readily, but I've never seen acrylic rod that is flexible like this. I've emailed them, but does anyone know if this needs to cure, or if it is widespread?

Any chance you could measure the wingspan for those of us that are curious? Or a photo next to an Eavy Bomber if that's easier?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

callidusx3 wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 TheSecretSquig wrote:
Anyone got a scale picture between this and the old Forgeworld Epic aircraft?

Any chance anyone can add the old Epic 40K, metal flyers to this picture for further comparison? Thanks!

The old metals were much tinier than the FW resin ones, maybe half the size of the FW resin ones.

I don't have any metal Thunderbolts or Nightwings, somewhere at my parents' place I'd have some metal Dakkajets that I painted when I was about 10yo, lol, but I can't put my hands on them quickly to get a comparison. I do remember they were a lot tinier though.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

callidusx3 wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 TheSecretSquig wrote:
Anyone got a scale picture between this and the old Forgeworld Epic aircraft?

Any chance anyone can add the old Epic 40K, metal flyers to this picture for further comparison? Thanks!

The old metals were much tinier than the FW resin ones, maybe half the size of the FW resin ones.

I don't have any metal Thunderbolts or Nightwings, somewhere at my parents' place I'd have some metal Dakkajets that I painted when I was about 10yo, lol, but I can't put my hands on them quickly to get a comparison. I do remember they were a lot tinier though.

Thanks for the input. As you requested above, measurements of one of the new AI figures and one of the old FW figures would suffice for my purposes too. I have old Epic 40K flyers for IG, Eldar and Orks, so I can arrive at the change in scale with those numbers. My main purpose is to play the new AI on a 3'x3' with 1" hexes using Epic figures (as well as scaled 3D prints of some of the models not released back in Epic).

You should share those early paint jobs of yours. I was in my 20's when Epic 40K released.

For which ones did you want measurements? I have a few in front of me...

New Plastic Thunderbolt:
70mm wingspan, 72mm if you include the landing lights.

New Plastic Dakkajet:
56mm wingspan

Old resin Dakkajet:
41.5mm wingspan.

If your hope was to use new plastics alongside the old metals, I think there's a pretty big difference in scale. The new plastics are ~8mm scale, the old resin was ~6mm scale, but the old metals were maybe 3 or 4mm scale if memory serves. Though I'd be curious if you have some old metals how big they are also.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:


Any chance you could measure the wingspan for those of us that are curious? Or a photo next to an Eavy Bomber if that's easier?

I haven't assembled the model yet, but it will be right around 170mm across, vs the 110mm of the Eavy Bommer.

Wing sections are 4cm, wingtips bits are 1cm (but angled slightly upwards), engines are 2cm across, and the main fuselage is 3cm across.

Da Butcha wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:


Any chance you could measure the wingspan for those of us that are curious? Or a photo next to an Eavy Bomber if that's easier?

I haven't assembled the model yet, but it will be right around 170mm across, vs the 110mm of the Eavy Bommer.

Wing sections are 4cm, wingtips bits are 1cm (but angled slightly upwards), engines are 2cm across, and the main fuselage is 3cm across.

Thanks! I had been estimating a 7" (178mm) wingspan based upon the pictures, seems that wasn't too far off. So it's a decent chunk bigger than an Eavy Bomber, but not insanely so. The Eavy Bomber is already pretty big relative to the hex pattern on the boards.

Have fun building and painting it! Would love to see it when you're done.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
For which ones did you want measurements? I have a few in front of me...

New Plastic Thunderbolt:
70mm wingspan, 72mm if you include the landing lights.

New Plastic Dakkajet:
56mm wingspan

Old resin Dakkajet:
41.5mm wingspan.

If your hope was to use new plastics alongside the old metals, I think there's a pretty big difference in scale. The new plastics are ~8mm scale, the old resin was ~6mm scale, but the old metals were maybe 3 or 4mm scale if memory serves. Though I'd be curious if you have some old metals how big they are also.

I have no interest in using the new figures at all. I just need to get an idea what the size of the new planes would be in the old scale (for 3D printing purposes). Thanks for those numbers!

Here are the sizes of the metal flyers (names as used then) I have from Epic 40K (most are 1997 release; width / length):

Ork Fights-Bommer: 22mm / 23mm & 25mm / 28mm [2 different sculpts]

Imperial Thunderbolt: 25mm / 28mm
Imperial Marauder: 35mm (including weapons) / 40mm
Imperial Maruader (older sculpt): 31mm / 36mm

Eldar Nightwing: 21mm / 28mm
Eldar Pheonix: 37mm / 37mm