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 suppose I'm just so used to seeing a two player starter/core set for most systems. After reading the preview article properly, yep, I agree this looks more like one unified force.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Tabletop_Magpie wrote:

I am a bit stumped as to why we have marines vs humans though. Granted I'm only like 8 or 9 books in the series but so far the only human armies I've read about are from the legion home worlds/systems? I haven't seen or heard much of anything about these Solar folk. I get that the idea is probably to have a full starter set as an army rather than split it in to 2 factions but still, I just feel the marines would stomp the meat bags.

We've seen nothing to suggest you're ever supposed to play the Marine part vs the Solar Aux part. The unit list on the back of the box doesn't even have separate columns for the two "factions"

Also every other box where the contents are supposed to go against each other, the factions are oriented looking at each other. Even for the HH Age of Darkness box where the contents where also advertised as a single army that is still the case.
But for this both the SM and the SA look in the same direction so I don't think they are meant to be played against each other.

0% chance of that happening so just take it as my rambling but everything in that box is potentially painted traitor right now. SM as Death Guard, Titans as Legio Mortis and while I don't know about SA paint schemes, for them any kind of scheme would work both for loyalists and traitors. So what if we might see another box with different contents painted as loyalists that is meant to go against this one for a dual starter set launch? Maybe that one could even be Mechanicum and Custodes against this box with SM and SA.
But again while that would be great so chance of it being true.

 Matrindur wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Tabletop_Magpie wrote:

I am a bit stumped as to why we have marines vs humans though. Granted I'm only like 8 or 9 books in the series but so far the only human armies I've read about are from the legion home worlds/systems? I haven't seen or heard much of anything about these Solar folk. I get that the idea is probably to have a full starter set as an army rather than split it in to 2 factions but still, I just feel the marines would stomp the meat bags.

We've seen nothing to suggest you're ever supposed to play the Marine part vs the Solar Aux part. The unit list on the back of the box doesn't even have separate columns for the two "factions"

Also every other box where the contents are supposed to go against each other, the factions are oriented looking at each other. Even for the HH Age of Darkness box where the contents where also advertised as a single army that is still the case.
But for this both the SM and the SA look in the same direction so I don't think they are meant to be played against each other.

0% chance of that happening so just take it as my rambling but everything in that box is potentially painted traitor right now. SM as Death Guard, Titans as Legio Mortis and while I don't know about SA paint schemes, for them any kind of scheme would work both for loyalists and traitors. So what if we might see another box with different contents painted as loyalists that is meant to go against this one for a dual starter set launch? Maybe that one could even be Mechanicum and Custodes against this box with SM and SA.
But again while that would be great so chance of it being true.

Solar Auxilia seem to match the colours of the Cthonian Head Hunters, so definitely traitor.

25mm bases just confirmed on the Forgeworld social media page!

This means most of my collection is now entirely usable and whilst I'm 99.99% sure no one in my group will want to swap from using Epic40k rules, this does mean my wallet is likely to take quite the beating over the next 6 months!



Edit for screenshot:

Nice! Considering that, these look smaller than the resin Armigers. Speaking of which, I expect them to be re-worked into plastic now...

10 Things You Need To Know About Warhammer: The Horus Heresy – Legions Imperialis (WarCom)

Hidden Orders & Alternating Activation mentioned, but a bit light on actual details...

Sounding a lot like 2nd with other edition rules mixed in.

Also, ruined terrain!




Also, note new base on Warbringer:

New ruins looks nice, waaay better than the AT building.

hidden orders is what 1st edition had, Advance, First Fire or Charge, with a Fall Back order you could be forced to issue

then split phases with alternating activations

sounds decent

the terrain looks.. odd, but ok

Sarouan wrote:
Well we can make an estimate based on what already exists. We know a box of 2 warhound currently cost 75$. There's another sprue and special bases for Epic, so it's possible it's sold actually higher, but let's base ourselves on the current one.

For the vehicles, let's say there a box of 4 / 3 and a box of 2 (the Leman Russ / Predator, and the super heavies). We can make a comparison with Aeronautica Imperialis that tend to sell 50$ a box (number varies, depends of the size from 6 to 2). Let's assume it's somewhat 25-35$ the box.

For the infantry, based on what I see and the options, I'd say they sell the different faction parts together with the dreadnoughts / sentinels ( I don't see them sold separately, it feels a bit too small for that but maybe I'm wrong). Let's say 50$ each set , maybe 60 ?

The book itself is likety to be sold like a regular rulebook from other games. I'd say 60-70$, given its size.

It arrives at a 365$ together (assuming there's nothing else).

Now if we make a bundle price...I guess we could go down to 250-300$. 200, I'm not sure if it's really accurate to current GW pricing and (likely) upper inflation.

Sounds plausible. Unfortunately 300$ after leviathan just launched at 250$ means it's dead on arrival. I think GW understands this and it will be closer to 200$ if not I don't see it getting very far. Granted this is just my thoughts with some of the folks I play witgn and would like to play epic with thoughts on the subject. 150$ would be solid gold for this. Maybe after discount.

Or if they price it like ash wastes (necromunda big box) then I'll just wait untill it's droped hard by the community and pick it up at 166$ on ebay (the same price I grabbed ash wastes for)

 zedmeister wrote:
Sounding a lot like 2nd with other edition rules mixed in.

Also, ruined terrain!




Also, note new base on Warbringer:

If they rebox that terrain with just an extra sprue of ruins and then double the price of the set, I will complain loudly on the internet!

Still, I'm a sucker for Epic and I'd still likely buy a set or 10!

Looking again, it's hard to pin down exactly, but seems like a Hybrid edition:

- Alt Activation - that's a given
- Hidden orders - 1st/2nd edition
- Terrain rules with roads being faster - 3rd edition
- Detachment and army building rules sound like 4th edition
- Weapon rules sound like 4th (Anti-Infantry, Anti-Tank, Macro Weapons)

Excuse me.

I need to go have a wipe down and change my grundies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

leopard wrote:
hidden orders is what 1st edition had, Advance, First Fire or Charge, with a Fall Back order you could be forced to issue

then split phases with alternating activations

sounds decent

the terrain looks.. odd, but ok

The kit behind the terrain is terrific. It takes an age to build big buildings, but boy can you build Big Buildings!

1st had anti tank and anti infantry weapons, guns having different stats depending what you shot them at as well

IIRC a lascannon was pants shooting at infantry for example


Automatically Appended Next Post:
rescaled some 6mm land raiders to 8mm, will print later and see how they look alongside warhounds.

mostly "just because", not the old style ones, a 40k style one as I have a nice model of it

 RexHavoc wrote:
25mm bases just confirmed on the Forgeworld social media page!

This means most of my collection is now entirely usable and whilst I'm 99.99% sure no one in my group will want to swap from using Epic40k rules, this does mean my wallet is likely to take quite the beating over the next 6 months!

That should take care of all the Epic FB group people complaining about the size! (it won't)

Time for a Reasonably Unreasonable Demand.

Land Raiders had best remain a proper Jack of All Trades!

looking at the infantry pictures in the wider view, thinking, what harm is there in that?

looks like they have arranged it as two units, I hope the units are a bit more flexible and they have not abstracted it to be "marine detachment" etc.

we appear to have two marine units, the first being

- 1x command stand
- 2x heavy weapon stands
- 6x tactical stands?

the second looks like

- 1x command stand
- 2x terminator stands
- 2x assault stands
- 4x tactical stands

the question mark on the first is because I think its six tactical, it could be four and two of something else

tanks are obviously a unit of two and a unit of three, and at a guess the dreadnoughts are also a unit, of four

the infantry I wonder about, will that be a unit of four tactical stands and a commander, to which others can be added? or have they just grouped models that can be used otherwise

e.g. is the first a tactical squad of four stands, then a heavy weapons squad of two stands and maybe a tactical support squad of two stands?

the second is more curious with the terminators in two stands as a squad sort of making sense but the assault unit of two stands is a bit small.

this suggests you will either have quite a granular level as to how forces are built - assemble a command from multiple squads, or it largely doesn't matter and the unit will be a "thing" with its own stats and maybe a card terminal for its weapons and damage track ala Knights?

hard to imagine you will be issuing orders to individual squads at this scale but you never know I guess

Can somebody shed some light on this, what edition is NetEpic primarily based on? Local Epic community primarily playes a mix of E:A and NetE, and so far the reaction to the new announcement has been mixed. People like new models, but are afraid GW will butcher the rules.

I think it came from the Epic Armageddon stuff and grew from there

if GW have any sense (warning! huge assumption!) they will leave Net Epic alone

as it stands if the rules are kak GW will shift a fair few models as long as they are either a decent range or play nicely with older models so long as people can still play the older stuff


Automatically Appended Next Post:
further to my post on the units, having looked at other images it does indeed appear that the left most unit is four tactical stands and two support stands with plasma guns

 SgtBANZAI wrote:
Can somebody shed some light on this, what edition is NetEpic primarily based on? Local Epic community primarily playes a mix of E:A and NetE, and so far the reaction to the new announcement has been mixed. People like new models, but are afraid GW will butcher the rules.

NetEpic was based off of Epic Space Marine/Titan Legions. Its founding was as a result of dissatisfaction with Epic 40K's total revamp of the system and what was felt to be the sucking out of flavor from the various armies (and how it seemed to do so unevenly). I know this as I was there for its founding. The Eldar Peregrine and Unicorn were my ideas to make use of the E40K models for the Falcon and Wave Serpent. At that time the original Falcon was the wedge shaped tank. Now I see the latest version of NetEpic has reversed the two models since I guess many people now are more familiar with the 40K version of the Falcon rather than the old wedge, even though the unit stats correspond to the original models.

leopard wrote:
looking at the infantry pictures in the wider view, thinking, what harm is there in that?

looks like they have arranged it as two units, I hope the units are a bit more flexible and they have not abstracted it to be "marine detachment" etc.

we appear to have two marine units, the first being

- 1x command stand
- 2x heavy weapon stands
- 6x tactical stands?

the second looks like

- 1x command stand
- 2x terminator stands
- 2x assault stands
- 4x tactical stands

the question mark on the first is because I think its six tactical, it could be four and two of something else

tanks are obviously a unit of two and a unit of three, and at a guess the dreadnoughts are also a unit, of four

the infantry I wonder about, will that be a unit of four tactical stands and a commander, to which others can be added? or have they just grouped models that can be used otherwise

e.g. is the first a tactical squad of four stands, then a heavy weapons squad of two stands and maybe a tactical support squad of two stands?

the second is more curious with the terminators in two stands as a squad sort of making sense but the assault unit of two stands is a bit small.

this suggests you will either have quite a granular level as to how forces are built - assemble a command from multiple squads, or it largely doesn't matter and the unit will be a "thing" with its own stats and maybe a card terminal for its weapons and damage track ala Knights?

hard to imagine you will be issuing orders to individual squads at this scale but you never know I guess

I posted this earlier in the thread, but I'm reckoning a 4th edition style army building setup:

For example, from þe box photo, you select a Tactical Detachment wiþ command (4 Tacticals + Commander) and then add in up to x amount of upgrades (Cataphractii Terminators, Assault Sqaud, Heavy Support, Tactical Support, etc) and þen choose up to x support detachments alongside (Predators, Sicarans or Contemptors) wiþ Titans and Aircraft being a Max of 25% of army total?

Same for Solar Auxilia - Lasrifle Section and command (4 Stands + Command) + upgrades (Storm Squad, Veletaris, Charonites) and þen support of Leman Russ, Malacodors and Sentinels.

Is anyone else surprised at how quickly this is being launched after release of 10th edition? I was really expecting the rumored October release to be true. I won't even have time to get all my new additions to my 40k army painted before that game goes on the shelf so I can learn new Epic.

thats what I'm thinking for the force building, you have a core "unit" to which you have optional additions to customise it

though wondering if that box is designed to split for two forces with each having a marine unit and an auxlia unit, then both sides get a marine and a guard tank unit, once side gets ogryn and one gets contemptors. can;t see how else you get two "almost balanced" forces

though the obvious intent is thats one army, and plays against another initially identical one

not sure on a 25% Titans total though, can see them just being another unit

though pick a formation that says what you can have, e.g. a marine force with one optional maniple and maybe knights, or a titan force that brings an infantry detachment

could be limited though, curious to see

and damn them, they have gone for XIV specifically to tempt and tease me

Toofast wrote:
Is anyone else surprised at how quickly this is being launched after release of 10th edition? I was really expecting the rumored October release to be true. I won't even have time to get all my new additions to my 40k army painted before that game goes on the shelf so I can learn new Epic.

Yeah very much so. Given the gap in major releases for Titanicus since 2021 it feels like Epic has been delayed in some manner. Perhaps the original intention was to release it late last year.

However now they're trying to quickly push it out of the door before all the other major Autumn and Winter releases, including TOW.

GW are likely still trying to get back on track after all the "issues" in 2020 & 2021

they do risk "wallet overload" though hitting sales

leopard wrote:
thats what I'm thinking for the force building, you have a core "unit" to which you have optional additions to customise it

It could be done like Armageddon, but there, the core detachments had very clear designations, and you wouldn't be adding Assault Squads to your Tac detachment.

My current assumption is that the photo doesn't mean anything, and the units might not even be strictly legal, or even complete, as I imagine transports are going to be a major element of the game. It's probably two infantry sprues arranged into a nice looking setup for a beauty shot.

My biggest question weirdly is table size. AT is 4x4 if I recall, if this is as well that'd be great. I'm about to have to to buy some sheet wood to extend the dining table and I was just going to get some cut to 60x44, but I'd like to cover options if other games use a larger width/length.

Looks like they're swapping to inches


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 zedmeister wrote:
Looking again, it's hard to pin down exactly, but seems like a Hybrid edition:

- Alt Activation - that's a given
- Hidden orders - 1st/2nd edition
- Terrain rules with roads being faster - 3rd edition
- Detachment and army building rules sound like 4th edition
- Weapon rules sound like 4th (Anti-Infantry, Anti-Tank, Macro Weapons)

Meh, not a fan of alternating activations. I liked the idea in Epic 40k with initiative for each phase, seemed like a good middle ground to me.

judgedoug wrote:

 RexHavoc wrote:
25mm bases just confirmed on the Forgeworld social media page!

This means most of my collection is now entirely usable and whilst I'm 99.99% sure no one in my group will want to swap from using Epic40k rules, this does mean my wallet is likely to take quite the beating over the next 6 months!

That should take care of all the Epic FB group people complaining about the size! (it won't)

haha yeah it should...but it won't! They will find something else to complain about now! (I'm already seeing 'money grabbing' and 'its not as stylised as the original' on the 6mm group lol)

Toofast wrote:Is anyone else surprised at how quickly this is being launched after release of 10th edition? I was really expecting the rumored October release to be true. I won't even have time to get all my new additions to my 40k army painted before that game goes on the shelf so I can learn new Epic.

Yeah its shockingly fast and honestly, I think its almost a set up for disaster. I can almost picture the posts in 10-20 years where the rules write comes out saying 'it was there fav project to work on, but it was set up to fail'. Much like we have seen posts in the past about 3rd Ed Epic, gorkamorka and other specialist games of that time.


I've not touched 28mm scale 40k out side of Necromunda (or some kill team bits for necromunda) for a long time now, but I can imagine anyone that's just spent on big on 40k is looking to spend more next month. And I can imagine a high percentage of heresy players brought enough last year to not want to buy it all over again in mighty max scale!

This is why I will play it safe, if I buy anything I will make sure to buy enough to last in case its canned very quickly!

 His Master's Voice wrote:

leopard wrote:
thats what I'm thinking for the force building, you have a core "unit" to which you have optional additions to customise it

It could be done like Armageddon, but there, the core detachments had very clear designations, and you wouldn't be adding Assault Squads to your Tac detachment.

My current assumption is that the photo doesn't mean anything, and the units might not even be strictly legal, or even complete, as I imagine transports are going to be a major element of the game. It's probably two infantry sprues arranged into a nice looking setup for a beauty shot.

to be fair the idea that this is set up to look nice more than mean anything does have a lot of merit to it yes