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 know we are all into doing things to the highest order, as hobbyists... but I never get the assertion that switching to a new scale adds monumental terrain costs. Sure it isn't glorious, but when starting out, a set of that Dropzone cardstock terrain is like $30 and completely covers a 6'x4' table.

 Albertorius wrote:

SU-152 wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:
Post battle review from Angry Joe:

"I'll tell you right now: this is an expensive game. I will talk more about it in the review, but this is more expensive than 40k. If you think that you're getting into this as a cheaper alternative to 40k, you're wrong, it's the opposite, and that SHOCKS us. I think that holds the game back by a tremendous amount."

And this is coming from someone that seems pretty positive about it.

I wonder how is that possible. I got rulebook+templates+accessories + 2 titans + 2 parts of Solar Auxilia for 124€. I can fill a 5x4" table with that.

Once the aircraft and artillery are out, I'll get 1 box of each for less than 80€ and get +500 points.

Probably adding all the scenery needed for it, which won't be compatible with "regular" scaled miniatures, for the most part.

My regular scaled scenery is Epic Armageddon, so no problem. If it is a problem for them it shouln't go into the cost of the game. On top of that, natural scenery should work, and making some ruins is cheap as chips.

If I build an army with maximum qty of drop pods (one of the worst point/price ratios) for example, I can also manipulate and say it's an expensive game (add in counting the price of GW buildings into the cost).

Well yes, going with GW terrain is always expensive. If you want to play Necromunda with a fully jazzed out multilevel plastic Hive Sector with plastic tile floors, its going to cost you several hundreds. LI is no different.

As always, you can use cardboard or MDF alternatives, which will save a bunch of money. Using GW plastics for your terrain was never something mandatory. Heck, even the models can be proxied with cheaper (and less undercut) options, unless you only play at GW events. Hasn't this traditionally been the case for Epic games?

Mix of what came in the boxes, and home made terrain served me well enough.

The infantry models don't look good now that we can see them from all sides.
It looks like they just took the poses from 30K, then let a computer down size them and work out the tooling to cram them in a sprue, regardless of the issues it caused to the end result.

box set on pre-order from local shop.

from those infantry figures I can see a need to get the Mk V 3d printed ones I have done, I mean they don't look too bad in one way, but in another way the ones from 1st edition were at least designed to be single part models and yes the gun was shadowed to the model but to be honest the pose made it hard to tell.

I suspect once painted they won't look too bad, but 3d print of Vanguard ones will look a lot better


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 tauist wrote:
Well yes, going with GW terrain is always expensive. If you want to play Necromunda with a fully jazzed out multilevel plastic Hive Sector with plastic tile floors, its going to cost you several hundreds. LI is no different.

As always, you can use cardboard or MDF alternatives, which will save a bunch of money. Using GW plastics for your terrain was never something mandatory. Heck, even the models can be proxied with cheaper (and less undercut) options, unless you only play at GW events. Hasn't this traditionally been the case for Epic games?

for Neccymunda even if you like the Zone Mortalis stuff (I do) there are 3d print options for a heck of a lot less, and several on you tube showing ways to get stuff thats remarkably compatible with it to make the plastic go further from foam and card.

for this I have some home designed stuff I did for Battletech thats suitable as well as some stuff printed for AT.

to the point that if I get seriously into this the cost of one of the 10" resin printers starts to seem a very good investment

I think the infantry looks pretty good. Not really looked at the pictures, just going by opening the store boxed set and having a good old rummage.
It's amazing how different something looks when you're actually physically looking at it in your hand, especially as I got to look at them before placing my order. All in all I'm definitely a happy bunny with this release. Each to their own I suppose.

Hey, if you're happy, you're happy. They're gonna be your minis, after all, and that's what's important.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
I know we are all into doing things to the highest order, as hobbyists... but I never get the assertion that switching to a new scale adds monumental terrain costs. Sure it isn't glorious, but when starting out, a set of that Dropzone cardstock terrain is like $30 and completely covers a 6'x4' table.

Are those ok in terms of scale for LI?

Ah well GW phones it in and sells out anyway once again.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:I know we are all into doing things to the highest order, as hobbyists... but I never get the assertion that switching to a new scale adds monumental terrain costs. Sure it isn't glorious, but when starting out, a set of that Dropzone cardstock terrain is like $30 and completely covers a 6'x4' table.

SU-152 wrote:My regular scaled scenery is Epic Armageddon, so no problem. If it is a problem for them it shouln't go into the cost of the game. On top of that, natural scenery should work, and making some ruins is cheap as chips.

If I build an army with maximum qty of drop pods (one of the worst point/price ratios) for example, I can also manipulate and say it's an expensive game (add in counting the price of GW buildings into the cost).

My answer was more to meant that I believe Angry Joe is thinking of the scenery cost and adding it to the price of entry, and that's why he says it's very expensive.

I mean, the models ain't cheap, by any sane measure from outside of the GW bubble, but that's another thing.

 RexHavoc wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:


I think it'd be easier to glue plastic backpacks on versus metal ones. For fiddly stuff like that, I usually just put a bit of blutack on a stick, use the stick to pick them up and hold them in place for a few seconds while the glue dries.

That would usually be my go to as well, but the connection point was so small for the backpacks that I'd actually tear it back off when removing the bluetak stick. It was far better to leave it glue to the stick and let them all dry over night before cutting the stick off.

That said, I'm sure shop brought superglue has gotten worse over the years. I don't recall having so many bottle of bad superglue as a kid.

If I had to do them again (which as I have another 100 or so marines tucked away for a rainy day that I've been avoiding due ot the backpacks) I might use some resin glue to glue & dry them a lot quicker.

Sounds like metal model problems + maybe slow super glue problems.

I snapped a whole heap of legs off my 8mm 3D printed models because I over supported them, rather than reprinting them I just glued them back on and it only took a matter of seconds for each one. Dab of superglue, hold together for 3 or 4 seconds, done.

Metal models often have uneven gaps, so the glue dries slower, and also the bond is weaker to the metal, so the joint needs to be held for longer.

The advantage of metal is that small undercuts mean if the model was 1 part it wouldn't look anywhere near as bad to begin with.

My aversion to multipart plastic 8mm models isn't with the gluing, I think that'd be the easy part, it'd be that each part would need a sprue gate that has to be removed and another mould line, so clean up gets way more time consuming (especially since most of the new models have the gates on their feet, meaning they don't need to be cleaned up carefully).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Albertorius wrote:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:I know we are all into doing things to the highest order, as hobbyists... but I never get the assertion that switching to a new scale adds monumental terrain costs. Sure it isn't glorious, but when starting out, a set of that Dropzone cardstock terrain is like $30 and completely covers a 6'x4' table.

SU-152 wrote:My regular scaled scenery is Epic Armageddon, so no problem. If it is a problem for them it shouln't go into the cost of the game. On top of that, natural scenery should work, and making some ruins is cheap as chips.

If I build an army with maximum qty of drop pods (one of the worst point/price ratios) for example, I can also manipulate and say it's an expensive game (add in counting the price of GW buildings into the cost).

My answer was more to meant that I believe Angry Joe is thinking of the scenery cost and adding it to the price of entry, and that's why he says it's very expensive.

I mean, the models ain't cheap, by any sane measure from outside of the GW bubble, but that's another thing.

Has anyone added up the cost of a typical army? Like, a legal one? Then compared it to typical armies in the other GW games?

The 30% cap on allies made the road to a cheap army, well, less cheap, because the starter set effectively comes with 3 different factions, when using it to construct a single legal army only about half of it can be used. So buying 2 starters gets you 2 small armies, not a single big one.

Compare that to the 30k starter, which has, what, 1500pts-ish in the starter set that can all go towards creating a single army?

But I've not added up the cost of a 2000pt or 3000pt army (even though GW said 3000pt, it seems like 2000pt might be the better level).

The 30% cap on allies made the road to a cheap army, well, less cheap, because the starter set effectively comes with 3 different factions, when using it to construct a single legal army only about half of it can be used. So buying 2 starters gets you 2 small armies, not a single big one.

Compare that to the 30k starter, which has, what, 1500pts-ish in the starter set that can all go towards creating a single army?

But I've not added up the cost of a 2000pt or 3000pt army (even though GW said 3000pt, it seems like 2000pt might be the better level).

VAYASEN wrote:

Isnt there even a starter battle set up that lets you ignore the 30%, designed for the starter set forces? (or have I imaged that lol)

The WarCom site has a 'quick start' PDF mission download which lets you either split the box as marines vs versus guard with a Warhound on each side, or do a combined marine/SA detachment mirror match with two boxes (and one warhound on each side).

Personally I think a house rule to make both marines & SA count towards the 70% value is a sensible idea, at least in the short term. It lets people use the full starter box without being confined to very small games while waiting potentally months for future model releases.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Has anyone added up the cost of a typical army? Like, a legal one? Then compared it to typical armies in the other GW games?

The 30% cap on allies made the road to a cheap army, well, less cheap, because the starter set effectively comes with 3 different factions, when using it to construct a single legal army only about half of it can be used. So buying 2 starters gets you 2 small armies, not a single big one.

Compare that to the 30k starter, which has, what, 1500pts-ish in the starter set that can all go towards creating a single army?

But I've not added up the cost of a 2000pt or 3000pt army (even though GW said 3000pt, it seems like 2000pt might be the better level).

The starter box gives you approx 450pts of marines and 600pts of SA, plus two Warhounds at 330 each. That basically maxes out 900pts of support options, meaning you need approx 1500-1650pts for the primary army to finish off a full size 3k list.

Outside of further support units, the best point per money ratio will be from armoured units like Kratos, Leman Russ, and Malcadors. Each box will add 250-300pts to your list, so for a strictly legal army you're looking at minimum 5 more boxes of models. At the other end of the scale the worst return will be from rhinos & especially from drop pods.

Of course the other option is to just either house rule things as above while people build up their collections, or agree to play smaller games at maybe 2k pts.

So basically £150 pounds minimum on top of the starter set to get a 3k army? And that’s assuming you want 2x Warhounds filling out the points.

So a rough guess on an army that doesn’t stretch the points to the limit is maybe £210 or £240 + £120 for the starter?

I dunno, that feels pretty expensive to me.

I think some circles will consider the additional costs to field a full army and to have a proper amount of terrain on the table as making the game quite expensive. Circles like the Earth.

XD

Terrain is a tough one because almost every game needs terrain, so do you add the cost of terrain to every game?

It's only really a problem if the rules are so specific that you need the actual GW style terrain (or something close to it) otherwise it'd affect gameplay. At that point you can't just use random paint pots and random blocks/boxes that you have lying around.

Anyway, I think the whole value thing... if the damned starter box didn't have Warhounds it'd be SO much more appealing.

Anyone with am AT starter set will already have ~2000pts worth of Titans and Knights, so it probably makes more sense to build a Titan army and use the Spehss Marines and/or Auxilia as allies rather than the other way around

I'm tempted to wait and see if they release a "battleforce" type box, which ONLY has Marines in it or ONLY has Auxilia.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
So basically £150 pounds minimum on top of the starter set to get a 3k army? And that’s assuming you want 2x Warhounds filling out the points.

So a rough guess on an army that doesn’t stretch the points to the limit is maybe £210 or £240 + £120 for the starter?

I dunno, that feels pretty expensive to me.

It's priced awfully close to the cost of a lot of 40k armies, as others are saying the only difference is you might need a whole new table of terrain.

Just a positive thought...

Not sure about Solar Aux, but Space Marines can also use models from Aeronautica as much as Titans and Knights from Titanicus and should count towards the 70%.

And considering that AT and AI are staying put, a Legions collection can spread as far as three games. I'll give GW credit where it's due, unless the core book doesn't include aircraft rules?

Both marines and sa have their own aircraft to use.

Ordered myself thunderhawk while waiting for more marine flyers. For now most are for sa. Marine ones waiting re-release

A big question is how many planes do you actually want in an army. They're pretty expensive, about 100pts for most and 150pts for the Thunderhawk, so anyone who collected Marines or Imperial Navy for AI can probably put down 1000pts worth aircraft....


....but do you want to? I dunno. In previous Epics I've played the aircraft were very much support and not something you wanted to sink a third of your points into.

Being the AI nerd I am, I could probably field close to 3000pts of just aircraft

For marines, I think the best expansion to what you get from the boxed set is a Kratos squadron. They have good firepower and survivability, something which all other Marine units in the box are lacking.

For SA, just having multiples of the same box seems fine. The included tanks are that good. Just keep spamming those Malcadors and Heavy Sentinels, Ogryns for melee, lasrifle tercios for chaff

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
A big question is how many planes do you actually want in an army. They're pretty expensive, about 100pts for most and 150pts for the Thunderhawk, so anyone who collected Marines or Imperial Navy for AI can probably put down 1000pts worth aircraft....


....but do you want to? I dunno. In previous Epics I've played the aircraft were very much support and not something you wanted to sink a third of your points into.

Being the AI nerd I am, I could probably field close to 3000pts of just aircraft

According to the WarCom articles, you'd bring aircraft to counter titans. I'd take a guess that they're also effective against Knights and super heavies.

With all that (Weapon) Rules LI gets and possible bloat of them, do you think we get rules for Characters in a later Expansion?

Angron as a upgrade for a Thunderhawk or Rylanor?

The way I see it, aircraft can pull similar kind of jobs as Land Speeders in 28mil games. You'd use them to give extra punch to where its most needed at any given time. They can pretty much cover the entire board in a single movement phase. Just reserve their activation until the very last stages of a turn, and catch already activated units by surprise.

For dealing with aircraft, Sicarans seem decent on the Marines side

They seem like a pretty cheap (£/$/€) option for transporting Marines too.

Watching GMG's review of the army lists, I notice that the rulebook includes rules for everything in the starter box + support batteries box + Leviathan/Deredeos....

Does that make us think the other stuff (Land Raiders, Spartans, Bikes, Jetbikes, etc) are still a long-ish way off, and in the near future we're only going to get what just released + support weapons and dreadnoughts?

(talking about Marines of course, the Auxilia might have other stuff, haven't watched that review)

all those things were teased already with the expansion book, if they keep the delay we will get it in 3-4 months
if GW wants to get back on the original release we should see those rather soon

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
So basically £150 pounds minimum on top of the starter set to get a 3k army? And that’s assuming you want 2x Warhounds filling out the points.
So a rough guess on an army that doesn’t stretch the points to the limit is maybe £210 or £240 + £120 for the starter?
I dunno, that feels pretty expensive to me.

yout take 1 core box to start, with either faction + titans for allies
swap the one you don't take for the other faction with a partner
and now buy/swap the half you want another 2 times and you get started but won't have all the things that make Epic exiting

like if you just want to play with Infantry and Walkers without any transports and large tanks, you can do this in HH2 for less (as you can use the full content of the core box)
if you want a diverse force that feels like Epic, we are looking at a higher price than an HH army

no the game is not cheap, no it is not the terrain and no just core box model won't to it if you want a proper game

but people also claim 40k is cheap because you can get the rules for free and just need a single army box to play the game and that doing so is enough "fun" for 3 years until the new Edition hits

If they've been previewed then they aren't going to be too far off. They don't show things unless they're due to come in the next few weeks.

Except then came delay. We don't know if they delay expansion as well.

3 month limit is what gw is happy with. If they delay expansion to have same gap between main launch could be about 3 month wait