The Warmaster Titan is revealed!

[Xanthier]

Very true, though some people are especially thirsty for big models - there are several posts on the AT18 FB group asking when this beast will come out for 40k!

[Noserenda]

I mean you are confused about why the fanbase of a game about big stompy robots wants the biggest stompiest robot you might want to rethink that :D I certainly agree more light/medium titans would be more interesting in game but then im a huge reaver fan ;) 

I mean especially given the AT groups on facebook are particularly prone to "look at all the money i spent" posts and the crossover between 28mm titan owners and AT players is a surprisingly dense venn diagram, the campaign weekend i helped run last year, nearly half the players definitely own 40k titans and id be fairly surprised if some of the guys i dont play 40k with had some too.

Hell id own one if i hadnt been sick :/ 

But yeah, while they may not work in an average size game they are usually fine as the focus of a big game, and make really cool centrepieces to collections, which is the point really.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Iirc on the AMA of the original designer, he a) said imperators weren't inline with the mechanics of the game and b) said the game turned into a bog with too many activations and that 2000 was basically the soft cap of the game as a result.

 

I see this a lot in 30k Facebook groups; everyone wants to use all their toys and just play giant point games and have their standard game be the upper limit of the game system where a lot of the systems start to stretch and break. It's visual spectacle being valued over what the game systems actually provide and do well. I'm going to get the warmaster as I think it'll be awesome to paint and be the centerpiece, but I have this sinking feeling thinking about everyone who'll just want to play warmaster+small maniple or push for bigger games so they can use more stuff with it. The fun of the game is careful movement paired with managing the titan systems and order of operation. This thing really only makes you consider movement, and only if you invested in terrain anyways.

[Noserenda]

Its a different kind of game at bigger levels, sometimes the spectacle is what people are after after all and im not arrogant enough to decide only one thing is fun ;) 

I dont think its a coincidence that when GW wrote a great system for resolving huge battles in the latest apocalypse book and it was seemingly rejected by the communities who play these huge games, they arent really in it for the rules as much as setting up all the things and blowing them up en masse. Its just another hobby niche.

We played a few really big AT games shortly after we started and the same folks enjoyed or hated that as enjoyed or hated the Great Crusade series of games, (Using the old Tempus Fugitives rules) we ran in my old store with tens of thousands of points, titans and primarchs etc.

[Sherrypie]

To be fair, it's not hard to use those models in games actually designed for mass battles too (like playing Epic with AT forces), when you want all toys on the table :D

[schoon]

It's going to take me a bit to digest this very interesting article.

 

It certainly doesn't move very fast and is vulnerable to flanking if not supported by other Titans...

 

And yes, I'm going to have to have at least one just so I can model and paint it. Sod what it's like on the table.

[Fire Golem]

 

 

As far as the Warmaster model goes, its top looks a bit busy to me. Too many things going on and not enough surface for decals or some thick stripes like a Warlord. Also the head as depicted on the book cover of the Loyal Legions seems to be the best. :)

I agree with this. I like the model but there’s very little flat space to play with. That helps with stuff like Mortis with single-colour panels but it makes my life a bit harder for Astorum. There aren’t many places to put flames or astronomical designs.

 

The thing I really don’t like is shipping it with two of the same gun. That’s really lame in my opinion. Wish they’d learned the error of that with the Warlord.

 

I’m getting one of course. Looking forward to the challenge.

I was thinking along the same lines for the flames as I am looking to grab one for my Fureans.

 

It will be rough to do the shin plates as they are broken up into many sections.

 

Looks great on Mortis however. But the challenge is there.

I’m tempted to do mine as Mortis, allied with my Fureans. I seem to remember a thing in the Fureans background that they didn’t have many engines above the Warlord scale? And gives an excuse to paint Mortis which I very nearly went with anyway haha.

[Sandlemad]

 

I’m tempted to do mine as Mortis, allied with my Fureans. I seem to remember a thing in the Fureans background that they didn’t have many engines above the Warlord scale? And gives an excuse to paint Mortis which I very nearly went with anyway haha.

 

I was mulling this one over as well RE: Fureans. The line from Extermination is "it is not believed the Legio Fureans possessed any Imperator-class titans or their analogues, although it did utilise at least five adapted "Deathbringer" Warlords, which served as the Legio 's heaviest assault units", which seems to me like it has some wiggle room. Depends if you're willing to count the Warmaster as an 'analogue' to an Imperator, which seems a bit much. The part about the 'Deathbringer Warlords' is perhaps firmer but then it's hard to parse given that Deathbringer used to be the designation for the standard Warlord loadout.

 

There's also of course the get out of jail card that (in-universe) the details in legion's section in Extermination come from the later crusade/early heresy and might not account for engines built in secret, engines whose records were obscured, engines seized from defeated loyalists at battles like Paramar and renamed, etc. I've got a warhound I'm thinking of painting with Gryphonicus colours showing through the yellow and black flames where it's taken damage.

 

RE: rules discussion, I agree that the Warmaster does show the 'outer limit' of what could conceivably be used in a game of AT while still being fun or just about making sense within the ruleset. It doesn't break the design space and I don't think it's particularly a game-changer (like knights/superheavies in 40k) so much as a theoretically fun luxury (like titans in 40k). In that regard it's a less interesting development than the proposed Rapier or other small/mid-sized titans but I'm going to tentatively say that this is some ok rules writing* for what it is: it's not pointless but it's hardly the optimal choice and most of its attraction is pure "big robot make enemy go boom".

 

But then yeah, what does this say about the Imperator? I don't think taking the Warmaster rules and just making them more would be particularly fun to play with or against. SG would probably be better off making an entire custom expansion/minigame to accommodate it, otherwise you just end up with a titan-deleting unkillable block which neither you nor your opponent can meaningfully engage with. Could be fun but none of that would be as productive or as good for the game as something new and smaller which would actually see play and shake things up.

 

But then yeah, actual rules decisions really don't have much influence on the appropriateness of an eventual Imperator. The community doesn't want an Imperator because it would be an exciting development to a largely well-made ruleset, they want it because it's the biggest stompy robot, and that's perfectly reasonable. It's a classic, it appears all the time in the background, it used to be the top dog out of only four titan classes, it's guaranteed to sell. If it does become something analogous to how titans are treated in 40k, even more so than the Warmaster, I think that's ok?

 

* barring typos and sloppy proofing

Edited January 27, 2021 by Sandlemad

[depthcharge12]

 

 

 

I’m tempted to do mine as Mortis, allied with my Fureans. I seem to remember a thing in the Fureans background that they didn’t have many engines above the Warlord scale? And gives an excuse to paint Mortis which I very nearly went with anyway haha.

I was mulling this one over as well RE: Fureans. The line from Extermination is "it is not believed the Legio Fureans possessed any Imperator-class titans or their analogues, although it did utilise at least five adapted "Deathbringer" Warlords, which served as the Legio 's heaviest assault units", which seems to me like it has some wiggle room. Depends if you're willing to count the Warmaster as an 'analogue' to an Imperator, which seems a bit much. The part about the 'Deathbringer Warlords' is perhaps firmer but then it's hard to parse given that Deathbringer used to be the designation for the standard Warlord loadout.

 

There's also of course the get out of jail card that (in-universe) the details in legion's section in Extermination come from the later crusade/early heresy and might not account for engines built in secret, engines whose records were obscured, engines seized from defeated loyalists at battles like Paramar and renamed, etc. I've got a warhound I'm thinking of painting with Gryphonicus colours showing through the yellow and black flames where it's taken damage.

 

RE: rules discussion, I agree that the Warmaster does show the 'outer limit' of what could conceivably be used in a game of AT while still being fun or just about making sense within the ruleset. It doesn't break the design space and I don't think it's particularly a game-changer (like knights/superheavies in 40k) so much as a theoretically fun luxury (like titans in 40k). In that regard it's a less interesting development than the proposed Rapier or other small/mid-sized titans but I'm going to tentatively say that this is some ok rules writing* for what it is: it's not pointless but it's hardly the optimal choice and most of its attraction is pure "big robot make enemy go boom".

 

But then yeah, what does this say about the Imperator? I don't think taking the Warmaster rules and just making them more would be particularly fun to play with or against. SG would probably be better off making an entire custom expansion/minigame to accommodate it, otherwise you just end up with a titan-deleting unkillable block which neither you nor your opponent can meaningfully engage with. Could be fun but none of that would be as productive or as good for the game as something new and smaller which would actually see play and shake things up.

 

But then yeah, actual rules decisions really don't have much influence on the appropriateness of an eventual Imperator. The community doesn't want an Imperator because it would be an exciting development to a largely well-made ruleset, they want it because it's the biggest stompy robot, and that's perfectly reasonable. It's a classic, it appears all the time in the background, it used to be the top dog out of only four titan classes, it's guaranteed to sell. If it does become something analogous to how titans are treated in 40k, even more so than the Warmaster, I think that's ok?

 

* barring typos and sloppy proofing

That was my line of thinking as well, but the Fureans lore is just so contradictory on its own that I’ve thrown up my hands. Fureans doesn’t like standoff titans...and yet Warlords don’t strike me as nimble flankers :P

 

We’ve seen plenty of art with Fureans Reavers (Paramar) and the studio painted up the full sized Warbringer in Fureans. Both of which are not called out as “normal” titans for them.

 

I’ll take it in the same vein as heresy white scars. They love their bikes, but conceivably, not all white scars are going to be on bikes or prefer them.

 

 

On the topic of the Imperator...sure it would be cool but I think with the size and scope of the game it would be unreasonable. I’d prefer to have more light and medium titans introduced for variety.

[Marshal Loss]

Good article with some preliminary takes on the Warmaster by Goonhammer

[Fire Golem]

@Sandlemad @depthcharge12 (cba to condense quotes on my phone) yeah, I wasn’t advocating a strict adherence to the fluff there, it’s very vague and even if it said ‘Fureans did not under any circumstances use Warmaster Titans’ they’d look cool in yellow and black flames so... more just a justification for not having to paint all those armour panels with flames!

[RipOffProductions]

I think seeing the rules for this really highlights how silly the apparent community focus on the Imperator is. If this is how much this costs in points, and how powerful it looks to be on the table, the Imperator would be for a different game. Like Apocalypse for Titanicus.

 

Which is why the constant demand for the Imperator is such a misapplication of fan focus. We should be clamouring for more titans at the light to medium scale.

while I agree that the Imperator would be of insane cost(both in its literal price tag and in-game points) and hopefully of greater madness in firepower to justify it, but at the same time, who wouldn't want "Apocalypse for Titanicus"? and the obsession with the Imperator is mostly fueled by the fact that it's a iconic model from the old Epic line, has mountains of lore, and no doubt a modern reimagining with GW's current quality of models(and the bigger size) would be an awesome collector's piece even if it never saw use on the table.

 

besides, there's been plenty of excitement about whole new Titans of all sizes... it's just that there's not much to be excited about since we know nothing about them except "will fit in these gaps in the scale".

[noigrim]

I think I'll equip mine with vulcans, since the apocalypse is a bit underwhelming.

The extra move reactor is pretty cool too.

Do you think we will see a maniple for this beast or it will be a support option like the sinister?

 

Not quite, in epic an imperator costed less than two warlords (900 to 1110) and wasn't that OP

 

Clocking at 1080 pts it's not that competitive, in a bash with a psi warlord the psi would win everytime, and it's far cheaper

Edited January 27, 2021 by noigrim

[Sword Brother Adelard]

The rules we have seen state it's auxiliary only.

[Noserenda]

I suspect every new titan going forward will either get something along the lines of "may be used instead of X titan in maniples" or Auxiliary only until they do a second edition and consolidate all the things. That said its probably sensible to keep the really big toys outside of maniples, or in their own version just to prevent shenanigans with so many Legios and Maniples available. 

Im actually a little surprised they didnt stealth nerf/future proof the Mega bolters and Plasma blastguns as they are pretty obviously too cheap. That said 10pts for +1 armour is pretty steep so maybe they did :D 



Also, i cant lie, im a bit sad that people are supporting Forge-"40k scaled warlord woooooooo!"-world in saying a model is "too big" :P 

[depthcharge12]

Did I miss something or is there a typo on the apoc Missile launchers on the Warmaster? Shouldn’t it be 5 shots instead of 3? Or is it something with semantics and array/launchers?

 

Weird you can fit a thermal cannon and a PBC, but not a full sized missil array.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Did I miss something or is there a typo on the apoc Missile launchers on the Warmaster? Shouldn’t it be 5 shots instead of 3? Or is it something with semantics and array/launchers?

 

Weird you can fit a thermal cannon and a PBC, but not a full sized missil array.

The entire article has typos, as do a lot of the weapons. Low shots on apoc, low strength on flamers, short range and low strength on the melta, blastgun has bonus to hit at long instead of a negative.

[Iron Hands Fanatic]

 

Did I miss something or is there a typo on the apoc Missile launchers on the Warmaster? Shouldn’t it be 5 shots instead of 3? Or is it something with semantics and array/launchers?

 

Weird you can fit a thermal cannon and a PBC, but not a full sized missil array.

The entire article has typos, as do a lot of the weapons. Low shots on apoc, low strength on flamers, short range and low strength on the melta, blastgun has bonus to hit at long instead of a negative.

 

 

The apocs are each an "Apocalypse Missile Array", and if you count the number of missiles each has (10) it's half the amount in the Reaver/Warlord apoc missile pods, so I'm pretty sure these are a distinct weapon system to account for the limited space of the shoulder mounts. I feel the same is probably true for the melta weapon, as all the other shoulder weapon systems are Warhound weapon size, I'm pretty sure the reaver cannon would be way too large to fit so this is a smaller melta weapon.

[Mandragola]

I think the melta and missile launcher are probably right. Note that they’re both relatively cheap, whereas other guns are more expensive than usual.

 

The flamer is obviously wrong and the plasma gun’s +1 to hit at long range almost certainly is - replicating the error on the psi-Titan’s laser blasters.

 

VMBs are probably the best option. I’m not sure whether to go with two of them or one and a plasma gun. Flamers would be terrible, no matter what they finally decide their rules should be

[Noserenda]

Yeah they are obviously new Warhound scale versions, still might have typos ofc, but probably not :D

I think Inferno cannons could have a place on a melee Warmaster build, but that depends entirely on stuff we havent seen yet, or possibly does not exist ;)  But a sufficiently scary melee weapon + the speed boosting reactor might benefit from automatic hits inside the shields followed by a targeted smash and mega fisting.

I still suspect the other options will usually be more appealing, but it would be weirdly close to my old Melee warlord when i was playtesting Epic Armageddon which is nice :P 

[Mandragola]

I don't agree on flamers for a melee titan I'm afraid. Melee titans want to be able to do targeted shots. VMBs would be better for one of those, and in almost any other situation. Flamers are marginally better against knights, but actually not all that great against them. Mostly it's like not having a gun there at all, as it'll so rarely be in range.

[noigrim]

The plasma destructor should be 4 shots, another typo

[Noserenda]

I don't agree on flamers for a melee titan I'm afraid. Melee titans want to be able to do targeted shots. VMBs would be better for one of those, and in almost any other situation. Flamers are marginally better against knights, but actually not all that great against them. Mostly it's like not having a gun there at all, as it'll so rarely be in range.

Im not sure targeted shots at such a hefty penalty are worth anything tbh (-2 for reactor, -2 for aiming, Using WS) especially when the real killer is going to be the melee weapon and smash attacks which you can aim for free. That said, one thing i forgot last night was my inferno cannons are usually racking up significant bonuses from flanking, lupercal and the Fuerans warlord trait that gives you a bonus against bigger titans, none of which would apply to a Warmaster :D

 

Im not saying its not a niche case, but there is a case there.

[Mandragola]

Im not saying its not a niche case, but there is a case there.

 

That's fair. There are obviously theoretical situations in which a flamer would be what you wanted. I just don't think that's going to be the case very often. I'd go as far as to say it's unlikely ever to come up in reality.

 

The Warmaster's main guns are capable of one-shotting a battle titan. It therefore wants weapons that can knock those titans' shields down as soon as possible. I think the best ways to do this are with VMBs or possibly apocalypse launchers - though those just seem massively weak with only three shots each. It actually lacks a great way to take out shields, so you probably ought to tool up its friendly maniple for the job.

[depthcharge12]

I’m thinking Warp Displacement and the air strike strategems will be popular with this Titan. The enhanced locomotors strat would also be a boon without having to sacrifice -2 to BS