Jump to content

Welcome to The Bolter and Chainsword
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Are GW contemplating an 40K Epic reboot?


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1
Gundric

Gundric

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 17 posts
  • Location:Old Albia.
  • Faction: Blood Angels, Death Guard.

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but it seems like a good time collect our thoughts on this subject. For what its worth, I see the recent release of AI and AT on a consistent scale as signs of them testing the water. The scale going up to 10mm ish being intentional, their are many recasters on ebay producing the old 6mm models.

 

Personally I would love to see it back, I do prefer grander scale conflicts that are more evocative of the 40k universe than the skirmish that is 40k proper. Do you think though, that with the introduction of apocalypse, they will bother?

 

Hopefully this will collate some of the thoughts of others I've been seeing on this forum and give it a bit more of a focus, have at it folks!



#2
Marshal Loss

Marshal Loss

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 3,348 posts
  • Location:New York
  • Faction: Sons of Horus

I don't think releases like AT and AI are part of any real concerted effort to set up a new epic piece by piece. They are clearly future-proofing in case they decide to do so eventually - they've told us as much, and the evidence is in the rulebook(s) - but don't expect it in the near/mid-term future. If these specialist games sell really well over a long period of time though it is probably inevitable, but there are so many other avenues they can explore first, and there is no need to rush.

 

As far as personal preferences go, I'm not too keen on epic. I just want BFG back. :P


  • PeteySödes, Kenzaburo and Gundric like this

bl-logo.jpg

The Unblinking Eye
A (perpetually inactive) blog about 30k & the Sons of Horus 29th Company


#3
Gundric

Gundric

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 17 posts
  • Location:Old Albia.
  • Faction: Blood Angels, Death Guard.

I don't think releases like AT and AI are part of any real concerted effort to set up a new epic piece by piece. They are clearly future-proofing in case they decide to do so eventually - they've told us as much, and the evidence is in the rulebook(s) - but don't expect it in the near/mid-term future. If these specialist games sell really well over a long period of time though it is probably inevitable, but there are so many other avenues they can explore first, and there is no need to rush.

 

As far as personal preferences go, I'm not too keen on epic. I just want BFG back. tongue.png

BFG definitely needs to be back, and soon! I doubt any epic reboot would be in the next 3-4 years, if ever really, heres to hoping!



#4
PeteySödes

PeteySödes

    ++ FERRARII CONQUISITOR ++

  • ++ MODERATI ++
  • 2,407 posts
  • Location:Minnesota
I’m honestly shocked BFG hasn’t happened yet with the relative success of the video game series.
  • Marshal Loss, Akylas and Gundric like this

#5
Sete

Sete

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 9,646 posts
BFG would be insta buy tbh.

#6
Urauloth

Urauloth

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,052 posts
  • Location:UK
  • Faction: Death Guard

If (when?) they bring void warfare back to the tabletop, they surely can't pass up the chance to set it during the heresy like with Titanicus... right? The HH series has added so much in the way of interesting ships and expanded the scale and detail of starship combat so much it seems like an opportunity that shouldn't be missed. That might just be wishful thinking, though - you could argue the other way with xenos ships and the lore of the great rift.

 

The spacefaring game has definitely changed since BFG, though, one way or another.

 

e; I should probably try to stay on topic instead of hijacking this thread to be about BFG now, so on the subject of a possible "new Epic", uh, I don't know, but if that happens I will buy the tanks.


Edited by Urauloth, 08 September 2019 - 02:30 PM.

It came with the nightfall

The dark that swallowed the stars
One by one, it painted them black
And brought horror to our hearts


#7
Redcomet

Redcomet

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 95 posts

If (when?) they bring void warfare back to the tabletop, they surely can't pass up the chance to set it during the heresy like with Titanicus... right? The HH series has added so much in the way of interesting ships and expanded the scale and detail of starship combat so much it seems like an opportunity that shouldn't be missed. That might just be wishful thinking, though - you could argue the other way with xenos ships and the lore of the great rift.
 
The spacefaring game has definitely changed since BFG, though, one way or another.


Ofc it will be a HH era game. 2 factions, that are basically the same for 90% of the ships, is much cheaper to produce than say a 40k era game with a lot of factions.

#8
Marshal Rohr

Marshal Rohr

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 16,326 posts
  • Location:Georgia
  • Faction: 7th Terran Regiment
I see Aeronautica as more like Blood Bowl than Titanicus because it’s a game in a box. Different types of fighters gives it longevity, since you’ll only need one or two boxes to do a whole faction and play a game in an hour. Titanicus is not a game in a box, and will require new release of new kits over many years to keep up the steam.

Your opinion is important, and someone posting here probably does care what you think. You should go tell them. Remember that it really hurts to come up with an idea you care about and have no one else care. Go care about something and tell them what you think. Now. Think of what it would have meant to you when you were young.

 

+++The Iterators Guild+++

A Group for Lore Minded Hobbyists and World Building Projects

 


#9
Brother Tyler

Brother Tyler

    ++ FIDELIS MILITUS ++

  • +++ADMINISTRATUM+++
  • 20,574 posts
  • Location:The Temple of Oaths
  • Faction: VIIth Legion
Let's get back on topic, folks. The issue is whether or not GW is paving the way for a potential Epic reboot.

As has been said, I think that both Adeptus Titanicus and Aeronautica Imperialis are forward-compatible with a potential Epic reboot in terms of models, though the rules/mechanics for neither game mesh with Epic. The thing that really hurts a potential Epic reboot in my mind is Apocalypse. Epic should really be the game system for the scope of game that is covered by Apocalypse, simply adapting the rules to the smaller scale of models. That would be much more affordable for those that would play only Epic. However, since Apocalypse allows players to use models across the range of games (Kill Team > [standard] Warhammer 40,000 > Apocalypse), there is much more portability there. While Epic was probably a much better system for that level of gaming overall, Apocalypse has much larger potential for sales and viability, making it a much more attractive prospect for GW in terms of aligning their resources.
  • Gundric likes this

gallery_26_548_13550.pnggallery_26_6416_0.gifgallery_26_548_4494.pnggallery_26_6416_0.gifgallery_26_14910_14794.png


#10
Noserenda

Noserenda

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,300 posts
  • Location:Southampton, UK
  • Faction: Scythes of the Emperor

Theyve certainly said in the past they are building towards an new Epic system, though plans may well change over the years, certainly AI was not the mooted second game originally :) It certainly makes a LOT of sense rather than trying to boot a whole Epic system out of the gate if most armies already have Titans, Aircraft and maybe Tanks (From a rumoured Battle for Tallarn tank game) and they just need to add some support and infantry stands. Makes a whole lot of sense with specialist games sprue budgets.


34625419033_b96a180fe5_o.png


#11
Exilyth

Exilyth

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 318 posts
  • Location:Terra
  • Faction: AM, SM, GSC

baseless speculation: AI could be both - a trial release of air units at 'nu-epic' scale, and a toe-in-the-water test for combat between units which move at speed & at different altitudes - like, I dunno - spaceships maybe? msn-wink.gif
 
 
 
AT & AI could be played in combination already - convert all distances to one or the other, declare titans as ground targets, let arm weapons fire at planes (with negative hit modifiers for speed/altitude), maybe adjust points costs a bit - et voila: homebrew epic with titans vs planes.
And if you're feeling really fancy, add some hydras from the AI ground target sprue as carapace flaks to AT knights.
 
 
 
Anyway, titans are iconic units which for most players are far from afordable at 40k scale, so with the success/popularity of knights, a titan only release makes a lot of sense. The local techpriests explanation of what it feels like to pilot an actual godmachine on the tabletop were very graphical, so I won't repeat them here.
 
While not as popular, many 40k aircraft are in a slightly similar position, e.g. the marauder is a resin monstrosity. Putting out an air-only game can serve as a 'small scale' testbed to judge interest in e.g. 'full' scale plastic (re-)releases of said planes.


Edited by Exilyth, 08 September 2019 - 09:06 PM.

WH40k: Astra Militarum: ~2500 Pts, Space Marines: ~2000 Pts, GSC: ~500 Pts

and if I had a camera, I'd post some pictures of them.


#12
Marshal Rohr

Marshal Rohr

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 16,326 posts
  • Location:Georgia
  • Faction: 7th Terran Regiment
Honestly, thinking about it a bit more, if they reboot epic by gradual releases of different ‘Game in a Box’ systems over the next few years it won’t just help gauge interest, they’ll go ahead an recover the investment in making those new plastic kits. If a fair amount of people who like the quick niche games like Blood Bowl pick up a box of Aeronautica and some boards and expansions and a few boxes of each type of plane for their faction that’s a successful game. As they introduce more races they’ll keep making money off of it. Titanicus has tons of players on IG. I see new posts of people picking up kits everyday so it might’ve tapered off, but that’s still going. It’s really strong in Heresy groups. I draw a clear line between Aeronautica which is meant to be a quick game with small buy in and you can sell it at games stores that aren’t just 40k but board games too. Titanicus is more traditional, but still you can play with a relatively cheap buy in. If they introduce the battle of Tallarn as Space Marines vs Auxilia as a game in box like Aeronautica and not a game like Titanicus that scales up into multi-hour games you’ve got three of the main things you need for epic done across three other self-supporting games. Tallarn could expand out like Aeronautica with a third Mechanicum faction. At that time you could easily introduce Epic as a scalable game like Titanicus with infantry models and rules incorporating kits they already make focusing on Legions, Auxilia, and Mechanicum infantry kits.

I say this because BFG returning would be a dream come true. I hope it happens soon. But BFG wouldn’t synergize with an epic reboot the way a Game in a Box Tank Battles roughly analogous to Team Yankee would, so I imagine that when the release BFG it will be intended as it’s own Stand Alone, scalable game like Titanicus with releases over a long period instead of like Aeronautica with a quick release schedule and varied race roster to keep it spicy.

Edited by Marshal Rohr, 08 September 2019 - 10:57 PM.

  • Bryan Blaire and Gundric like this

Your opinion is important, and someone posting here probably does care what you think. You should go tell them. Remember that it really hurts to come up with an idea you care about and have no one else care. Go care about something and tell them what you think. Now. Think of what it would have meant to you when you were young.

 

+++The Iterators Guild+++

A Group for Lore Minded Hobbyists and World Building Projects

 


#13
Bryan Blaire

Bryan Blaire

    ++ EXPLORATOR BIOLOGIS ++

  • ++ MODERATI CEDO ++
  • 6,690 posts
  • Faction: Imperium, Chaos, Xenos
I actually really hope that Titanicus and Aeronautica Imperialis both are leading up to an Epic reboot, at least for me because I never got into it the first time around and the minis for both systems are fantastic. It would also be great to have some BFG to play as well, but again, selfishness - I never played and I have been developing a campaign system in the back of my mind for whole sectors in 40K for a long time.

I don’t know how many people are into tying specialist games into larger campaigns across the gaming systems, but to me it seems like it would be really fun to knock out an Aeronautica game in the morning, take a lunch, come back that afternoon and play a planetstrike game where the winner gets a bonus rule. Would be even cooler in a campaign weekend type scenario, where teams play aeronautica on a Friday to establish air superiority, planetstrike Saturday am, a normal game Saturday afternoon, another quick aeronautica game Saturday evening, then tally up the victories for special conditions for an apocalypse game on Sunday. Celebratory drinks Sunday afternoon, first round on the losers ;)

Oh man, a campaign system for multiple players across multiple game scopes is totally where my heart lies - BFG for some kind of bonus, or just a free use of the Orbital Bombardment Stratagem, AI grants a free upgrade or additional flyer slot, a Kill Team game or two to provide some strategic bonuses ala information or C3 disruption, a few outrider skirmishes via 40K main rules, and then a city war via Epic. Rinse repeat for as much as the campaign calls for to contest/seize a planet, then zoom back out and roll on to the next battle zone.

It's hard to balance, sure, but it can be fantastic fun if everyone is committed. You can even have benefits for the losing side of games in the form of strategic withdrawals setting up bonuses in other war zones, or simply not having sacrificed too many points/Power Levels/whatever slots in a given event and preserving some forces for later.
  • Marshal Rohr, choppyred and Gundric like this
My DA Successor Chapter DIY - Stoneburners: Index Astartes Stoneburners; Images: Stoneburners WiP - DA Forum
Completed Squads: Stoneburners - Hall of Honor Forum
Drakeslayers, Bellicose Monster Hunters of the Fang: Drakeslayers - Space Wolves Forum
Other Material Here (Angels on both sides of the Long War): PCA WiP Forum
gallery_59244_7045_11084.jpggallery_59244_7045_3768.jpggallery_59244_7045_10256.jpg

#14
Plasmablasts

Plasmablasts

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 837 posts
I wondered whether Apocalypse might be a test run for an Epic rule set. They could potentially use the same rules for both scales.

Although Epic would divert some sales from Apocalypse, the two systems do have different markets: Epic is more for the “I want to play huge games with Titans and multiple detachments of tanks and infantry”, whereas Apocalypse covers the “I’ve amassed far too many 40k miniatures over the years and want to see them together on the tabletop”.

Two markets, one rule set, choose your scale.
  • Gundric and Exilyth like this

#15
Gundric

Gundric

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 17 posts
  • Location:Old Albia.
  • Faction: Blood Angels, Death Guard.

I wondered whether Apocalypse might be a test run for an Epic rule set. They could potentially use the same rules for both scales.

Although Epic would divert some sales from Apocalypse, the two systems do have different markets: Epic is more for the “I want to play huge games with Titans and multiple detachments of tanks and infantry”, whereas Apocalypse covers the “I’ve amassed far too many 40k miniatures over the years and want to see them together on the tabletop”.

Two markets, one rule set, choose your scale.

They do have a habit of using these smaller games as test beds for other rules changes to the main game systems, I am hoping they add the split activation from kill team into 40k proper, as it limits alpha strike shenanigans quite well.

 

 

Honestly, thinking about it a bit more, if they reboot epic by gradual releases of different ‘Game in a Box’ systems over the next few years it won’t just help gauge interest, they’ll go ahead an recover the investment in making those new plastic kits. If a fair amount of people who like the quick niche games like Blood Bowl pick up a box of Aeronautica and some boards and expansions and a few boxes of each type of plane for their faction that’s a successful game. As they introduce more races they’ll keep making money off of it. Titanicus has tons of players on IG. I see new posts of people picking up kits everyday so it might’ve tapered off, but that’s still going. It’s really strong in Heresy groups. I draw a clear line between Aeronautica which is meant to be a quick game with small buy in and you can sell it at games stores that aren’t just 40k but board games too. Titanicus is more traditional, but still you can play with a relatively cheap buy in. If they introduce the battle of Tallarn as Space Marines vs Auxilia as a game in box like Aeronautica and not a game like Titanicus that scales up into multi-hour games you’ve got three of the main things you need for epic done across three other self-supporting games. Tallarn could expand out like Aeronautica with a third Mechanicum faction. At that time you could easily introduce Epic as a scalable game like Titanicus with infantry models and rules incorporating kits they already make focusing on Legions, Auxilia, and Mechanicum infantry kits.

I say this because BFG returning would be a dream come true. I hope it happens soon. But BFG wouldn’t synergize with an epic reboot the way a Game in a Box Tank Battles roughly analogous to Team Yankee would, so I imagine that when the release BFG it will be intended as it’s own Stand Alone, scalable game like Titanicus with releases over a long period instead of like Aeronautica with a quick release schedule and varied race roster to keep it spicy.

I was a teenager when Epic really launched, I had a massive Iron hands army that somehow vanished! I also loved BFG but I had to sell all my toys when I went travelling a few years ago. Epic was great, I could field an entire space marine company, plus supports and I didnt need to get a mortgage to do so, unlike apocalypse. I really do hope it returns.



#16
Kenzaburo

Kenzaburo

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 192 posts
  • Location:Germany
  • Faction: Adeptus Custodes

Funny enough I never got into Epic or BFG back when it was released. I liked the larger minis of standard 40k. I still love those today, but BFG has been on my wishlist ever since I started reading more about fleet battles in Black Library publications. And Epic got way more interesting after I built my first Flames of War armies...the ability to fight battles on that larger conflict scale was immensely satisfying.


Visit my painter profile on Instagram: https://www.instagra...gfused.painter/

 

gallery_48988_15465_14148.png gallery_48988_15465_5251.png

 

My Titanicus Plog


#17
Marshal Rohr

Marshal Rohr

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 16,326 posts
  • Location:Georgia
  • Faction: 7th Terran Regiment

Brother Tyler pointed out how Epic an Apocalypse might conflict, and I've spent some time thinking about how to work around that. Essentially, Apocalypse becomes highly unwieldy for a one on one game above the company level, which is why I think they encourage team play as integral to the experience. Epic should be designed for one on one play at the Battalion or even Regimental Level for infantry and armor. As in, your army should be multiple companies of infantry and tanks and artillery in the ground component, and then to really drive home the scale you'd also be taking a full Maniple of Titans, Banners of Knights, and Squadrons of Aeronautica. I think their biggest worry is that people will use Epic for Pocket40k or it will grow to replace 40k as a mainline game. I don't really know how to work around that beyond making the baseline game at such a scale to make it impossible to recreate even with Apocalypse. 


Edited by Marshal Rohr, 09 September 2019 - 12:04 PM.

  • Gundric likes this

Your opinion is important, and someone posting here probably does care what you think. You should go tell them. Remember that it really hurts to come up with an idea you care about and have no one else care. Go care about something and tell them what you think. Now. Think of what it would have meant to you when you were young.

 

+++The Iterators Guild+++

A Group for Lore Minded Hobbyists and World Building Projects

 


#18
Gundric

Gundric

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 17 posts
  • Location:Old Albia.
  • Faction: Blood Angels, Death Guard.

Brother Tyler pointed out how Epic an Apocalypse might conflict, and I've spent some time thinking about how to work around that. Essentially, Apocalypse becomes highly unwieldy for a one on one game above the company level, which is why I think they encourage team play as integral to the experience. Epic should be designed for one on one play at the Battalion or even Regimental Level for infantry and armor. As in, your army should be multiple companies of infantry and tanks and artillery in the ground component, and then to really drive home the scale you'd also be taking a full Maniple of Titans, Banners of Knights, and Squadrons of Aeronautica. I think their biggest worry is that people will use Epic for Pocket40k or it will grow to replace 40k as a mainline game. I don't really know how to work around that beyond making the baseline game at such a scale to make it impossible to recreate even with Apocalypse. 

I think it really depends on how people deal with abstractions, as they are needed for epic scale games. I know many historical gamers who dont like playing games at higher levels because they want to micro manage every action a unit makes, epic should be about the kinds of decisions a chapter master would make. He isnt worried if that plasma cannon in range, he is only worried about wether the target is down, wether that flanking maneuvre is going to plan or if one of his companies is being overwhelmed at close quarters by knights! At this scale, tactical choices should be out of the players remit, it should focus the players on making tough command decisions during the ebb and flow of grand tactical battles.


  • Marshal Rohr likes this

#19
Marshal Rohr

Marshal Rohr

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 16,326 posts
  • Location:Georgia
  • Faction: 7th Terran Regiment

 

Brother Tyler pointed out how Epic an Apocalypse might conflict, and I've spent some time thinking about how to work around that. Essentially, Apocalypse becomes highly unwieldy for a one on one game above the company level, which is why I think they encourage team play as integral to the experience. Epic should be designed for one on one play at the Battalion or even Regimental Level for infantry and armor. As in, your army should be multiple companies of infantry and tanks and artillery in the ground component, and then to really drive home the scale you'd also be taking a full Maniple of Titans, Banners of Knights, and Squadrons of Aeronautica. I think their biggest worry is that people will use Epic for Pocket40k or it will grow to replace 40k as a mainline game. I don't really know how to work around that beyond making the baseline game at such a scale to make it impossible to recreate even with Apocalypse. 

I think it really depends on how people deal with abstractions, as they are needed for epic scale games. I know many historical gamers who dont like playing games at higher levels because they want to micro manage every action a unit makes, epic should be about the kinds of decisions a chapter master would make. He isnt worried if that plasma cannon in range, he is only worried about wether the target is down, wether that flanking maneuvre is going to plan or if one of his companies is being overwhelmed at close quarters by knights! At this scale, tactical choices should be out of the players remit, it should focus the players on making tough command decisions during the ebb and flow of grand tactical battles.

 

 

Don't tease me with a good time. 


  • Arendious likes this

Your opinion is important, and someone posting here probably does care what you think. You should go tell them. Remember that it really hurts to come up with an idea you care about and have no one else care. Go care about something and tell them what you think. Now. Think of what it would have meant to you when you were young.

 

+++The Iterators Guild+++

A Group for Lore Minded Hobbyists and World Building Projects

 





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Google (1)