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.

Alright so I just got the new flyer rules. They seem cool and I can't wait to play them (plus it's an excuse to get another two planes which are my favourite thing to paint), now there's mention of the vendetta but no rules...how do I go about playing them then? I also have the cadian suppliment, I was thinking of running that formation in the book with just one normal valkaye then just equip the rest with lascannons. Wpuld this be allowed?

They now count as a valkyrie, use the points in the codex for the vendetta weapon loadout. Pic related, a follow up question to yours but verifies the info, straight from Games Workshop.

afk1sec wrote:
They now count as a valkyrie, use the points in the codex for the vendetta weapon loadout. Pic related, a follow up question to yours but verifies the info, straight from Games Workshop.

Or, at least, straight from some guy named 'Eddie' who responded on the GW Facebook page.


Without some sort of verification on who this 'Eddie' is and how qualified he is to answer rules questions, that doesn't really count for any more than asking the casual at your local store. Or some random guy off the street.

 insaniak wrote:

afk1sec wrote:
They now count as a valkyrie, use the points in the codex for the vendetta weapon loadout. Pic related, a follow up question to yours but verifies the info, straight from Games Workshop.

Or, at least, straight from some guy named 'Eddie' who responded on the GW Facebook page.


Without some sort of verification on who this 'Eddie' is and how qualified he is to answer rules questions, that doesn't really count for any more than asking the casual at your local store. Or some random guy off the street.

Sadly, this. It's not official unless it's literally an official release, like an FAQ.

 kingbobbito wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

afk1sec wrote:
They now count as a valkyrie, use the points in the codex for the vendetta weapon loadout. Pic related, a follow up question to yours but verifies the info, straight from Games Workshop.

Or, at least, straight from some guy named 'Eddie' who responded on the GW Facebook page.


Without some sort of verification on who this 'Eddie' is and how qualified he is to answer rules questions, that doesn't really count for any more than asking the casual at your local store. Or some random guy off the street.

Sadly, this. It's not official unless it's literally an official release, like an FAQ.

Is it weird that this is not the first time I've seen someone make an dakka account only to post an "official" rules clarification?

 insaniak wrote:
Without some sort of verification on who this 'Eddie' is and how qualified he is to answer rules questions, that doesn't really count for any more than asking the casual at your local store. Or some random guy off the street.

Of course it counts for more, because "Eddie" is authorized to speak on behalf of GW while the random guy off the street is not.

 Peregrine wrote:

Of course it counts for more, because "Eddie" is authorized to speak on behalf of GW while the random guy off the street is not.

How familiar is Eddie with the rules of Warhammer 40000?

 insaniak wrote:
How familiar is Eddie with the rules of Warhammer 40000?

Does it matter? GW giving someone incompetent authority to speak for them doesn't have anything to do with how official the statement is. We would all love for everything GW says and publishes to be done by people who are familiar with the rules of Warhammer 40k, but clearly this is not the case.

 Peregrine wrote:

Does it matter? GW giving someone incompetent authority to speak for them doesn't have anything to do with how official the statement is. We would all love for everything GW says and publishes to be done by people who are familiar with the rules of Warhammer 40k, but clearly this is not the case.

Of course it matters.

Unless there something officially stated somewhere that says that the guy on the Facebook page has any authority to do anything other than interact with people on the Facebook page, we have no reason to believe that he has any more authority to answer rules queries than any other non-studio employee, or that his answers will be anything other than his own opinion.

 insaniak wrote:
Unless there something officially stated somewhere that says that the guy on the Facebook page has any authority to do anything other than interact with people on the Facebook page, we have no reason to believe that he has any more authority to answer rules queries than any other non-studio employee, or that his answers will be anything other than his own opinion.

That's still more authority than some random person on the street has, and you still didn't answer my question. Whether or not "Eddie" is authorized to give official rulings has nothing to do with whether or not "Eddie" understands the rules he is commenting on. GW is clearly happy to issue rules and FAQs (which are indisputably "official") written by people who don't understand how the rules work.

"Eddie" seems legit.

On the other hand what would YOU all say? Just in case "eddie" never responded.

 tau tse tung wrote:
On the other hand what would YOU all say? Just in case "eddie" never responded.

I'd say the Vendetta gets the same pursuit/agility stats as the Valkyrie and has the same updated wording ("take a flyer wing of 2-3" vs. "take a squadron of 2-3") for the ability to add additional models to the unit, but it is NOT a Valkyrie. It is a separate unit and can does not count for any references to "Valkyries", nor can it be mixed in units with Valkyries. This keeps things as close as possible to the printed rules and only does the bare minimum to update the rules to be compatible with DFTS.

Of course what I'd really say is "DFTS is an incredibly stupid expansion and I'm not using it, so the question doesn't matter".

You guys realize this is the typical response everyone is getting from gamesworkshop about it.

Besides, didn't you know, huge companies can't be bothered to operate properly within their own websites so they just use facebook.

Games Workshop has -always- kept reigns on what is allowed to be discussed by its employees with the Public.

Every company that has social media accounts give their employees "do's and don'ts" and a list of what they can and can't respond to and how to do so. Don't think for a second GW doesn't practice these as well.

As such "Eddie" has been given the authority to respond to these questions, and this makes any statement he makes as official as anyone on the design teams, until something is published that overturns or strengthens the statement.

I guess so, it's just annoying because is it a fighter or am assault plane etc? It's pretty fustratring for those who used the vendetta for the past few years.