mercury14 wrote: Okay so the Dark Eldar formation requires two Razorwings and a Void Raven Bomber... and the bonus is interceptor.
Except when it wants to use interceptor it's at crappy BS3 because most stuff will be on the ground (drop pods, etc). Not only that but interceptor doesn't work turn one on pods (or turn 2 if you go second) because the fliers will be in reserve.
Wow. Terrible. How could they not think this through even a little bit?
That's because they give rules based on what seems more "cinematic" to them. They just sort of envision a scene playing out in their mind's eye and then give rules based on what sounds appropriate. So they think of a wing of agile Dark Eldar aircraft intercepting some ponderous Ork bombers and decide "Interceptor" is the rule to go with (afterall it says "intercept" right there in the name - that's what it must do right?).
The fact that the game mechanics prevent this from actually having any efficacy on the tabletop isn't really relevant. I'm sure they don't even get far enough in the "playtesting" to realize this. That's probably already more effort than they want to expend on a throwaway dataslate for a throwaway faction like Dark Eldar anyway.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I actually start to like these rules. They might be poorly executed but the idea of fliers with different roles on the battlefield really appeal to me.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The only other downside is the price :\
What kills me is that now the gap between FMC's and the rest is even wider! They are still hard to hit, and while fliers lost ground cover they still laugh at the rules with toe in cover all while being able to move shorter minimum distances shooting 360 degrees all while still having the convenience of picking skyfire or ground fire at no penalty to BS.... WTF.
Can we please get a FMC supplement next
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and I forgot they now seem to be safe in reserve while in the air!
Red Corsair wrote: What kills me is that now the gap between FMC's and the rest is even wider! They are still hard to hit, and while fliers lost ground cover they still laugh at the rules with toe in cover all while being able to move shorter minimum distances shooting 360 degrees all while still having the convenience of picking skyfire or ground fire at no penalty to BS.... WTF.
Can we please get a FMC supplement next
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and I forgot they now seem to be safe in reserve while in the air!
You're starting to sound like a Chaos player with that amount complaining...
Red Corsair wrote: What kills me is that now the gap between FMC's and the rest is even wider! They are still hard to hit, and while fliers lost ground cover they still laugh at the rules with toe in cover all while being able to move shorter minimum distances shooting 360 degrees all while still having the convenience of picking skyfire or ground fire at no penalty to BS.... WTF.
Can we please get a FMC supplement next
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and I forgot they now seem to be safe in reserve while in the air!
You're starting to sound like a Chaos player with that amount complaining...
Well they do haev things it complain about - given this is yet another - give the Marines new stuff supplement - I remmeber the halicon days when my Astartes only had Thunderhawks in the fluff..........now look at the crap they have to fly
I am hoping they post all of their flyers on the website with full stats so everyone has access. It would be so nice to live in a world where we don't have to buy the same book again and again when they decide to add stuff out of nowhere...
Red Corsair wrote: What kills me is that now the gap between FMC's and the rest is even wider! They are still hard to hit, and while fliers lost ground cover they still laugh at the rules with toe in cover all while being able to move shorter minimum distances shooting 360 degrees all while still having the convenience of picking skyfire or ground fire at no penalty to BS.... WTF.
Can we please get a FMC supplement next
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and I forgot they now seem to be safe in reserve while in the air!
You're starting to sound like a Chaos player with that amount complaining...
Well they do haev things it complain about - given this is yet another - give the Marines new stuff supplement - I remmeber the halicon days when my Astartes only had Thunderhawks in the fluff..........now look at the crap they have to fly
As a Chaos player, I totally agree. He was pointing out how Chaos players whine in every thread a few pages back. With all his complaining about FMC, it seemed fitting
Red Corsair wrote: What kills me is that now the gap between FMC's and the rest is even wider! They are still hard to hit, and while fliers lost ground cover they still laugh at the rules with toe in cover all while being able to move shorter minimum distances shooting 360 degrees all while still having the convenience of picking skyfire or ground fire at no penalty to BS.... WTF.
Can we please get a FMC supplement next
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and I forgot they now seem to be safe in reserve while in the air!
On the other hand, tyranids, daemons and CSM need all the help they can get. Saying FMCs are unfairly good is really taking things out of context.
Red Corsair wrote: What kills me is that now the gap between FMC's and the rest is even wider! They are still hard to hit, and while fliers lost ground cover they still laugh at the rules with toe in cover all while being able to move shorter minimum distances shooting 360 degrees all while still having the convenience of picking skyfire or ground fire at no penalty to BS.... WTF.
Can we please get a FMC supplement next
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and I forgot they now seem to be safe in reserve while in the air!
On the other hand, tyranids, daemons and CSM need all the help they can get. Saying FMCs are unfairly good is really taking things out of context.
Nah, Chaos & Tyranids are the most OP armies in the game, and it's great that we have new rules to feth them over!
Red Corsair wrote: What kills me is that now the gap between FMC's and the rest is even wider! They are still hard to hit, and while fliers lost ground cover they still laugh at the rules with toe in cover all while being able to move shorter minimum distances shooting 360 degrees all while still having the convenience of picking skyfire or ground fire at no penalty to BS.... WTF.
Can we please get a FMC supplement next
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and I forgot they now seem to be safe in reserve while in the air!
You're starting to sound like a Chaos player with that amount complaining...
Well they do haev things it complain about - given this is yet another - give the Marines new stuff supplement - I remmeber the halicon days when my Astartes only had Thunderhawks in the fluff..........now look at the crap they have to fly
As a Chaos player, I totally agree. He was pointing out how Chaos players whine in every thread a few pages back. With all his complaining about FMC, it seemed fitting
I have played chaos since 2nd and I have always been embarrassed by the amount of whining chaos players bring to these threads, that however doesn't mean legitimate gripes can't be heard. How many threads have been hijacked by concerns over FMC's? Exactly.
I think Chaos are over due for an update, but at this point until the WHOLE codex gets a rewrite from the ground up we are stuck in a standstill. So for me, the griping in every thread is better saved for when or should they fail at an attempt in a new codex. That will have to wait until they do however. For now it is just pissing in everyone elses cheerios.
According to what we know, the helldrake is no worse off then any number of fliers. In fact it is better off against ground targets then any fighter class, the razorwing jetfighter got absolutely hosed, not the helldrake.
Red Corsair wrote: What kills me is that now the gap between FMC's and the rest is even wider! They are still hard to hit, and while fliers lost ground cover they still laugh at the rules with toe in cover all while being able to move shorter minimum distances shooting 360 degrees all while still having the convenience of picking skyfire or ground fire at no penalty to BS.... WTF.
Can we please get a FMC supplement next
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and I forgot they now seem to be safe in reserve while in the air!
On the other hand, tyranids, daemons and CSM need all the help they can get. Saying FMCs are unfairly good is really taking things out of context.
Except it isn't. You should look at them as a unit type first not at how much needed power increase they can bring to a crap army otherwise when you fix the crap units from said books, you now have an otherwise solid book running around with broken units making it unfair.
No thanks, fix those armies from the bottom up, don't give them crutches to stand on by making certain unit types bend the core mechanics. thats a very odd stance to have.
Red Corsair wrote: No thanks, fix those armies from the bottom up, don't give them crutches to stand on by making certain unit types bend the core mechanics. thats a very odd stance to have.
Yeah of course it would be wonderful if GW actually fixed the Tyranid book....
....except they don't. So, ummm, yeah. "fixing" FMC's at this point will kill Tyranids. Obviously it's ideal that GW fix the Tyranid book first.
I actually don't mind in general that FMC's are better than flyers anyway, it makes sense that an FMC would be a better supporter of ground troops than a piloted aircraft. Some things are a bit wacky I agree, but a lot of the stuff you've bitched about in this thread I think is perfectly fair (FMC's being able to shoot 360 degrees for example, a biological flyer can shift its body, head, arms to shoot at a target on the ground and behind it without massively altering its flight path).
Indeed there's some things FMC's could have added that I think would be fair, like being able to charge out of a swoop or turn more than 90 degrees per turn while swooping.
On the flip side, they could probably have a modified version of Skyfire so that instead of being able to fire at full Bs they can fire at -1 or -2 Bs or something like that. You could also add that enemy flyers have +1 to hit them (because they are going to be slower and being slow in a dogfight is your main disadvantage).
Red Corsair wrote: According to what we know, the helldrake is no worse off then any number of fliers. In fact it is better off against ground targets then any fighter class, the razorwing jetfighter got absolutely hosed, not the helldrake.
Oh, but that's okay though, because at least the razorwing looks cool. Doesn't matter if the rules are garbage, DE players at least have a prettier model to play with.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also more leaks from the book. Vector Strike during Dogfight phase for Heldrakes...
Inq. Serge - Warseer
[..]
ALSO: Double-checked the rules for heldrakes; They DO have a dogfight-only vector strike!!! It's just near impossible to get it in, especially against anything that can outmanoeuvre a flying croissant. (The heldrake's very agile, almost as a Razorwing. It is quite slow however.) (EDIT: It has a better probability against overconfident players with fast flyers, but not against the sensible ones). (In case anyone's wondering, it's in addition to whatever weapon it can or can't shoot in a dogfight. And it has still has its ordinary vector strike on the field).
Considering that the vendetta's not even mentioned in the book, and FW's already making a vendetta upgrade kit (have one myself); I think It'll go back to FW-only.
The Orks; The tellyporta is an awesome weapon (Very strong and penetrative), it's just lacking in range. And it can make stuff "Disappear". Orks have 2 different wing leader tables, and they have 2 formations: 1 with 1 new flyer with the KFF, and 3 other flyers of ANY ork-kind, and makes them tougher in the correct attack pattern. The other consists of 6-12 fliers (3 wings), makes one wing better, and have access to a larger attack pattern.
And come on people, Unlike me, most of you do not use an average of 3-4 flyers in your 1850 pts armies, and even if you did, the sky isn't falling down. Sure, the formations do not give voidravens 10" stD blasts, but then again, the formations are free and the attack patterns are free-er, we all saw how pissed people got when marines got a free disintegration gun, making attack patterns and formations too good would make people go crazier than usual. It's just a compensation for the lack of footsoldiers. The dogfight subphase and the new roles and stats make flyers something more than poorly manoeuvred hard-to-hit skimmers. They're more "gamble"-y, less overpowered (not that most of them where overpowered, just presumed to be), and still not mandatory. They can still be ignored, they're just a little bit more difficult to dodge now.
Stormhawk might be mighty, but, against equally good players, the razorwing (With DL) will defeat it more times in a dogfight than the other way around. Not 9 of 10 times, nothing is that good, but more in line with 6, at most 7, of 10 times*. Nothing is invincible in dogfights, some are just better. Dogfights are very balanced. And quick. It's a bit of a high risk high reward "game theory"-duel, something for the gambler in us.
*(Does not mean it will kill it every time it wins)
The one for the flier is an upgraded version from one taken for big meks in MA right?
Don't know what the ordinary does. This one has set strenght and ap.
[..]
Also; Who plays with more than 1 voidraven? Most of the bombers are rarely taken in multiples. Most of the flyers are rarely taken in multiples. Sure, I rarely play DE without my 3 RJF, and I occasionally add in 1 VRB, but most people do not spam flyers, especially not the same flyer. Thus, you will, most likely, never meet a proper attack pattern, and if you do, the opponent will be lacking in ground forces.
And the loss of skyfire, Considering that most flyers jink a lot, it's not that much of a loss.
And for -1bs against ground targets; Skimmers and jetbikes do not count as ground targets! Thus, 3 RJF in attack pattern can get Tank hunter when shooting Monoliths. And ignore cover against jetbikes!
In my opinion; It's a wonderful book, and I love it.
Can't wait to see what they do with the nightwing interceptor. I custom built two from the razorwing and build my Phoenix bomber from the eldar flyer kit. I always field them with my corsairs because it matches their fluff and I like having fewer units on the ground...
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Can't wait to see what they do with the nightwing interceptor. I custom built two from the razorwing and build my Phoenix bomber from the eldar flyer kit. I always field them with my corsairs because it matches their fluff and I like having fewer units on the ground...
I was more responding to someone who said "one of two armies that have FMCs". Powerful rules are not necessary for a unit to be classified as an FMC. It's just a bad FMC.
This is the absolute core of the whining about "why is X an MC and Y a walker? BAAAWWW"
As soon as you had an edition where a walker had stronger rules by default than an MC, you would have everyone whining that the strongest walkers should be MCs ("Why is a dreadnought a walker? It's got a living integral pilot! BAAAAAWWW")
Well, I won't be getting this book, and by extension a Stormhawk. My Stormtalons will suck against other flyers and are needed against ground targets. Same goes for my Stormraven, my Blood Angels sole AA. Also, the fact it breaks whenever someone brings a Forgeworld flyer, makes me like this will never be a commonly used supplement. The thing that concerns me is that GW will probably try to force it down our throats.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, I won't be getting this book, and by extension a Stormhawk. My Stormtalons will suck against other flyers and are needed against ground targets. Same goes for my Stormraven, my Blood Angels sole AA. Also, the fact it breaks whenever someone brings a Forgeworld flyer, makes me like this will never be a commonly used supplement. The thing that concerns me is that GW will probably try to force it down our throats.
Getting a second talon has been on my to-buy list for a while now. I might pick up the new one, just because it looks a lot better and field it as a counts-as. But I’m with you on the book. Just feels tacked on and phoned in from most of what I hear.
I’ll support good models with my money, but not bad rules. I shell out enough for those anyway for “required” stuff. Optional stuff like this that I can pass on I will.
I read there is a line in the book that says these rules replace the flyer rules in the brb.
So they may not be as optional as you think. I can see most people ignoring the dog fight phase. But the new formations, detachments, patterns etc are looking like the new flyer rules.
On the other hand, tyranids, daemons and CSM need all the help they can get. Saying FMCs are unfairly good is really taking things out of context.
I don't think that's accurate at all. It's not fair to say that FMCs are OMGWTFBBQ game-breakingly good, but when compared to flying vehicles, especially when shackled with the new rules, it's absolutely fair to say that FMCs are unfairly good. They always have been, but now they're even more so.
On the other hand, tyranids, daemons and CSM need all the help they can get. Saying FMCs are unfairly good is really taking things out of context.
I don't think that's accurate at all. It's not fair to say that FMCs are OMGWTFBBQ game-breakingly good, but when compared to flying vehicles, especially when shackled with the new rules, it's absolutely fair to say that FMCs are unfairly good. They always have been, but now they're even more so.
Yeah they are good. But who cares let those Chaos and Tyranid players have their fun.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, I won't be getting this book, and by extension a Stormhawk. My Stormtalons will suck against other flyers and are needed against ground targets. Same goes for my Stormraven, my Blood Angels sole AA. Also, the fact it breaks whenever someone brings a Forgeworld flyer, makes me like this will never be a commonly used supplement. The thing that concerns me is that GW will probably try to force it down our throats.
Getting a second talon has been on my to-buy list for a while now. I might pick up the new one, just because it looks a lot better and field it as a counts-as. But I’m with you on the book. Just feels tacked on and phoned in from most of what I hear.
I’ll support good models with my money, but not bad rules. I shell out enough for those anyway for “required” stuff. Optional stuff like this that I can pass on I will.
I already have two Stormtalons, so I won't be needing a third and won't be getting the kit to make a Stormhawk since I won't ever have the rules. Now, if they released a $5-$10 dataslate to run it in a non-DFTS game, I would snap the kit up and the dataslate easy. As of now, I will just keep what I've got.
Agreed on support. I will buy cool models even if I probably won't use them, but I won't buy bad supplements to use cool models.
the_scotsman wrote: The Tau have an FMC that instantly kills itself if it fails a grounding check. Whoops.
It's an FMC with literally none of the rules that make FMCs good.
Smash is barely ever used by FMCs because most of them want to be shooting 100% with near-impunity, rather than land to get shot to pieces.
Fear is useless.
Vector Strike is also next to useless on a S5 model, so you aren't really missing anything by not having it.
So no, the Coldstar isn't missing all the rules that 'make FMCs good'. It has the main ones (Hard to Hit, being able to shoot 2 weapons, high movement, optional skyfire, etc).
The problem is that T4 is a death sentence and its guns are fairly terrible for how much you pay.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, I won't be getting this book, and by extension a Stormhawk. My Stormtalons will suck against other flyers and are needed against ground targets. Same goes for my Stormraven, my Blood Angels sole AA. Also, the fact it breaks whenever someone brings a Forgeworld flyer, makes me like this will never be a commonly used supplement. The thing that concerns me is that GW will probably try to force it down our throats.
Getting a second talon has been on my to-buy list for a while now. I might pick up the new one, just because it looks a lot better and field it as a counts-as. But I’m with you on the book. Just feels tacked on and phoned in from most of what I hear.
I’ll support good models with my money, but not bad rules. I shell out enough for those anyway for “required” stuff. Optional stuff like this that I can pass on I will.
I already have two Stormtalons, so I won't be needing a third and won't be getting the kit to make a Stormhawk since I won't ever have the rules. Now, if they released a $5-$10 dataslate to run it in a non-DFTS game, I would snap the kit up and the dataslate easy. As of now, I will just keep what I've got.
Agreed on support. I will buy cool models even if I probably won't use them, but I won't buy bad supplements to use cool models.
Rules for new models are always in White Dwarf so I would expect these to be as well.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, I won't be getting this book, and by extension a Stormhawk. My Stormtalons will suck against other flyers and are needed against ground targets. Same goes for my Stormraven, my Blood Angels sole AA. Also, the fact it breaks whenever someone brings a Forgeworld flyer, makes me like this will never be a commonly used supplement. The thing that concerns me is that GW will probably try to force it down our throats.
Getting a second talon has been on my to-buy list for a while now. I might pick up the new one, just because it looks a lot better and field it as a counts-as. But I’m with you on the book. Just feels tacked on and phoned in from most of what I hear.
I’ll support good models with my money, but not bad rules. I shell out enough for those anyway for “required” stuff. Optional stuff like this that I can pass on I will.
I already have two Stormtalons, so I won't be needing a third and won't be getting the kit to make a Stormhawk since I won't ever have the rules. Now, if they released a $5-$10 dataslate to run it in a non-DFTS game, I would snap the kit up and the dataslate easy. As of now, I will just keep what I've got.
Agreed on support. I will buy cool models even if I probably won't use them, but I won't buy bad supplements to use cool models.
Rules for new models are always in White Dwarf so I would expect these to be as well.
Here is hoping. Nowhere in my entire city sells White Dwarf so I will have to wait and see. I will be going to the Twin Cities GW store soon, so perhaps they will have it in stock. If the stats are in there, I will snap up a Stormhawk and the White Dwarf all in one stop.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, I won't be getting this book, and by extension a Stormhawk. My Stormtalons will suck against other flyers and are needed against ground targets. Same goes for my Stormraven, my Blood Angels sole AA. Also, the fact it breaks whenever someone brings a Forgeworld flyer, makes me like this will never be a commonly used supplement. The thing that concerns me is that GW will probably try to force it down our throats.
Getting a second talon has been on my to-buy list for a while now. I might pick up the new one, just because it looks a lot better and field it as a counts-as. But I’m with you on the book. Just feels tacked on and phoned in from most of what I hear.
I’ll support good models with my money, but not bad rules. I shell out enough for those anyway for “required” stuff. Optional stuff like this that I can pass on I will.
I already have two Stormtalons, so I won't be needing a third and won't be getting the kit to make a Stormhawk since I won't ever have the rules. Now, if they released a $5-$10 dataslate to run it in a non-DFTS game, I would snap the kit up and the dataslate easy. As of now, I will just keep what I've got.
Agreed on support. I will buy cool models even if I probably won't use them, but I won't buy bad supplements to use cool models.
Rules for new models are always in White Dwarf so I would expect these to be as well.
They would have been in this past week's White Dwarf if they were going to be.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, I won't be getting this book, and by extension a Stormhawk. My Stormtalons will suck against other flyers and are needed against ground targets. Same goes for my Stormraven, my Blood Angels sole AA. Also, the fact it breaks whenever someone brings a Forgeworld flyer, makes me like this will never be a commonly used supplement. The thing that concerns me is that GW will probably try to force it down our throats.
Getting a second talon has been on my to-buy list for a while now. I might pick up the new one, just because it looks a lot better and field it as a counts-as. But I’m with you on the book. Just feels tacked on and phoned in from most of what I hear.
I’ll support good models with my money, but not bad rules. I shell out enough for those anyway for “required” stuff. Optional stuff like this that I can pass on I will.
I already have two Stormtalons, so I won't be needing a third and won't be getting the kit to make a Stormhawk since I won't ever have the rules. Now, if they released a $5-$10 dataslate to run it in a non-DFTS game, I would snap the kit up and the dataslate easy. As of now, I will just keep what I've got.
Agreed on support. I will buy cool models even if I probably won't use them, but I won't buy bad supplements to use cool models.
Rules for new models are always in White Dwarf so I would expect these to be as well.
They would have been in this past week's White Dwarf if they were going to be.
That is kind of what I was thinking as well. In which case, $55+$4 saved for me!
Better wait for an unboxing of the Stormhawk... but since early 2015 every 40k kit has come with its datasheet(s) in the construction manual. This may have changed but it has been the norm.
If I recall correctly, wasn't the first death from the skies released the same year flyers were brought into the brb?
Which is interesting since I think I read a rumor were they were basically going to release a 7.5 brb in the fall.
So the way I see it playing out will be just like last time. People will pledge to ignore it and then will be forced to use it when they get rolled to a new rule book.
Warhams-77 wrote: Better wait for an unboxing of the Stormhawk... but since early 2015 every 40k kit has come with its datasheet(s) in the construction manual. This may have changed but it has been the norm.
That is certainly true. It will need either a second set of instructions or new instructions. Seems like a good place for them. The fact that all the weapons besides the Las-Talon have known stats (though the Icarus Stormcannon isn't in an array so that changes things) makes that a viable option.
godswildcard wrote: If I recall correctly, wasn't the first death from the skies released the same year flyers were brought into the brb?
Which is interesting since I think I read a rumor were they were basically going to release a 7.5 brb in the fall.
So the way I see it playing out will be just like last time. People will pledge to ignore it and then will be forced to use it when they get rolled to a new rule book.
Another reason I will be hesitant to buy it. If it's all going to get rolled into 7.5 in a few months, I'm just going to wait I think.
godswildcard wrote: If I recall correctly, wasn't the first death from the skies released the same year flyers were brought into the brb?
Which is interesting since I think I read a rumor were they were basically going to release a 7.5 brb in the fall.
So the way I see it playing out will be just like last time. People will pledge to ignore it and then will be forced to use it when they get rolled to a new rule book.
Another reason I will be hesitant to buy it. If it's all going to get rolled into 7.5 in a few months, I'm just going to wait I think.
I already had my FLGS old one for me, back when it sounded a lot better than what we are getting. Otherwise I'd drop it and grab a second Ork Wazbomma instead.
Is this supplement required for fielding Flyers now?
Are they gping to FAQ each factions Flyers to add/remove the innate Sky fire from the BRB?
Edit: think I missed the point of your Q bud, apologies. Yes these rules succeed the old rules for fliers but I'm sure you can play whatever you want like normal.
I imagine, like all times playing 40k talk with the guy you're playing with before hand. If it's a tourney, in sure the rules pack will say. If you play a guy who wants to use the new rules, perhaps he'll have a copy and you can just indulge on the new rules then OR I'm sure you'll be able to find a decent summary of the rules changes on 4chan or a pdf off kickass.
I do not expect them to make any erratas, as the book covers all the changes.
Is this supplement required for fielding Flyers now?
Are they gping to FAQ each factions Flyers to add/remove the innate Sky fire from the BRB?
It is basically just like the old flyer book. It's only really useful if you want to buy it to play those specific games.
If not, it's something probably nobody will pick up since it really makes flyers a more paper rock scissor game and some get really screwed over by the new rules.
Is this supplement required for fielding Flyers now?
Are they gping to FAQ each factions Flyers to add/remove the innate Sky fire from the BRB?
It is basically just like the old flyer book. It's only really useful if you want to buy it to play those specific games.
If not, it's something probably nobody will pick up since it really makes flyers a more paper rock scissor game and some get really screwed over by the new rules.
There is a lot more to it than just the rock , paper, scissor dog fight stuff.
There are new formations and a new flyer detachment on top of the new patterns that grant tank hunter, ignores cover etc while on the table. 3 storm talons now being able to ignore cover vs ground or storm hawks ignoring cover vs Air units.
And there is a line in the book that says these replace those in the brb.
/rant So DA air superiority Nephilim Jetfighter have same stats as small Stormtalon and Stormhawk, and Stormhawk have +1 on it's stats in dogfights... Well played. /rant over
Rygnan wrote: Buuuut with the new FAQ we can shoot the Dark Talons Rift Cannon at other flyers, making it the ultimate blunt force in the air with possible S:
Nope. The Dark Talon lost the ability to fire Skyfire with Death From the Skies.
Based on the images of the Stormhawk's instructions, it can indeed mount the Stormtalon cockpit without issue. It does also come with its rules in the instructions. The only things it is missing is weapon profiles for the Las-Talon, Icarus Stormtalon, and something called Infernum halo-launcher.
Eldar rules are fair. Flyers get to cast Shrouding. Hahaha...no I just wish I had bought the previous Dakkajet boxes. No way were the new plastic parts worth £12.50, even if it was a new sprue.
Is this supplement required for fielding Flyers now?
Are they gping to FAQ each factions Flyers to add/remove the innate Sky fire from the BRB?
It is basically just like the old flyer book. It's only really useful if you want to buy it to play those specific games.
If not, it's something probably nobody will pick up since it really makes flyers a more paper rock scissor game and some get really screwed over by the new rules.
There is a lot more to it than just the rock , paper, scissor dog fight stuff.
There are new formations and a new flyer detachment on top of the new patterns that grant tank hunter, ignores cover etc while on the table. 3 storm talons now being able to ignore cover vs ground or storm hawks ignoring cover vs Air units.
And there is a line in the book that says these replace those in the brb.
So, what you're trying to say is not only is there rock paper scissors, there's good ol' pay-to-win formation rules as well? How exciting
Is this supplement required for fielding Flyers now?
Are they gping to FAQ each factions Flyers to add/remove the innate Sky fire from the BRB?
It is basically just like the old flyer book. It's only really useful if you want to buy it to play those specific games.
If not, it's something probably nobody will pick up since it really makes flyers a more paper rock scissor game and some get really screwed over by the new rules.
There is a lot more to it than just the rock , paper, scissor dog fight stuff.
There are new formations and a new flyer detachment on top of the new patterns that grant tank hunter, ignores cover etc while on the table. 3 storm talons now being able to ignore cover vs ground or storm hawks ignoring cover vs Air units.
And there is a line in the book that says these replace those in the brb.
So, what you're trying to say is not only is there rock paper scissors, there's good ol' pay-to-win formation rules as well? How exciting
Of course many of those bonus rules are not granted for free, but require you to keep your planes in a specific formation and within distance bands from one another. Easy on an open field, but once you get close to ruins or the enemy, a lot harder (which is appropriate)
Red Corsair wrote: What kills me is that now the gap between FMC's and the rest is even wider! They are still hard to hit, and while fliers lost ground cover they still laugh at the rules with toe in cover all while being able to move shorter minimum distances shooting 360 degrees all while still having the convenience of picking skyfire or ground fire at no penalty to BS.... WTF.
Can we please get a FMC supplement next
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and I forgot they now seem to be safe in reserve while in the air!
On the other hand, tyranids, daemons and CSM need all the help they can get. Saying FMCs are unfairly good is really taking things out of context.
Nah, Chaos & Tyranids are the most OP armies in the game, and it's great that we have new rules to feth them over!
It's called a FAQ. Because it FAQed those armies right over as well.
FMCs are literally the only thing Tyranids have going for them.
MCs? Nah, every other army has better ones.
Cheap infantry? It gets out of babysitter range and eats itself. Like....I don't even know.
GCs? I giggled at that though.
So finally got to read over all the leaks for the flyer book coming out here are some thoughts and questions that I have.
First, I like this book. Flyers IMO atleast needed something.. some reason to maybe take them over something else in your codex, and I feel like this book does just enough for them without being over the top. I know some people that are pretty upset about "how OP" some of the patterns are, such as the 4++ IWND pattern.. but again IMO, and as a few have stated above, at some point you may not be able to hold the pattern because of terrain and units on the board. Plus being in a pattern does limit your flyers to specific targets (granted agility does allow for some wiggle room). My vote, GW did this book right.
Couple questions.. As each flyer has a dataslate that mentions it can be taken in a wing. Does this mean that a flyer in a formation can be taken as wing? And thus benefit from the formatoin bonuses and an attack pattern?
The leaks that I have seen specifically call out fighters as having a "fighter skyfire" ability, where they can choose skyfire or not but with a -1 BS penalty to ground. No where else have I seen it overrule the BRB that says flyers in general lose skyfire... did i miss something here?
Only complaint If it is indeed the case that all flyers no longer have skyfire (except fighters), then IMO fighters should have more of a penalty against ground targets. My storm talon has to snapfire at your zooming fighter... but your zooming fighter can pick out a squad of infantry on the ground with nearly a negligent penalty? I think fighters should only have skyfire period. That means they snap fire at ground targets.. My opinion though.
About the ork flyer:
140 points 12/10/10 3HP
(Cannot translate the ork weapons)
Twin-linked 36", S8, AP2, Heavy 1, Blast, Gets hot
1x 36" S1D6+4, AP1, Heavy1
5++ vs one single hit each enemy shooting phase (May be exchanged for an ork energy shield 5++ to be bearer and all models at 6" for +25 points)
That is 140pts (30more then a battlewagon) with a TLKMK, a single shot smasha gun (useless) and it can take a KFF for 25pts. So really your paying through the nose for a flyer that has a TLKMK and the ability to take a KFF that you don't want to use because jink is better, but if you jink you can't fire the only weapon worth a damn on the thing. Wow, if that is all it gets this thing is a pile of hot garbage.
Ratius wrote: Could be usable if you took the KFF and put it in a squad with 2 dedicated dakkajets kept within 6".
Except that again, your going from a 4+ Save to a 5+ save. Dakkajets are utter garbage anyway. 12 TL S6 shots at BS3 (against ground targets) isn't that good, on average your looking at around 9 hits, but for the same amount of points your paying for a dakka jet you could buy Warbikers and other scoring units that are more durable then an AV10/10/10 fighter.
Every Ork Flyer has been extremely underwhelming so far and I think this new one just adds to the flavor of disappointment with whoever is designing Ork rules.
Ratius wrote: Could be usable if you took the KFF and put it in a squad with 2 dedicated dakkajets kept within 6".
Except that again, your going from a 4+ Save to a 5+ save. Dakkajets are utter garbage anyway. 12 TL S6 shots at BS3 (against ground targets) isn't that good, on average your looking at around 9 hits, but for the same amount of points your paying for a dakka jet you could buy Warbikers and other scoring units that are more durable then an AV10/10/10 fighter.
Every Ork Flyer has been extremely underwhelming so far and I think this new one just adds to the flavor of disappointment with whoever is designing Ork rules.
But then you stick them in an attack pattern and suddenly your getting bonuses to BS.. That flyer is not bad when compared to other 40k flyers in the game. MOST flyers I would say aren't as good as something else in the codex. Look at Tau flyers for example.. why take them at all when everything else is better?
Except that again, your going from a 4+ Save to a 5+ save.
5+ inv though, makes a difference VS no cover weapons as they negate jink. With the KFF you get a 1/3 chance every time to save.
Agreed DJs arent super competitive but I dont think this flyer if used in conjunction is total trash.
And if you take flyboss and waaagh they become better.
Except that again, your going from a 4+ Save to a 5+ save.
5+ inv though, makes a difference VS no cover weapons as they negate jink. With the KFF you get a 1/3 chance every time to save.
Agreed DJs arent super competitive but I dont think this flyer if used in conjunction is total trash.
And if you take flyboss and waaagh they become better.
Also take into account wing leader bonuses.
6" added range to all weapons, +1 strength to all weapons or +1 shots to all weapons. Now the Wazbom could have a S9 kmk, twin linked S7 supa shoota and a S4+1+d6 smasha gun. Or 2 shots with a twin linked kmk and smasha gun.
There is also a formation that is a wazbom + 3 flyers that they all get a 3++ in a certian pattern and interceptor.
As for ork flyers in general , my favorite it the blitz bomber. S7, AP2, large blast, armor bane (tank hunter in the formation) have worked well for me. And going to be even better with DftS.
My biggest disappointment with it is that you have to buy it if you use Flyers of any sort since they replace the BRB entry.
Also that, to my knowledge, DA, SW, BA and GK didn't get anything new from the book, aside an extra Flyer to ally with and universal detachments. I guess not playing the XIII legion has it's cons.
Frozocrone wrote: My biggest disappointment with it is that you have to buy it if you use Flyers of any sort since they replace the BRB entry.
Also that, to my knowledge, DA, SW, BA and GK didn't get anything new from the book, aside an extra Flyer to ally with and universal detachments. I guess not playing the XIII legion has it's cons.
You don't have to buy it. Yes the rules replace the ones in the brb. But not if you don't have them they don't. As long as your opponent agrees it's still perfectly fine to use the old rules.
Except that again, your going from a 4+ Save to a 5+ save.
5+ inv though, makes a difference VS no cover weapons as they negate jink. With the KFF you get a 1/3 chance every time to save.
Agreed DJs arent super competitive but I dont think this flyer if used in conjunction is total trash.
And if you take flyboss and waaagh they become better.
Also take into account wing leader bonuses.
6" added range to all weapons, +1 strength to all weapons or +1 shots to all weapons. Now the Wazbom could have a S9 kmk, twin linked S7 supa shoota and a S4+1+d6 smasha gun. Or 2 shots with a twin linked kmk and smasha gun.
There is also a formation that is a wazbom + 3 flyers that they all get a 3++ in a certian pattern and interceptor.
As for ork flyers in general , my favorite it the blitz bomber. S7, AP2, large blast, armor bane (tank hunter in the formation) have worked well for me. And going to be even better with DftS.
Take two dakka jets with 3 twinlinked suppa shootas with an orcurion for 2x 12 str6 ap4 bs3 twinlinked shots.
In attack pattern means lead flyer has 3+ jink save. (Other one 4+)
Also ork wing leader gives the leader 1-2 as AV12/10/10 or 3-4 (bunch of shooting buffs) 5-6 1/3 chance to immediately prevent hull point loss. Also dakka jets have skyfire if they chose still and strafing run.
This makes the lead dakka jets way more durable with a 3+ cover and AV12 or 1/3 chance ignore hull point loss for only 2 dakka jets.
Except that again, your going from a 4+ Save to a 5+ save.
5+ inv though, makes a difference VS no cover weapons as they negate jink. With the KFF you get a 1/3 chance every time to save.
Agreed DJs arent super competitive but I dont think this flyer if used in conjunction is total trash.
And if you take flyboss and waaagh they become better.
Also take into account wing leader bonuses.
6" added range to all weapons, +1 strength to all weapons or +1 shots to all weapons. Now the Wazbom could have a S9 kmk, twin linked S7 supa shoota and a S4+1+d6 smasha gun. Or 2 shots with a twin linked kmk and smasha gun.
There is also a formation that is a wazbom + 3 flyers that they all get a 3++ in a certian pattern and interceptor.
As for ork flyers in general , my favorite it the blitz bomber. S7, AP2, large blast, armor bane (tank hunter in the formation) have worked well for me. And going to be even better with DftS.
Take two dakka jets with 3 twinlinked suppa shootas with an orcurion for 2x 12 str6 ap4 bs3 twinlinked shots.
In attack pattern means lead flyer has 3+ jink save. (Other one 4+)
Also ork wing leader gives the leader 1-2 as AV12/10/10 or 3-4 (bunch of shooting buffs) 5-6 1/3 chance to immediately prevent hull point loss. Also dakka jets have skyfire if they chose still and strafing run.
This makes the lead dakka jets way more durable with a 3+ cover and AV12 or 1/3 chance ignore hull point loss for only 2 dakka jets.
That is a good idea, except that it is unplayable at under 2k point games.
The point was to gain the benefit of Waaagh every turn. That increases the number of shots per flyer by 3. Regardless, even if that were possible under 1850 (which it is not) your not going to bring 3 dakkajets anyway because what is a dakka jet? a rather expensive and fragile platform that fires S6 shots....don't we already have lootas for that, and they fire at S7?
Was just making a point, and they will also have better clearance for shots due to the chance at vector dancer now (agility roll)
I never field many lootas because I run snake bite and blood axe clans. I want my army moving up, not hanging back to shoot.
Just finished a kit bashed mega armor big mek with kustom forcefield to drag around some artillery full of grots for my big guns too. So even my artillery are pushing forward. Toughness 7 blob with giant guns and a 5++ versus shooting with the gretchen. Survivable grots! If the enemy close, my big squig full of nobz/warboss and my camo stompa full of ard boyz are more than happy to intercept.
Except that again, your going from a 4+ Save to a 5+ save.
5+ inv though, makes a difference VS no cover weapons as they negate jink. With the KFF you get a 1/3 chance every time to save.
Agreed DJs arent super competitive but I dont think this flyer if used in conjunction is total trash.
And if you take flyboss and waaagh they become better.
Also take into account wing leader bonuses.
6" added range to all weapons, +1 strength to all weapons or +1 shots to all weapons. Now the Wazbom could have a S9 kmk, twin linked S7 supa shoota and a S4+1+d6 smasha gun. Or 2 shots with a twin linked kmk and smasha gun.
There is also a formation that is a wazbom + 3 flyers that they all get a 3++ in a certian pattern and interceptor.
As for ork flyers in general , my favorite it the blitz bomber. S7, AP2, large blast, armor bane (tank hunter in the formation) have worked well for me. And going to be even better with DftS.
Take two dakka jets with 3 twinlinked suppa shootas with an orcurion for 2x 12 str6 ap4 bs3 twinlinked shots.
In attack pattern means lead flyer has 3+ jink save. (Other one 4+)
Also ork wing leader gives the leader 1-2 as AV12/10/10 or 3-4 (bunch of shooting buffs) 5-6 1/3 chance to immediately prevent hull point loss. Also dakka jets have skyfire if they chose still and strafing run.
This makes the lead dakka jets way more durable with a 3+ cover and AV12 or 1/3 chance ignore hull point loss for only 2 dakka jets.
That is a good idea, except that it is unplayable at under 2k point games.
Not true
You need to take an auxiliary anyway.
Heck you can fit a ghaz council, waagh band and dakka squad in an 1850 list. I just did it in battle scribe and had enough points to upgrade nobs to warbikes and mega armour warbosses. You're not getting trukks for the boys squads but I don't think that's the best way to run them.
The point of the above list is the dakka jets are more durable
The wing leader of the unit (which you always hit the closest model in a unit) will have a 3+ jink save and be either 12/10/10 or ignore 1/3 of all hits and if you take a dakkasquadron they also have tankhunter.
Not true
You need to take an auxiliary anyway.
Heck you can fit a ghaz council, waagh band and dakka squad in an 1850 list. I just did it in battle scribe and had enough points to upgrade nobs to warbikes and mega armour warbosses. You're not getting trukks for the boys squads but I don't think that's the best way to run them.
The point of the above list is the dakka jets are more durable
The wing leader of the unit (which you always hit the closest model in a unit) will have a 3+ jink save and be either 12/10/10 or ignore 1/3 of all hits and if you take a dakkasquadron they also have tankhunter.
which means you have six boyz squads that don't have a nob, foot sloggin up the table. And when they actually get where they need to be? they probably die in CC.
With the list you specify here your basically left with a bunch of foot sloggin models that are easy to pick off or out distance for most armies, you have a ghaz death star which isn't at all frightening because it is walking to its target ohh but you do have a single unit of over costed nob bikeres, and you didn't say you upgraded any of them to PKs so once they get into CC they are useless for the most part as well. and you have 3 extremely flimsy Air planes that most armies Skyfire options will obliterate. Yea the Wing leader makes them a bit more durable but still not that durable, and who is to say that he will be the one getting shot at every single time?
JimOnMars wrote: Rock paper scissors is the worst part of the game. How about Tactics? Wouldn't that be fun?
The dogfighting mechanics are not really paper/rock/scissors mechanics. By that definition, any game mechanic that requires you to attempt to guess what your opponent is going to do, and attempt to counter it, is paper/rock/scissors. You could just as easily say the dogfight mechanics are Tic-Tac-Toe mechanics, or Checkers mechanics, or Chess mechanics.
Dogfights are about anticipating what your opponent is going to do, which is exactly how the mechanics are set up. You have to think about the type of flyer your opponent is using and what actions would be most beneficial to them and then decide on your own course of action based on those same conditions. While its an unnecessary (which is why its optional) phase to a game that is already bloated, I can't fault them on the mechanic itself.
JimOnMars wrote: Rock paper scissors is the worst part of the game. How about Tactics? Wouldn't that be fun?
The dogfighting mechanics are not really paper/rock/scissors mechanics. By that definition, any game mechanic that requires you to attempt to guess what your opponent is going to do, and attempt to counter it, is paper/rock/scissors. You could just as easily say the dogfight mechanics are Tic-Tac-Toe mechanics, or Checkers mechanics, or Chess mechanics.
Dogfights are about anticipating what your opponent is going to do, which is exactly how the mechanics are set up. You have to think about the type of flyer your opponent is using and what actions would be most beneficial to them and then decide on your own course of action based on those same conditions. While its an unnecessary (which is why its optional) phase to a game that is already bloated, I can't fault them on the mechanic itself.
Yeah, but it's far easier to bash GW if you make out their rules to be simplistic and child like.
I actually really like the look of the dogfight phase now I've seen it, I agree with you on all the bloat, but it still looks kind of fun.
The point of the above list is the dakka jets are more durable
The wing leader of the unit (which you always hit the closest model in a unit) will have a 3+ jink save and be either 12/10/10 or ignore 1/3 of all hits and if you take a dakkasquadron they also have tankhunter.
I'm not sure.
....Reading page 60, they sound more like a 30k Dreadnought Talon; you have to deploy in coherency, but you 'operate as individual units' after deployment.
They're not a vehicle squadron; I'm not sure you have to apply hits to the closest vehicle. Vigilance Pattern still lets one ship protect another, but nothing stops you blowing away the escort rather than the lead, it just means you're ignoring the wing leader, or ignoring a loaded-for-bear stormraven in favour of a cheap-ass storm talon.
Or am I missing something?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Except that again, your going from a 4+ Save to a 5+ save. Dakkajets are utter garbage anyway. 12 TL S6 shots at BS3 (against ground targets) isn't that good, on average your looking at around 9 hits, but for the same amount of points your paying for a dakka jet you could buy Warbikers and other scoring units that are more durable then an AV10/10/10 fighter.
Three dakkajets. Drop the four flyers into the 'box' formation and you get a 3++ save from the Kustom Force Field. Plus the Wazbom's tail gun is a twin-linked super-shoota turret with interceptor - okay it doesn't have skyfire, but that goes a long way to persuading incoming fighters to jink.
Also, the Wazbom has pursuit 4 - one better than Stormtalons and Stormravens, and on a par with the Stormhawk interceptor.
/rant So DA air superiority Nephilim Jetfighter have same stats as small Stormtalon and Stormhawk, and Stormhawk have +1 on it's stats in dogfights... Well played. /rant over
Yeah.... the Nephilim does look a bit fail compared to the Stormhawk:
The infernum halo launcher gives you rerolls on Jink - so essentially Ravenwing.
Both have a twin-linked heavy bolter.
The Twin-linked assault cannon outclasses the avenger - 5 shots is slightly outclassed by 4 shots twin-linked. Of course the avenger has a 48" range to the assault cannon's 24", and there's only a very minor difference in accuracy, so it's probably a wash. If forced to jink, though, the assault cannon is miles better.
The Nephilim's S7 blacksword missiles are not even slightly a match for the las-talon's three Icarus shots, and that's ignoring the fact that they're one use. Both have skyfire as an integral rule, so can be used in a dogfight in a head-on pass without trouble.
The Nephilim really falls flat on its face when you look at the cost and armour, though. If you allow for the firepower being more or less the same, the fact that you're paying ~50 points less and get armour 12 frontal armour on the 'hawk just seems insane.
It does have two things going for it, though.
The Blacksword's unlimited range in dogfights is nice, though. If you can win the intercept phase - not easy but not impossible - you can up the range to 48" - meaning blackshards and avenger can fire, whilst the las-talons (if it's got them) are the only thing a Stormhawk can muster. Sadly, it's much more likely that the stormhawk will win, but you should remember that the assault cannons only get to fire if it wins, whilst all the Nephilim's guns get to fire regardless.
Plus, the Nephilim has strafing run, which the Stormhawk doesn't. That means BS4 attacking ground targets, not BS3. Combined with the extra range of the avenger, it may allow you to avoid closer range, and hence not take things like rapid-fired plasma weapons or tesla fire. Plus, because Blackswords are One Use Only, they benefit from Bunker Buster in the Tactical Strike mission, which essentially gives them armourbane and makes them a viable weapon against the objectives where a Stormhawk is stuck with a couple of BS3 lascannon shots.
I'm not going to argue it's not new model syndrome and/or favoured army syndrome. The Stormhawk is pretty much the nastiest thing in the air despite also being one of the cheapest and (with an AV12 front) one of the toughest.
The dogfight rules and air war missions are cool, though, and I'm looking forward to giving them a try. I'll be interested to see if we get an Imperial Armour/Horus Heresy Aeronautica update to match it.
