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.

So, I was just looking through a totally legit and not torrented copy of Death from the Skies and... Dogfights are really, really poorly done. They're practically worthless for some things and ridiculously powerful for other people, the rules aren't always clear, and it's generally terrible.
For example...
Helldrakes with flamers can't do jack.
Ork Dakkajets are nearly worthless.
If you can get at the enemies rear armor, (the only time you'll consistently be getting a dogfight anyways,) why bother if you can just shoot at rear armor?
A lot of risk, not much reward.
Meanwhile...
Flyers with a single powerful gun become godlike. (See: Helldrakes with Autocannons.)
Free victory points for the lucky few that can function well in Dogfights.

I had other problems with DFTS, but that was the big one.

It's not just you. There's a reason nobody uses these rules.

Dogfights are absolutely slowed, don't waste your time with them.

I'm surprised anyone actually owns that book. Everyone at my old FLGS boycotted it and no one in my new city GW seems to use it.
People just accepted that SM get the SR and that was it. The rest of it looked like a model showcase anyway from the scans I've seen.

I thought the Dogfight rules were kinda fun....but thats what we play for...fun

I find that entire book strange for the simple fact that it supposedly sold out very quickly on the GW site and they had to actually put it on back order. Yet I don't know a single person who bought it. There's enough players in my area that you would think someone would have it if the sales #s were that good ...

FarseerAndyMan wrote:
I thought the Dogfight rules were kinda fun....but thats what we play for...fun

What's fun about it? It's a game of rock-paper-scissors with no decisions being made by either player. In fact you're better off taking their suggestion and rolling dice to see what maneuver your plane will pick, since that eliminates the possibility of your opponent guessing a pattern in your choices with no loss in your odds of winning.

Yeah, they struck me as being very similar to challenges too.

Given the flyer mechanics and the huge disparity between the current flyers, and the wonkiness of the dogfight rules themselves, yes...they are a complete and total waste of time and I've never seen or heard of anyone actually trying to use them.

 Peregrine wrote:

FarseerAndyMan wrote:
I thought the Dogfight rules were kinda fun....but thats what we play for...fun

What's fun about it? It's a game of rock-paper-scissors with no decisions being made by either player. In fact you're better off taking their suggestion and rolling dice to see what maneuver your plane will pick, since that eliminates the possibility of your opponent guessing a pattern in your choices with no loss in your odds of winning.

Yeah....my thoughts exactly. It is neither fun nor well written. I tried it one time, very boring.

Furthermore, I don't really see the point. The game is about controlling objectives with troops half the time. Dogfighting aircraft seems like it belongs to a different game entirely. Like a 40k-scale BFG, or something.

You know, it kind of reminds me of the old GW game Talisman. The point of the game was to kill your opponents. You killed your opponents best by getting to the middle of the board. Then they added an expansion for one of the outer-ring squares (city), and THEN they added an expansion to the EXPANSION (dungeon), which meant that if you wanted to play with the new material, you had to make the game much longer by engaging in a pointless adventure that didn't bring anybody any closer to actually winning the game.

Fliers that aren't transports are already one step removed from the point of 40k, and extra rules to let said fliers run off on their own pointless, rules-heavy extra game within a game seems even odder.

Dogfights just slow down the whole game, you may as well just ignore them and vector strike or shoot at eachother.. It makes more sense...

 Ailaros wrote:
Furthermore, I don't really see the point. The game is about controlling objectives with troops half the time. Dogfighting aircraft seems like it belongs to a different game entirely. Like a 40k-scale BFG, or something.

That game did exist at one point. Called "Aeronautica Imperealis" or something like that. No clue how well it worked, but it wasn't around long I don't think, so that would probably answer my question.

I've never met anyone RL who has used the dogfight rules (or wants to).

Tycho wrote:
I find that entire book strange for the simple fact that it supposedly sold out very quickly on the GW site and they had to actually put it on back order. Yet I don't know a single person who bought it. There's enough players in my area that you would think someone would have it if the sales #s were that good ...

http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=211

Eh I've used it to tell narratives. It helps put some more story into the game play. In actual play though, probably never going to use them.

Waaaghpower wrote:
So, I was just looking through a totally legit and not torrented copy of Death from the Skies and... Dogfights are really, really poorly done. They're practically worthless for some things and ridiculously powerful for other people, the rules aren't always clear, and it's generally terrible.
For example...
Helldrakes with flamers can't do jack.
Ork Dakkajets are nearly worthless.
If you can get at the enemies rear armor, (the only time you'll consistently be getting a dogfight anyways,) why bother if you can just shoot at rear armor?
A lot of risk, not much reward.
Meanwhile...
Flyers with a single powerful gun become godlike. (See: Helldrakes with Autocannons.)
Free victory points for the lucky few that can function well in Dogfights.

I had other problems with DFTS, but that was the big one.

WOW sounds like your copy of the book is too legit to quit.

I've never heard of them. Do they take part in a normal game of 40k or is it a separate flyer game?

Thats just it guys,
Ive played long enough to not really care about who wins and who loses, its more about getting together with my buds and having a good time than it is about who wins and who loses. We just play for fun.

FarseerAndyMan wrote:
Thats just it guys,
Ive played long enough to not really care about who wins and who loses, its more about getting together with my buds and having a good time than it is about who wins and who loses. We just play for fun.

When you say that, are you implying that people who disagree with your idea of "fun" not playing for fun then?

You said it bro, not me...and I didnt imply anything. When my idea of fun is blasted by someone who doesnt even know me ( peregrin ) or any of my friends, that is an implication that I dont know what I consider fun. And by the way, Rock, Paper Scissors is kinda fun....
If the OP wanted opinions, then he should just take them for what they are ... OPINIONS.

FarseerAndyMan wrote:
You said it bro, not me...and I didnt imply anything. When my idea of fun is blasted by someone who doesnt even know me ( peregrin ) or any of my friends, that is an implication that I dont know what I consider fun. And by the way, Rock, Paper Scissors is kinda fun....
If the OP wanted opinions, then he should just take them for what they are ... OPINIONS.

The only thing is, the game takes a fair while to complete as it is, and throwing just another time-sinking element isn't what 40k needs to be "fun"... but so each his/her own of course.

FarseerAndyMan wrote:
You said it bro, not me...and I didnt imply anything. When my idea of fun is blasted by someone who doesnt even know me ( peregrin ) or any of my friends, that is an implication that I dont know what I consider fun. And by the way, Rock, Paper Scissors is kinda fun....
If the OP wanted opinions, then he should just take them for what they are ... OPINIONS.

I will entertain you with one post, then I'm off... Since I did ask you this... so, it'd be rude to not reply... Although I did thought about just replying "Ok..." while backing away...

It's a discussion board, you're on a forum, in a thread where the majority opinion is different from yours, and you offered nothing but "I like it", so it is of no surprise that someone, like ( Peregrin ), is questioning your post, there is no need to get defensive, no one is going to your house and shout at you because you're having the wrong "fun", just chill out and perhaps, if you've gotten over that people can have different, with a lack of better word, OPINIONS, you could try and explain your stance a little more than "you guys aren't playing the right kind of fun, so derp!".

i used to like rock paper scissors too when i was 10

maybe little timmy enjoy dog fight rules?

I'm confused, FarseerAndyMan... when did I not take opinions as opinions? I feel like you are upset with me for not liking your opinion, but I never said that...

FarseerAndyMan wrote:
When my idea of fun is blasted by someone who doesnt even know me ( peregrin ) or any of my friends

So, what exactly about the dogfight rules do you enjoy? And how is this better than playing a round of rock/paper/scissors with the loser removing their model from the table?

 Ailaros wrote:
Fliers that aren't transports are already one step removed from the point of 40k

You mean just like how every single other unit in the game that isn't a scoring unit or dedicated transport is "one step removed from the point of 40k"? Because tanks, MCs, psykers, etc, are all just as "removed" as flyers are.

Of course this is really just an absurd thing to say. Gunship flyers work just fine with the point of 40k (if you can't figure out how mobile firepower units can have an impact on the objectives you're just bad at 40k), and there would be nothing wrong with more detailed rules for flyer vs. flyer combat. The problem with the DFtS rules isn't the idea of flyer combat, it's the boring zero-effort execution of the idea that's worse than no rules at all.

 dementedwombat wrote:
That game did exist at one point. Called "Aeronautica Imperealis" or something like that. No clue how well it worked, but it wasn't around long I don't think, so that would probably answer my question.

IMO it's a great game, and better than 40k. The biggest problem with it was that GW never bothered to market it so most people didn't even know it existed and most of the people who were aware of it were reluctant to buy anything since there weren't going to be very many potential opponents to play with.

Of course now, like all the other specialist games, it's gone.

Its terrible. Makes me want to go back to battle fleet gothic to make up for how horrible the dog fighting junk is.