Why are Flakk Missiles a thing?

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.

**Big Blind Bill**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Big Blind Bill wrote:
lord_blackfang wrote:
Big Blind Bill wrote:
There is nothing stopping those vendettas just flying on and taking your tanks out before they even get to fire.

Let's be honest, an AA tank shooting down a flyer the moment it arrives before it even gets to fire is just as whack as the flyer taking out the AA tank before it can fire at the flyer. 40k is just a bad game of rock paper scissors and having or not having Interceptor doesn't change it either way.

Most strategy games effectively come down to rock paper scissors.

...
...

I disagree with this. It's the other way around. Games that work as paper/scissors/stone are by definition strategy games of a fairly limited scope.

You pick a strategy -- paper, scissors or stone -- and if you guessed right you win. There's no tactics involved.

Ironically, paper/scissors/stone is very precisely balanced. Whatever you pick, you have a 1/3 chance of a win, a 1/3 chance of a loss, and a 1/3 chance of a draw. Ignoring the psychological dimension -- though there certainly is one -- it's basically random. That's why it is often used as a way of settling minor arguments, much like tossing a coin, and you normally play best of three. The same game is played in Japan as "Jan/Ken/Pon".

There is a wargame that uses paper/scissors/stone for the combat resolution system, but I can't remember the name.

A more interesting type of strategy game presents you with a variety of options and you try to select the best one, which will depend on your variable start position and then develop or change as the game moves along.

40K is not a strategy game, as such. It's a tactical game of platoon level skirmish warfare. Strategy enters into it because the more striking imbalances in some codexes make your selected army and powerful units or combos arguably more important than the actual tactical play on the tabletop. Once you've chosen your list you're stuck with it, though you can hope to mitigate a bad start by using tactics, adaptability and luck.

A famous designer once said that a game is a series of interesting choices. In a strategy game, if you cannot choose and change your strategy as the game plays out, it's a bad game.

Starcraft uses a rock paper scissors system, one armour type is beaten by a certain type of attack, yet this does not force it to be a simple game. Only the core concept is. As it is with 40k. Pick the right gun for the right job, and the battle is half won. The other half is the strategy.

**koooaei**

In wh 40k there are some rocks with sharp edges that both crush scissors and cut through paper. And some scissors with blunt edges that can't even scratch paper.

**Andilus Greatsword**

Big Blind Bill wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:
Big Blind Bill wrote:
lord_blackfang wrote:
Big Blind Bill wrote:
There is nothing stopping those vendettas just flying on and taking your tanks out before they even get to fire.

Let's be honest, an AA tank shooting down a flyer the moment it arrives before it even gets to fire is just as whack as the flyer taking out the AA tank before it can fire at the flyer. 40k is just a bad game of rock paper scissors and having or not having Interceptor doesn't change it either way.

Most strategy games effectively come down to rock paper scissors.

...
...

I disagree with this. It's the other way around. Games that work as paper/scissors/stone are by definition strategy games of a fairly limited scope.

You pick a strategy -- paper, scissors or stone -- and if you guessed right you win. There's no tactics involved.

Ironically, paper/scissors/stone is very precisely balanced. Whatever you pick, you have a 1/3 chance of a win, a 1/3 chance of a loss, and a 1/3 chance of a draw. Ignoring the psychological dimension -- though there certainly is one -- it's basically random. That's why it is often used as a way of settling minor arguments, much like tossing a coin, and you normally play best of three. The same game is played in Japan as "Jan/Ken/Pon".

There is a wargame that uses paper/scissors/stone for the combat resolution system, but I can't remember the name.

A more interesting type of strategy game presents you with a variety of options and you try to select the best one, which will depend on your variable start position and then develop or change as the game moves along.

40K is not a strategy game, as such. It's a tactical game of platoon level skirmish warfare. Strategy enters into it because the more striking imbalances in some codexes make your selected army and powerful units or combos arguably more important than the actual tactical play on the tabletop. Once you've chosen your list you're stuck with it, though you can hope to mitigate a bad start by using tactics, adaptability and luck.

A famous designer once said that a game is a series of interesting choices. In a strategy game, if you cannot choose and change your strategy as the game plays out, it's a bad game.

Starcraft uses a rock paper scissors system, one armour type is beaten by a certain type of attack, yet this does not force it to be a simple game. Only the core concept is. As it is with 40k. Pick the right gun for the right job, and the battle is half won. The other half is the strategy.

This would be great in 40k if you could change parts of your army mid-game... actually, that would be a pretty interesting system, like each player has Xpts for reserves which you can bring in at a certain time.

**kronk**

I rather wish that Space Marines Devstator squads could take autocannons like Chaos Havocs can. I'd take those over Flakks any day of the week!

COME GET SOME!

**Scipio Africanus**

To forge the narrative that space marines are such awesome fighters that they don't actually need firepower to do their jobs, despite them having absolutely no close combat weapons standard.

**nareik**

Scipio Africanus, they do have close combat knives, but they are too arrogant to use them once they graduate out of the scout company. Combat knives aren't seen as a 'real' space marine's weapon

.

**Jackal**

The reason i didnt add the night scythe to my list of evil flyers was simply because its damage output really isnt as scary as a drake, doom scythe or vendetta.

Dont get me wrong, the night scythe really is a scary piece of kit and it fills the role as a transport to an amazing level.
Its damage output though is the cost of it being such a great transport.

Its one of the flyers you can simply ignore since a few shots from it each game really dont mean alot to most of my armies (usually heavily armoured or ++ saves or in high AV vehicles)

Trying to ignore a heldrake, doom scythe or vendetta though means you will lose a chunk of your army as a resuly unless you play smart with your movement and keep out of their arc of fire.

**Neorealist**

Sure, whereas ignoring the nightscythe only means you will lose the game with all the objectives contested/controlled effortlessly by supersonic transports and the minimal troop choices required by same. That is less 'bad' than the other ones you mentioned, right?

**Martel732**

Hey, I'm BA here. My secondary victory success is have models on the table at the end.

**pepe5454**

For my dark angels I think they might actually be worth it on occasion if I could put them on terminator deathwind launchers. They could split fire and not waste the rest of the squads shots twin link when they deep strike and on a relentless platform so they could move and shoot without snap fire. Then I would at least consider them. Staying with a pure DA army though there is not to many options.

**Big Blind Bill**

pepe5454 wrote:
For my dark angels I think they might actually be worth it on occasion if I could put them on terminator deathwind launchers. They could split fire and not waste the rest of the squads shots twin link when they deep strike and on a relentless platform so they could move and shoot without snap fire. Then I would at least consider them. Staying with a pure DA army though there is not to many options.

DA have mortis dreads, and do not have the 0-1 restriction that other marines have. Paint it DW and you have a pure fluffy DA anti air dread.
2 TL lascannons with skyfire and anti air for 145 points isn't a bad deal.

That said, I'd be all for a CML with flak missiles, buffing terminators in anyway would be a good thing, The flak missiles should come with the CML as standard though.

**pepe5454**

Yeah I was not thinking of FW units I should think about ordering the book and a mortis dread but will need to check the local shops are allowing FW units in tournaments I know one has been. And yes CML not DWML must of had DWML stuck in my head from another conversation I had earlier with someone but that is a whole other why is this even a thing thread.
I think flak should just be another choice in rounds to use and at no cost so you can fire krak, flak, or frag.

**schadenfreude**

Quad guns are 1 per force org.

S7 is weak, but quickly turns deadly with tank hunters. Imperial fist dev squads are scary with flakk. Combat squad 10 with 4 flakk and have them man a quad gun. Now it's 8 tank hunting s7 shots/turn.

Against av11 each hit has a 75% chance of causing a HP.

Against av12 each hit has a 55.55% chance of causing a HP.

They are also good at striping hp from a wave serpent with quad shots and krak.

**Mavnas**

Quadguns are 0-8 per force org...

Imperial strongpoints are a single fortification slot that consists of 1-5 aegis lines, 1-3 bastions, etc. Then again, I'm not sure buying more than 3-4 can lead to a viable list in non-Apoc games.

**ninjafiredragon**

Flakks in dev squads are ok to fine.
but flakk in tac squads? Only reason is for fluff and to trip up newbs into thinking they have enough aa

**minigun762**

ninjafiredragon wrote:
Flakks in dev squads are ok to fine.
but flakk in tac squads? Only reason is for fluff and to trip up newbs into thinking they have enough aa

Can be useful on a Tac squad who is manning a quad gun. Another modest chance to strip a hull point.

**Slayer222**

It was a great idea, but crap-ily implemented.

**Waaaghpower**

Slayer222 wrote:
It was a great idea, but crap-ily implemented.

That should be the GW motto...

**TedNugent**

Mavnas wrote:
Quadguns are 0-8 per force org...

I'm not sure where you got this idea. Page 114 in mini rulebook states clearly and in bold text that you may take one Fortification per primary detachment, in other words 0-1 under 2000 points and 0-2 for over 2000 points if you take a second primary detachment.

And the Aegis Defense Line entry states you may take ONE of the following, Icarus Lascannon, Quadgun, Comms Relay.

**Jefffar**

Stronghold Assault allows you to take a Fortification Network consisting of multiple fortifications.

**Skinnereal**

Stronghold Assault lets you take a platoon-type fortification choice.
You could choose a ADL from the BRB, or a bastion and 4 ADLs from the SA book.
Since an ADL and a bastion can both take Quad-guns, that's a fair few you can get in that single choice.

Also in that book are the wall of Martyrs items. Some of these can take Quad-guns, or bigger AA.

**ninjafiredragon**

minigun762 wrote:
ninjafiredragon wrote:
Flakks in dev squads are ok to fine.
but flakk in tac squads? Only reason is for fluff and to trip up newbs into thinking they have enough aa

Can be useful on a Tac squad who is manning a quad gun. Another modest chance to strip a hull point.

Modest chance. Not worth it.

**Feasible**

rockgod2304 wrote:
I love 4ML dev squad ,its my core unit in the middle

it either soaks up all the fire in the 1st 2 turns (to frees up all the other tanks /squads) or it rocks & cause the opponent loads of probs

I nearly always use krak missiles (but mainly play marines)

ive only use Flakk missiles once as I played elder & I knew he was playing with 2 flyers, blow 1 out of the sky straight away very impressed with them

I refuse to buy a hunter / stalker due to price £40 for a rhino with a big gun ,you must be on drugs

so flakk missiles are the only option at the moment

How do 5-10 marines soak up much fire? Especially when they hit like wet noodles. Eldar flyers are different in comparison to most other useful flyers, the Crimson Hunter is terrible at taking fire, and they would STILL get 1 turn to fire. The Quad Gun stops this, as Interceptor will stop the flyer before it is able to do anything. The comparison is basically a 5x Man Tac Squad w/ Bolters vs. a 5x Man Tac w/ Bolters and a Melta against AV 10.

**Col. Dash**

My ten man missile launcher Night Lord squad chuckles quietly in the corner with both intercept and skyfire finding it humorous they spent 60 points for everyone to have it and another 45 to get FnP.

That said it is useless in your normal Tac squads and I don't know if I would put the points down in a normal codex dev or havoc squad for four flakk guys with a lack of interceptor. They are however still more flexible in use than Hunters or Stalkers.