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.

Is the new book really necessary? Or only if you want to run these so called "flyer squadrons"? Im behind a little on my marines and dont have their latest book plus this new flyer one. Id be close to 150$ in books and dont even have the new models yet hahaha!!! feth GW why keep pumping out new expensive books :(

what are the changes to skyfire, in a nutcase?

You could just use the current rules couldn't you?

Yes, it is optional. Despite what some poeple have been saying all you need is the BRB and the Codex for your specific army and no one can force you into buying any other supplement just to play the game. Of course if you want to use the rules in those supplements you will have to buy them, but they are not a prerequisat to play the game.

 Imateria wrote:
Yes, it is optional. Despite what some poeple have been saying all you need is the BRB and the Codex for your specific army and no one can force you into buying any other supplement just to play the game. Of course if you want to use the rules in those supplements you will have to buy them, but they are not a prerequisat to play the game.

Wrong.....you of course can do this with opponent approval, but you are not playing the current version of the game then. This is like saying I can play CSM 3.5 because I dont like the new CSM codex. The book specifically says that it updates the rules in the BRB.

 Imateria wrote:
Yes, it is optional. Despite what some poeple have been saying all you need is the BRB and the Codex for your specific army and no one can force you into buying any other supplement just to play the game. Of course if you want to use the rules in those supplements you will have to buy them, but they are not a prerequisat to play the game.

Nope they replace the current rules, no options unless both parties agree.

well that sucks haha. i hate always having to buy yet another 70$ book. The core rules are only $100 why are just flyer rules $70.....

40KNobz11 wrote:
well that sucks haha. i hate always having to buy yet another 70$ book. The core rules are only $100 why are just flyer rules $70.....

Well it does give you some new formations, and a new (as far as I can tell optional) additional phase now....the Dogfight phase.

Why would you need a boo once again?

The worst part is that 8th is suppose to drop in september. Meaning this book will be outdated and useless. PASS

UrsoerTheSquid wrote:
The worst part is that 8th is suppose to drop in september. Meaning this book will be outdated and useless. PASS

Is this rumour from an accurate source? My 7th edition rulebook is practically missing it's spine.

I guess i was right. IG and CSM are not getting updates until 8th.

Unless we're not getting 8th this Spetember...

Still, I cba to buy any more GW stuff. Everything they released this year has been garbage.

 quickfuze wrote:

 Imateria wrote:
Yes, it is optional. Despite what some poeple have been saying all you need is the BRB and the Codex for your specific army and no one can force you into buying any other supplement just to play the game. Of course if you want to use the rules in those supplements you will have to buy them, but they are not a prerequisat to play the game.

Wrong.....you of course can do this with opponent approval, but you are not playing the current version of the game then. This is like saying I can play CSM 3.5 because I dont like the new CSM codex. The book specifically says that it updates the rules in the BRB.

Yes, you are very wrong. DftS might be changing the core rules when using that supplement but at no point does it invalidate the core rules. It is still only a supplement, not the core rules.

You know how 7E was pretty much 6E with the supplements added in?

What's the bet that this is a preview of 8E content?

There's a fair chance that this is going to be used to grab money, then invalidate the book entirely, and make you pay again. If that happens, then you know that GW is not going to be getting the rework it needs.

UrsoerTheSquid wrote:
The worst part is that 8th is suppose to drop in september. Meaning this book will be outdated and useless. PASS

Where did you hear this from? None of the "normal" rumormongers have mentioned this that I'm aware of.

Seriously people, enough with the bitching already. It is an optional expansion. OPTIONAL EXPANSION. If you don't want to play it, then don't. Plenty of people don't like Maelstrom objectives...so they don't use em. Done. No thread needed.

No, we shall not. This is further evidence that GW is only getting a cosmetic makeover (like with the FAQ), and not the full rework that is needed to keep 40k alive and playable into the far future.

So I'm honestly confused can I still use my flyers under the old rules/way of the 7th rule book or not?

The Word is:

Burning Skies provides updated rule for Flyers in games of Warhammer 40,000,. These expand upon those from the rulebook allowing you to use special Attack Patterns, to take part in vicious dogfights, to field ace pilots and to fight thrilling Air War missions. This first section of the Burning Skies rules presents the expanded rules for Flyers, which replace those from Warhammer 40,000: The Rules.

and later (pg 104)

The datasheets and Formations on the following pages allow you to field Flyers as individual models, or in Flyer wings of 2 to 4 model. The Datasheets replace those found in the models' respective codexes. Remember the flyers in a Wing must all be chosen from the same datasheet or be part of the same Formation. Flyer Wings chosen from datasheets will therefore have the same sort of model (though they may have different upgrades), while Flyer Wings that are from a Formation may include several different types of Flyer in the same Wing.

make of that what you will

And yes the Vendetta is missing, so I personally can't use anything in the book now with my current model.

Which is a shame because *it's actually quite good* and, if you could use Vendettas (or Emprah be praised, Vultures) in the flyer formations they'd become seriously seriously awesome.

malamis wrote:
The Word is:

Burning Skies provides updated rule for Flyers in games of Warhammer 40,000,. These expand upon those from the rulebook allowing you to use special Attack Patterns, to take part in vicious dogfights, to field ace pilots and to fight thrilling Air War missions. This first section of the Burning Skies rules presents the expanded rules for Flyers, which replace those from Warhammer 40,000: The Rules.

make of that what you will


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And yes the Vendetta is missing, so I personally can't use anything in the book now with my current model.

Which is a shame because *it's actually quite good* and, if you could use Vendettas (or Emprah be praised, Vultures) in the flyer formations they'd become seriously seriously awesome.

im a bit perplexed by this one, since the vendetta is essentially an upgrade of the valkyrie and it is in the codex, where i live we have decided to simply use the valk stats for agi and pursuit and keep everything else as is

 Selym wrote:
No, we shall not. This is further evidence that GW is only getting a cosmetic makeover (like with the FAQ), and not the full rework that is needed to keep 40k alive and playable into the far future.

No it isn't. You're basing that on unsubstantiated rumours from none of the usual sources. Ever heard of confirmation bias?

Fwiw the only rumours I've seen is a rerelease of the current rules with the FAQ/Errata added in. That doesn't sound like so,etching that will invalidate this release to me.

I said evidence, not proof. Making it discussion worthy.

Also, I'm only basing it on current releases. Stuff you can find in the online store right now.

 Selym wrote:
I said evidence, not proof. Making it discussion worthy.

Also, I'm only basing it on current releases. Stuff you can find in the online store right now.

Let me help you out there:

proof
pruːf/
noun
1.
evidence or argument establishing a fact or the truth of a statement.
"you will be asked to give proof of your identity"
synonyms: evidence, verification, corroboration, authentication, confirmation, certification, validation, attestation, demonstration, substantiation, witness, testament; More

Evidence is not definitive. It is a contributing factor to proof.

It's why a single witness statement does not a court case solve.

 Selym wrote:
Evidence is not definitive. It is a contributing factor to proof.

It's why a single witness statement does not a court case solve.

Except in this case you have no evidence at all. Rumours on the Internet =\= evidence.

Oh cripes, look, the smattering of releases that fail to add much to the game and just add small bits to previously released books suggests inertia on the rules-writing front.

FAQs may or may not suggest inertia. Who knows? Does all this 'your idea of evidence is not evidence' really matter.

 Wulfmar wrote:
Oh cripes, look, the smattering of releases that fail to add much to the game and just add small bits to previously released books suggests inertia on the rules-writing front.

FAQs may or may not suggest inertia. Who knows? Does all this 'your idea of evidence is not evidence' really matter.

He's basing his criticism on something that hasn't even happened yet, it's a knee jerk over reaction.

No, he's citing precedent and extrapolating from that.

It's a perfectly logical train of thought, but with only one edition following this pattern this far, it is, perhaps, a bit early to make the call.

I honestly don't think GW has the chops to do a complete rewrite in 8th, irrespective of when it may release, and a patched and extended (with such this as expanded flyer rules) 7th is probably where the smart money is right now.

Who knows with all the new changes, but I don't think a sufficiently changed and fixed 40K edition sufficient to draw disenfranchised players back is on the cards for a while.

Yea but how do you say do a Fire Raptor vs a Stormraven in the dogfight phase?

Debilitate wrote:
Yea but how do you say do a Fire Raptor vs a Stormraven in the dogfight phase?

wait for the inevitable forgeworld FAQ,

regarding a new edition, it's possiable, but IMHO doubtful. IMHO the evidance suggests GW may be moving instead towards an expansion/Splatbook approuch, forgoing singular "all the rules here" updates in favor of a more module optional system.

even 6th to 7th was suprisingly minimal changes, with mostly some balance fixes, supplement rules tossed in and a psykic phase added. yet even during 6th edition I have a feeling that they wanted to mostly adopt a suppelment approuch, it just hadn't caught on. in 7th edition however people are a lot more open to buying supplements then they where in 6th.