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.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

txdyz wrote:
Only Fighters can skyfire and get nerfed against ground units.

Attack Flyers are designed to attack ground.

Bombers only get buffs from flyer wing for their bombs.

Fighters shoot at full BS against Air Targets and -1BS against Ground Targets. Attack Flyers get BS1 against Air Targets and full BS to Ground Targets. So the Stormhawk is BS4/BS3, the Stormtalon and Stormraven are BS1/BS4. And the Stormhawk gets more and better weapons all for 15 points. Do you see why I am irritated by this? If they had made Attack Flyers -1 BS to Air Targets and Full BS to Ground, there would be parity between the two. But as it stands, Fighters are OBJECTIVELY better than Attack Flyers. Period.

On a side note, GW Facebook said the book is optional.

Stormtalons are bs5 against ground for they have strafing run.
When forming a flyer wing pattern provides ignore cover, Fighters get ignore cover against air targets(Flyers, Flying Monstrous Creatures, Skimmers, Jetbikes), and Attack Flyers get ignore cover against ground units(others). Bombers only get ignore cover for their bombs.

txdyz wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

txdyz wrote:
Only Fighters can skyfire and get nerfed against ground units.

Attack Flyers are designed to attack ground.

Bombers only get buffs from flyer wing for their bombs.

Fighters shoot at full BS against Air Targets and -1BS against Ground Targets. Attack Flyers get BS1 against Air Targets and full BS to Ground Targets. So the Stormhawk is BS4/BS3, the Stormtalon and Stormraven are BS1/BS4. And the Stormhawk gets more and better weapons all for 15 points. Do you see why I am irritated by this? If they had made Attack Flyers -1 BS to Air Targets and Full BS to Ground, there would be parity between the two. But as it stands, Fighters are OBJECTIVELY better than Attack Flyers. Period.

On a side note, GW Facebook said the book is optional.

Stormtalons are bs5 against ground for they have strafing run.
When forming a flyer wing pattern provides ignore cover, Fighters get ignore cover against air targets(Flyers, Flying Monstrous Creatures, Skimmers, Jetbikes), and Attack Flyers get ignore cover against ground units(others). Bombers only get ignore cover for their bombs.

Some things that were Ground Targets have been moved to Air Targets. Jetbikes are now Air Targets, so now my Stormtalons can only fire Snap Shots against them.Actually, since they don't have the Hard to Hit rule, Jetbikes probably can be shot fine. Still, Stormhawks still shoot Jetbikes at full ballistic skill, meaning they are still objectively better than the Stormtalon. Meanwhile Stormtalons don't get their handy BS5 against Skimmers or Jetbikes.

The updated dfts book is just as optional as the last dfts book.

Did you use the rules from the last dfts book?
If no then continue to ignore this updated version.

Furthermore what's the difference between planet strike and cities of death and death from the skies? Nada!!!

There's actually a 4 pack warhammer 40k expansion bundle in black library.
It lumps all 4 current 40k expansions.
Stronghold assault
Escalation
Planet strike
And killteam.

Are we now saying killteam is required rules for 40k?
Absolutely not that's ridiculous.
They are all expansions and you can choose which ever rules you wish to play with.

gungo wrote:
The updated dfts book is just as optional as the last dfts book.

Did you use the rules from the last dfts book?
If no then continue to ignore this updated version.

Furthermore what's the difference between planet strike and cities of death and death from the skies? Nada!!!

There's actually a 4 pack warhammer 40k expansion bundle in black library.
It lumps all 4 current 40k expansions.
Stronghold assault
Escalation
Planet strike
And killteam.

Are we now saying killteam is required rules for 40k?
Absolutely not that's ridiculous.
They are all expansions and you can choose which ever rules you wish to play with.

Not true, quit misleading people. From GW website "Death From the Skies is a must-buy for Warhammer 40,000 players – the 160-page hardback contains new rules for Flyers that completely replace those found in Warhammer 40,000, with datasheets including new Agility, Combat Role and Pursuit Value characteristics and options for fielding Flyer Wing units, with their own leaders. Also this book is listed under rules and expansions....not the supplements section. Those you listed also dont state that they specifically replace existing rules. Stick your head in the sand if you want to, but the train has left the station, these are the new flyer rules.

It's an expansion. Kill team is also an expansion that replaces many rules in the core book.

The only time this book will be required is when competitive play organizers say so.

 jokerkd wrote:
It's an expansion. Kill team is also an expansion that replaces many rules in the core book.

The only time this book will be required is when competitive play organizers say so.

And just about any and all pick up games, cause well its the actual rules for flyers.

 quickfuze wrote:

 jokerkd wrote:
It's an expansion. Kill team is also an expansion that replaces many rules in the core book.

The only time this book will be required is when competitive play organizers say so.

And just about any and all pick up games, cause well its the actual rules for flyers.

Only for those players who wish to use that level of rules, though.

If neither party has the book and/or chooses not to use them in their game, that is perfectly fine and acceptable as much as not using the Stronghold rules or the Escalation rules (for Necrons).

 quickfuze wrote:

gungo wrote:
The updated dfts book is just as optional as the last dfts book.

Did you use the rules from the last dfts book?
If no then continue to ignore this updated version.

Furthermore what's the difference between planet strike and cities of death and death from the skies? Nada!!!

There's actually a 4 pack warhammer 40k expansion bundle in black library.
It lumps all 4 current 40k expansions.
Stronghold assault
Escalation
Planet strike
And killteam.

Are we now saying killteam is required rules for 40k?
Absolutely not that's ridiculous.
They are all expansions and you can choose which ever rules you wish to play with.

Not true, quit misleading people. From GW website "Death From the Skies is a must-buy for Warhammer 40,000 players – the 160-page hardback contains new rules for Flyers that completely replace those found in Warhammer 40,000, with datasheets including new Agility, Combat Role and Pursuit Value characteristics and options for fielding Flyer Wing units, with their own leaders. Also this book is listed under rules and expansions....not the supplements section. Those you listed also dont state that they specifically replace existing rules. Stick your head in the sand if you want to, but the train has left the station, these are the new flyer rules.

Gonna have to go with gungo on this one, who cares if the book replaces rules for flyers from the 40k rulebook, its not mandatory until its actually in the rulebook, until then its just a supplement like Cities of death etc. and thus, not required for actual play, unless of course your saying all supplements are mandatory?

A more accurate analogy would be that it's like Stronghold Assault in 6th Edition. A book that changes the rules that isn't a separate expansion (like Cities of Death, Apocalypse, Spearhead, etc) and being 'mandatory' because that it updates the 6th Edition rules completely, but could still be ignored if both parties didn't have it or didn't want to use it (in the same way you could refuse to play anyone's army).

I'd expect 7.5/8th edition to have the updated rules rolled into it, like Stronghold Assault and Escalation in 7th.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
A more accurate analogy would be that it's like Stronghold Assault in 6th Edition. A book that changes the rules that isn't a separate expansion (like Cities of Death, Apocalypse, Spearhead, etc) and being 'mandatory' because that it updates the 6th Edition rules completely, but could still be ignored if both parties didn't have it or didn't want to use it (in the same way you could refuse to play anyone's army).

I'd expect 7.5/8th edition to have the updated rules rolled into it, like Stronghold Assault and Escalation in 7th.

I bought Stronghold Assault. In addition to cleaning up the building rules (which were a hot mess) it also served as Codex:Fortifications. Overall a decent value.

DftS tweaks the flyer rules in ways which are cumbersome and unneeded. It has no new content I care about, besides one page of rules for the new SM flyer.

I do recognize my hypocrisy from a rules POV, where I embraced SA, but reject DftS. They are equivalent books. IMHO one was a needed patch to the game, that fixed and expanded one aspect of it. The other is an unnecessary cash grab, that tacks on more random charts and RPS mechanics, just to get more flyers on the table.

I’m hoping it crashes and burns like the last time they published it. Not just because it adds another level of negotiation to setting up a game (do we want to use it?) but because it better not be included in the next edition of 40k. There is enough random bloat there now.

As an imperial guard player, I loathe these new rules.
Between the designated difference between ground targets and air targets, my already mediocre codex took a huge hit.
Valkyries are easily now the worst fliers in the game, unless taken strictly to deal with infantry that doesn't have a 3+ save.
Vendettas (common sense dictates they have the same role and statline as a valkyrie) are now way over costed (unless they are designated as a fighter).
The only benefit a guard player gets here is ObSec on Valkyries/vendettas... Other than that GW has deemed the guard flyers to be the slowest flyers with so-so maneuverability.
Somehow Ork flyers (which to be fair, ork players deserve some goodies) are better than valkyries in almost every way. Same goes for the Astartes flying bricks.
To further add insult to injury, every other faction (except chaos, because GW hates them too.) gets at least one designated formation with bonus rules.
Am I over reacting, or does anyone else think this book is squig excrement as well?

FlyingCamel wrote:
As an imperial guard player, I loathe these new rules.
Between the designated difference between ground targets and air targets, my already mediocre codex took a huge hit.
Valkyries are easily now the worst fliers in the game, unless taken strictly to deal with infantry that doesn't have a 3+ save.
Vendettas (common sense dictates they have the same role and statline as a valkyrie) are now way over costed (unless they are designated as a fighter).
The only benefit a guard player gets here is ObSec on Valkyries/vendettas... Other than that GW has deemed the guard flyers to be the slowest flyers with so-so maneuverability.
Somehow Ork flyers (which to be fair, ork players deserve some goodies) are better than valkyries in almost every way. Same goes for the Astartes flying bricks.
To further add insult to injury, every other faction (except chaos, because GW hates them too.) gets at least one designated formation with bonus rules.
Am I over reacting, or does anyone else think this book is squig excrement as well?

I play IG/TS as well, and was not thrilled with the way Valks faired. Vendettas faired worse--they aren't even in the book at all. I suspect we will lose them entirely.

That being said, the flyer wing attack patterns do present some interesting buffs for some already existing Valk-based formations. (Emperor's Spear and TS Airborne Assault formation) The missing datasheet for Vendettas though means that you have to work out with an opponent what in the hell a Vendetta is, or you just can't use one in a DFtS based game. I think this bodes poorly for the Vendetta (considering it requires a FW kit or conversions) to make anyway.

It isn't cool what GW did. I will hold hope for vendettas, since they are still in the codex for the IG. As I said, I assume they will take on the same statline as valkyries, which, I don't really bring to the table to deal with ground targets. I use vendettas to eliminate storm fangs, storm wolves, skimmers trying to bring wraiths, or tau vehicles,or heldrakes.
In short, EVERYTHING I use the vendetta for are no longer the best targets for the vendetta.
Emperor help the poor valk/vendetta that is forced to dog fight against any eldar or dark eldar craft.
I am all about a challenge, but they have effectively neutered my air power.... Which is more than a little infuriating considering I have 5 valkyries/vendettas with magnetized weapons.
I have never brought more than 2 to the table at once (I didn't want to be THAT guy), but now I can't even justify taking one.

A vendetta is roughly a harrier style plane; not uber quick in a straight line, but can land on a helipad if needed. An ork fighter is more old school fighter design (yes, I know the harriers from the 60s..)

So it makes sense to me why it's slower. It's also av12 which is a big deal in flyer terms!

the original DFTS was listed as optional within its cover.

this DFTS is not, an is said to replace existing rulebook rules.

Saying it is optional because it is an expansion is not really true, since it is not listed as an expansion.

Saying it is optional because it is a supplement is not really true, because it is not listed as a supplement:

Ironically the following are supplements:
Daemonic incursions
Angels of death
Waagh Ghazkull
Haemonoculi
Harlequins
All of the new SW/NID books outside of their main codex
tau units/formations from Kauyon books
etc.

Do people who think supplements are optional think those are optional? "I am sorry, skyhammer comes from angels of death which is a supplement, meaning its optional- you need to remove those models you just drop podded in" yeah right lol.

Not that it matters but stronghold assault and escalation were not written as optional either, that some people put their head in the sand and GW soon after released a version folding them into the RB so same said people who did not like them and looked for made up reasons to try and not allow people to play with what were core rules, although updated in another non expansion book, did not make those optional in any way.

AV 12 on 3/4 sides on the valk doesn't mean anything. That poor thing gets into a dogfight with literally anything in the codex, with the inferior statline it has, the enemy will most likely get easy shots on the rear armor. Which even the weakest weapons (in this book) can glance to death in one round. If your valk ends up in a dogfight vs eldar, one may as well just remove it from play.
I can understand if it is a bit slower. But even space wolf xbox huge flyers have better pursuit and AV12 all around.
The pros and cons of taking a fighter vs an attack craft are insane.
Fighters can ignore jinking with their formations, they can get skyfire whenever, and only suffer a -1 BS if they engage ground targets. With most aircraft being BS4 with most weapons being TL or strafing run this is hardly a punishment. This means that the flyers that were meant to be air to air fighters can do the close air support (CAS)mission BETTER than the CAS craft. If they wanted to give my vendettas the benefit of -1 BS skill vs zooming flyers, I would happily take that. Would be better than the short stick IG is getting now...

blaktoof wrote:
the original DFTS was listed as optional within its cover.

this DFTS is not, an is said to replace existing rulebook rules.

Saying it is optional because it is an expansion is not really true, since it is not listed as an expansion.

Saying it is optional because it is a supplement is not really true, because it is not listed as a supplement:

Ironically the following are supplements:
Daemonic incursions
Angels of death
Waagh Ghazkull
Haemonoculi
Harlequins
All of the new SW/NID books outside of their main codex
tau units/formations from Kauyon books
etc.

Do people who think supplements are optional think those are optional? "I am sorry, skyhammer comes from angels of death which is a supplement, meaning its optional- you need to remove those models you just drop podded in" yeah right lol.

Not that it matters but stronghold assault and escalation were not written as optional either, that some people put their head in the sand and GW soon after released a version folding them into the RB so same said people who did not like them and looked for made up reasons to try and not allow people to play with what were core rules, although updated in another non expansion book, did not make those optional in any way.

Yes, they are optional. I do not need to abide by any of those that are not in use. I do not need to abide by anything I choose not to use. That is the definition of House Rule.

Would it be any more fair if I just started using Battle Missions without discussing it with my opponent? What about Planetstrike? Cities of Death? Spearhead?

Also, remember for the longest time, even codices were listed as supplements to the game. That is all any of these books really are in the end. They are there to enhance and improve the experience of the game.

But it will only do that if all players are on board.

Wow, I'm certainly glad I didn't buy any Storm Talons when I was considering it a couple weeks ago... They seem to have gone up in $$$ by about $11 Canadian as well. Wtf are GW doing? Nerfing the thing and then putting the price up 20%??

 Lord Corellia wrote:
Wow, I'm certainly glad I didn't buy any Storm Talons when I was considering it a couple weeks ago... They seem to have gone up in $$$ by about $11 Canadian as well. Wtf are GW doing? Nerfing the thing and then putting the price up 20%??

You do realize its now a combination kit to make either a Stormtalon Gunship or a Stormhawk Interceptor?

 Charistoph wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
the original DFTS was listed as optional within its cover.

this DFTS is not, an is said to replace existing rulebook rules.

Saying it is optional because it is an expansion is not really true, since it is not listed as an expansion.

Saying it is optional because it is a supplement is not really true, because it is not listed as a supplement:

Ironically the following are supplements:
Daemonic incursions
Angels of death
Waagh Ghazkull
Haemonoculi
Harlequins
All of the new SW/NID books outside of their main codex
tau units/formations from Kauyon books
etc.

Do people who think supplements are optional think those are optional? "I am sorry, skyhammer comes from angels of death which is a supplement, meaning its optional- you need to remove those models you just drop podded in" yeah right lol.

Not that it matters but stronghold assault and escalation were not written as optional either, that some people put their head in the sand and GW soon after released a version folding them into the RB so same said people who did not like them and looked for made up reasons to try and not allow people to play with what were core rules, although updated in another non expansion book, did not make those optional in any way.

Yes, they are optional. I do not need to abide by any of those that are not in use. I do not need to abide by anything I choose not to use. That is the definition of House Rule.

Would it be any more fair if I just started using Battle Missions without discussing it with my opponent? What about Planetstrike? Cities of Death? Spearhead?

Also, remember for the longest time, even codices were listed as supplements to the game. That is all any of these books really are in the end. They are there to enhance and improve the experience of the game.

But it will only do that if all players are on board.

The problem with that line of thinking is the things you refrence are actually told to be optional within their respective books, DFTS does not in contain any such language.

So it is as optional as the eldar codex, or rolling to hit against ballistic skill.

DFTS is essentially Codex fliers.

You have as much right to deny someone using it as they have to deny you using the adeptus astartes codex.

So yes everythin can be said to be.optional as a house rule, even playing by a points system. The reality however is that DFTS is not actually listed as optional so outside of playing by house rules it is part of the normal 40k game.

blaktoof wrote:

The problem with that line of thinking is the things you refrence are actually told to be optional within their respective books, DFTS does not in contain any such language.

So it is as optional as the eldar codex, or rolling to hit against ballistic skill.

DFTS is essentially Codex fliers.

You have as much right to deny someone using it as they have to deny you using the adeptus astartes codex.

So yes everythin can be said to be.optional as a house rule, even playing by a points system. The reality however is that DFTS is not actually listed as optional so outside of playing by house rules it is part of the normal 40k game.

But does anything state it is required outside of its own use?

blaktoof wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
the original DFTS was listed as optional within its cover.

this DFTS is not, an is said to replace existing rulebook rules.

Saying it is optional because it is an expansion is not really true, since it is not listed as an expansion.

Saying it is optional because it is a supplement is not really true, because it is not listed as a supplement:

Ironically the following are supplements:
Daemonic incursions
Angels of death
Waagh Ghazkull
Haemonoculi
Harlequins
All of the new SW/NID books outside of their main codex
tau units/formations from Kauyon books
etc.

Do people who think supplements are optional think those are optional? "I am sorry, skyhammer comes from angels of death which is a supplement, meaning its optional- you need to remove those models you just drop podded in" yeah right lol.

Not that it matters but stronghold assault and escalation were not written as optional either, that some people put their head in the sand and GW soon after released a version folding them into the RB so same said people who did not like them and looked for made up reasons to try and not allow people to play with what were core rules, although updated in another non expansion book, did not make those optional in any way.

Yes, they are optional. I do not need to abide by any of those that are not in use. I do not need to abide by anything I choose not to use. That is the definition of House Rule.

Would it be any more fair if I just started using Battle Missions without discussing it with my opponent? What about Planetstrike? Cities of Death? Spearhead?

Also, remember for the longest time, even codices were listed as supplements to the game. That is all any of these books really are in the end. They are there to enhance and improve the experience of the game.

But it will only do that if all players are on board.

The problem with that line of thinking is the things you refrence are actually told to be optional within their respective books, DFTS does not in contain any such language.

So it is as optional as the eldar codex, or rolling to hit against ballistic skill.

DFTS is essentially Codex fliers.

You have as much right to deny someone using it as they have to deny you using the adeptus astartes codex.

So yes everythin can be said to be.optional as a house rule, even playing by a points system. The reality however is that DFTS is not actually listed as optional so outside of playing by house rules it is part of the normal 40k game.

Good luck getting games in, I can see trying to convince/make everyone use DftS will make you very popular in your group.

 Imateria wrote:
Good luck getting games in, I can see trying to convince/make everyone use DftS will make you very popular in your group.

Every other "optional" rule book that expanded the core rules met with initial resistance and then promptly became standard. I'd expect the next version of the core rule book to include these new flyer rules in the same way that the current version includes rules originally found in Escalation and Stronghold Assault.

History shows that trying to convince everyone to use rules that are obviously intended as standard rules won't be as much of an uphill battle as you think.

I really only plan on playing friendly games with house rules that don't give broken advantages to "fighters". At least unless they decide to make valkyries/vendettas not be trash.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Imateria wrote:
Good luck getting games in, I can see trying to convince/make everyone use DftS will make you very popular in your group.

Every other "optional" rule book that expanded the core rules met with initial resistance and then promptly became standard. I'd expect the next version of the core rule book to include these new flyer rules in the same way that the current version includes rules originally found in Escalation and Stronghold Assault.

History shows that trying to convince everyone to use rules that are obviously intended as standard rules won't be as much of an uphill battle as you think.

That is very true.

But that doesn't mean I need to use Escalation rules if neither I nor my opponent are using Super-Heavies in that book.

We're using the units from the book, but with the old flyer rules.

 Imateria wrote:

blaktoof wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
the original DFTS was listed as optional within its cover.

this DFTS is not, an is said to replace existing rulebook rules.

Saying it is optional because it is an expansion is not really true, since it is not listed as an expansion.

Saying it is optional because it is a supplement is not really true, because it is not listed as a supplement:

Ironically the following are supplements:
Daemonic incursions
Angels of death
Waagh Ghazkull
Haemonoculi
Harlequins
All of the new SW/NID books outside of their main codex
tau units/formations from Kauyon books
etc.

Do people who think supplements are optional think those are optional? "I am sorry, skyhammer comes from angels of death which is a supplement, meaning its optional- you need to remove those models you just drop podded in" yeah right lol.

Not that it matters but stronghold assault and escalation were not written as optional either, that some people put their head in the sand and GW soon after released a version folding them into the RB so same said people who did not like them and looked for made up reasons to try and not allow people to play with what were core rules, although updated in another non expansion book, did not make those optional in any way.

Yes, they are optional. I do not need to abide by any of those that are not in use. I do not need to abide by anything I choose not to use. That is the definition of House Rule.

Would it be any more fair if I just started using Battle Missions without discussing it with my opponent? What about Planetstrike? Cities of Death? Spearhead?

Also, remember for the longest time, even codices were listed as supplements to the game. That is all any of these books really are in the end. They are there to enhance and improve the experience of the game.

But it will only do that if all players are on board.

The problem with that line of thinking is the things you refrence are actually told to be optional within their respective books, DFTS does not in contain any such language.

So it is as optional as the eldar codex, or rolling to hit against ballistic skill.

DFTS is essentially Codex fliers.

You have as much right to deny someone using it as they have to deny you using the adeptus astartes codex.

So yes everythin can be said to be.optional as a house rule, even playing by a points system. The reality however is that DFTS is not actually listed as optional so outside of playing by house rules it is part of the normal 40k game.

Good luck getting games in, I can see trying to convince/make everyone use DftS will make you very popular in your group.

The point is, which you missed, I don't have to convince anyone.
Optional rules you have to convince someone to use.
the normal rules both players have to agree not to use.

DFTS are not listed as optional rules anywhere.
DFTS are the normal rules for flyers now.

Just like someone can show up to play a game with the angels of death supplement to use cataphractii terminators and skyhammer, or a hive tyrant with a fighter ace rule from one of the baal supplements, I can show up with flyers from DFTS, and use all the rules which are not listed as optional within. Someone can of course decide they do not want to play with flyers, Just as someone could decide they don't want to play a game with any SHV or GMC.

Just as I can play a pick up game at a FLGS and decide to not play against someone because they are using Eldar, You can opt to not play against someone for using flyers.

My tree-fiddy:

If I own rules for flyers that I already paid for, and this gives me different rules for flyers for [price], but I'm happy with my current rules for flyers, I'm not buying it. I need rules, so I buy BRB and codex. I now have everything I need to play. Everything else is always optional. If someone wants to use the optional rules, I have no problem trying them out, but be prepared to share your book and help me learn them. And then let's play a game where we don't use them!

Tournaments may require it, and that is their prerogative.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
They don't have to be listed as optional to be optional.

FlyingCamel wrote:
I really only plan on playing friendly games with house rules that don't give broken advantages to "fighters". At least unless they decide to make valkyries/vendettas not be trash.

Yes, Valkyries/Vendettas are "trash" because they can't fire at normal BS versus other Flyers natively. Oh noes!

Let's ignore that they have some of the better Wing Leader abilities(+3 inches to their moves and autopass Break Turn tests while in an Attack Pattern[Why would you NOT be in an Attack Pattern with Valkyries or Vendettas?], rerolls on To Wound/Armor Pen rolls of 1 while in an Attack Pattern, and the ability to reroll all failed saves when they Jink while in an Attack Pattern when the save is made) and that Attack Patterns fundamentally change the way that you will want to use Valkyries/Vendettas.

Let's also ignore that while their Pursuit value is low(1), their Agility value is high(3) which means they can potentially get the win in the Manoeuvre sub-phase, which allows you to change the facing of your opponent's Flyer during a dogfight--allowing you to get into their rear arc which means you are firing at your normal Ballistic Skill.

blaktoof wrote:
The point is, which you missed, I don't have to convince anyone.
Optional rules you have to convince someone to use.
the normal rules both players have to agree not to use.

Not if they think they are optional. And really, all the rules of the game are optional. Those outside the core rulebook are even more optional then others.

blaktoof wrote:
DFTS are not listed as optional rules anywhere.
DFTS are the normal rules for flyers now.

You haven't quoted the part that says they are required and are normal now.

blaktoof wrote:
Just like someone can show up to play a game with the angels of death supplement to use cataphractii terminators and skyhammer, or a hive tyrant with a fighter ace rule from one of the baal supplements, I can show up with flyers from DFTS, and use all the rules which are not listed as optional within. Someone can of course decide they do not want to play with flyers, Just as someone could decide they don't want to play a game with any SHV or GMC.

Just as I can play a pick up game at a FLGS and decide to not play against someone because they are using Eldar, You can opt to not play against someone for using flyers.

Now you are starting to get it.