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.

speaking of eldar - dark reapers are awesome. FMC get obliterated by them.

for 25 points a dark reaper gets a 48 inch range SnP missile launcher str 5 ap3 2 shots. Reaper range finder allows them to reroll hits against skimmers and flyers and IGNORE JINK.

they also got a 3+ save too for shyts and giggles.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I can't believe someone talked about Amrored Ceramite on Space Marine aircraft as if it were an advantage. I've haven't seen that rule come up ONCE since the 6th edition codex and quite frankly I'd be happy if they got rid of it to make the aircraft cheaper.

aint that the rule that ignores melta?

Yeah, but not Armorbane. When was the last time you saw AA Melta?

I keep a MM on the nose of my stormraven.

I will agree that it’s a mostly useless rule on flyers, but thematically appropriate. Something with the aerodynamic properties of a brick is going to generate a lot of friction heat zipping down from orbit.

But due to the hight of the flight stand, metlagunners are basically going to have to kiss the base if they want to get the flyers into half range for the extra melta die. MMs have a little more wiggle room, but not by much.

I don't care if it is thematically appropriate. We are paying for what is essentially a useless rule.

Even if it just knocked off FIVE points of the aircraft I'd be okay.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I don't care if it is thematically appropriate. We are paying for what is essentially a useless rule.

Even if it just knocked off FIVE points of the aircraft I'd be okay.

Welcome to DE world.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I don't care if it is thematically appropriate. We are paying for what is essentially a useless rule.

Even if it just knocked off FIVE points of the aircraft I'd be okay.

Welcome to DE world.

Which rule are you specifically complaining about?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I don't care if it is thematically appropriate. We are paying for what is essentially a useless rule.

Even if it just knocked off FIVE points of the aircraft I'd be okay.

Welcome to DE world.

Which rule are you specifically complaining about?

Other than Night Vision on the Fliers? You know sense they literally will never use it, or the other few melee only units with it also. Or that the RSR cad gives a 6+ cover save (5+ to troops) only while NF is going on (Stealth already gives +1 so all units already have 6+ in open and would have better cover with Stealth instead of the RSR rule if it was in cover, so it LITERALLY is pointless). Or the fact that they are the same cost as other units and have 1 less armor save all around "So they can feel glassy".

There is some more but this post is about "FMC"

You do realise NF and the RSR bonuses stack, right? So it isn't entirely as useless as you say it is.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
You do realise NF and the RSR bonuses stack, right? So it isn't entirely as useless as you say it is.

Was gonna say, you know cover bonuses stack right?

Yes they do, but Im saying it you are play DE correctly you will be in 4+ or 5+ cover ALREADY not 6+ cover to start the game.

Tell me what DE player leaves things in the open?

Also it only work (NF) 50% the games too.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yes they do, but Im saying it you are play DE correctly you will be in 4+ or 5+ cover ALREADY not 6+ cover to start the game.

Tell me what DE player leaves things in the open?

Also it only work (NF) 50% the games too.

Ok im not a DE player so what rules boost you up to a 4+ cover saves.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yes they do, but Im saying it you are play DE correctly you will be in 4+ or 5+ cover ALREADY not 6+ cover to start the game.

Tell me what DE player leaves things in the open?

Also it only work (NF) 50% the games too.

Ok im not a DE player so what rules boost you up to a 4+ cover saves.

Terrain and Jink. The point is DE players dont use these rules, the rules only work for 1 turn and only for half the games.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I can't believe someone talked about Amrored Ceramite on Space Marine aircraft as if it were an advantage. I've haven't seen that rule come up ONCE since the 6th edition codex and quite frankly I'd be happy if they got rid of it to make the aircraft cheaper.

aint that the rule that ignores melta?

Yeah, but not Armorbane. When was the last time you saw AA Melta?

Nearly every list I make has one or two of these actually.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I can't believe someone talked about Amrored Ceramite on Space Marine aircraft as if it were an advantage. I've haven't seen that rule come up ONCE since the 6th edition codex and quite frankly I'd be happy if they got rid of it to make the aircraft cheaper.

aint that the rule that ignores melta?

Yeah, but not Armorbane. When was the last time you saw AA Melta?

Nearly every list I make has one or two of these actually.

What in codex 40k is skyfire: armorbane? There are only a handful of armorbane weapons in the game, and I cannot think of 1 that has skyfire/the option for skyfire outside of mysterious objectives.

I was more talking Melta AA itself.

 pumaman1 wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I can't believe someone talked about Amrored Ceramite on Space Marine aircraft as if it were an advantage. I've haven't seen that rule come up ONCE since the 6th edition codex and quite frankly I'd be happy if they got rid of it to make the aircraft cheaper.

aint that the rule that ignores melta?

Yeah, but not Armorbane. When was the last time you saw AA Melta?

Nearly every list I make has one or two of these actually.

What in codex 40k is skyfire: armorbane? There are only a handful of armorbane weapons in the game, and I cannot think of 1 that has skyfire/the option for skyfire outside of mysterious objectives.

Not armorbane, melta. He asked when was the last time you saw skyfire melta. And I take one or two every game.
Velocity tracker on riptide and/or ghostkeel.

And that doesn't matter because you're hitting a target with Av11-12.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
And that doesn't matter because you're hitting a target with Av11-12.

Against AV 11, it makes less of a difference:
4/6 chance of HP loss (with 75% chance of AP1 vehicle table roll as well)
versus
35/36 chance of HP loss (with 32/35 chance of AP 1 vehicle table roll as well)

But it still makes a difference. That alone is NEARLY a 50% increase in hull-stripping power.

Against AV 12?
3/6 chance of HP loss (with ~67% chance of AP1 vehicle table roll as well)
versus
11/12 chance of HP loss (with 10/11 chance of AP1 vehicle table roll as well)

That's nearly DOUBLE the increase in raw hull-stripping power.

In both cases, you have a better chance of an explodes result.

Not to mention ap1 damage results in pens are superior.
It literally won my last game by velocity locking (or whatever it called that fixes its movement) a GK plane full of paladins and forcing it to fly out of the table.

The increased odds of something like that happening is very meaningful.
Skyfire melta is freaking nuts against anything using the AV system trying to fly around without the ceramic plating.

How on earth did you reach the conclusion that an ability that counters the rule meant to get easy penetrates on armor is irrelevant is beyond me.
It's practically like saying invul saves are irrelevant because armor exists.

1. Fliers as transports is always a trap. Because things on them die. Melta doesn't make a difference there.
2. Straight up HP damage is more efficient than praying for an explodes result.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
1. Fliers as transports is always a trap. Because things on them die. Melta doesn't make a difference there.
2. Straight up HP damage is more efficient than praying for an explodes result.

1. Melta makes a difference if it means you take off an HP instead of failing to glance or pen, and when you get an explodes result instead of glancing the target.
2. Melta provides approximately a ~50% to ~90% boost in raw HP damage compared to non-Melta shots. By your own standard, Melta makes a significant difference in effectiveness.

So... what is your point? Is it your contention that a 50-90% boost in destructive capability is meaningless?

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
Really they should just get rid of the 'flyers' rules altogether, and make them count as jump infantry again for FMC, and aircraft count as skimmers to represent the whole fact they are slowing to a relative crawl to be able to do anything.

I strongly agree with this. The only "flyers" that should show up in normal 40K games should be helicopter-like vehicles that are dropping off, picking up or supporting troops from an airborne position. Same goes for FMC's, they should at best be in Hover or Jump mode and junk the Swooping mode. Jets, Bombers and the like would be better represented by something like an artillery bombardment sort of rules, where the model isn't put on the board - unless you just want a visual representation that AA-style weapons can take an Overwatch against as it streaks over the battlefield.

Really, I love the flyer models they've made for 40K, but I don't think they should actually be used in the 40K game. If they want a flying game, they should do something that's a more serious attempt than Stormcloud Attack - that has a kernel of a good game, but it would really need better development to survive on its own.

 Stormonu wrote:

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
Really they should just get rid of the 'flyers' rules altogether, and make them count as jump infantry again for FMC, and aircraft count as skimmers to represent the whole fact they are slowing to a relative crawl to be able to do anything.

I strongly agree with this. The only "flyers" that should show up in normal 40K games should be helicopter-like vehicles that are dropping off, picking up or supporting troops from an airborne position. Same goes for FMC's, they should at best be in Hover or Jump mode and junk the Swooping mode. Jets, Bombers and the like would be better represented by something like an artillery bombardment sort of rules, where the model isn't put on the board - unless you just want a visual representation that AA-style weapons can take an Overwatch against as it streaks over the battlefield.

Really, I love the flyer models they've made for 40K, but I don't think they should actually be used in the 40K game. If they want a flying game, they should do something that's a more serious attempt than Stormcloud Attack - that has a kernel of a good game, but it would really need better development to survive on its own.

Ok, EVEN if they are not Jets flying in the air super fast but slower moving aircrafts, the "Hard to hit" rule Still works.

All air craft vehicles has spots where you can unload into the plane and it wouldn't effect the plane much at all (IDK the actual term, my father work on planes in the air force) Less metal in these spots and a better built area for the important parts.

So even if dudes on the ground are shooting an aircraft 100 yards away most shots wouldn't do much anyway. There are more variables we can talk about to, but the point stands, Hard to hit is more realistic than we give it credit for.

Yea, hitting even a relatively stationary helicopter is absurdly hard.
A true jet us not "hard to hit", it's impossible. You usually can't even see it.

There is a reason for why our drill for enemy helicopter attack us "get the feth away from the cannon" rather than "try to take potshots at it" even though the cannon is powerful enough that it will wreck the chopper if it merely glances it.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yes they do, but Im saying it you are play DE correctly you will be in 4+ or 5+ cover ALREADY not 6+ cover to start the game.

Tell me what DE player leaves things in the open?

Also it only work (NF) 50% the games too.

Ok im not a DE player so what rules boost you up to a 4+ cover saves.

Terrain and Jink. The point is DE players dont use these rules, the rules only work for 1 turn and only for half the games.

I'm still a bit confused what universal rule to the get that give them that?

Terrain generally is a 4+ for ruins, 5+ for things like tree. Go to ground is default 6+ and jink is a 4+. Stealth would give a bonus to all of these

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yes they do, but Im saying it you are play DE correctly you will be in 4+ or 5+ cover ALREADY not 6+ cover to start the game.

Tell me what DE player leaves things in the open?

Also it only work (NF) 50% the games too.

Ok im not a DE player so what rules boost you up to a 4+ cover saves.

Terrain and Jink. The point is DE players dont use these rules, the rules only work for 1 turn and only for half the games.

I'm still a bit confused what universal rule to the get that give them that?

Terrain generally is a 4+ for ruins, 5+ for things like tree. Go to ground is default 6+ and jink is a 4+. Stealth would give a bonus to all of these

DE are more points b.c ALL MODELS get

NV, Fleet and PfP

When most of the time these 3 rules do little to nothing.

NV: Only works for 1 turn 50% the games, many units will never use it due to their rules

Fleet, Mostly good, but many units again wont need it. Take it off some units for a better fitting rule for them (They all have it to make them "fee fast" when it doesnt work, give them JsJ like Eldar)

PfP: This chart is better, but it still just trash, With all the S6+ FnP almost never works, it only works when your Vehicle dies and your guys inside do too, the Fearless sucks b.c everything breaks your armor so you want to "go to ground" for that +1 cover but you cant, so now your save is bad.

And Im saying there "Bonus cover" never takes into effect B.c of what you just said, its a Flat 6+ or 5+, yes stealth gives you a +1, but again like you said most terrain is already a 4+ or 5+, so 4-5+ via terrain with NF +1 for stealth is a 3-4+ Cover, if you did not use the terrain and use the DE cover, you would then have a worst save. No DE player will leave units clear in the open, AV10 open top and T3/5+ save dies in the wind now days.

OK Back on Topic.

I think we all agree that 4+ armor on FMC is a bad idea.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

OK Back on Topic.

I think we all agree that 4+ armor on FMC is a bad idea.

Or at least a very silly one that doesn't actually address anything.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

OK Back on Topic.

I think we all agree that 4+ armor on FMC is a bad idea.

Or at least a very silly one that doesn't actually address anything.

But...Flakk Missiles....

Next poll is should AV be capped at 13, otherwise my 10pt upgrade isn't a threat to everything in game.

Well ok ok hold on let's entertain OPs idea just for a moment and see where he is coming from.

Now hear me out hold on.

What about this, I agree that a single flak Amal should not be able to blast a flyer clean outta the sky, that's just silly, but what about a dev squad full of them?

How about this, if you take a dev squad full of flakk ML, meaning 4, and they all target the same flying creature, MC or vehicle, they get some sort of bonus? Maybe like something like "Flakk barrage" where the target of they jink need to reroll successful jinks, the idea being that they are littering the sky with shrapnel. That or change it so, the flakk is stronger then it currently is, AP stays the same, but, you can ONLY, get glancing hit, even if we made it str 6 and you roll a 6 for wound and the armor is only 10, it's always going to be a glance to represent the fact it's not a warhead with a payload but an air burst missile.

Huh huh? Yay nay? Build on the idea?

Or SM can just do what most other factions have to do, bring a dedicated AA weapon if you are that worried about it. Hunter's are pretty solid weapon platforms with reasonable range. Heck, their misses might even hit still. Who else can take AA on the troop choice as a standard upgrade?