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.

While it’s understandable they had to cap the number of aircraft in tournament play to stop it from being exploited, how do people feel about it in casual play?

Keep it limited. Aircraft don't belong in 40k at all and plane spam isn't fun. A 0-2 limit is a fair compromise between good game design and letting people use the aircraft models they've bought and painted.

I mean I prefer no aircraft period. If you're cool with aircraft, why not spam them?

In the end, this isn't tournament play, so should be down to what the individual players want.

We adapted the limit for our casual play.

The issue with planes is that they ignore a large portion of the game rules and thus can easily cause extremely non-interactive and boring games. Two planes at 1000 or three at 2000 is just too much for games where people don't necessarily optimize towards winning or have deep collections.

Games with less planes tend to be more friendly towards your average casual army, while still allowing people to bring their air support when they wish to do so.

TL;DR: Less planes make for better games.

Hecaton wrote:
If you're cool with aircraft, why not spam them?

Because plane spam isn't fun. Planes in general aren't fun and don't work in a 28mm game but people tend to get annoyed when the expensive models they bought and painted aren't legal at all. Allowing a severely restricted number of them lets people continue using their models but minimizes the amount of disruption they cause.

Do not use them. They imho do not belong in the game at this scale. Epic, sure, maybe ... 40k should be limited to e.g. slowed skimmers and jetbikes and koptas and so on. Just my opinion, but I wont play with or against them at all.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
While it’s understandable they had to cap the number of aircraft in tournament play to stop it from being exploited, how do people feel about it in casual play?

This really depends on the flyer, some flyers are just not even worth it, so who cares if you take 4 of them, others are really good. I would say its up to your group, my group just keeps the FoC structure across off games to keep it simple.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:
Aircraft don't belong in 40k...

Says who? You?

With the cp tax on new detachments being more severe wonder if it's even problem in tournaments either.

Though not that I can really comment. Never been troubled by 3+ flier armies so not best qualified to comment. But with less 2 detachment armies there's less room for 3+ fliers to begin with.

I think they're great for narrative missions that are designed to accommodate them.

I think it's a shame that because of a few tournament players using aircraft from a pair of completely different Codices I can't bring my Guard Air Cav to the table.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:
Aircraft don't belong in 40k...

Says who? You?

Me, too... gave my dakkajet to a buddy for his mantle, never look back and have zero interest in playing with or against them. Zero. They do not belong imho...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think it's a shame that because of a few tournament players using aircraft from a pair of completely different Codices I can't bring my Guard Air Cav to the table.

Betcha your planes would look great on a mantle, tho...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think it's a shame that because of a few tournament players using aircraft from a pair of completely different Codices I can't bring my Guard Air Cav to the table.

I couldn't agree more. It is yet another reason I prefer Crusade to Matched, as this is a Matched only restriction.

 jeff white wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:
Aircraft don't belong in 40k...

Says who? You?

Me, too... gave my dakkajet to a buddy for his mantle, never look back and have zero interest in playing with or against them. Zero. They do not belong imho...

So, you would refuse a game to someone with a single Valkyrie?

 jeff white wrote:
Betcha your planes would look great on a mantle, tho...

I dunno. You tell me.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Betcha your planes would look great on a mantle, tho...

I dunno. You tell me.

Nope, they do not look good just sitting there, tucked to the back of the shelf.

I still think it would be best to remove the Flyer battlefield role from all detachments and have a specific Flyer detachment that's 1 to 3 Flyers and you can only include one Flyer detachment in your army.

People that are all "I hate fliers because broken and don't belong" are the same people that refuse any change whatsoever since 3rd. They're not to be listened to.

I went with "Other". I'd prefer that planes didn't exist in 40k. I think they don't really work well at the scale the game tries to represent. If they have to stay, I 'd prefer to see them treated like skimmers as they were before full Flyer rules were incorporated into the main rulebook.

I like Aircraft models but generally I don't think they belong in games below 1000pts. I have played in a 3000pt game with several aircraft and those were tons of fun.

Slipspace wrote:
I went with "Other". I'd prefer that planes didn't exist in 40k. I think they don't really work well at the scale the game tries to represent. If they have to stay, I 'd prefer to see them treated like skimmers as they were before full Flyer rules were incorporated into the main rulebook.

Yeah, ironically the "fast skimmer" implementation was the one that worked best.

If certain Flyers are proving an issue, address those units specifically - don't Ol' Yeller an entire class of units because a couple are too strong.

ccs wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Betcha your planes would look great on a mantle, tho...

I dunno. You tell me.

Nope, they do not look good just sitting there, tucked to the back of the shelf.

To be fair, the Triaros in front of them is far cooler.

 Jidmah wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
I went with "Other". I'd prefer that planes didn't exist in 40k. I think they don't really work well at the scale the game tries to represent. If they have to stay, I 'd prefer to see them treated like skimmers as they were before full Flyer rules were incorporated into the main rulebook.

Yeah, ironically the "fast skimmer" implementation was the one that worked best.

I want a modified version of Fast Skimmers back for Flyers.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

ccs wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Betcha your planes would look great on a mantle, tho...

I dunno. You tell me.

Nope, they do not look good just sitting there, tucked to the back of the shelf.

To be fair, the Triaros in front of them is far cooler.

Give 40k rules for Mecanicum PLEASE

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:
Aircraft don't belong in 40k...

Says who? You?

Says lots of people. A supersonic fighter jet does not belong on a battlefield slightly larger than a football field. It's conceptually stupid, and the fact that aircraft can't meaningfully interact with objectives means that games against plane spam are little more than "can I kill you in one turn with the alpha strike" and aren't fun for either player.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Betcha your planes would look great on a mantle, tho...

I dunno. You tell me.

Nope, they do not look good just sitting there, tucked to the back of the shelf.

They might if they were painted though.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:
Aircraft don't belong in 40k...

Says who? You?

Says lots of people. A supersonic fighter jet does not belong on a battlefield slightly larger than a football field. It's conceptually stupid, and the fact that aircraft can't meaningfully interact with objectives means that games against plane spam are little more than "can I kill you in one turn with the alpha strike" and aren't fun for either player.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Betcha your planes would look great on a mantle, tho...

I dunno. You tell me.

Nope, they do not look good just sitting there, tucked to the back of the shelf.

They might if they were painted though.

In a competitive game it might be like that, but if your are playing it casually and in a more realistic sense that it makes less sense since there is no reason their wouldn’t be air support since they play a major role in combat and likely will far into the future

Also the game isn't a football size, come guy learn to forge a narrative, its an isolated look at a larger battle.

Its a Matched Play only rule.
It doesn't apply to other modes of play.

 Blndmage wrote:
Its a Matched Play only rule.
It doesn't apply to other modes of play.

And yet it is a good rule that should apply everywhere, just like rule of three and similar "matched play only" rules that were almost universally adopted outside of matched play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Also the game isn't a football size, come guy learn to forge a narrative, its an isolated look at a larger battle.

But the space the flyer is circling around in is the size of a football field. Aircraft in a 28mm game should be represented by non-model assets and treated as off-table artillery. The plane comes in at 500mph, drops a load of bombs on something, and is gone before anyone can react. It doesn't hover over the football field doing tight circles to avoid flying over the magic line and disappearing for a turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
In a competitive game it might be like that, but if your are playing it casually and in a more realistic sense that it makes less sense since there is no reason their wouldn’t be air support since they play a major role in combat and likely will far into the future

Air Support (200 points)

At the beginning of your shooting phase place an air support marker on the table anywhere within line of sight of a CHARACTER model or any model equipped with a vox. At the beginning of your next shooting phase you may make an attack against a unit within 6" of the air support marker using one of the following profiles:
{AoE bombs}
{railguns/lascannons/etc}
{high RoF strafing}

That's how air support should work in a 28mm game representing a battlefield the size of a football field. Aircraft arrive, blow something up as they streak past at 500mph, and you barely have time to look up before they're gone.