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.

Hey guys,

I recently picked up two of these beauties, and to my delight an apoc game was announced at my FLGS in a few weeks. I'm thinking about running a heavy air force list, with a vulture, a vendetta, the two fighters, and maybe an allied storm eagle.

Does anyone have any expirence actually using the fighters with the new rules listed in Aeronautica? I've seen the vulture discussed enough, and while the Lightning doesn't appear to be a fantastic deal point-wise or anything, I was wondering if anyone had any input.

Are the missiles worth taking, at their relatively expensive price? (on a related note, I can't seem to find the rules writeup for "missile" type weapons, ie skystrike missiles which have "oneshot only, missile, air-to-air" in the rules. If anyone can explain or give a page number I'd be happy) Would it be worth it to kit one out as a ground attack and leave the other as a leaner anti-air fighter?

Sadly the Lightning is garbage. It's fragile and lacking in firepower by default, and the missile options suck. Skystrike missiles are only half an autocannon shot and taking a load of them gives you weaker shooting than a Thunderbolt on a less durable platform, and as insult to injury it costs MORE points. Tactical bombs are too weak to do anything. Hellfury missiles are decent, but force you to waste your other guns. And hellstrike missiles are just FW's personal " you" to anyone who buys a Lightning, thanks to the ordnance rule making all of your other shots BS 1 (including the hellstrike missile if you fire two of them) they're worse than hunter-killer missiles and you're better off taking no missiles at all than attempting to use hellstrike missiles, even if they were free.

On the good side, if you got the old model with the long-barrel autocannon instead of the new missile-only one you might be able to count it as the far superior Avenger since it kind of has the same weapons (2x LC, 1x big gun). If you're stuck with the new model the best you can do is glue four autocannons on the missile hardpoints and pretend it's a Thunderbolt.

I love the FW books and products, but I was really dubious when comparing stuff in IA:Aeronautica
I mean, a Lightning costs the same as an Eldar Nightwing for reduced weaponry, no Shrouded and no Vector Dancer, dafuq ?
The Thunderbolt sadly suffers from the same issue, overcosted for no reason (and taking missiles isn't a good idea as you already have 3 good weapon systems), I mean, why take a Thunderbolt when you can have a Storm Eagle for a few more points ?
Please note I'm only taking "pure" FW flyers into account, not considering undercosted Vendettas here

The Lightning's problem is that they just replaced the old model with a new one (after stating it was overdue for replacement), and it's pretty clear they had no enthusiasm for the old model anymore and didn't care enough to do more than the bare minimum in IA:Aeronautica. Hopefully now that it has a shiny new model it will finally get some decent rules soon.

The Thunderbolt isn't bad, it's just stuck with a point cost that hasn't changed since 4th edition. It's a better pure flyer killer than most of the alternatives, so if FOC slot efficiency and/or money are more of a factor than pure point efficiency it's not a bad choice.