Flyers and how we deal with them.

[Master Sheol]

Spartans the mo0rtis dread based off the common mk V dread is cheaper...

Dual TLAC for 125 points... if ti remains stationary it gains the skyfire/interceptor rules...

Same as contemptor but cheaper and it shares the same chassis as the normal dread so you can use it as normal dread if needed (if your opponents is against using FW rules)...

The TLAC is a normal loadout for normal DA dreads too... And even if your opponent is against using FW rules you can use it to shoot at flyers too...

[facmanpob]

The Mortis Dread with TLAC has the advantage of range over the Contemptor (and its a lot cheaper), but there is a lot to be said for 12 S6 rending shots per turn! ;)

[Dark_Master]

I've gone for a 'normal' Mortis dredd with TL Lascannons.

 

With its long range, if no flyers are around its great for anti-tank.

 

Which Deathwing needs lots of.

 

DM

[worloch]

@worloch, I swear you read my list... I did add the PFG to the libby, but I also added a bastion with Icarus Lascannon! I have been toying with adding las-backs to the dev and tac squads, just to get three more TLed lascannon shots into the list. I am assuming the extra cost isn't really worth it though.

Just out of curiosity, did you post a list up?

Cheers

I like Razorbacks, and I miss cheap HB Razorbacks, but I think it needs evaluation in the context of your army as a whole. Adding 3x Lascannon Razorbacks, for instance, costs enough points that you could throw in another whole squad of some kind. So, the questions becomes something more like: Do I need Transports for mobility? Do I not have enough FoC slots or any other way of getting those guns without paying this premium? Is there something else that can perform the same role better or for less?

In the context of this thread - Anti-Air - I'd say that 3x Las-backs aren't worth it, as you're looking at paying a premium on vehicles that are likely to be targetted and nuetralized before Flyers even hit the board. If you need the tank busting power in the list, sure, take them and take pot shots at Flyers that make an appearance as targets of opportunity, but personally I'm leaning other ways.

I haven't posted a list yet, as I'm still toying with my second HQ and Elites choices. Probably going to be DW terminators, but I may also put a second HQ in TDA and join him to a DW Command squad - just still haven't decided (going for a 1750 point list, btw).

[pueriexdeus]

Haven't got my BGB handy (out of town)but isn't there a Libby power that specifically targets vehicles? How might it be useful against flyers? Just thinking out loud.

[Brother Immolator]

Well, on the subject of razors, I take one for each my tac squad points permitting. 110pts for las plas and 3 hull points each aint that bad. A dev squad costs more for less survivability and more points (to match the razors firepower at 5 man).

 

Just my thoughts.

[Chaplain Killmer]

Doing the mathhammer quickly in my head, the speeder option listed above gives roughly the same outcome (in terms of pens and glances) for Typhoon speeders. The advantage is that the Typhoons are slightly cheaper, and have longer range so a greater threat radius. The question is, however, is it better to drop 150/160 points worth of speeders, in order to take some devastators with flakk missiles?

 

Devs with 3 flakk missiles come in at around 145 points, and will do as much damage (on average) to a flyer as an entire squadron listed above.

 

So, against flyers, a combined Devastator/Speeder set-up with 4 speeders will do quite nicely, but obviously 6 speeders will do better against ground targets.

Oh the speeders were not intended to fight against flyers, but in one round they had one flyer each in range to give shots against them.

[brgabriel]

This is response to th A-10 comment, the Nephilim is a great bird, if you study the flyers section of the rule book, Nephilims are fighters and they can rule the ground as well as the air.

[Brother Immolator]

This is response to th A-10 comment, the Nephilim is a great bird, if you study the flyers section of the rule book, Nephilims are fighters and they can rule the ground as well as the air.

I think I made that post didnt I? Anyways, its good fluffwise, table wise its a good gunship and the weakest for dogfights.

[elphilo]

This is response to th A-10 comment, the Nephilim is a great bird, if you study the flyers section of the rule book, Nephilims are fighters and they can rule the ground as well as the air.

I think I made that post didnt I? Anyways, its good fluffwise, table wise its a good gunship and the weakest for dogfights.

Yep. The one time I ran the Nephillim I ran it with the mega bolter and absolutely loved the amount of firepower it was putting out. Put a real hurt on my guard opponent. Though when his Vendettas came on, I started to really dislike not having those lascannons

[facmanpob]

 

Doing the mathhammer quickly in my head, the speeder option listed above gives roughly the same outcome (in terms of pens and glances) for Typhoon speeders. The advantage is that the Typhoons are slightly cheaper, and have longer range so a greater threat radius. The question is, however, is it better to drop 150/160 points worth of speeders, in order to take some devastators with flakk missiles?

 

Devs with 3 flakk missiles come in at around 145 points, and will do as much damage (on average) to a flyer as an entire squadron listed above.

 

So, against flyers, a combined Devastator/Speeder set-up with 4 speeders will do quite nicely, but obviously 6 speeders will do better against ground targets.

Oh the speeders were not intended to fight against flyers, but in one round they had one flyer each in range to give shots against them.

I realised that that they weren't fielded as anti-flyer, but having some units like that with large scale anti-armour damage output means its worth doing the maths to see how effective they are against flyers. Anything that has a halfway decent chance of blowing a Heldrake out of the sky has to be worth considering ;)

[Blank05]

I'm loving all of this activity on here. I didn't expect to get such a response. I like the mortis dreadnought but I'm having difficulty justifying using Forgeworld rules.

[facmanpob]

I'm loving all of this activity on here. I didn't expect to get such a response. I like the mortis dreadnought but I'm having difficulty justifying using Forgeworld rules.

See, I don't understand this. Why should anyone have to justify using Forgeworld rules, especially as the Mortis Dread ones come with a big WH40K stamp all over them. Its like saying "ah well, its only a bit of rain, I can't really justify using the wipers!" ;)

[Brother Immolator]

Because its not in the codex, and some official tournaments dont allow them. Because if you equip a similar codex unit with said loadout and less special rules it costs more. The approval means nothing. An oponent is entitled to refuse FW units in a match, wereas if you deploy a standard codex army there is no actual reason to do so. FW units interfere too much with codex internal balance (what there is in some occasions anyway).

[facmanpob]

Because its not in the codex, and some official tournaments dont allow them. Because if you equip a similar codex unit with said loadout and less special rules it costs more. The approval means nothing. An oponent is entitled to refuse FW units in a match, wereas if you deploy a standard codex army there is no actual reason to do so. FW units interfere too much with codex internal balance (what there is in some occasions anyway).

It was more a rhetorical rant than an actual question! :) I know the reasons and arguments that are used against FW, I just think its a shame that there's so much inflexibility and nitpicking around what is supposed to be a fun game .... I'd happily play against basically any FW model simply because of the rule of cool .... oh well!

[brgabriel]

I read the dog fighting rules and GW should've made them part of the 6th edition rule set, they are really, really cool. B-) 

[Brother Immolator]

Because its not in the codex, and some official tournaments dont allow them. Because if you equip a similar codex unit with said loadout and less special rules it costs more. The approval means nothing. An oponent is entitled to refuse FW units in a match, wereas if you deploy a standard codex army there is no actual reason to do so. FW units interfere too much with codex internal balance (what there is in some occasions anyway).

It was more a rhetorical rant than an actual question! I know the reasons and arguments that are used against FW, I just think its a shame that there's so much inflexibility and nitpicking around what is supposed to be a fun game .... I'd happily play against basically any FW model simply because of the rule of cool .... oh well!

Well yeah, I mostly answered that to myself really, cant resist a good rumbling

I agree the rule of cool overrides everything, but sometimes is just plain OMG THAT DID WHAT!?!?!?!!?

See the decimator for referemce

I read the dog fighting rules and GW should've made them part of the 6th edition rule set, they are really, really cool. B-)

BTW Theres supposed to be a new expansion hitting soonish with new models and rules for flyers. Perhaps something like that might be in.

[Cypher 102]

According to the rumors (Link) the new flyer book will be out this week and will have the dog fight rules in it.

[brgabriel]

The new supplement sounds really cool.

[Bryan Blaire]

I know this wasn't a thread to have an FW/anti-FW row, but while the FW books say "these should be considered official, but owing to the fact that they may be unknown to your opponent, it's best to make sure they are happy to play a game using Forge World models before you start." This really isn't any different than playing an opponent with an unfamiliar Codex. The Codexes are official, but you don't have to play anyone. There are some Codex builds that I would be more loathe to play than some of the Forgeworld stuff. The worst thing about Forgeworld is that they don't do enough for non-Imperium forces.

 

I really hope this new flyer supplement actually balances out the flyers and gives us something new, but my biggest fear is that it simply collects a bunch of rules into a single book from multiple sources and does nothing new for the game.

 

Back to the Forgeworld discussion though, if people are so loathe to play against FW stuff, would they also refuse to play against someone that purchased the flyer supplement if it does change things from the Codex set-ups?

[facmanpob]

Interesting question, Bryan. I don't think you could force anyone to play with the new flyer rules, and I'm sure there will be some who will refuse to play using them if it changes the balance of power in the air.

[Bryan Blaire]

And yet it is an official supplement. That's why balance arguments for things overall don't work for me, because Codexes aren't internally balanced or balanced against each other. I think it's a shame when someone says "I want to play an official Dark Angels army, what do I do about fliers?" the response becomes "Ally in Guard and take some Valkyries/Vendettas." That's what makes the idea that GW products are in any way intended to be played in a tournament competitive fashion a sham.

 

I'd much prefer to put down an army with FW components in it than play with one that pulls Allies from another Codex to fill in my army's deficiencies.

 

All that said, my thoughts on dealing with flyers in a DA army: flakk missiles and FW Mortis Dreads, then possibly Black Knights, because the DA flyer has a hard time handling other flyers (it just doesn't shoot enough).

[Brother Immolator]

A prudent call but no. When a unit in a codex is costing 120 points thats it. It is supposedly taken into account anything. Sloppy game design is not an ecxuse, if we wanted to play a perfect game we wouldnt play 40k. If the creators of the DA codex (since thats what this section is all about) wanted to add the excecutioner (example) or the mortis in the codex they would have done so just like they did for various options of the guard. Taking a unit from forge world that costs EVEN LESS than a codex entry is at least breaking from your codex (not to use any worse words). And cost is not the only issue. Most of the time they are loaded with a number of rules that have no place in their respective armies. Yes you can take allies to circumvent certain problems but you create more holes in your lines because you have to pay the H.Q. tax. The fw units are designed to give that advantages that shouldnt exist in the first place. Use them for an apocalypse match but not regular 40k game.

As you say I agree that knowledge or not of said units is irrelevant and IMHO its a week arguement. When you play someone you ought to know or at least ask your opponet to show you the rules from his codex. That why in many turneys you cant participate without a copy of the dex.

 

Also dont compare my sceptikism to forgeworld in contrast to this supplument (especially when we havent read it first). Those are two different things. And most likely it wont add anything to the existing codeces. It will most likely iron out the rules for the planes or add a couple of options. Those are two different things. Adding a storm raven to the templars is one thing, adding them an executioner predator is another (and I dont speak from a fluff perspective).

 

Anyways my 2c. I would be happy to elaborate this furter if anyone wishes but please the messenger option, weve derailed the thread enough as is.

[Bryan Blaire]

Sorry Brother Immolator, we'll have to agree to disagree on this subject. There are just as many broken Codex builds as there are broken things you can add from Forgeworld. Forgeworld is a 40K expansion/supplement just as much as a Flyer supplement is. Adding a Flyer to the Templars and C:SM is just a much a break from the units in those Codexes as a FW supplement would be, because the unit wasn't included in the design for that Codex. Yes, some of this is just me being cranky, because I think the Storm Raven is already one of the harder flyers to take down AND it adds transport capacity, neither of which the DA Codex got. As well, if it truly is being added to the C:SM list, all of the sudden, C:SM has two different types of flyers (almost two completely different flyer classes), one of which was previously exclusive to the BA & GK (thereby lessening the uniqueness of the BA some), and that's more than any other Marine Codex gets (even the DA only have two variants of the same basic flyer). To me, adding the Storm Talon to C:BT makes a LOT more sense than making the Storm Raven their only flyer.

 

I'd much rather use a FW DA unit before I will use Allies in my army to deal with flyers. Either one is just as much violating a Codex army as the other. The Allies rule itself allows for some of the biggest 'broken' violatiors for armies, a lot more extreme than most of the FW units will if you only played Codex+FW items.

 

(I don't think this is off topic at all because the FW dread specifically deals with flyers, just like Allied Valks/Vendettas would)

[Brother Immolator]

I agree with you that there are broken rules, but as I said above those are in the core setting (army codexes rulebook). Either like it or not is the only choice we are given. Breaking a balance already streatched, its not the best move. And we all know why those units are  so good already.My 2c.