Abductor Squadron

[jbaeza94]

So while looking at the GW site, I noticed a thing call the abduct squadron. Is this a replacement for the silence squadron? Any news on this?

[Jazzhands]

Its all coming from the new death from the skies supplement

[Chaplain Raeven]

It's the same configuration as the Silence Squadron. It's strange that they change the name all of a sudden.

[shabbadoo]

They probably changed the name because a Silence *Squadron* is not a *Squadron*, which is a particular rules designation.  They were morons to use the term "Squadron" in the name of a Formation that does not use the Squadron rules.  The name change is quite sensible then.

[Epher]

I wonder if they got negative feedback on the Silence Squadron name.  It has an appeal to us who participate in the hunt but to those from the outside looking may not have seen the appeal.  Abductor Squadron... now that sounds badass and gets the point across in one breath. 

 

I am looking forward to seeing the new rules but not looking forward to buying a new book. I do have birthday coming up in a few months...

[Brother Haim]

Sounds like GW is trying to sale more models. Silence Squadron Formation isn't doing the trick so they'll do something different. 

[Polythemus]

I am actually pretty sure that the silence squadron is 2 Dark talons and a nephilim, while the abductor wing is two nephiim and 1 DT from what I have read. I also think they may change the rules for it so its not identical to the silence, since just taking a flyer wing formation is much better at reserves manipulation than the acutal rules were for the silence squadron. Either way I think the whole rule set is much better for flyers since FMCs have many built in advantages over flyers, and the means by which flyers move and interact was a little clunky. The interaction where they still play a role even when off the table is also an interesting change. I am interested to see if it all comes out as a beneficial to the function of what is one of the prettiest flyers out there, the Dark Angels Nephillim.

[jbaeza94]

I just checked, silence is 2 neph and a ds, so the same composition. It could be a name change, but I hope it's something new.

Hopefully it has a remove from play rule :)

[dalleron]

Does anyone know/heard through the grapevine whether the formation rules have changed?

[Dark_Master]

Does anyone know/heard through the grapevine whether the formation rules have changed?

For those that haven't seen below thread

 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/322038-death-from-the-skies-qa/

 

New rules- Thanks to Dariokan

 

"I do not know the Silence Squadron, but the new formation yes It is the Abductor squadron. 2 Nephi, 1 Dark Talon. Bonus: squad leader (ie: the talon) always gets the Vigilance bonus if the Squad is in any pattern. Since the Talon has the Assault role, it will have +1BS VS ground targets and +1 jink.

 

As for the table, good question. Yes, all bonuses are really different between all tables. Here you go:

 

Dark Angels:

 

12: +1 pursuit, or +2 VS chaos

34: you can come from any table edge from reserve

56: Friendly DA within 12" of the leader do not deviate when deep striking."

 

Nephilim are fighter class

Dark Talon are Attack class

 

Also individual planes can shoot individually of each other.

 

DM

[jbaeza94]

Any special rules for the abductor squadron?

[aura_enchanted]

Any special rules for the abductor squadron?

yes its actually pretty good, you basically always get vigilante attack pattern even if your in another pattern. and this effect is cumluative. so you get that on top of the others

 

no changes to the dark talon or the nephilims other then cosmetically cleaning up the readability of the datasheet itself.

 

one formation i like the feth out of is the other marine ones

 

the space wolf one called the ice storm assault (i believe) gives you fleet when you disembark from there transports (so basically you almost never fail a disembarked charge attempt). and hellfrost now gets to have two chances at removing a model from play set across 2 turns. and if you fail turn 1 attempt the model cant do anything anyway as its frozen

 

the values for the dark talon and nephilim are also crazy high for there roles. the dark talon is 3/3 for both making them equal with every interceptor in the game and making the dark talon better then every other ground attack vehicle in both pursuit and agility including the storm wolf (3/1), storm raven (3/2), storm talon (2/2), valk (1/3), void raven (2/2), orky fliers, barricuda, and ties evenly with the hellturkey. which is absolutely bananas.

 

the nephilim matches the storm hawk with these values but its objectively worse though they may have modified its weapons stats as they have there own entries in the death from the skies wargear sections

 

Book is out so I had to take away the picture for IP reasons. CL

[march10k]

They probably changed the name because a Silence *Squadron* is not a *Squadron*, which is a particular rules designation.  They were morons to use the term "Squadron" in the name of a Formation that does not use the Squadron rules.  The name change is quite sensible then.

Complete and utter nonsense.  Squadron rules, let's see, for ground vehicles,  that mainly means unit coherency requirements, targeting the same enemy unit (pending split fire), and that the enemy has to apply its shooting to the closest squadron member first.  Virtually all of that is related to relative distances...which in the case of aircraft naturally operates on a scale that is orders of magnitude greater than on the ground.  You can't enforce 40k squadron rules against aircraft because aircraft operate on a geographical scale that simply exceeds the limits of the tabletop!  If you were to zoom out to the level at which aircraft operate, of course the squadron rules are in force.  Squadron coherency, all of you birds go to tabletop X, check.  Targeting, all of you birds attack the enemy formation on tabletop X, check.  The only part that isn't enforced is the part where the enemy has to target the nearest squadron member first.  Leman russes move 6" a turn...aircraft, unless they slow down to try and cope with the micro-scale (from their perspective) battlefield as they conduct an attack run or land troops at a specific place, move multiple table-lengths per turn (outside the scope of 40k tabletop rules). 

 

Now, with Death from the Skies coming out, there may be separate squadron rules for aircraft versus ground vehicles, but until then, once you adjust for the fact that aircraft operate on a vastly different geographic scale that is poorly implemented on a 4x6 table where infantry might move 12" a turn, squadron rules absolutely apply to aircraft squadrons in 40k.

[mika_angelus]

Flyers are only squadrons in name. They mostly operate independly.

And Nephilim missiles get extra rules in dogfight. In my opinion it's the best marine fighter.

[twopounder]

They are two separate formations. Abductor squadron has different rules and does not replace silence squadron.

[Quixus]

Kidnapper Squadron? Well done, GW.

[march10k]

A large, rusty, windowless cargo van in the sky...with "free candy" written on the side...

[aura_enchanted]

A large, rusty, windowless cargo van in the sky...with "free heresy" written on the side...

FTFY

[twopounder]

A large, rusty, windowless cargo van in the sky...with "free candy" written on the side...

http://orig15.deviantart.net/14ec/f/2016/133/f/e/deathwingcandy_by_s3dition-da2e24i.jpg

[jbaeza94]

Good one twopounder!

Another question guys, can the silence squadron be organized into a formation? Or do they have to operate as individual units?

[aura_enchanted]

Good one twopounder!

Another question guys, can the silence squadron be organized into a formation? Or do they have to operate as individual units?

they are treated as a single unit so they are a squadron unto themselves

[PhilB]

The units in the Silence Squadron operate independently. It doesn't note anywhere in the formations entry that the 3 flyers need to form a single squadron, look at the wording for The Hammer of Caliban formation, which is the case. Similarly look at the entry for the RWAS & RWSS, both of the formations are called squadrons, yet only the RWSS has to form a squadron.

 

@ jbaeza94, did you mean attack pattern? If so, the rules for attack patterns (pg. 60 Death From the Skies tablet edition) state that the flyer wing can only be made up of models from the same datasheet or formation, based on that I'd say you could use the Silence Squadron in an attack pattern.

There could be a conflict however in that if you're using the Death From The Skies (DFtS) supplement, the book states it supersedes all flyer rules (BRB) and datasheets (from their respective codexes). So it could be that the Silence Squadron isn't even a legal formation anymore if you're using this supplement? I'll let the more learned on here argue out that one...

[jbaeza94]

Yes attack pattern.

I figured the nephelim could be used as an attack pattern seeing as they are the same data sheet. I was just concerned weather the dark talon could join. I don't remember reading the part about the formation, I'll have to check my copy again.

I don't see why the silence squadron wouldn't be a thing anymore though, I thought dfts added to it, not necessarily took away (well except for the obvious new rules).

 

Would you guys run the ss in an attack pattern? I kinda want to get 2 more birds,since I'm still hyped over the book, but I was just curious about what you guys think.

[shabbadoo]

They probably changed the name because a Silence *Squadron* is not a *Squadron*, which is a particular rules designation. They were morons to use the term "Squadron" in the name of a Formation that does not use the Squadron rules. The name change is quite sensible then.

Complete and utter nonsense. Squadron rules, let's see, for ground vehicles, that mainly means unit coherency requirements, targeting the same enemy unit (pending split fire), and that the enemy has to apply its shooting to the closest squadron member first. Virtually all of that is related to relative distances...which in the case of aircraft naturally operates on a scale that is orders of magnitude greater than on the ground. You can't enforce 40k squadron rules against aircraft because aircraft operate on a geographical scale that simply exceeds the limits of the tabletop! If you were to zoom out to the level at which aircraft operate, of course the squadron rules are in force. Squadron coherency, all of you birds go to tabletop X, check. Targeting, all of you birds attack the enemy formation on tabletop X, check. The only part that isn't enforced is the part where the enemy has to target the nearest squadron member first. Leman russes move 6" a turn...aircraft, unless they slow down to try and cope with the micro-scale (from their perspective) battlefield as they conduct an attack run or land troops at a specific place, move multiple table-lengths per turn (outside the scope of 40k tabletop rules).

Now, with Death from the Skies coming out, there may be separate squadron rules for aircraft versus ground vehicles, but until then, once you adjust for the fact that aircraft operate on a vastly different geographic scale that is poorly implemented on a 4x6 table where infantry might move 12" a turn, squadron rules absolutely apply to aircraft squadrons in 40k.

You missed the point, but I must also mention that somebody had previously intimated that the new Formation name did not contain the word "Squadron", but that was wrong. As you can see by the comments just prior to this post, GW's conscious choice to put the word "Squadron" in the new Formation name is generating no confusion of any kind whatsoever.

[Solrac]

A large, rusty, windowless cargo van in the sky...with "free candy" written on the side...

http://orig15.deviantart.net/14ec/f/2016/133/f/e/deathwingcandy_by_s3dition-da2e24i.jpg

Oh my lord I wet myself