Flyers - The great disappointment?

[Mr Mystery]

How do?

Currently listening to 'Death or Glory' by Iron Maiden, because it's ace.

And it's got me thinking about the unit type I find to be the most 'meh' in modern 40k. It used to be Bikes (only speaking for myself), but now it's most definitely flyers.

I don't mean the models, I really like those. I don't mean how tough the game can be if your opponent has gone airborne and your army has ridiculous few/no AA weapons in their Codex, as that's entirely situational.

No, I mean how they work on the field. They just don't appeal to me. Some are dedicated interceptors. Some are dedicated ground attack. Some are in the middle. But none satisfy.

I think they just don't belong in the scale 40k is played at. The field is much too smol, limiting how their rules can work. Now don't get me wrong, the current rules are massively better than FW's original take, but still disappointingly bland.

When I think Flyers, I think of dogfights and long, fast strafing runs. 40k has neither. Instead of incredibly fast jetspacedeathwings, we've got, well, really nippy but not terribly manouverable tanks with near-laughable armour ratings for the most part (not inappropriate though. Indeed, AV12 flyers are bent for a number of reasons)

If/when we get 8th Ed 40k, I'd love to see extra complexity for Flyers - even a sort of 'side board' game where dedicated interceptors can do their best to get in the way of bombing and strafing runs, on account that's what interceptors traditionally do. Intercept. To my mind, such units should have to get through the Interceptor to get on the board, or only enter once the Interceptor has intercepted and there's nothing else to intercept. Yes, I know this is a bit much. But still.

[Mr.Pickelz]

When the rumors and confirmations of flyer rules were being discussed, this was a big argument against their inclusion in standard 40k games. The scale for flyers is better represented in Epic scale where the board is big enough to include all the turning without having the model come in one round, shoot, maybe move and shoot again, and then leave the table if he, or she, isn't shot down first. they really are just a different form of artillery(indirect weapons), while some can be used as transports.

[Grand Master Raziel]

There's a lot of abstraction that goes on in 40K. The size of the table really isn't big enough to realistically portray anything other than an urban engagement. Modern day vehicles can engage each other from a mile away. 40K games start off with its vehicles being within what in modern day engagements would be considered point-blank range.

So, if we want the vehicles in the game, and we don't want them to be able to reach every part of the table while tucked into one corner of it, then we have weapons with unrealistically short ranges.

The same logic applies with flyers. GW wanted to include them in the game, but the FW rules for them were pants. People want their models to be on the table. So, they get speed/turning rules that keep them on the table. Also, it's not unreasonable to think that aircraft in the far future can both turn more easily and fly more slowly without stalling than modern aircraft can.

[Mr Mystery]

True, but I find it stretches my suspension of disbelief.

Other opinions are just as valid of course.

[Cactus]

I agree that most flyers don't belong in this scale of 40k (also special characters but that's just my two cents) ... I think things the size of land speeders are ok, but bombas, valkyries, necron crescent rolls, storm ravens, etc. should be moving too fast to even really be present on the table.

Perhaps if they moved more like helicopters I could get behind them.

[Psychosplodge]

Drophips make sense, either landing and shooting on the way in, or moving like an overgrown speeder?
idk the current ruleset, but something supposedly like a future jetfighter should be just whipping across the table and gone.

[Mr Mystery]

Drophips make sense, either landing and shooting on the way in, or moving like an overgrown speeder?
idk the current ruleset, but something supposedly like a future jetfighter should be just whipping across the table and gone.

Yup. And I can imagine any attempts to intercept Droppers and Bombers is usually done well before they get within their own reach.

Sorry to any Flyer Fans out there, but remember, it's just my opinion :)

[CoffeeGrunt]

This is actually one of the reasons I shelved my 40K collection recently, (after much time online defending the game,) and went with Dropzone Commander.

My ultimate dream was an airborne Guard regiment, and I immediately realised that any more than three Fliers has a few effects:
- The models and bases are massive and clutter the table,
- Turning is a PitA and they can be easily outmaneuvred,
- Anything without Hover and with Hull-Mount weapons will be one good shot per game,
- If you don't explicitly tell your opponent what you're bringing it makes for a dull, dull game,

DzC, conversely, had Fliers integrated from the get-go and it really shows in comparison. AA is plentiful and available to all factions, and is an important consideration when building your force. It can come in a variety of platforms and flavours, and each faction typically has a collection of vehicles, aircraft and infantry that can bring it with them. Even most standard Infantry can concentrate fire on fliers to try for a lucky hit on a fuel line or something, in a pinch.

Your standard Fliers merely move like normal craft, though typically faster, and can ignored obstructions of 6" height or lower. Anything more and they "climb" over the obstacles sacrificing movement to do so. Most can only shoot if they move half speed, but they can turn how they want, and move as fast as they're able if they want. Those are the gunship/dropship type fliers.

The other type are Fast Movers, which you draw a line across the board for, taking into consideration obstacles and enemy AA, and it travels along that line, engages targets with its weapons, then leaves via board edge. This can happen from any point on any board edge to any other. Some of these are Interceptors, which can chase down enemy Fast Movers when they activate.

AA can also Reaction Fire against aircraft that move into line of sight, but the range can't be pre-measured and you take a -2 to your Hit rolls. This means you have to weigh up taking that opportunity shot now, and saving it for your activation later when you can engage at full Accuracy. This gives more tactical opportunity. E.g., the maligned Hydra is disliked because it basically sits there with its thumb up its bum while your entire opponent's army rolls in, realises it might mildly harass a Flier that's just come on, and blows it up before you get to do anything with it next turn, which was probably just snap-fire because you're Shaken and miss anyway.

Basically Reaction Fire is like Interceptor, but with a reason to not always do it every chance you get. It also helps that AA weapons are typically horribly lethal and slightly longer-ranged than the flier weapons engaging them, so there's no real benefit from trying to run a Flier into its face and shoot first.

Also Infantry Troops are really important in DzC, rather than that annoyance you take a minimum of in order to save points for the really cool stuff.

And no separate damage system for Vehicles and Infantry, making things feel more streamlined. Alternate Activations so you're not spending half an hour occasionally rolling Saves while your opponent moves 140 Gunts and rolls mountains of dice for them.

In a nutshell, 40K needs a complete overhaul, IMO. It's really showing its age, and tbh I've really fallen out of love with the system.

[Psychosplodge]

T

The other type are Fast Movers, which you draw a line across the board for, taking into consideration obstacles and enemy AA, and it travels along that line, engages targets with its weapons, then leaves via board edge. This can happen from any point on any board edge to any other. Some of these are Interceptors, which can chase down enemy Fast Movers when they activate.


Isn't that how they originally approached fliers in 40k? When you were limited to FW stuff in about 3rd/4th?

[MacKinley Johnston]

The Elysian army I'm working on has 7 sexy flyers I'm working on but to be honest, I'd never have them all on the table if I can help it, especially the Forgeworld ones. The models are great and seeing them all when they are eventually finishes X many years down the line shall be sexy as hell, but unless I can come up with some way to properly weigh the bases and make the flying stands and detachable wings(necessary for transport but a constant worry on the table) stay on solidly then it's not worth the risk(or anxiety over) of them tumbling over and breaking(especially the forgeworld ones, those things are gorgeous, but heavy, not very durable and expensive to replace), not to mention potential casualties on the ground.

In terms of the game though, I think one or two work well. Plenty of military aircraft specialize as interceptors or strike craft and gunships. I know a vulture or avenger in 1k or 1250 lending fire support to by Elysian vets is always fun and it doesn't mess up the game much other than a small bit of the aforementioned falling anxiety.

[Alaric]

Got a buddy playing a 9 Valkyries list (assorted makes) he spends alot of time figuring out where to put them. Its great fun to screw witb his plans and make him fly offa the board, quite the traffic jam.

[Defenestratus]

I have a flyer that completely satisfies me everytime I use it (them). The Nightwing. Still even after the new codex Craftworld flyers, the good ole Nightwing never disappoints. It's got guns that are both good at anti air, and against ground targets. It has vector dancer, and an amazing jink save to keep it infuriatingly alive. In the new IA11 book, its dirt cheap at like 125pts.

Only downside? 2HP. Don't care though since it usually dishes out so much pain before it dies.

[Mark Mitchell]

.

[Defenestratus]

40K is a game designed for effect. Bolters have a range similar to the Brown Bess smooth-bore musket. A .38 revolver has a better rate of fire. This requires a serious suspension of belief, but one that is not too outlandish. Especially since it makes the game work in a way that fits the limitations of a 28mm scale tabletop battlefield. NOTHING about fliers (fast movers, or slow ones) realistically fits the squad level narrative. Vehicles barely do. They are slowed to Tiger II speeds in 40K. A flier with the speed of a helicopter would traverse a 40K battlefield in a fraction of a turn. A flier traveling at tactical jet speeds would zoom past in a fraction of that fraction of a turn. Even if we assume the battlefield is distorted to accommodate weapon ranges, the numbers don't work. The scale of the game (squads fighting in a field or city block) does not work out. So, the rules would have to be designed for that. Would not have to make implausible effects sorta plausible. Merely make them palatable.

"That's how things might work 38.000 years from now" doesn't fit the fluff. Nothing in the fluff says a bolter should have the same range as a black powder smooth-bore flintlock with no sights. Fliers need to be designed to resemble popular notions of what they might do. And, make it worth while to buy them, build them, paint them, and deploy them. And, have fun playing them. Definitely designed for effect, rather than realism. Anything other than a hovering helicopter should flash by, rather than remain for a turn, and another turn, or return fire. Me, I find the notion unpalatable. Other than troops landing into a hot LZ, fliers lingering on the tabletop make no sense in the fluff or the game. But, whatever. If folks like them, it's all good.

I mean seriously. Who can believe my librarian can shoot fireballs from his arse and lightning bolts from his eyes?

What kind of crock is this game?

You've convinced me, I'm quitting this farce!

[Alaric]

I mean seriously. Who can believe my librarian can shoot fireballs from his arse and lightning bolts from his eyes?

What kind of crock is this game?

You've convinced me, I'm quitting this farce!

Im callin you out! You MUST model a librarian bending over arse first with a flamer marine holding the pilot light from his flamer by the arse.
Actually.
I got sallies, maybe Ill just do it.

[CoffeeGrunt]

I've never understood the whole attitude of, "well there's this one accepted unrealistic factor in a thing, therefore no-one is allowed to critique anything else in it at all, ever."

Like when people ask about why the Empire is so strategically idiotic in Star Wars and people start arguing that, "IT HAS THE FORCE, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE REALISTIC!"

[JMichael]

I love my Eldar Crimson Hunter model, but the fact that it regularly dies to Bolter fire keeps it out of my army.

[Andrew Thomas]

40K is a game designed for effect. Bolters have a range similar to the Brown Bess smooth-bore musket. A .38 revolver has a better rate of fire. This requires a serious suspension of belief, but one that is not too outlandish. Especially since it makes the game work in a way that fits the limitations of a 28mm scale tabletop battlefield. NOTHING about fliers (fast movers, or slow ones) realistically fits the squad level narrative. Vehicles barely do. They are slowed to Tiger II speeds in 40K. A flier with the speed of a helicopter would traverse a 40K battlefield in a fraction of a turn. A flier traveling at tactical jet speeds would zoom past in a fraction of that fraction of a turn. Even if we assume the battlefield is distorted to accommodate weapon ranges, the numbers don't work. The scale of the game (squads fighting in a field or city block) does not work out. So, the rules would have to be designed for that. Would not have to make implausible effects sorta plausible. Merely make them palatable.

"That's how things might work 38.000 years from now" doesn't fit the fluff. Nothing in the fluff says a bolter should have the same range as a black powder smooth-bore flintlock with no sights. Fliers need to be designed to resemble popular notions of what they might do. And, make it worth while to buy them, build them, paint them, and deploy them. And, have fun playing them. Definitely designed for effect, rather than realism. Anything other than a hovering helicopter should flash by, rather than remain for a turn, and another turn, or return fire. Me, I find the notion unpalatable. Other than troops landing into a hot LZ, fliers lingering on the tabletop make no sense in the fluff or the game. But, whatever. If folks like them, it's all good.

I don't see it.
I don't see anyone being comfortable with standard-issue infantry weapons making 3, 5, or 10 shots a piece, per turn, while being able to essentially hit anything they have line of sight to. The rate of fire issue is just a matter of practicality and economy of die rolls.

As for the range issue, there's a perfectly reasonable explanation (I've said this here before): tactical bias. Most Imperial-held worlds (outliers like Fenris or Catachan notwithstanding) are Hive Worlds, or at the very least are far enough along in the urbanization process that they are practically Hives already. Such conditions generally negate the benefits of most long arms, and demand a degree of fire discipline i.e.: conserving ammo, taking shoots when you have them, and firing on the advance. Carbine-format weaponry tends to perform better in that scenario than full-size rifles, despite having shorter range and less ammunition, because they can be readied faster.

Vehicle speed has nothing to do with the assumed maximum distance a comparable vehicle could move in a discrete period of time, because turns are not discrete periods of time. 40K turns are a narrative convention, not an artifact of accounting.

TL;DR: 40k isn't a simulationist game.

[Caitsidhe]

Of all the silliness, you can pick just one nonsensical thing? :D There is very little in the setting that makes any sense at all. It is exactly what it started out as, an eclectic mix of poorly synthesized elements as a pretense for a battle. There is no context. There is no economy. There is only WAR! It is the WWF of settings. That is why I'm a Philistine; I don't care about the fluff. It is just another war game to me, and since it is largely a bad rules set, I hardly play anymore. I mean seriously, how can you choose which silly thing which doesn't make sense to settle on?

[fabu00]

The elysian troops are awesome

[Mark Mitchell]

.

[nuclearfeet]

40k is not a battlefield simulator.

Lol. Very very far from it.

[MacKinley Johnston]

I don't see it.
I don't see anyone being comfortable with standard-issue infantry weapons making 3, 5, or 10 shots a piece, per turn, while being able to essentially hit anything they have line of sight to. The rate of fire issue is just a matter of practicality and economy of die rolls.

As for the range issue, there's a perfectly reasonable explanation (I've said this here before): tactical bias. Most Imperial-held worlds (outliers like Fenris or Catachan notwithstanding) are Hive Worlds, or at the very least are far enough along in the urbanization process that they are practically Hives already. Such conditions generally negate the benefits of most long arms, and demand a degree of fire discipline i.e.: conserving ammo, taking shoots when you have them, and firing on the advance. Carbine-format weaponry tends to perform better in that scenario than full-size rifles, despite having shorter range and less ammunition, because they can be readied faster.

Vehicle speed has nothing to do with the assumed maximum distance a comparable vehicle could move in a discrete period of time, because turns are not discrete periods of time. 40K turns are a narrative convention, not an artifact of accounting.

TL;DR: 40k isn't a simulationist game.

I just try not to take the game too literally, otherwise characters in both my guard armies would have resurrected themselves enough times to make Christ insecure or at the very least be made Imperial saints a few times over :P

I've also done a few years as a Napoleonic re-enactor portraying a British Grenadier on the Niagara Frontier circa 1812, I would at least hope that a bolter is more reliable than my temperamental ol'Bessy. Although, according to contemporary writings on the subject of fortress building, the standard effective musket range they used when planning new forts was about 300 yards, not 50 like most people think. Probably meant for volleys with more than just a couple soldiers but effective range doesn't just mean the range where individuals can make their targets reliably. If you're a read coat you're basically a cog and barrel carrier in the best and fastest firing battalion or company sized organ gun ever conceived. So don't underestimate muskets, they're actually a decent weapon on a larger scale when wielded by disciplined professionals.

[Psychosplodge]

Do YOU know what makes a good soldier?

The ability to fire three rounds a minute

[Mr Mystery]

Bloody 'ell 'Arper.

[MacKinley Johnston]

Do YOU know what makes a good soldier?

The ability to fire three rounds a minute

Good ol' Sharpe.

He's right though! I've gotten 9 in three minutes at a competition so I averaged out to the old British infantry standard at my peak. Speed loading with a muzzle loader is hard skill to learn. Kinda on the fence whether I should put it on my resume though...

But ya, flyers are cool too :P

[Psychosplodge]

Well considering modern RoF it's not really a selling point anymore.

[Haighus]

I always thought the dice rolled in 40k represented one effective 'burst' of fire. So for a bolter, this would be one of the 4 round bursts, a lasgun would fire a scattering of shots, a missile launcher a single missile, but they would all equate to one dice worth or 'burst'. Some weapons are capable of putting out such a high number of rounds they are equivalent to many 'bursts' like heavy bolters or Punisher gatling cannons.