Games Workshop AREN'T TRYING to Balance Them - The Plight of Aircraft in 10th Edition...

[@jimmydesouza4375]

The strangest thing about fliers is that since they made it so any unit can shoot at them, instead of requiring sky-fire, they're really no different than any other type of vehicle in the game so it doesn't make any sense that they're approached differently balance wise.

[@tyrodinpainting]

I feel like it’s a pretty easy fix tbh. Sky fire get +to hit and normal weapons -to hit. Get rid of flying and just have hover mode but change the rules slightly. Like make it so they can’t be hit by melee and 1 flyer per 1000 pts or something (let’s face it, if there was a melee only army created, that’s their problem. In real life and helicopter wouldn’t land so it can be hit by melee weapons or climbed on by the enemy)

[@stephenferry3017]

​@@tyrodinpaintingthis seems like a good fix. Do you mind if I copy this idea?

[@Carrisonfire1]

@@tyrodinpainting Need to address flamer style weapons too. I've always found it really stupid that flamers were good AA because they auto hit.

[@v4tomoe]

@@Carrisonfire1could do something like modified indirect fire rules. Just say that 1-3 or 1-4 can’t wound. Not really sure if it’s a good idea

[@danjones3012]

As most aircraft are very weak defensively compared to normal vehicles, they need to give aircraft not in hover mode their -1 to be hit again. The buff the night scythe got made it actually useable, although it is the necrons only true transport. Anyone who thinks a ghost ark is a good transport needs to shake their head. GW gave it deep strike and the ability to enter the battlefield turn 1 regardless of any other rules. Other aircraft dont need the second part but giving them all deep strike would fix the biggest problem with aircraft. With deep strike being something you can zone out, it would not be overpowered at all and would still require proper placement as the next turn it still has to fly straight forward on your next turn if it's still alive.

[@whichDude]

I want them to be OK. I got Orks partially because their planes look absolutely amazing

[@chetmanley1885]

One Ork plane is ok, not great but ok. It's looking fine in my display cabinet though.

[@Atom-Phyr]

I love that they look like Migs from WW2. They weren't that great, but we're simple and relatively easy to mass produce. Proper Orky.

[@whichDude]

@@chetmanley1885 What aircrafts look good to you? I personally think most outside of Ork planes look pretty bad. Imperium has flying square bricks and goofy dragonflies. Choas has Cold Steel the edge lord dragon. I do like Necrons Cylon Raider

[@Lowlandlord]

One of my favourite 40k things is still and old drawing of the inside of a Fighta-Bommer cockpit, and the speed gauge reads Stop, Fast, and WAAAAGH. The Fighta-Bommer is also one of my favourite looking flyers, like something outta WW2, which I fucking love, especially in a space setting. Granted, when I used to smoke I would use a Zippo lighter that had a P-47 Thunderbolt or B-25 Liberator on it. Still need an Avro Lancaster one actually.

[@Atom-Phyr]

@@whichDude That's the Imperium of Man. They'll stick powerful jets to a big metal bawks. Function over form.

[@vojtadrasner2440]

Honestly, Valkyrie would be best if it lost Aircraft keyword, and it was just a Wave Serpent-equivalent. Maybe give it deep strike, and be done with it. Same with Heldrake - but keep it as just as a fast flying monster.

[@Trazynn]

It's also a weirdly large model compared to everything else. I would love for the guard to have a mode modest, slower flying transport lander.

[@Beta-f8e]

Same with the Corvus Blackstar 🤷🏼

[@luckmyst3r986]

I really want to see GW have another shot at aircraft and fortifications Seeing AoS have a free faction specific fortification looks fun and flavourful. Maybe an army in 40k could choose between a free fortification or free flyer and have different utility for each

[@Trazynn]

Not just flyers. There's a whole range of models that GW has deliberately made inviable so they no longer have to manage their balance. The Astra Miliatrum Wyvern is a good example. It never receives any changes, it's just a dead unit.

[@captainweekend5276]

Actually the wyvern was decent at the start of the edition when it was only around 80 points, it being basically a better HWS w/mortars and passing out -1 to hit was pretty good, it just unfortunately kept getting hit by the indirect nerfs which jacked up the points to make it unviable.

[@minkster5054]

I'm hoping they dont get rid of flyers all together. Not that anything will stop me using my 5 valkyries, because it looks so damn cool. I always take my hydra too, in case my opponent has their own flyers. Fly and anti fly should be in the game for sure. BTW, waiting for the votann Gyrocopter with fingers crossed and a lot of hope.

[@Flirkann]

A real shame when thematically, certain factions are supposed to make dramatic use of Orbital Insertion, arriving in the nick of time with Ride of the Valkeries playing in the background

[@TheCoincidence]

There is likely a way to balance flyers reasonably. But they're also likely intentionally becoming vestigial, or way out of focus when all these armies now in the game could use extra variety in ground units.

[@spicybarbecue222]

i think they realised that aircraft was a mistake. they will probably remove all the upie downie stuff next editon too if not before as this was also clearly a mistake

[@stephenferry3017]

Back in 4th and 5th edition, they were mostly a forge world thing. An extra set of rules for hard core people. I like them and I would like to use them, but I admittedly play casual games.

[@LordOffal]

I think you could have them work in big games like apocalypse and balance them in that but standard 40K is a skirmish game based on old fashioned historical military games. What would be fun is having a secondary layer on a board which, in game modes that allowed it, would be a layer of battle.

[@attemptedunkindness3632]

@@stephenferry3017 I started in 7th but even then bringing an aircraft to the table wasn't blowing any minds unless you're talking mantas in which case eff you.

[@stephenferry3017]

@@LordOffal but Apocalypse is defunct now. I feel like the rules for aircraft are not great either.

[@stephenferry3017]

@attemptedunkindness3632 yeah in 5th and 6th, they weren't too bad and the rules weren't awful. You made sure to have anti-air around because they could be deadly.

[@ZaberFangAT]

6:18 I get what you're trying to say, but an assault marine with jump pack is one of the situations where you specifically CAN get an aircraft in melee - units with the Fly keyword can charge and be selected to fight Aircraft

[@AndrBR0]

You can make aircraft to be able to come out of reserves more than 1” and at the end of opponent's turn you must place it back in reserves, to represent strafing runs. Also, "counts 12” away for weapon range and all other rules" would be nice rule

[@PlasmaPea04]

I think the best way to balance flyers would be to just make them normal vehicles like how AOS handles the kharadron overlords skyvessels.

[@phillipA123]

If we can balance an infantry unit and a knight I think we can do better with flyers. My opinion is make them more expensive but with better stratagems. They shouldn't be the bread and butter of any army, but doing cool stuff with cool models should be the driving force behind design

[@TheWarpForge]

Best way to balence: Remove the Aircraft Keyword. Just let them be vehicles with the Fly Keyword. If they need anything to amke them "Flyers" just give them the uppy-downy rules.

[@iliahgranovsky3400]

I just dont see the point in making aircraft different in any way from tanks?. They have bases. They have 20 inch movement and they have guns. Theres no need for weird flight rules. Just make them the same as any vehicle. The models are cool on their own

[@jibjibs9401]

Exactly, is melee hitting fliers really so unacceptable in the game? There’s plenty of stuff that already doesn’t make the most sense.

[@Evil0tto]

@@jibjibs9401 Gotta disagree. There needs to be some at least basic real-world grounding in 40K, even if the game itself has plenty of silliness. Troops aren't ordered to do bayonet charges against helicopters and jets.

[@OverlordZephyros]

Melee against a aircraft is just dumb

[@jimmydesouza4375]

@@OverlordZephyros Melee just in general is dumb when the opponent has science fiction weapons that can deatomise MBTs in an instant from several miles away, as in 40k.

[@jeremiegartner464]

This would be bad against most big flyers because lone of sight rules. Nowhere to hide them.

[@SWW978]

They're a miniature company pretending to be a tabletop game company

[@Psybx-r4g]

To be fair to GW, and if you ever hear interviews with some of their former staff, they’ve always been a miniatures company first and foremost. I have no doubt if they wanted to write a compelling, balanced and strategically deep tabletop game they could - they certainly have in the past (looking at you OG Necromunda) but I don’t tink they really make money from the game side of things. It’s all about getting people to buy more plastic crack…

[@thefloatingcontinent9897]

They’ve said this, yes

[@henrychurch6062]

Why would you bring Helldrakes when a dreadnaught can just throw a statue at it?

[@chetmanley1885]

Brother Yeetus Deletus casts you down!

[@jeremiegartner464]

Soulforge. Use the walk through walls strat. Sneaky anti fly 2 from 20" away. Through a wall

[@GFortz]

@@jeremiegartner464 They fly anyway, so that point's kinda moot. Sweeping the Baleflamer along the ground, giving them an out-of-phase attack on a target they pass over - now THAT would be a Heldrake I'd put points into.

[@DaThingOnTheDoorstep]

Sucks because some factions (coughDrukharicoughcough) have barely any models to put into lists that some of the cooler things are getting squatted. I also really want a Guard army with Valkyries, maybe even Avenger Strike Fighters.

[@ashleyharris4114]

Indirect Fire needs to be next!

[@sockMonster241]

- Jink as a core stratagem (1CP, only hit and be hit on a 6 until opponents next shooting phase) - A global -1 to hit for all aircraft - Move the turn they come on the board That would fix it for me. Adjust points as needed.

[@Billy-vi8nu]

I’m a noob but this is why I prefer playing with fluffers rather than tournament bros. Right now I’m collecting for a Word Bearers army. With the exception of my terminators, it’s going to be a demon themed army. Going to have some possessed, obliterators, warp talons, etc. I don’t even know if that would be powerful but I just like the ideas of thematic armies.

[@Paradukes]

I think they need to rework flier rules to be a genuine threat, but on top of that they then need to cap them in some way - either by restricting numbers or points. Honestly the best option might just be to make the rules an optional extra - make it clear they aren't intended for tournament play, unless the TO's explicitly allow them, which would mean they wouldn't be dominating the competitive scene.

[@tommytymesaame6624]

Thats litterally legends. Technically unless your TO says otherwise legends units are tourny legal according to gw its just that all TOs say otherwise. So to have them in matched not tourny play itnwould be the same effect as legends and let be honest a legends unit isnt a unit

[@Paradukes]

@tommytymesaame6624 you're not wrong, but I was thinking of a new category: not legends (which is where things go to die) but a category of optional extras that still get rebalanced and updated. Living Legends, if you will. I'd stick fortifications in there too, as they're another one they don't want at tournament tables.

[@sweden4thewin]

Fliers are cool af so they should be playable imo.

[@vinnythewebsurfer]

You can tell how bad the competitive brain rot has taken its toll on the game when people are genuinely arguing for LESS variety in a war game. No planes, no fortifications, Psychic abilities and indirect fire being heavily restricted and stripped over flavor. Give it another decade and people will be demanding even more vehicles to be removed from the game.

[@jimmydesouza4375]

Sad really. Not much we can do about it though, I suppose.

[@DaThingOnTheDoorstep]

Slowly devolve the game to just chess... when they can just go play actual chess.

[@LDZMarder]

1. No meele for Aircraft and no base restriction for ground units (aka if there would be no base for the aircraft model) 2. Bring back popup attacks for hover mode units. Each hovering model that pop up attacks above ruins is being seen other wise LOS restrictions apply for both. 3. Units shooting fast moving flyers get a -2 to hit if they cant get a clear LOS on a airplane no malus if its a anti air unit. No malus if its a hovering units that is doing a pop up attack. A -1 to hit if its clear LOS. 4. Hovering units can be attackt in meele (meele is also shooting in close combat at point blank range not just punching) 5. Flyers cant hold objektives or take them. They are just fier support. 6. No announcing of fly paths so units can be moved out of the way. The unit shows up on every second turn, theoretically. Put unit on its turn on egde of the board, say in its own turn where is leaving. If the enemy has any kind of reactive movement he can do it as per rules. If he has any kind of reactive shooting let him do it. Other wise move and drop bombs and should you stay on map because movement did not let you leave the map recive return fier in the enemys turn. 7. Aircraft can meele other circraft 8. massive explosions and carnage, i demand scater dice or rules for that to see where a aircraft drops and how many friendly or enemy or both units it takes down while crashing. No escape for transports no emergency disembarkation. If its a aircraft with no hover roll 2d6 to see how far its flys in its designated path and then see if it drops out of sky on any one head. Roll for EXPLOSIONS!!!! 4D6 for mortal wonds!

[@neilkirkley1500]

Right here's my suggestion for flyers, have them not behave like any of the ground based units at all. On your turn the flyer enters the board, you place it anywhere and can drop bombs on any unit that is in-between that point and your deployment zone, you then shoot as normal on your opponents turn they can shoot at it but it can only hit on a 6, and maybe that -12" to range on weapons shooting at it like it used to have, on your next turn it does not move but exits the board again after your shooting phase. Rinse and repeat. Although that seems strong, it could easily be balanced with low T and W for the flyers so they could be dropped with dedicated anti armour shots but they're hard to hit, like a fucking plane would be...

[@RoyalPurple.Paints]

I don't get why they don't just cap them at 12" move and remove all the aircraft stuff. It's not fair to have such cool models blatantly thrown to the wayside. Maybe have a strat that gives one the 20"+ move speed, or not at all. There's loads of options that could be done to change them up, they're just not being acted on.

[@danhill99]

I really would love at least A faction that can use them.

[@Astronometric]

I think that balancing their datasheets/points would already be a great start to make them viable. I support the idea of limiting the number of aircrafts based on your army points. None for less than 1000p, one for 2000p, two for 3000p and so forth.

[@RandyTheSavage5150]

I still use two Stormhawk Interceptors in my Ironhands Army. 😉They are not that good but with 20" move and Anti-Fly they can hunt down enemy flyers and if nothing else they can complete some secondaries.

[@marauder340]

On one hand, I get the grief caused by good aircraft rules, but on the other hand, that's exactly what air superiority is. That said, I think the rules should make them meaningful when taken but only in limited amounts. A once per battle strafing/bombing run kind of mechanic might work and you'd still need to use the model to represent its path of attack. While it's uninteractive to most things, let the enemy get free overwatch or something with every gun that has a range of 36" and up, native stats for anti-fly profiles so that there's some counterplay. You have a chance to do something impactful once with aircraft, enemy has counterplay unless they really forego such shooting, and it's not repeatable except maybe in special or specific cases so that it doesn't get oppressive. Transports could drop off their personnel the turn they come in, but must remain stationary and treated like hover to represent landing to let units disembark. Following turn they have to fly off the board. Could feel like pseudo deep strike plus temporary extra guns that can be shot down.

[@sm901ftw]

GW buffing Necrons again (especially the Doomsday Ark) and leaving the Doomscythe at 230 points kinda drives the point home for me. The Scythe already has enough drawbacks over competitors that it'd be a tough sell if they were the same cost. An extra 40 points for the privilege of arriving late isn't remotely competitive. On the other hand, the Nightscythe is a good example of them turning things around. It may not be competitive still, but it's very fun.

[@ChrisKCook]

One thing that will tell us if they are ignoring Flyers is if the FW 'Astra Militarum' (Navy) flyers when the codex comes out..

[@mentok1]

My poor robo-dragon. I love the model so much I still run it. It is especially fun against my friend's Tau force. So many fly units to anti-,

[@justinbarnes8834]

I would like flyers to be used only in a hover role and disappear off board the minute they want to change role. Zooming flyers can be represented by say a stratagem that has limited use per game to represent strafing or bombing.

[@LordNerfherder]

The answer to this is even more obvious. Where are the new flier and fortification models? There you go. Most already have a flier or two. They are working on shelving all of your fliers so they can sell new models. Same as wraithknights.

[@LordCrate-du8zm]

That's nonsense. Fortifications make sense, they're just buildings you pay money for. But Flyers? Where else will we find these iconic units?

[@UochRS]

hot take: the helldrake can't be gotten rid of and is now more iconic than 90% of chaos vehicles "THAT ABOMINATION IS MINE" "...holy terra..."

[@yhormthemidget]

Helldrakes are awsome. Yeah, stuff like Angron or Morty are cooler, but I have yet to see anyone who looked at a decently painted helldrake and was not thoroughly impressed. They are peak Chaos. Also huge... that model is a display case queen.

[@UochRS]

@@yhormthemidget yeah frankly if i want something that fits nicely into a corner to be part of a diorama it might genuinely be the helldrake.

[@eldenwarden9673]

IN THE GRIM DARKNESS THERE IS ONLY WAR! But no planes please - GW

[@garathminis5108]

When they where introduced in 6th ed, they broke the game. People where fielding Necron armies with 6 Croissant transports , costing 130 pts each. You could only hit them on 6...unless you had sky fire. Which not a lot of models had. That's why they where removed.

[@TheFlyingNostril]

The solution is simple. Limit flyers to one per 1000 points. Then, release 3-5 MORE flying units per faction, and release a new game mode that is flyers only.

[@frankieh]

I started my Necrons in 5th so I have a pretty sweet squadron of murder croissants. Miss actually using them.

[@TheThewhatnow]

I think the main problem is that buffing them is not a linear process. If you buff them so running one is decent, then spam is almost always broken. If you buff them so spamming them is viable, then different matchups can be wildly swingy and running a single unit is complete trash. You really need to remove the option of spam, and slant them more into utility or buff/debuff so that they stay useful but not game-ending if the opponent can’t deal with them.

[@Atom-Phyr]

The ever increasing reduction in board size doesn't help. We still like to play on a 6'×4' table so you have a bit of room to manoeuvre. As a guard player with a few Baneblade variants it sucks if you know you're going to get stuck in the deployment zone. I feel Knight armies suffer from this too. If feel like the Astronautica game is intended to full the gap. Bit like how HH is where all the first born will end up.

[@TheInsaneupsdriver]

LOL i'm almost done my 40k Scale Eavy Landa that's over a meter long. i have no rules but worked out the points cost for 10th, it's 2750 points for the thing. Pretty sure it's majorly imbalanced. GW really dropped the ball starting with when they got rid of 4.1 instead of just building on it. they're as bad as wizards of the coast.

[@enricocarlini5363]

Aircraft are just like titans, cool models you can build/collect, and if you reaaally wanna play, you get some (bad) rules If GW really wanna fix them my tips would be 1- they dont deserve to be in the same Toughness/wounds range of tanks. In reality (ok 40k is pretty far from reality) aircraft can be damaged from a lot of weapons who dosn't even scratch a tank. Other than been logic, that's wuould adress the "they just come in and nuke everything able tu hurt them" issue. 2 An anti-aircraft support stratagem could help too. I mean, i can have some anti aircraft support from out of the battlefield 3 on a more general note, imho Warhammer could be reeeally imporved if they just make a rule to give us a "hitting big stuff is easier than hit little stuff" effect. Shioting infantry from an aircraft should be less effective (would be realistic) but aircraft should be a real threat for huge veicles (realistic too) that should be easy to hit and should have to rely on thougness/armor to resist. The same could be helpful to help balancing infantry weapon, should be deadly, but hard to lock on small target. Something like a target size at range, with -1 little (gretching, ratlings) +0 regular (standard infantry) +1 to hit on small veichles +2 to hit on big veichles/tanks And real anti-tank weapon with just bad to hit stats, to make them useful only on bis stuff and aircraft bad "to hit" too, i mean, i can have adcanced tech, but i'm still flyng...

[@peppermintshore]

Im played back in 3rd and 4th edition when aircraft was an abstract rule not a model. Having aircraft in 40k is like confining a F-16 within an football pitch, it makes absolutely no sense, and i would be glad to see them go rules wise. However i do like the models. GW should still release them under a range of models that are for collectors but have no rules, like airfix fits...for display purposes only. I also feel the same way about titanic units. They are too big for the 40K table.

[@TheInsaneupsdriver]

2nd edition for me. there wasn't anything locally back then to buy other then the main box.

[@jimmydesouza4375]

Half the units in 40k don't make sense. Fieldguns in a battle that is at most 200 yards of realworld scale. Or just the entire concept of melee units in a world where plasmablasters exist.

[@samhunter1205]

​@@jimmydesouza4375the idea that melee makes no sense doesn't necessarily follow. Just because in the real world weapons are far more effective than defensive systems doesn't mean that is the case in a sci-fi universe - Dune is a great example of this. If someone is more able to survive to close distance and/or there is some advantage to melee weapons then it can make perfect sense.

[@terrydavis5924]

Not all planes in history moved at mach speed launching missiles in attack runs. Biplanes were much better for strafing because the slow speed kept them on target longer, and less time to return. And we have outright hover-flyers in 40k. What really gets my goose is people saying fliers 'dont belong in the skirmish scale' and then field 12 tanks. I'm sorry, any tank deployment that wide is going to draw aircraft to bomb them in reality, and that was the solution from the moment tanks started existing.

[@jimmydesouza4375]

@@samhunter1205 Melee weapons don't make sense in dune either. The excuse is that if you shoot someone's shield with an energy weapon it causes the shield to explode with kiloton levels of yield. So, of course, in actual reality you'd just shoot them from further away. Or if you have to get close, shoot them with something that is not a laser since the book and film both make it clear that the kinetic energy and momentum are passed on to the shield's wearer, so you can just blunt force people with an elephant rifle if you want. The reason why they use melee in dune is because it is supposed to represent societal customs, not because it is practical. But that kind of dynamic doesn't work in a gritty "edge of extinction, do everything necessary" style setting like 40k.

[@joshuaaspinall5524]

They should make a 3-4k separate game on a massive board with flyers and fortifications supported and remove them from the core game. It's nice for veteran players or group playing special/narrative events to have an option for progression. I don't think they work with the current design philosophy of standard 40k.

[@runeh3022]

Luckily the Drukhari flyers are a bit of an exception. The models are way to cool to not have on the tabletop (and the Drukhari roster isn't all that deep to begin with), so those being viable at least is good.

[@henrychurch6062]

When you think about it, the games portrayal of flying units is just silly. A living Sci-Fi space jet-plane empowered by the Chaos Gods... that flies around at about 40 MPH. (A guardsman moves 6 inches. A Heldrake moves 30 inches, or 5x the speed of a guardsman. An athletic and trained human runs at about 8 MPH. The moped I had in high school is faster than a Heldrake)

[@turret2380]

Because flyers are already added and they are having a hard time to even balance the game without flyers, the easy way for them is to just heavily nerf them and put them aside. The alternative is removing them outright but that would be really unpopular.

[@No_nameOG]

Why not just add an aerial combat game mode? We have boarding actions and skirmish rules, so there is a precedent for it. Then you can even make more plastic flyer models and have a new dedicated game just for them.

[@zackorreaperrr]

This applies to a LOT of units. Reavers are a prime example.

[@I2dios8]

As much as I would like to never return to the days of early 9th, where most aircraft could reliably delete a good third of an army in the first turn, I don't think the answer is to intentionally relegate flyers to C tier or worse for all of 10th, and potentially beyond. I mean, it's not like they're even a unique problem, GW constantly make this "first strike" mistake with all sorts of units and factions, like with Eldar at the start of 10th. It's not like flyers can't be balanced, it's just GW not willing to put forth the effort.

[@RSBurgener]

I can only afford models a few times a year, so I was stoked when my best friend sent me a Heldrake. I spent 3 weeks painting it and it is one of best in my collection. And it's completely useless. I hate that!

[@Avera9eWh1teShark6]

They seem to want to relegate flyers and super heavies to 3,000 point games as vehicles like the Crassus and Peaetor also seem to have this issue. This is entirely due to GW being so focused on tournament play that fun units arent allowed to be played at a reasonable points level.

[@MrFiremagnet]

The short answer is yes. The longer answer is they are challenging to be made somewhat realistic (to actually feel like proper aircraft) while also writing them into the game. Challenging to the point of being pretty much not worth the time or resources. In real life, aircraft is a flat upgrade that requires whole anti-aircraft measures to counter. They tried that during the 6th edition (space marines even got dedicated anti-aircraft units), but it turned out poorly - everyone had to take them and balance their armies around it, but the core rules weren't balanced around it. So they pretty much sucked by being realistically overpowered. So, they can't really mimic the real life (even as a hyper-realistic abstraction of real life). They can't force players to buy flyers and anti-aircraft within their 2000 pts lists. What can they do? 1) Absolutely nothing and discourage the players from taking them; 2) Try to rewrite core rules to actually accommodate for flyers; 3) Make flyers unrealistic and not remotely like the real life, but tightly fitted with the current ruleset. That means: don't make them invulnerable to small arms fire, make them hover mode only, design them more like fast moving skimmers, basically. Like land speeders but with more armor. And. Maybe make them able to be moved away from the infantry movement in one way or another.

[@terrydavis5924]

Saying they'd be hard to write into the game might hold water if the game design team played more than 2 games a month. They barely even play the game, let alone test the rules they write.

[@AllAboutParker]

I haven't even opened my Stormraven to build because it's been so disheartening to see how they've treated flyers. Though seeing a couple of lists using one has been somewhat encouraging. Though honestly I'm not sure what makes one in hover mode any different that rolling up with a tank with weak-ass toughness, it seems like a fine trade-off for more movement and being able to haul infantry and a dreadnought. Just give it a reasonable points cost instead of raising it so people are encouraged to not play it.

[@myrddraalhalfmen9524]

I don't mind their removal, but on the other hand, GW removes just too many models already. Aircraft is redundant, but if someone there likes to field them - let them do it in peace. And the models are so nice

[@MrJDMBenji]

Valkyrie's could do with a points reduction. 👀

[@Fomfonicus]

Flyers in the 32/28mm scale were ALWAYS a mistake, is just a mess to balance since 3rd edition introduced the first interations of using them. They just end overpowered or overcosted bad tanks with wings.

[@reverenddmo8944]

Make Aircraft Great Again. Because the Ork flyers look fantastic, basically.

[@viktorgabriel2554]

The reason is simple movement is king

[@TheDrLegend10]

I remember when they were first introduced and they even had their own phase against other aircraft completely off the game board and couldn't even get into the actual battle until turn 3. It was dumb, lame, and a complete waste of time. Aircraft can have their place on the table but they need to be balanced as if they've always been that way. Maybe an entire rework is in order.

[@AspectPL]

I don't really like them in the game, except for the valkyrie which makes a lot of sense being the equivalent of a chopper. But I don't mind them that much, I'd be okay with them being fairly balanced.

[@TheJamesboink]

I mean, mass mech also sucks if one fights infarntry only vs tanks etc. If you don't have any anti-armour then the game is also kinda uninteractive (though there is a bit of it since you CAN charge etc.) o i think its a matter of tackling a different problem which is mono-thematic armies. Honestly I don't really know the solution, either I would allow some level of equipment that can help you (like in killteam) or make some restraints on list building. Problem is both of those ideas make the game a bit less interesting but maybe its worth it for the sake of fairness?

[@mosselliadelt]

Give them all hover mode, but they have the ability to actually fly over ruins. Feels fixed

[@ryansmyth8139]

Hey you made the video thank you!

[@Dewoy1]

I mean at this point, i m conviced they wanna put all aircrafts into legends.

[@snake555510]

I would only get them to put on shelf as they look cool

[@freshwaterspaceman7194]

The Archaeopter was released over four years ago!?! Aieeee!

[@akumaking1]

When has GW ever been competent at balancing anything?

[@LucaHard-e6m]

Desperately want harpies/harridans to be viable

[@MikeRaine]

How about giving them all move - shoot/deploy transport - move? move 10" shoot then move 10"? they cant get cover, so shouldnt make a massive amount of difference to return fire?

[@darko-man8549]

Fliers should be limited to 0-1 per X points level. But Gw won’t do that cos that means they sell fewer of them.

[@TheInsaneupsdriver]

LOL i'll just use my 40k scale Eavy landa. 10th edition 2750 points.

[@jimmydesouza4375]

No, because they'd be useless. Look, they're no different than any other vehicle unit, so they should just be treated as such. They can pathfind over terrain but a bunch of vehicles and monstrous creatures can already do that anyway so even that isn't much of a difference.

[@chetmanley1885]

You think they're selling flyers right now?

[@darko-man8549]

@@chetmanley1885 fair point

[@yhormthemidget]

​@@jimmydesouza4375 melee still wouldnt be able to interact with them, and quite a few armies are heavily melee focused. It would be a shitshow either way. If planes were good, they would stomp Nids, marines, CSM, WE and so on but would auto lose to Tau, Eldar or guard. They would be even worse than custodes and knights. Every single army has some good anti-armor for the banana boys or knights, but not all of them are ranged.

[@hagen5129]

I just think the flyers look really cool. Would be great if they perform cool, too

[@bjontis]

Having armies that spam fliers is no fun, if they're good again then someone will spam them and everyone will hate it again, some of the recommendations here like only hitting on 5's, no melee, flamers don;t work against them, harder to wound etc. will lead to poor balance and no fun

[@Smilomaniac]

I know you're about competitive, but scenarios fixes this. You've explained well the challenges of making them work, but it's the nature of competitive that makes it even harder. 40k should mainly be about playing scenarios and roleplaying, not about winning and I think drilling this into people as the introduction to the game, will make them enjoy more serious games more and also be better at it. The point being that flyers fit better in scenarios.

[@smatting2627]

Thousand Sons flyer fix: Retcon the helbrute and Heldrake. Boxed set. Have the thousand sons helbrute can Robotech itself into a helbrute!

[@josephrigley8974]

I really like the flyer models but the rules have been rubbish this edition. That's partly just because the toughness has scaled up but their damage output hasn't.

[@Sureshot05]

The sadness that flyers, fortifications and super heavies are all bad choices does have reduce the diversity of the game and this is a bad thing in my opinion. i think the whole game would benefit from a +X points per multiple choice. Could then make the baseline troops choices really cheap. 10 point intercessor squad, but the second is 60, third is 110. We'd then see the archetype unit for each army in every list just because they would be essentially free.

[@ashtodust]

The same is those models are beautiful... They need love and upsizing to new standard (SM flyers looks dwarfish next to primaris model 😢)

[@michaelagin7076]

They should be a 0-1 on the force org chart.

[@8bitbonsai]

i mostly use them now for terrain for killteam or necromunda or some boarding action. I like to build a cargo bay and then put in some Vultures an Arvus Lighter or some Thunderbolts. Just adding detail make the table more alive if that makes sense.

[@jimmydesouza4375]

I misread that rv as an n for a moment, I was deeply confused.

[@doctor8bricks]

I left the hobby before Aircraft were a thing, and returned just in time to see them made unusable. I fear they'll be pushed into Legends with the next edition.

[@Lavendeer201]

I want them to be playable. I want Heldrake lore and gameplay! Also please, we are concerned for your health🥺. Get some sleep lol

[@stephenferry3017]

For all my fellow non-competative players, i have to ask. Why do we bother waiting for GW to "balance" out units? Its pretty clear that flyers seem destined to 3k point games.

[@OverlordZephyros]

Give them a 1- to hit them so they get at least some defensive bonus

[@PooberryPancake]

That’s the problem with all games, they suffer from never wanting to balance things. They nerf things into the dirt and leave it for months at a time

[@wesleytree4562]

So weird literally made a custom chapter focused on using aircraft 🤣

[@jimmydesouza4375]

As someone who likes fliers a lot I would like them to be balanced thusly; They're incredibly hard hitting, they cannot be shot by most units and require specialist anti aircraft units to be targetted (that essentially are autocannon equivalents or missile launcher equivalents in guard terms but that pay a slight premium for the skyfire rule), they need a command unit to be called in (such as a command squad with a vox for the guard). When you call them in they enter from one board edge and take a straight line to the opposite board edge crossing on top of whatever unit they were called in on (or whatever position they were called in on for transport fliers). But each of those skyfire units has an area that they cover, where if a flier passes through it they get a free round of shooting against the flier with special bonuses to represent the anti aircraft nature. "Light" fliers like the Lightning or the Avenger should be almost certain to be taken down by one round of such shooting, mediums like the thunderbolt should be able to survive 1 with near certainty and go down to the second or third, and heavy fliers like the marauder bomber should be able to survive 2 turns with certainty and go down on the 3rd or 4th. But of course if you have more than 1 AA unit that the model passes over then you lose them faster. The flier should take a leadership test if it is destroyed to determine whether or not it still gets its payload off in that strike (to represent the pilot flying to the end or jumping out). So fliers essentially end up playing similar to deepstrike, where most of the game is about positioning denial zones to limit their impact, but if you don't position those denial zones well, or if your opponent is just willing to sacrifice the flier, they hit HARD. It also has the added benefit of there being the unit on the ground that you can focus on as the enemy player to just take the fliers out of the game. This also roughly fits the conceptual role strike aircraft have in reality too.

[@CainAhlin]

I hope they just take away hover and such. Make them alot squishier and with after enemy movement unless in engagement range they have a free 8" move. Also a -1 to hit and ++4 for ranged. There fixed it 😂

[@JoeyFangaz]

Aircraft are such an important part of tau warfare and annoys me they are not more prominent. We lost Airnautica too so what are we supposed to do?

[@Khobai]

its fine if theyre not good, theyre just gonna let flyers phase out anyway it seems

[@Renegade-5-2]

One thing that I had been thinking about. A new core strategem available to all factions: Ace pilot (1CP) (battle tactic) When: your movement phase, after having selected an aircraft to move Target: 1 aircraft in your army that has not moved and is not in hover mode Effect: This aircraft can make it's mandatory pivot move before it's normal move of >= 20" Restriction: This aircraft can not make a pivot move at the end of it's normal move this turn ---- This would give bombers more flexibility at a cost, provide a tactical consideration for the opponent to spread out their forces but also make it a choice for your precious command points. And could even make players having to think ahead turns to consider if they want/need to use this 2 turns in a row or just 1 time and maneuver from there with normal pivots.

[@mega__miss6309]

I got my heldrake then found out just how bad it can be. It feels like almost 200 points of not that much

[@Deathgaming112]

I think there movement speed is the biggest problem super fast and tons of gun making it impossible to hit first, making the game all about who wins the dice roll

[@sagacity1071]

There are a lot of things GW is trying with... gotta keep those share(scum)holders happy first above else right?

[@valkyriegremory]

GW: aircraft, oh yes are favourite models that never seen them in game u know what let nerf them even more so they never get use including heresy. Me: so their going above 600 points, X attacks hitting on 6 and wound on 6 doing 1 dmg, pettty much what gw would do unless they are planning to make them great again.

[@LordCrate-du8zm]

Heresy aircraft are great, tf you on?

[@valkyriegremory]

@LordCrate-du8zm it a joke. Due to GW hates aircraft in 40k they might nerf heresy as well due to how OP they are. Imo heresy aircraft are fine, but would love to see 40k aircraft have a rework when they can be playable again.

[@LordCrate-du8zm]

@@valkyriegremory Didn't really read like a joke :/

[@valkyriegremory]

@LordCrate-du8zm yeah i know, but it more of a sarcastic joke whre people can respond.

[@LordCrate-du8zm]

@@valkyriegremory oh

[@thenapalmbrothershq5585]

The flyers are really cool even if a little outdated. If GW yeets them the game will have lost part of its soul.

[@philurbaniak1811]

Get them to Legends 👋!

[@Warrelwind]

if not in main 40k at least make them playable in some game