Fighter-Bombers [FAQ 2010 Rules] Clarification

[horizon]

Hi,

yesterday we played a 1250pts fleet engagement (Adeptus Mechanicus vs Orks, battlereport with pictures soon...) and needed the FAQ for the renewed fighter bomber rules...

... and as I stated in the pdf thread the rule is clunky and not clearly written (two conflicting paragraphs if you ask me).

Fighta-Bommas: Fighta-Bommas are fighters with a speed of 25cm. They may also attack like bombers with D3 attack runs instead of D6.

Ork Fighta-Bommas and turret suppression: Ork fighta-Bommas and other attack craft that behave as both bombers and fighters apply this bonus by adding +1 attack for each marker in the wave after attacks are modified by turrets, meaning each ordnance marker will be able to conduct at least one attack and will not have a minimum of zero attacks. For example, a Terror Ship launches a wave of four fighta-bommas against an Emperor battleship with five turrets. The Emperor‟s turrets roll 2,3,4,5,6 to knock down three fighta-bommas. The remaining single fighta-bomma now rolls 1D3-5 (minimum zero) attacks regardless of whether or not any of the fighters survived against turrets. Now this fighta-bomma contributes +1 attack if at least one fighta-bomma survives against turrets, for a single total of one attack. At least one ordnance marker has to survive against turrets for the wave to attack in this manner.

When a wave of fighta-bommas attacks a ship you must decide if any of the markers will forgo their attack runs in favour of turret suppression. Every one that does so cannot make any attack rolls but adds an additional +1 bonus attack to any surviving fighta-bommas when rolling their attacks. Fighta-bommas used in this manner cannot contribute more bonus attacks than the defending ship actually has turrets.

We played it likes this:

4 fighter-bombers attacked a crippled Lunar.
2 fighter-bombers assigned as fighter.
2 Turrets shoot down 2 markers.

Two surviving fighter bombers make (d3-2) + (d3-2) attacks.
Result: (3-2) + (1-2) = (1) + (0) = 1 attack.

Then the 2 attacks from fighters added: +2.

Thus Orks made a total of 3 attacks vs armour.

Is this correct?

This is a significant drop in effectiveness of fighter bombers compared to the previous FAQ or am I mistaken?

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Yep. Not very fluffy.

[RayB HA]

Whoa, I thought this was changed!

I'll have to check with the others but I thought we were going for fighter support being offered upto the number of bombers in a wave, forgeting turret strength alltogether. So each bomber can have a fighter supporting it.

FB's on the other hand were to have in built fighter support. So D3-T+1.

Cheers,

RayB HA

[Vaaish]

I'll have to check with the others but I thought we were going for fighter support being offered upto the number of bombers in a wave, forgeting turret strength alltogether. So each bomber can have a fighter supporting it.

Ray, are you referring to changing the turret supression rules for normal bombers and fighters so that a wave of 4 fighters and 4 bombers would give you +4 to the total attack runs thus eliminating the odd wave compositions like one bomber and five fighters attacking an emperor to gain +5 to the total attack runs?

[fracas]

Doesn't cripple reduce turret?

[Trasvi]

Whoa, I thought this was changed!
I'll have to check with the others but I thought we were going for fighter support being offered upto the number of bombers in a wave, forgeting turret strength alltogether. So each bomber can have a fighter supporting it.

FB's on the other hand were to have in built fighter support. So D3-T+1.

Won't this make the (average) best bomber wave vs any T3+ ship 50/50 bombers/fighters?
Against T3, each bomber inflicts average 1 hit, min 0, max 3.
Against T4=  0.5 / 0 /2. T5 = 0.166 / 0 / 1. T6 = 0/0/0

Thus against T3+ ships, you may as well send in a 50/50 mix of bombers and fighters (or even heavier towards fighters, depending on what enemy fighters are in play) as your fighters are doing equal damage as the bombers, but have many other advantages.

I still think this is better than being limited by the number of turrets, as it does force you to still use SOME bombers, rather than a bomber and all fighters. It also decreases the maximum damage of large waves against high turret ships. But it still doesn't change that the math for turrets is always going to be 'broken';  turret effectiveness is directly proportional to number of attacking bombers, and exponentially proportional to number of turrets.

Doesn't cripple reduce turret?

Seconded.

[Eudaimon]

Doesn't cripple reduce turret?

AdMech's Lunar

[horizon]

Ray,
you're the man if you make that the FAQ2010 fighter-bomber rule.

Cripple reduce turrets.