Nightshields on Ravagers

I normally don't use NSs on anything, specially ravagers but I have been seeing some lists with NSs on ravagers. I just think it's not worth the points because ur not going to be jinking them often, hopefully, and a 6+ cover save in the open is not worth the points. I'm probably missing something so would like hear from those who do use NSs on ravagers on their effectiveness. I just want to learn from people who do use them and get a different perspective then my negative view of NSs. I just think 140 pts is way too much for something that falls over to a light breeze. Thanks for ur thoughts.

Nah man, not worth. The only time Night Shields are worth it IMO is on the Gunboat, since you can Jink and fire to full effect with the dudes inside. Even so, 15 points is a LOT of points. I would only spend it if I had no other points to spend.

Any platform that wants to shoot and is going to Jink shouldn't be added extra points.

I tend to buy them anyway, but they probably aren't worth it.

I like it.
If I'm going to jink for one reason or another, I want to make it worthwhile.

I really only take NS on Ravagers. The idea is that I can move from cover to cover and use the +1 to cover save on top of the +4 or +5 that I already have and not be forced to jink. Most people have learned that Ravagers are a serious anti-tank threat and often prioritize them (at least in my FLGS anyways). Let's be honest, our paper mache anti tank vehicles need all the help they can get and jinking is fine for Raiders but is much more of a handicap with Ravagers.

They aren't about getting a 6+ cover save in the open or about boosting your jink save. They're about taking the cover you have available to you and making it better without having to snap shoot. If you take advantage of the scatterfield objectives, you can score a 2+ cover save behind ruins while still firing at full BS.

Sinister and lessthanjeff, do u find the ravager last longer when they are behind cover? I know it depends on the meta but I find in tournaments u face a lot of ignore cover bs. Do either of u play in a lot of tournaments and do u run into these problems. Also how do u deal with it?

I don't run ravagers much anymore, tbh. I do play in tournaments frequently though and when I do run Ravagers they often survive well into the game but more as a result of my cautious playstyle staying at max range and blocking LOS than anything else. I can tell you I very rarely have to jink with them because of the night shields so my output stays higher which lets me keep the pressure up.

What do u run instead for first turn AT? Not to bring this point up again but I'm sad what they did to the ravager so I'm really interested in other options.

I run Scourges with haywire usually and a single raider with a WWP and fire dragons. I kind of shifted my ravagers to razorwing jetfighters, too. They have one less lance and don't cost much more but have far greater utility in also being able to wipe out ground infantry and threaten enemy flyers (and i consider them tougher because most enemies snap fire at them).

Lately I've been running a more coven heavy list though so they can take care of most light vehicles on their own.

pehldog63 wrote:

Sinister and lessthanjeff, do u find the ravager last longer when they are behind cover? I know it depends on the meta but I find in tournaments u face a lot of ignore cover bs. Do either of u play in a lot of tournaments and do u run into these problems. Also how do u deal with it?

My meta has a fair amount of Eldar (doesn't everyone's?) and Tau in it, so I know the frustration of ignore cover weapons. If this is the case for you, Ravagers can be much less effective, given the long range of the serpent shield and Tau's homing capabilities to pop Ravagers even when they are out of LoS.

Jeff laid out some of the better alternatives that include deep striking scourges, WWP fire warriors, and Razorwings. If you are feeling brave, Reavers with caltrops ( at least 2 caltrops) can be an effective AT alternative if played correctly. The coven formations are becoming more and more interesting and I encourage you to look into them if you haven't already. They offer alot of versatility to any list.

It does depend quite a bit on your local meta, lots of tau and eldar will make you regret spending those points especially if you put night shields on a lot of your vehicles.

That said I find them very useful and tend to always take them, I'd much rather have a slightly more expensive vehicle that has jinked and is still alive to redeploy and keep firing later than a cheaper dead one.
So I suppose it also depends on you playstyle

You guys have terrain that is tall enough to give cover to skimmers but short enough to let them fire? I belong to three clubs, and around here that s--t is rarer than a chupakabra banging a unicorn while Bigfoot films it.

My club plays terrain like ruins and forests so that if you're in them or up against the walls you can shoot out but get cover saves from return fire. Even though the trees and the walls of the buildings are taller than my ravagers, that lets me get cover while still firing.

An alternative is to place your ravager's side up against the blocking terrain in such a way that you lose one shot but the blocked side arc is what the enemy counts as standing in. This gives you a further +1 to cover save when they can only see the front arc but are standing in the side arc and you can still fire the other two weapons pretty freely because of the range of motion on the lances.

For the record: night shields convey a 5+ cover save in the open. 3+ if you Jink. Not too shabby for 15 points. I put em on my Ravagers and hug cover. It's not too hard to cover 25% of the front of these skinny lil skimmers so jinking is largely unnecessary and you can still claim a 3 or 4 cover.

Sizzly wrote:

For the record: night shields convey a 5+ cover save in the open.  3+ if you Jink.  Not too shabby for 15 points. I put em on my Ravagers and hug cover. It's not too hard to cover 25% of the front of these skinny lil skimmers so jinking is largely unnecessary and you can still claim a 3 or 4 cover.

Incorrect? Stealth alone only gives a 6+ in the open.

Although I agree with the general consensus that, rather than a boost to Jink, it allows Ravagers to stick behind "standard" cover and not be forced to jink at all (ie, still have a 4+ save). If you really need it, then sure, you can go for the 3+ jink... it's only a bonus to have the option.

In the end, though? I have yet to be really impressed with the Night Shields these days... especially the Ravager, which between the price hike and the lessened output has really seemed sub-optimal, although that's also partially because I just haven't been in love with Lances an an anti-tank weapon either. They're never bad, they're just not really that good... and they're not that cheap these days. Oh how I miss 5 point blasters -_- ...

Anyway.

Quote :

Incorrect? Stealth alone only gives a 6+ in the open.

Hmm... Page 428 of the BRB says that any wargear or special rule that obscures a vehicle gives it a 5+ in open terrain unless overriden by the codex or army book. Stealth is in the BRB so wouldn't it obscure the vehicle and thus apply a 5+ cover in open terrain?

No, Stealth doesn't count the vehicle as being in cover, it adds one to its cover save, and specifies a 6+ save when in the open.

"obscuring" a vehicle is a bit of a key phrase, here... I believe Smoke Launchers currently use it (they at least did in the past), and such things... some wargear gives a + to cover saves, some "obscure" the target (which is a 5+), etc.

If it were a 5+ in the open that'd be a different story... although the "cover" part of it is questionable these days, IMHO. Shrug.

I use NS on Ravager because I can park one in a ruins to have a 3+ save without jinks.

Selvhan wrote:

I use NS on Ravager because I can park one in a ruins to have a 3+ save without jinks.

Only if you can hide 25% of the vehicle though ... which isn't that easy to do and still be able to shoot with all 3 guns.

Aether sails