How does the Ravager stack up?

The Ravager is the Dark Eldar answer to armour, both vehicles and heavy infantry.

How does it stack up to other factions and their equivalents?

Well, I've only got the Craftworld Eldar codex to compare to but from what I can tell the Fire Prism outclasses it.

The Ravager, when kitted out for AV work, gets 3 shots. on average, 2 hit. on average, one of those does anything. If it's moving fast to keep up with the very fast army it's with then it's only getting two shots.

The Fire Prism is only packing 1 AV shot base, but if it hits it's more likely to A) penetrate and B) do serious damage. It can do this after moving 12 inches, and at better range than the Ravager.

For infantry killing it's 6-9 shots at strength 5 ap 2 vs Large Blast S 5 AP 3 (or blast at S 7 AP 2). Averaging 4-6 hits, 3-4 wounds vs MEQ. About even with the Fire Prism, depending on the terrain.

The difference is that the Fire Prism can switch between these roles as needed, while the Ravager (at about the same points) needs to be kitted out for one or the other. Add to that the vastly superior durability of the CE vehicle, and the potential for a Scannon on top of that and access to invulnerable saves and you're looking at a serious difference between the two. The worst part of which is that the CE vehicle can fight at full efficiency at full speed while the Ravager... can't.

The fact is that the Ravager NEEDS to be able to kill the enemy tanks before they can return fire, as otherwise they either die or jink... which makes them all but useless. Ditto enemy heavy infantry, who're likely lugging around at least 1 weapon that can trash it in a single turn.

How does it stack up against other armour out there? I'm short of codexes here, and CE are very powerful so it's not necessarily a fair match-up.

Traditional Ravager with 3 DL compares well against its equivalents in other codexsies. Predator and Exorcist (other). But nobody uses them. It should have more shots with lower strenght perhaps. Not 5 though.

I take 2 Lance Ravagers and 1 Dissie Ravager in pretty much every single list I ever make. The dissies are fantastic and the Lance Ravagers always cause enough of a problem to be a major target for my opponent, no matter what they are playing.

I'm not a fan. For less than their price you get a blasterborn squad, which has an additional S8 AP2 shot, and you can get the venom with them too.

If you want to get pens for crew shaken effects, you can potentially do that with a Raider-heavy list, or if that's not what you're running you can get pens cheaper with blasterborn than the Ravager. If you're looking to knock off HP, scourge or FW's Reaper can do that better.

I use them and true enough on all points above. The main reason for me to use them is really simple. Distraction Carnefex. Opponents go after them hard. Nine times out of ten that is where their shots are going.

What are FW reaper?

MHaruspex wrote:

I'm not a fan. For less than their price you get a blasterborn squad, which has an additional S8 AP2 shot, and you can get the venom with them too.

Well, for 10 points less than their cost you can get 4 Trueborn with Blasters, which is an additional shot - but also a unit running around 6" a turn as opposed to 6-12" and also is a unit that has an 18" range as opposed to a 36" range, both of which are big considerations.

If you get the Trueborn a transport to try to mitigate their drawbacks - the cost becomes higher than the Ravager, albeit with more guns and less range. I do think there is valid debate as to which is "better" at that stage. I know I choose the Ravager, and I know some others choose Trueborn.

MHaruspex wrote:

If you want to get pens for crew shaken effects, you can potentially do that with a Raider-heavy list, or if that's not what you're running you can get pens cheaper with blasterborn than the Ravager.

You can't get there cheaper with Trueborn though, and also, I would submit that adding Raiders is a tool to be used in addition to Ravagers as weight of fire is an important aspect of our army since our individual shots are a touch lackluster in dealing with vehicles.

MHaruspex wrote:

If you're looking to knock off HP, scourge or FW's Reaper can do that better.

Both are basically better at the specific goal of anti-mech, with a small bit of debate about the value of pens vs. glances. I, personally, still favor the Ravager as a better all around vehicle than Scourges or Reapers, as there are multiple targets he performs better against then them so in a TAC sense I still find the Ravager superior.

The old ravagers were fantastic IMO and now they are still good. Increased cost and loss of aerial assault and old night shields hurt but they still perform ok especially with stealth parked in a ruin. Blasterborn don't compare in my experience. I'll just second everything Thor said and emphasize that those factors matter so much I don't even touch blasterborn anymore especially with the changes to unit size and such.

I will agree - Blasterborn have left my army lists entirely, and I am easily amongst the first in line to note that Ravagers cost more than they should. But Ravagers fulfill a rather unique role in our army, it is an important role, and nothing else can do it.

CptMetal wrote:

What are FW reaper?

They are a forge world model with rules published in their books.
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Dark_Eldar/DARK_ELDAR_REAPER.html

Their one weapon is the Storm Vortex Projector with 2 modes
Blast 24" str5 ap4 Heavy 1, Haywire, pinning, 5" blast
Beam 36" str7 ap3 Heavy 1, Haywire, Kill-shock

Kill shock: If against vehicle D3 haywire hits, if toughness instant death on 5+ regardless of toughness.

I think the main advantage of Blasterborn in an Venom is that the Venom can jink and the passengers can still fire at full BS, which improves survivability by a large margin.

I personally think that Disintegrator ravagers are good as they fill a niche that we A) really need filled and B) has little competition. Heavy Infantry killer.

For vehicle hunting, Haywire Scourges are more my speed. Monsterous creatures? We have ALL of the poison. GMCs? We've got no solid counters to those.

Freakshows are a great counter to GMCs, and DE make a great foundation for Freakshow lists.

And Reapers are good for Freakshow too, you can get the pinning off very reliably! Just as versatile as a lance Ravager in that style of list, I'd say. Give them nightshields and take some Reavers to jetbike move in front of them during assault for a 4+ intervening model cover save without jinking, and charging at opportune pinned targets too. I'd even go so far as to say you can make Wyches adequate as your mandatory troops by doing so.

I could see myself using a Dissie Ravager, though. High volume low AP firepower never hurts and isn't something you can take a huge amount of otherwise.

Dissie Ravagers also maintain their utlity better while Jinking, due to the volume of fire.

Why does everybody put true born in a Venom? They need to be put in a Raider with night shield because it enhances their survivability drastically...

Raw firepower and less space on the table.
A raider has 1 lance shot and comes for the same points as 12 poison shots.
It is easier to claim a cover save with the venom and it still has a 5++ while the raider got nothing when stripped of cover.
A deepstriking venom is less likely to mishap due to beeing smaller.
A venom is easier to hide behind a LoS blocker.

Comes up to taste. In the early stages I also used a raider + NS but in my opinion it is just as fast down as a venom.

Raiders do have +1 hall point and if you take night Shields they have stealth thus giving them +6 cover save even in the open. I use both but tend to run mostly Gunboats as they are my flavor. They are pretty interchangeable in my my experience for things like blaster born.

Quote :

if you take night Shields they have stealth thus giving them +6 cover save even in the open.

Venom got 5++ in the open which is not ignored by "ignore cover".
Claiming a cover save is incredibly easy (think Reaver screen) and the single hullpoint does not tend to make a lot of difference as you do not get "glanced to death" like vehicles with higher armor. Most of the time you have a good chance of getting destroyed due to "open topped" anyways.

It is a tradeoff but it pays more often than not. 12 additional poison shots are more valuable than 1 hp and it tends to sum up. I only would take the raider if im in dire need of more lances or need to abuse its lenght (think imperial knight shield facings)

If I had a choice I would take 3 vanilla ravagers
reason: If I truly wanted anti-tank scourges are wayyyy better in terms of cost (irl and ingame) and perform better (they move further, pour out more shots, have access to haywire). With their total volume of shots (27 str 5 ap2 shots), they can threaten meq up to teq.

However, even then compared to the vast majority of IG tanks (AV12 front) which can too take str5++ stuff for cheaper costs and come in bigger squads, they do seem quite dodgy.

The only redeeming quality they have that I can think of is that they can deepstrike, which I think we should take advantage of (tell me what other faction has a deepstriking heavy weapons platform which is not a walker). Sure, deepstrike rules are quite a risk but then, come to think of it in our current state, how can we hope to win without being extremely lucky and taking high risks?

The other factions out armor and out-gun us (Take 10 man necron barges for example, they will screw both tanks and infantry real hard) and they come with av 13 (the whatever shield thinggy that boosts it up to 13 can be negated by lance thought, I think)

Lance weapons still work on their force field.