Fire Prism vs Ravager

I'm comparing Ravagers and Fire Prisms on paper, and feeling a tad envious of the Eldar.

For almost the same points cost, they don't have to choose between anti-troop or anti-armour. They can tank shock and ram without wargear. They can move 12" without losing almost 1/3rd of their firepower. They're significantly tougher.

OK, there's a benefit to the ravager's specialization in that they can dump a little more firepower onto a single target at once, but it seems like we got the short end of the stick here.

What do more experienced players think?

Sadly you can do the same with pretty much any DE unit and its Craftworld equivalent. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any that would come out ahead of the Eldar version.

The Dark Eldar have strippers, and now we can officially put those soulless monsters in charge of a raid. Let's see the Craftworlders top THAT!

Ravager do have more shots. Fire Prism can miss and thatd it. Little bit of sugarpill...

P.s. Is it R6 on the picture ? Or some Fazer variation...

Now do hornets!

or a Wraithknight vs 2 talos?

or... Reavers Vs Cloud dancers

Fire raptor vs voidraven?

Carnival of Pain vs any other decurion...?

Actually just don't.

With the tactics forum already degrading into a hugbox without people to keep it honest, it may become rare that people will tell you this but -
You can assume that with the exception of (non-flyrant) tyranids, some daemons lists, or orks, the dark eldar are always going to at a disadvantage.

If you regularly face players of comparable skill, which know what the dark eldar are capable of (or will in a few games) - and you still care about winning - You're going to need another army.  I usually recommend corsairs (since you can play them with DE models).

Hopefully, there is some remedy to this in the near future.  The get started set is a start, but I doubt it even compensates for the damage done by the various FAQs.

I've always been a proponent of simply making "Dark eldar" fire dragons, wraithknights, etc.. with a little converting. In what world do you think dark eldar couldn't make a proper melta?

Count Adhemar wrote:

Sadly you can do the same with pretty much any DE unit and its Craftworld equivalent. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any that would come out ahead of the Eldar version.

Dark Eldar are inferior at shooting, but better at assault than the Craftworld equivalents. Craftworld options to match the Grotesques are decidedly limited. The rules in the current edition are strongly in favour of shooty units though, so in the area that mostly matters, Eldar will win.

I like the aesthetics of Fire Prisms, but they are over-costed compared to other options available. If you want anti-tank, the Ravager will outperform the Fire Prism against any armour value.

Hornets, Fire Dragons and Wraithguard on the other hand, we really can't compete with.

The Red King wrote:

I've always been a proponent of simply making "Dark eldar" fire dragons, wraithknights, etc.. with a little converting. In what world do you think dark eldar couldn't make a proper melta?

I'm in favor of it. I also like running Eldar models who are 'slaves' of my DE.

The Red King wrote:

I've always been a proponent of simply making "Dark eldar" fire dragons, wraithknights, etc.. with a little converting. In what world do you think dark eldar couldn't make a proper melta?

http://wasted-knights.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/joys-of-melta.html

Thank you for that lol

Azdrubael wrote:

Ravager do have more shots. Fire Prism can miss and thatd it. Little bit of sugarpill...

P.s. Is it R6 on the picture ? Or some Fazer variation...

2011 CBR250R. Cheap, reliable, fun. Not so much fast.

stilgar27 wrote:

Now do hornets!

or a Wraithknight vs 2 talos?

or... Reavers Vs Cloud dancers

Fire raptor vs voidraven?

Carnival of Pain vs any other decurion...?

Actually just don't.

With the tactics forum already degrading into a hugbox without people to keep it honest, it may become rare that people will tell you this but -
You can assume that with the exception of (non-flyrant) tyranids, some daemons lists, or orks, the dark eldar are always going to at a disadvantage.

If you regularly face players of comparable skill, which know what the dark eldar are capable of (or will in a few games) - and you still care about winning - You're going to need another army.  I usually recommend corsairs (since you can play them with DE models).

Hopefully, there is some remedy to this in the near future.  The get started set is a start, but I doubt it even compensates for the damage done by the various FAQs.

I think the comparison between Ravagers and Fire Prisms is fairly evident since they perform the same role at the exact same point cost. I think it is a fair question and I am against telling people what they have to talk about. If anything, this is only going to make things worse.

To be honest, I even prefer the Ravager.

I tend not to be a fan of 'all or nothing' shooting, so even if they were in the same codex I would still probably field Ravagers over Fire Prisms.

If you want them for killing tanks, Ravagers are better than Fire Prisms against any armour value.

Fire Prism pays for its versatility by not being the best option against any target.

I'd be more inclined to compare the Ravager to the Falcon than the Fire Prism. For virtually the same point cost you get more weapons, more armour, a transport capacity bigger than one of our two actual troop transports plus the ability to take them in squadrons

The Strange Dark One wrote:

I think the comparison between Ravagers and Fire Prisms is fairly evident since they perform the same role at the exact same point cost."

I don't.  I see it more like comparing a leman russ main with a salamander scout or a land speeder... if either cost as much as the tank.

One is a tank with a high AV (for a skimmer) that can use it's (versatile) weapon's range to help keep it out of danger, and the other is open top and relies on cover or jinking, as it's threat range is only 42"-48" depending on whether or not you're willing to sacrifice its (single role) firepower.

The hornet is a much better analogue to the ravager regardless of it's price, as it's more similar in function.  That said - with it's best weapons - it's only 64% of the cost of a lance ravager, but supplies more Strength 8 ap2 shots, at a 12" longer range.  It's also has star engines, scout/outflank, acute senses, and the ability to snap shot after moving flat out - making it's mobility sharply superior.  Durability wise the ravager wins out slightly (with the extra HP being mitigated by the +1 on the damage table), but consider that you can field 3 hornets for less than 2 ravagers - which works out to the same number of HP, with the hornets spreading them out among more vehicles while also supplying 2 to 3 times as much firepower (for 10 less points)

The count's comparison to the falcon is pretty apt too.  It could be made even more painful though, as on top of everything he mentioned - the falcon is even more durable (cuz not open topped), has longer range and versatile turreted weapons (including an option for skyfire), can tank shock, and depending on the army can gain objective secured or deep striking without err.

The Eldar have a codex that was significantly better than the DE to begin with before it was updated for the current 7th environment. They have strong units, with strong rules, are well costed (or severely under-costed in some cases) and excellent formations for them to thrive in the current meta. DE have non of that. In fact their transition to 7th saw nerfs across the board and the pure gimping of many units. The stronger factions get to take tanks in squadrons, the DE lose the ability to use all their frickin guns! Why would you take away the Ravagers ability to fire all its guns if it moves? Such a dumb nerf. Other tanks from other factions are built is such a way that they can move and fire everything (imp guard excluding the ordnance changes) or they can fire main weapons and get optional snap-firing sponson or additional weapons if you want them (marines). A few other vehicles (like Land Raiders, Decimators) simply have a mix of weapons and you choose target priority and fire accordingly. Ravagers are a single-use specialised gun platform. They either kill tanks or troops. They need to move to survive and be effective. There's no reason they shouldn't be able to float around the table at 12" a turn and still be able to fire all those guns. It's only 3 guns, hardly game breaking. To kill an average tank you statistically need to fire 9 lances at it (if you don't get a lucky explosion), that's 3 Ravagers (your entire Heavy Support choice) firing on one tank to kill it in one turn. At only 2 shots and one snap-fire you're losing nearly a third of your killing power unless you stay still. But if you stay still as DE you;'re gonna get killed. Ravagers should be moving away from enemy threats whilst dishing out their constant damage.

Ravagers need Aerial Assault back. Given GW's policy of aligning rules with models and their sprue options it's silly that that took it away. They also need squadrons but every faction will get those in the next incarnations of their codex's. I also think they need to bring down the cost of shock prows and night shields. Night shields should be much cheaper across the board because jinking and cover is the only defence DE vehicles really get and even then ignore cover can easily ruin that. At 15pts they're expensive and relegated to only a few key units. At 5pts night shields can be distributed amongst all your vehicles for <50 pts. DE have to choose between being able to fire (and do their actual job) and surviving, yet trying to survive costs so much.

One advantage Ravagers have over their Eldar contemporaries is the ability to deep strike and thus catch an opponent by surprise. But that's not a big advantage.