Is the Ravager over hyped?

Count Adhemar wrote:

FuelDrop wrote:

That leaves us with MEQ, which is where this weapon excels. They come in big enough squads to get the benefits of dropping the bomb on them, each mortal wound causes a model to go away, and they are valuable enough that dropping the bomb means something.

While this is great (and a good MEQ killer is nothing to sniff at), this does mean that the void mine (which you are paying rather a lot for) is only a "good" choice against armies with MEQ-like infantry, valuable, hard to kill with splinter weapons, and expensive enough that their loss means something while also not being so tough that your void mine only kills a single dude.

I fight against Death Guard a lot. I suspect I may end up getting a Voidraven.

Good Man!

I suggest Dark Scythes over void lances in this case, simply to focus harder on making the raven a better heavy infantry killer (since with DG they'll want to focus on their badass infantry rather than going heavy mechanized). However it goes, have fun!

The Void Mine is free no? So it is expensive how? The Void Raven is also only 15 points more expensive than the RWJ so again it isn't all that more expensive and comes with an additional 2 wounds so I think that makes them pretty even.

Looking at it now it would seem you would only kill 1 Terminator in a squad of 5 and potentially 6 Marines in a squad of 10.

The fact that it causes mortal wounds means you should target 1 wound models with a good save if you really want to get the points back from taking it...is that right?

You could get lucky and kill 2 Terminators which is 80 points worth right there...you have nearly made back half of the cost of the flyer with one attack.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

The Void Mine is free no?  So it is expensive how?  The Void Raven is also only 15 points more expensive than the RWJ so again it isn't all that more expensive and comes with an additional 2 wounds so I think that makes them pretty even.

Looking at it now it would seem you would only kill 1 Terminator in a squad of 5 and potentially 6 Marines in a squad of 10.

The fact that it causes mortal wounds means you should target 1 wound models with a good save if you really want to get the points back from taking it...is that right?

You could get lucky and kill 2 Terminators which is 80 points worth right there...you have nearly made back half of the cost of the flyer with one attack.

Sure, it's not to much more than a razorwing if you don't get missiles, the catch being that you don't get missiles. One you throw the missiles on the cost difference is noticeably higher. a lot of that extra cost is for a one-use weapon which is nice but not too impressive.

It's a very eldar weapon: Fantastic within its narrow specialty. Drop this on the enemy's 10-man TH/SS deathstar (be it vanguard veterans or termies) and you will get your points worth. Go up against Imperial Guard, and you will be lucky to find something worth bombing. This just means that the voidraven is a specialty pick for taking on some armies while being less valuable against other armies. It's all about bringing the right weapon to the right battlefield.

So the Voidraven is 185 points with the missiles and the RWJ is 170 points with a x2 Dark Lance and Splinter Cannon build.

So I know that the RWJ has a slightly better variation of missiles (3 options rather than 2), but for 15 points the main comparison to be made here is the one off Void Mine vs a Splinter Cannon over the course of a battle...and the Voidraven had +2 wounds.

Like you state it might depend on who you are facing...against Guard infantry the Void Mine might be overkill.

But the two flyers are not that far apart on points cost.

The Voidraven has to pay for his missiles. He then costs 194pts. The RWJF costs 155pts. Never take the Splinter cannon upgrade, it's not worth it at all.

I don't know why but Battlescribe has the points down as 160 base on the Voidraven but I checked and yep you are 100% correct it is 169 points base. That means without the Splinter Cannon there is a difference of 39 points.

I can see why people choose the RWJ then...in certain games against certain armies I think I might still choose the Voidraven but on average I would more than likely be taking the RWJ.

Cheers for going over this with me everyone...

Now who knows how good the Reaper is? LOL

The Reaper is a sligthly superior form of Dark Lance Ravager (3.5 shots in average instead of 3), that has an anti-infantry mode, but has 2 problems : it's a heavy weapon (so -1 to hit when moving), and it brings more dice rolls, so more luck, into your strategy.

It's a brilliant gun, and one of our best AT option, if you can cope with it being heavy weaponry and random number of shots.

The Voidraven is a completely different unit and the only thing it has in common with the RJF is being an aircraft. In all other aspects, the Ravager is far more akin to the RJF. The Dark Lances make them vehicle killer and the JF sacrifices one lance to get some Splinter fire.

I think if you play the Voidraven with Void Lances you don't understand it's role. It is a heavy anti-MEQ bomber that happens to fly. It's Dark Scythes are essentially better 4 x Blasters and its Voidmine is exemplatory of its rule as well. Just laugh at 2+ cover MEQ or Necron blobs and see how 2/3 gets killed by the blast, followed by another chunk due to morale.

Sure, it never hurts to have more AT capability, but in reality a Void Lance will not achieve more than a DL. It only makes a difference against units of the sorts of Baneblades, but against those targets those 2 S9 Lances won't give you an edge.

The way I see the Voidraven is a more durable squad of Blaster Scourges and if you compare the price for both of these units, a Voidraven is not unreasonably priced. Would I recommend a Voidraven for a general-purpose list? No. But it surely has its role, even if it might not be needed all the time.

I suppose an argument could be made on how good a Voidraven is compared to a Disintegrator Ravager, but I haven't seen anybody mathhammering that out, yet.

Quote :

I suppose an argument could be made on how good a Voidraven is compared to a Disintegrator Ravager, but I haven't seen anybody mathhammering that out, yet.

The Voidraven is hard to mathhammer, actually, because it's hard to judge the value of that bomb. It can yield so much points, or be very useless, depending on the match-up. That's why i called it a specialist unit : if you don't know your opponent taking one is risky...

Reaper is also tougher, better in CC and notably benefits from our best HQ, the Haemy, because it has the <Coven> keyword. So it can be T7 W12 vs the alpha strike, where Ravager would be T6 W10. I have used both but if I am trying to be competitive and have other units to grab objectives with I will bring a bunch of Reapers instead of Ravagers.

But this has basically cost me 1 game when I lowrolled on the Reapers EVERY TIME and had low CP. But you can have bad luck with Ravagers too so don't fear the Reaper, but do consider saving CP for the shot number.

If I were to play Jimsolo's "armored core" list where most of your army is HS then i would also take dissie Ravagers and Lance Ravagers and only a few Reapers because then mobility is more important.

E: the difference in hits expectation is 1/2 * 3.5 for 1.75 vs 2/3 * 3 for 2 so it is questionable if objectively seen moving the reaper is even that bad but if youre going to move it every turn you should bring a Ravager instead

I think the Voidraven is being highly underrated. Sure, the Voidmine is very much a specialist weapon that isn't suitable for a lot of targets but I face Thousand Sons, Grey Knights, Raven Guard and Necrons regularly so I at least get targets (and sigh when I face Guard and Nids), but those Dark Scythes are really mean.

On a flyer, the 24" range doesn't hurt as it's easy enough to get in range early on (movement restrictions might make moping up a bit harder late game) but 2D3 S8, AP-4 D D3 shots is excellent. I got rather lucky in my last game but downed a Storm Raven turn 1 with them by doing 15 wounds, Voidlances and the Razorwings Dark Lances can't physically do that much damage. The potentially high rate of fire means it's also quite good against a variety of targets as well, giving the Voidraven a lot of flexibility.

The missiles might be a problem, they're a lot of points for not a lot of damage, I'm probably going to start running without them.

Anyone else uses voidmine to swing a balance of CC into his favour? Since it can be dropped onto enemy units in melee. AND to get rid of character force multipliers. I will happily use it to land wounds on farseers, commisars and the like.

Also I find the S9 of the void lances superior to the S8 on scythes. Dependent on meta ofc. But I see quite a few T8 targets where that S9 means +33% damage statistically.

I think there is an argument where the Voidraven does more damage than the RWJ...thats certainly the impression I am getting. But what the people are telling me on here is that for the extra points that extra damage is perhaps only at its best against particular targets.

So the RWJ is a better choice all around but the Voidraven can be very awesome...that's kind of what I have taken from the discussion.

So far I don't have any of the above mentioned units (Ravager, RWJ, Voidraven or Reaper) so where best to come and find out which I should consider. I find this site great for the advice you all give out, the mathhammer I pick up on etc it's really useful.

The Reaper kit is basically just a big gun you mount on a plastic Raider so no reasonable person should oppose you using a Raider as a proxy to try it.

Btw, I've found myself never or almost never using the anti-infantry mode because the higher strength and better AP means you are often still better off shooting with beam mode. Eg against marines, do you want 3.5 shots that wound on 2+ and they get no save or do you want 7 shots that wound on 3+ and they save 2/3 of them? The anti-infantry mode is really basically anti-guardsman mode where it will kill 2.59 and beam mode is 1.944. You will usually have more important targets for your Reaper.

Reaper weapons also stop the target unit from advancing if you kill a model which wasn't mentioned.

But the real reason to take one is basically that you get more lances for cheaper. It's not a game changer.

aurynn wrote:

Anyone else uses voidmine to swing a balance of CC into his favour? Since it can be dropped onto enemy units in melee. AND to get rid of character force multipliers. I will happily use it to land wounds on farseers, commisars and the like.

You're only rolling 1 die against a HQ. Throwing a one-use mine to have 66% of dealing 1 mortal wound to a HQ is not a great idea, especially not against a farseer that can cancel that wound on 5+.

Quote :

Also I find the S9 of the void lances superior to the S8 on scythes. Dependent on meta ofc. But I see quite a few T8 targets where that S9 means +33% damage statistically.

But rolling d3 hits instead of 1 statistically means +100% against everything :p
So Void lances only shine vs T8-T9 tanks, while scythes are vastly superior against everything else.

In regards to the Lance vs the Scyth.

A Void Lance has, against a Russ.
1 Shot -> .67 Hits -> .44 Wounds -> .44 Unsaved -> 1.56 Damage

Its counterpart has,
2 Shots -> 1.33 Hits -> .67 Wounds -> .67 Unsaved -> 1.33 Damage.

Huh. I'll be honest and say that wasn't the result I was expecting.
Against T9 with a 3+ Save, we're looking at 1.17 Damage for the Lance, with .89 for the Scyth.
Finally, for T7 it's again 1.56 for the Lance, and 1.78 for the Scyth.

So it seems like the Void Lance is, in fact, our best weapon against high toughness vehicles.

As a final note, rerolls on the Lance are exponentially more useful.

The damage boost is significant.
On T7 and T8 it goes up to an even 2, T9 it hovers at 1.5.

I...might actually be taking Void Lances now.

@TheBaconPope you are comparing an AT weapon with an AI one.
Dark Scythes are not optimal for tunk busting, but, just st like the blasters, are primarily anti heavy infantry, with the role of anti tank support.

Quote :

So it seems like the Void Lance is, in fact, our best weapon against high toughness vehicles.

It really isn't. A Voidraven costs almost 33% more than a Ravager.
In terms of Anti-tank, you're comparing 3 S8 shots vs 2 S9. Even against T8, the Ravager is better, as well as being cheaper.

The Void lance is great and all, but a lot more expensive than Dark Lances (because they can only be fielded on an expensive unit), and the +1S is only relevant against a few targets (T8 and T9) and even then, it does not justify the loss of 1 weapon.

So if you want to resolve this analytically then the question would be (see this thread)

2*2/3 * (1+UnitStep(18-(T+1))+UnitStep(9-T)+UnitStep(9-(T+1))+UnitStep(9-T*2))/6 * (1+min(w,2)+min(w,3)+min(w,4)+min(w,5)+min(w,6))/6 / 169 > 3*2/3*(1+UnitStep(16-(T+1))+UnitStep(8-T)+UnitStep(8-(T+1))+UnitStep(8-T*2))/6*(1+min(w,2)+min(w,3)+min(w,4)+min(w,5)+min(w,6))/6 / 155

and it simplifies to

155/169 * 2/3 * (1+UnitStep(18-(T+1))+UnitStep(9-T)+UnitStep(9-(T+1))+UnitStep(9-T*2)) > (1+UnitStep(16-(T+1))+UnitStep(8-T)+UnitStep(8-(T+1))+UnitStep(8-T*2))

and the result for this is

when T=16 or when T=17. In those cases the VR-mounted void lance is more economical per wound than a Ravager-mounted DL, not otherwise.

But at this point it's apples and oranges, this is of course only assuming you don't take the missiles (shatterfields are worth something like 2/3 of a lance vs a tank I think) or use the void mine. The Void Raven is tougher too, while the Ravager is a ground unit and can hold objectives after Chapter Approved hits.

E: shatterfields are worth closer to about 1/2 of a lance than a 2/3 vs a Leman Russ according to my cheat sheet. Implosion missiles are worse.

I can't agree with that.
155 for 3 S8 weapons.
169 for 2 S9 weapons.

Now sorry if my math is a bit less fancy than yours, but here it goes :
I won't be applying the 3.5 damage factor, since it's identical for both weapons.


Against T1-T4, the 3 S8 weapons generate 1.66 wounds
Against T1-T4, the 2 S9 weapons generate 1.11 wounds

Against T5-T7, the 3 S8 weapons generate 1.33 wounds
Against T5-T7, the 2 S9 weapons generate 0.88 wounds

Against T8, the 3 S8 weapons generate 1 wound
Against T8, the 2 S9 weapons generate 0.88 wounds

Against T9, the 3 S8 weapons generate 0.66
Against T9, the 2 S9 weapons generate 0.66

So 2 Voidlances are identical to 3 Dark Lances against T9, and inferior to 3 Dark Lances against everything else. You're basically paying for a downgrade.

Now sure, you got missiles if you pay extra cash, and you got a sweet mine that works well against Meq. I'm not saying the Voidraven is useless. But Void Lances are inferior to Dark Lances in terms of value.

We probably agree here, since according to the more complex math the void lance is more economical vs toughness 16 or 17 targets mathematically, but nothing else. Meaning the ravager is equally or more economical otherwise.

when T=16 or when T=17. In those cases the VR-mounted void lance is more economical per wound than a Ravager-mounted DL, not otherwise.

Those don't really exist but I've always loved finding fancy abstract useless solutions like this. So what I am saying is we got the same result.

(If you are wondering if the math is correct then indeed vs a T16 model it's 2/3*2*2/6*3.5/169 points for the VR-mounted VL for 0.0092 wounds per point and 2/3*3*1/6*3.5/155 points for 0.0075 wounds per point for the 3 DL Ravager)

@TheBaconPope
The thing is that two Void Lances will achieve nothing. Yes, that 3 damage on average is nice, but it comes on a platform that is far too expensive to consider it efficient.

You will only ever have a very limited amount of Void Lances because Voidravens are so specialized. And if you really want to crack those T8 tanks, a few more Void Lances just won't make a difference. That is, if there are T8 tanks on the field to begin with.

Quote :

We probably agree here, since according to the more complex math the void lance is more economical vs toughness 16 or 17 targets mathematically, but nothing else. Meaning the ravager is equally or more economical otherwise.

I'm sincerely sorry, i read your post wrong and thought you were advocating for the superiority of Void Lances. My bad really

Lets be honest, you don't take Razorwings and Voidravens instead of Ravagers/Reapers usually, you take them in support of for maximum threat overload.

As for Dark Scythes vs Void Lance, I go DS fore reliability, the Void Lance is too all or nothing for me and our army doesn't provide re-rolls to hit.

Void Lances would be a great as an option if they could be put on other platforms.

If we ever get a lord of war, some void lances on it would be nice. In a vacuum they are among the best anti-tank weapons in the game. However, given that they are exclusive to a single rather expensive unit, the fact is that they are largely inferior to the more practical Dark Lances.