Ravager Design

Last time I played a game my opponent had to ask which models the Ravagers were. In a sea of raiders they had somehow blended into a plethora of sails, lances and skimmer bases. But when you think about it, the Raider design and model is somewhat lazy.

While marines base so much off the rhino STC this can be somewhat forgiven as the imperium has lost a massive part of their knowledge. But DE have no such excuse.

I get that it makes model production easier, and fluff wise DE like to feel the wind in their hair. But I cant help but feel it could have been more dynamic, closed top even.

What do you guys think? Is it a lazy kit or a perfect blend of style? What would you change?

I wouldn't call it lazy perhaps, but it certainly could have been a bit more distinctive. My own next-gen Ravagers have twin-sails, one on each of the deck bollards, to help differentiate them, but I seriously doubt that any opponent even notices.

A different prow profile or forward gunner mount, or some beam-mounted vanes like the Reaper, would have really helped, but I totally understand why it is the way it is. And I have to say, I don't mind it at all.

I think that they are fine for what they are. Look at :
Tau Devilfish/Devilray/Hammerhead
Eldar Wave Serpent/Nightspinner/Fire Prism
Orks are the only true kings of cool in this department.

Evil Space Elves wrote:

...Orks are the only true kings of cool in this department.

Score one for the Big Mek shop. Or as I prefer it,Orkish County Choppas!

Lazy big time!
But that is the price of an almost complete range of models. If they had to make an individual model for all variations then we would never see all of our stuff produced. As much as I hate the new trend of multiple unit choices from the one kit (think pain engines) I do accept it as a neccassary evil.

Or in the case of Ravagers, I just take Jetfighters instead.

When you consider the huge amount of time and money that goes into creating a miniature, from concept to sculpt to revisions to more revisions to casting and then to production, 'lazy' is the last word I'd use!

I agree that it would be helpful if ravagers were differentiated more from raiders, for people who aren't trained to spot 'em. I haven't painted my first ravager yet, but plan to set it off from the raiders with paint. My raiders are black with white accents, so the ravagers will be the reverse. Shouldn't be too hard to tell them apart, especially with multiple raiders and multiple ravagers really emphasizing the contrast.

If you look at the 'Eavy Metal teams ravagers they are differentiated by their sail colour. The raiders have white sails and the ravagers have red ones, which happens to correspond with the hair colour of the rest of the army. Even the most unfamiliar player should be able to tell the difference between a whopping big red sail versus a white sail. This is what I plan to do however if you're like me and have only painted one raider so far (they take forever!) then you might have to stick to telling people the difference till you finish painting.

I personally like the similar shapes that both the ravager and the raider has. Even after clearing it up with my opponent, the less experienced ones tend to always forget the difference until I roll the dices. 3 dice means that it is a ravager, and one dice is always the raider. In a sense it helps protect both my ravagers and raiders, as they will just shoot randomly at times.

Only seasoned gamers really could see the difference.

I like the design and think they did a really good job. I have never had issues with people confusing my vehicles.

The old ones never seemed to confuse people, and the designs there were exactly identical except for the extra guns, plating, and crew. I blame newer models with players who aren't familiar with them - like how new players have a bit of a struggle telling a Hellhound from a Chimera or something.

easy with me:
Old Raiders are now converted to Ravagers (old RJB-front parts as armor plating)
New Raiders are ... Raiders

As I do not like the sails, none of my Raiders/Ravager is equipped with them

Only times I've had issues are when playing people who have never faced DE before. I just tell them that the one with 3 guns can't carry passengers and it's fine. And this is somebody who fields an army of pure black (undercoat).

I can't say I've ever really had a problem with it, but then I only field one Ravager and it's a conversion so....

With that said I don't think I can see the argument that it's a lazy design. I really like the design of the new Ravager/Raider and I think it is no more "lazy" than any other races tanks. Chimera and Hellhound, WaveSerpent and Falcon, Tau fishes. By the logic used I shouldn't be able to tell the difference between a Space Marine Devastator or Tacticle squad.

The only time I've had a problem with telling the difference between Raiders and Ravagers was when I played against someone who had brought his army down to the store for a painting session and decided he was up for a game instead. Undercoated Raiders and Ravagers without the sponsons on...yeah that gets a little confusing. Was a fun, if chaotic game though...

Kesharq wrote:

Old Raiders are now converted to Ravagers (old RJB-front parts as armor plating)

I want pics of this!

I have been thinking about this myself. But as I do not have models in my hands not sure what I am going to do to fix this, probably emblems, and filling the ravager open area with bits.

I never have a problem with this. My opponents ask what each is if they don't already know. If you remember the older design, they just added gunners on the side also. The new sleeker design is more appealing to me.

I really don't understand why this would be an issue... 2 big guns on the side = Ravager, no guns on the side = Raider.

I think the Ravager design is elegant and functional. It was a wonderful model for me to build and paint and I wouldn't change a thing.

Personally this is what I love about ravagers. They blend in with my masses of raiders and make the army feel cohesive and united. Three guns is hard to miss, especially since they usually get deployed in pairs or have special attention lavished upon them. Mind you there's not much difference to justify an AU $28 price hike.

In any case, my opponents usually learn the difference come my shooting phase (cue evil laugh).

I like the new ravagers and raiders, and the venoms (But who doesn't like them!)
It would however have been cool iif on the "Ravager sprue" that you get there was an additional piece of side armour or blades that could be mounted on the rear flat bits, something like what the Tantalus has. I thought it might make them a bit more distinguishable if not bulkier to accomodate that really useful 1 extra armor rating

Other than that change I would make, can't complain about the quality of the models!

What is lazy are the empire's metal boxes. Just saying...

Bibitybopitybacon wrote:

What is lazy are the empire's metal boxes. Just saying...

I think you mean bawxes!!!

Sorry ,

Mud

I just find it amusing that apparently sticking manned, shielded turrets on the sides means the front and side armour are increased by 1.

Ablative armour. The shot hits the gunner instead of the vehicle and loses some penetration power.

The protective shields are more powerful thats how I see it cause lets face it by the look of our vehicles they aint AV10 or 11 there must be some sort of shield around them!

Honestly i wouldn't change a thing, except maybe the size. Same with the Raider, a little bigger wouldnt hurt, make it looks somewhat in scale lol..

Other then that though, I Atually WANT people to Mix up my Raiders and Ravagers, because then they will proboly make a mistake
A legit mistake at that