Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

so i usually bring an aegis defense line to keep my lootas safe, but recently i've been going in against eldar and their ruddy shield-cannons of invariably twin-linked cover-ignoring S7 multi-shot long range doom (not that i think it's overpowered or anything...)

Anyway I was looking through the fortifications the other day and saw the skyshield, the fortification i'd forgot about, and i read that you get a 4+ invulnerable save against shooting attacks, and a guaranteed necessity for anyone attacking to roll a 3+ on the charge through cover, making it good for defense against assaults as well. it'll also provide a decent height-boost the aegis doesn't, but can't come with a gun or help hold objectives (as you can put an objective behind the aegis but not on a skyshield). it does however give defence from all round, and covers more area than an aegis does.

anyone used a skyshield? does it work well & compare to the aegis?

We now have an abundance of cover ignoring weapons and abilities in the Tau Codex, Eldar, and to an extent CSM, the much forgotten Landing Pad is a great defensive bunker. For an army like Orks who are relying on keeping Lootas alive, etc the 4++, height advantage, and possible LOS blocking terrain is hugely valuable.

And for Orks is super simple to just create your own!

As to objectives, its not like your lootas which were sitting behind it were holding objectives either.

true, but often i have a layer effect of (front to back) aegis, grots, lootas, more grots.

that way the lootas have a charge buffer and the second grot mob hold the objective.

i think i'll be knocking a skyshield together soon enough then, maybe even 2 for 2k games...

I use a Landing Pad in my CSM/Daemon allied army, and was planning to try one in my White Scars before the rumours reared their heads. As said above, with the amount of ignores cover about having that invul. is very valuable, and whereas you have no option for Quad Gun, you are only paying 75pts for it.

The biggest problem with fielding the Landing Pad is that it forces a fundamental rethinking of your list design, with a much bigger emphasis being put on your AA.

Zagman wrote:
The biggest problem with fielding the Landing Pad is that it forces a fundamental rethinking of your list design, with a much bigger emphasis being put on your AA.

It does change your list design, but it certainly doesn't put any more emphasis on your AA; neither the Quad Gun or the Icarus are anything to write home over.

Lootas are about the best darn AA anyway...a lucky round of 15 lootas shooting means 10 str 7 hits on any flyer...that's more than any want to see

Technically the Skyshield is superior to ADL in every way. With the exception of 2-3 armies (orks for one) not having any interceptor/skyfire capabilities the quad gun offers, the skyshield gives the same save but as an invul not a cover and elevation for easier line of sight.

People just dont field it because they feel either:

1) Too big, i might not even be able to place it where it will help.
2) I'd rather bring the gun than take a 4++ over a 4+.
3) That thing is utter cheese, and i refuse to use it because its lame.

And if you were wondering, im no3. I will never field it because i find it severely undercosted for what it does and kinda cheesy. More often than not, if my opponent isnt having fun, neither am i.