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.

Okay Dakka.

So I play mixed guard. Have had a lot of posts about utilizing various underutilized units on here in the past few weeks. But I have a new one for you. I normally run an "anchor" of an aegis for the icirus/quad gun. With a few heavy support and some foot behind it to hold the back field.

I had a game last night and my opponent suggested something I at first thought was silly but then began to wonder... Is it?

Why not bring a sky shield instead. Cheaper the. My defense line + gun. And provides a 4+ invuln, which is always better then the 4+ cover as it can't be ignored or removed by barrage/ignores cover weapons.

So Dakka. Is a sky shield worth giving up an icirus las cannon? Is it worth clustering my tanks to:

Increase LOS, gain a 4+ invuln, andakr it harder for melta and cc troops to reach?

I say yes. Especially since guard can essentially buy Quad Guns in squadrons of three anyway.

It is not a simple question. If you use an anchor of foot guard then probably not as the ADL is really a 2+ cover save with the requirement of get back into the fight and a quadd gun is better than a hydra in every way.

The skyshield starts to shine when you are going to fight on it in the middle board, need the height, or anchor with 2+ Sv, MC, or (for guard) tanks. Leman Russ' on a skyshield is just mean.