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.

They are obviously great armies but which is more effective? I've heard some opinions on youtube and wondered what the dakka community thinks.

It's weird. Ravenwing has a better combat unit, by far, but scars have a better combat character, by far. Scars have much better psyker due to conclave not requiring ez-e. Scars are 6 points cheaper each and have much, much better support options. But the other army doesn't get a shooting phase if you are ravenwing and your shrouds are alive. So that's nice.

white scars are better

 Silverthorne wrote:
It's weird. Ravenwing has a better combat unit, by far, but scars have a better combat character, by far.

Khan vs. an Interrogator-Chaplain with Mace of Redemption. Guess who wins?

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Silverthorne wrote:
It's weird. Ravenwing has a better combat unit, by far, but scars have a better combat character, by far.

Khan vs. an Interrogator-Chaplain with Mace of Redemption. Guess who wins?

I'm a Ravenwing fan (I have both armies and they have quite different play styles for me).

I actually find Khan to be quite a mediocre character in combat. I think Sammael packs more of a punch in combat with eternal warrior and an AP2 power weapon. As has been said above, a bike-mounted interrogator-chaplain with the mace of redemption is great in combat and really buffs a unit of black knights.

Pure Ravenwing is a nice army and has some very powerful units- a unit of Black Knights backed up by a Darkshroud are practically indestructible from anything but ignores cover shooting.
White Scars have a lot more variety to the army in terms of building a themed force with access to drop pods, rhino mounted squads, grav centurions, etc. It depends on your playstyle and what you want in the army.

If you are interested, I have written some articles on comparing the white scars and Ravenwing: http://standwargaming.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/battle-of-bikers-white-scars-vs.html as well as reviewing the Ravening http://standwargaming.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/dark-angels-codex-review-ravenwing.html

OP- By more effective, what do you mean? Competitive play? Depends on the missions and what you are likely to face.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Silverthorne wrote:
It's weird. Ravenwing has a better combat unit, by far, but scars have a better combat character, by far. Scars have much better psyker due to conclave not requiring ez-e. Scars are 6 points cheaper each and have much, much better support options. But the other army doesn't get a shooting phase if you are ravenwing and your shrouds are alive. So that's nice.

Ravenwing have some great support options too. The Darkshroud is amazing and a must have for Ravenwing armies. It makes Black Knights and a command squad practically invulnerable, as well as providing anti-overwatch capacity. Plus, the Ravenshield from the support squadron can cause a lot of damage to the enemy army. The Dark Talon and Interromancy powers are also great support units, able to severely hinder the enemy army for your elite units to take out.

I am talking on a more competitive level. Khan is good (just not kitted out Chapter Master good). I heard black knights are one of the best FA in the game, but I dont see them played much (might just be me). I have seen victories in favour of both sides when they play...so I am leaning on they are both very competitive, just depends on what you wanna play.

I dunno. I play quite a bit of both. Black knights and darkshrouds are tough to top, but scouting alphas and brutal hit and fun command squads with a shield eternal TH CM in tow wrecks a day pretty well with some flyers in tow.

Regardless which one you go with, I do recommend having one non bike/flyer/speeder unit, be it DW termies, or a dev/centurion unit, or the like.

We play larger games at my local club (2500), so at that size it's an easy call... run both.

There is no clear answer there, each has it's edge on other situations.

Basically, its a matter of playstyle.

Alpha_Strike90 wrote:
I am talking on a more competitive level. Khan is good (just not kitted out Chapter Master good). I heard black knights are one of the best FA in the game, but I dont see them played much (might just be me). I have seen victories in favour of both sides when they play...so I am leaning on they are both very competitive, just depends on what you wanna play.

On a competitive level, lack of objective secured on the Ravenwing can be a big down side for a lot of tournament missions, especially if you come up against MSU armies, the Ravenwing will be unlikely to have enough firepower to put a serious dent in the enemy army and grab the objectives.

Without allies, I would say that White Scars have the edge. They are cheaper, have objective secured bikers and have access to hard hitting competitive units such as grav centurions, sternguard and a tooled up command squad. I would say that Khan is an essential choice in a competitive list. Giving the army the ability to scout and outflank is very powerful for board and objective control.