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.

While a Storm Raven can pack a lot of fire power it also costs a lot of points and isn't very maneuverable on the table top. I mean you have to move 20" and can only make 1 90 degree turn each move. So you end up flying in squares but you also don't get much choice in where you go. If you want to maneuver then you have to take a turn to go into hover mode and then you're vulnerable to charges and lose your -1 to be hit.

Is there something that I'm missing or would I be better off taking just normal ground vehicles?

The stormraven brings 2 things:

1. -1 to hit , spoiling things like Wrath of Mars
2. Substantial transport capacity, with no maximum number of units - unlike a bastion

Combined it makes it very viable for putting in a stack of characters ( and some ablative scouts for when it explodes) to preserve a drop advantage, or more specifically a drop *pod* advantage.

Unless your army specifically needs that, give them a miss.

In practice it works out to be pretty maneuverable and by turn 2-3 when you've flown yourself into a corner you will either be able to hover without worry of getting shot down or won't have that worry as it will already be a smoking crater.

You can pretty much get wherever you need to on the table (unless you are playing against a true horde army) and with PoTMS you can put good dakka on the targets that need it (that's why it WAS a staple of some of the most competitive marine lists).

Don't forget about the -1 to hit (which offers a lot of protection against everything but dark reapers) throw in tiggarius and you can pump one of them up to -2.

Also, you can park it so far back in a corner and then zoom into gun range protecting you from enemy alpha and providing good beta strike ability (something marines are sorely lacking).

Think of it more of a deepstriking tank with PoTMS than a true flyer and it will help with figuring out why it is so valuable.

But with the point cost drop of the Fire Raptor it is outclassed by that bird in every conceivable way.

bananathug wrote:
But with the point cost drop of the Fire Raptor it is outclassed by that bird in every conceivable way.

Except in one absolutely crucial area for most of us: real world money price!

And that is significant. It might not be as good as a Fire Raptor, but it's good enough if you don't have over £100 to spend on a single model.

Unless you want the transport option the Fireraptor is a better choice overall. I also like the Stormhawk for less points.

The Storm Hawk/Talon have the same lack of maneuverability issues. 20" with only a 90 degree turn is just too limiting on a 4 x 6 board.

Hovering is great but you pay for it.

That's what I mean. Would I be as well off/better off if I invested those same Storm Raven points in say, razorbacks or land raiders? Both of them have transport capabilities and fire power and they can pretty much go wherever they want on any given turn.

 Primark G wrote:
Hovering is great but you pay for it.

If you are hovering you are probably close enough to shred something so you probably wont need to worry too much about retaliation on the next turn anyway.

 malamis wrote:
The stormraven brings 2 things:


2. Substantial transport capacity, with no maximum number of units - unlike a bastion

Unlimited? Did I miss something? In my codex it shows 12 infantry and 1 dread.

As the proud owner of a Stormraven, I wouldn't mind having a high capacity...but I think not having a max would be kinda broken.

 Karthicus wrote:

 malamis wrote:
The stormraven brings 2 things:


2. Substantial transport capacity, with no maximum number of units - unlike a bastion

Unlimited? Did I miss something? In my codex it shows 12 infantry and 1 dread.

I think he means like you could potentially put 12 characters that take up 1 slot each and a dread

rather than it only holding a single tactical squad.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
The Storm Hawk/Talon have the same lack of maneuverability issues. 20" with only a 90 degree turn is just too limiting on a 4 x 6 board.

Maybe last edition. You fire 360 from the flyer, so the direction you point is somewhat irrelevant. at only 20" a turn the game is usually over before you're forced to limit your targets.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
That's what I mean. Would I be as well off/better off if I invested those same Storm Raven points in say, razorbacks or land raiders? Both of them have transport capabilities and fire power and they can pretty much go wherever they want on any given turn.

Nope. Because your razorbacks/landraiders are blown off the table in alpha strike vs. deploying your flyers way out of range of most things that will kill you turn 1. Also they cannot be assaulted by most units capable of t1 charges and PoTMS makes them way better than razors once you start facing armies with -1+ to hit.

Stormraven has more dakka (2x hurricane bolters > 2x heavy bolters, 2x Sky Missiles + 2x melta + 2x las > 4x las +1 melta), harder to kill (-1 to hit > +1t and 2W, deployment shenanigans make it even better), more maneuverability and better target selection (gets around LOS and most screens, dakka version can get into hurricane bolter + asscanon ranges t1) than any SM tank for less cost (even after CA). Fire Raptor does all of that better than a storm raven.

Thanks for the advise/info.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
That's what I mean. Would I be as well off/better off if I invested those same Storm Raven points in say, razorbacks or land raiders? Both of them have transport capabilities and fire power and they can pretty much go wherever they want on any given turn.

It’s a lot of points sunk into one unit and some armies can shred them quickly. I’d rather take a lesser pointed flyer. I like the Stormhawk because you can load it up with a lot of ranged weapons. It also +1 to hit against units with the keyword Fly which can be useful. The best thing about flyers is they can reach most any unit.

 Primark G wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
That's what I mean. Would I be as well off/better off if I invested those same Storm Raven points in say, razorbacks or land raiders? Both of them have transport capabilities and fire power and they can pretty much go wherever they want on any given turn.

It’s a lot of points sunk into one unit and some armies can shred them quickly. I’d rather take a lesser pointed flyer. I like the Stormhawk because you can load it up with a lot of ranged weapons. It also +1 to hit against units with the keyword Fly which can be useful. The best thing about flyers is they can reach most any unit.

Storm hawks are nice.

the raven is pretty much an all your eggs in one basket situation.

it comes down to not only how expensive it is but all the junk you are putting into it like an ironclad or and a bunch of choppy guys

its functional but you kinda need to go all out otherwise it will get blow out of the sky potentially hurting and stranding whatever you put inside in some place you dont want it to be.

I agree. It’s really good but versus some armies it won’t last long.

Yeah, but if they are blowing your raven out of the sky they are blowing your land raider or razorbacks off the board as well (which is why I've been converted to the only infantry SM team, target saturation FTW). Really begs the question if any SM armor is really worth it...

Or you take those 350ish points and buy 6 las cannons in 3 squads of devs...

The only safe unit is one that can't be shot (or has a -2 to hit, stupid hemlocks). Flyers do this through deployment better than most other armor.

I really wish the hawk/talon were like 25 points cheaper. Once they take some damage and degrade they have a really hard time hitting anything. Although I did have a Hawk get really lucky and one round a winged demon prince...

edit: And who doesn't want to spend +150$ Freedom Dollars on a model that will be "adjusted" to uselessness in a couple months? What kind of peasants are we? Let me guess, you have silver toilet seats rather than gold? Fething savages...

An alternative to a flyer for hard to reach enemy units is for example two Whirlwinds. A friend of mine uses them and swears by them. They are not amazing but they can do some damage. IG will tear up your armor so I don’t like to heavily invest in it. If you have a reasonable amount of LoS blocking terrain they have some survivability.

 deviantduck wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
The Storm Hawk/Talon have the same lack of maneuverability issues. 20" with only a 90 degree turn is just too limiting on a 4 x 6 board.

Maybe last edition. You fire 360 from the flyer, so the direction you point is somewhat irrelevant. at only 20" a turn the game is usually over before you're forced to limit your targets.

Speaking of firing arcs, isn't facing just not a thing this edition?

As I understand it it's totally legal to move a tank sideways if you wish, so long as no part of the model moves further than its movement.

So while you are limited to a 90 degree turn, can you not still go in any direction, so long as it's a straight line? I suppose it could come down to the semantics of what 'straight forward' means, but it does seem poorly defined...

Stux wrote:


Speaking of firing arcs, isn't facing just not a thing this edition?

As I understand it it's totally legal to move a tank sideways if you wish, so long as no part of the model moves further than its movement.

So while you are limited to a 90 degree turn, can you not still go in any direction, so long as it's a straight line? I suppose it could come down to the semantics of what 'straight forward' means, but it does seem poorly defined...

If you're arguing that "straight forwards" can be any direction, you're just trying to misunderstand. The "supersonic" and "wings of Khaine" rules clearly provide an exception to the rule that a model can move in any direction. The rules may not define which direction is "forwards" for a Stormraven, but then again, they expect you to figure out "up" and "down" on your models as well.

It can fly backwards but your one turn is limited to 90 degrees. It can fire from any point along it’s hull so it’s not a big deal.

 Cream Tea wrote:

Stux wrote:


Speaking of firing arcs, isn't facing just not a thing this edition?

As I understand it it's totally legal to move a tank sideways if you wish, so long as no part of the model moves further than its movement.

So while you are limited to a 90 degree turn, can you not still go in any direction, so long as it's a straight line? I suppose it could come down to the semantics of what 'straight forward' means, but it does seem poorly defined...

If you're arguing that "straight forwards" can be any direction, you're just trying to misunderstand. The "supersonic" and "wings of Khaine" rules clearly provide an exception to the rule that a model can move in any direction. The rules may not define which direction is "forwards" for a Stormraven, but then again, they expect you to figure out "up" and "down" on your models as well.

That's fair.

It's a rule that bugs me though. Not because of balance, I get limiting flyer movement in this way makes sense logically. It's because a massive part of the design philosophy of 8th that dictated many of the rule changes was to take away ambiguity in things like firing arcs and facing, and this rule means now we can have arguments about whether a model was turned at all between the start of its movement and the end, or whether it was turned more than 90 degrees and such.