PDA

View Full Version : tired of dark reapers.



jackveneno
07-08-2007, 04:23
i can honestly say that reapers are done in my eldar army, they are useful against marines and other things with 3up or more but the price is too great for the way i like my armies (large and cheap). the way i have my eldar army geared they are not as useful, i have a fast and close combat oriented army with falcons and scorpions (3 squads of them).

to replace the reapers i was thinking of adding some harlequins or a seer council when my farseer is present. or maybe even some shinning spears to harass the flanks. what is recommended.

WallWeasels
07-08-2007, 04:25
Honestly, Reapers are a unit that are going to die eventually. Basically the unit, as you said, is only good against marines, and such a waste to fire against a horde army. Once your reaper squad takes 1-2 casualities, it starts becoming horrible at shooting. Not only the huge point cost, I just can't see them working well against people I play, and against my non-eldar armies.

Shaper Shakra
07-08-2007, 04:29
Shame they killed the exarch.

WallWeasels
07-08-2007, 04:30
:p The only squad that you can easily make the squad leader over 100points. :(

muskrat
07-08-2007, 05:18
I hate reapers myself...but i play chaos.

And I agree, they always die. Because I usually throw a lot of firepower at em. Reapers are those two shot krak missile launcher eldars guys, correct? Yeah...i hate them. i hate my opponent when he takes two squads.

elvinltl
07-08-2007, 06:57
Actually the reapers are generally easy to deal with if you have the Mobility and Tatics. They are static gunline army style and have problems when it comes to claiming objectives.

chaos0xomega
07-08-2007, 07:43
I love my Dark Reapers(though I'd never take more than one squad of them), so many common armies these days have at LEAST one unit with 3+ saves. Marines, Chaos, Tau, Tyranids, other Eldar armies, Chaos, even Orks! I always manage to find a use for them, and they really aren't that bad against 4+ save troops either, as a squad of 5 reapers can usually put enough shots into one to force leadership or eliminate it entirely.

Spetulhu
07-08-2007, 07:55
My regular Eldar opponent has a squad of Reapers and he hates them. They're expensive, their weapons are Heavy and they can't Fleet if they need to find a better firing position. Ultimately pointless, as he says. Why not take an extra Wraithlord instead?

Dr.Clock
07-08-2007, 08:09
Reapers are the toughest aspect to get mileage out of, I agree.

That said, I love the models, fluff and ability of them too much to part with them.

I favour them over falcons any day of the week.

As a rule though, I prefer taking large numbers of guardians as well.

I find the problem with playing with too many mobile units is that you lack the 'anchor' that slower units provide. Reapers provide the ability to control fire lanes and bottle the enemy up for the cavalry to swoop in. Nothing says love like blasting apart marines in the open...

As far as anti-horde goes, I'd have to invite y'all to face down four BS5 S4 AP4 pinning blasts and 16 BS4 S5 AP3 shots a turn. Basically any unit in their way is a smoking hole in the ground. Oh... and Guide gives me rerolls...

I've said it before and I'll say it again: reapers are absolutely an all or nothing unit. Either take two full squads or take none at all. One unit becomes a fire magnet that can't take the heat and two small units will be ineffective from the word go.

Of course, as a full third of a 1500 point army, they really only come into their own in 2000+ point battles where they can get the support they deserve. I fear this may lead to newer players who are building their forces to give up on them (not that the OP is necessarily one of these...).

Cheers,

The Good Doctor.

Alexandr Ulyanov
07-08-2007, 10:02
Dark reapers are mainly just ridiculously overpriced. Their guns are good, very good even, but they shouldn't cost the same as a space marine devastator with a missile launcher! 4 SM devs with this cost the same as 4 dark reapers, have the same save, the same BS, etc. but the SM missiles are Str 8 while the reaper launcher ones are Str 5. :wtf:
Then you can factor in the benefits for the SM besides of this: higher toughness helps when being shot.
The benefits of the Dark Reapers? None as far as shooting/taking shots is concerned, except maybe they can pay through the nose to get a good exarch.
How to fix the problem? Reduce the Dark Reaper cost significantly. 5 pts is nice, but 10 is probably better. Come on, would a 25 pt dark reaper be broken?

Commisar BoB
07-08-2007, 10:26
But Marine devs do not have the option of taking a guy that can fire 2 str 8 (iirc) missiles a turn at BS 5.

I believe reapers are worth it. But you have to deploy the right. You place them if possiable in cover and covering a fire lane. If you do that they make the points back and then some.

Alexandr Ulyanov
07-08-2007, 10:36
But Marine devs do not have the option of taking a guy that can fire 2 str 8 (iirc) missiles a turn at BS 5.

No they don't have that option. How much does that option cost? a lot. Instead you can buy two more missile launchers in your tactical squads and come out about the same, yes?



I believe reapers are worth it. But you have to deploy the right. You place them if possiable in cover and covering a fire lane. If you do that they make the points back and then some.
Any unit that only does well when in very ideal circumstances is not good. You say they need:
cover(And I do believe you mean good cover; a 6+ is not going to help much vs shooting)
a fire lane that is visible from the cover.
They also need:
Targets that aren't meatshields or vehicles they can't hurt.

So you want your opponent to walk down a fire lane up to an entrenched position with good targets visible along the way? If he does so, he is a complete idiot but the dark reapers do well. If he puts his men in decent transports and/or blocks LOS with vehicles/MCs in the front he can make the unit basically useless. (too slow to relocate, unable to do well where they are)

Randy
07-08-2007, 12:05
This is a thread asking wha tto replace them with, not how good they are.

I'd suggest some harlequins with a WS or shadow seer. Just rmeember the rules for the SS says specifically they can't be TARGETTED unless you pass the viel of tears thing - meaning indirect fire cannot shoot them.

pillbox
07-08-2007, 12:12
pathfinders may make a good alternative and fill a similar battlefield role. placing them down last due to infiltrate really lets you choose the best lanes of fire. and the 2+ cover save can cause many an opponent to cry lol

jackveneno
07-08-2007, 16:30
does anyone use shinning spears? the prospect of strength 6 power weapons is great, but they suffer from the same problem that he reapers do. the squads are too small and the points are too great.

Vedar
07-08-2007, 16:44
Pathfinders may not be as effective but 2 or 3+ cover saves they can annoy your enemy for about half the cost and take down teminators, light vechicles and high toughness creatures. Right now I mostly run 1 squad of Pathfinders and one squad of Dire Avengers for troops.

Alexandr Ulyanov
07-08-2007, 16:51
does anyone use shinning spears? the prospect of strength 6 power weapons is great, but they suffer from the same problem that he reapers do. the squads are too small and the points are too great.

Yes, my friend used them in a game sunday night. And yes, the problem you mention is a large one. They attacked a group of zoanthropes, killed some, and pulled back using hit-and-run but failed all their saves vs. the shooty-carnifex's guns in the following phase. They (a 3 man unit) just made up their points in that situation, so it wasn't so bad.

They end up being practically a one-shot unit, hitting any vehicle(lance rule ftw!) or high armor save creature with Init 5 or less hard and fast, then being cut down unless they get a really good hit and run roll. But that's ok; they'll usually do fine by points in the process.

If you want them to be more enduring, add a farseer on jetbike or autarch on jetbike to the squad for extra wounds and boosts.

Also, they excel at last second objective grabbing. (24" move over terrain)

ratfusion
07-08-2007, 16:55
Dark reapers are mainly just ridiculously overpriced. Their guns are good, very good even, but they shouldn't cost the same as a space marine devastator with a missile launcher! 4 SM devs with this cost the same as 4 dark reapers, have the same save, the same BS, etc. but the SM missiles are Str 8 while the reaper launcher ones are Str 5. :wtf:
Then you can factor in the benefits for the SM besides of this: higher toughness helps when being shot.
The benefits of the Dark Reapers? None as far as shooting/taking shots is concerned, except maybe they can pay through the nose to get a good exarch.
How to fix the problem? Reduce the Dark Reaper cost significantly. 5 pts is nice, but 10 is probably better. Come on, would a 25 pt dark reaper be broken?

They get twice as many shots for the same price though. A 25 pt dark reaper would be ridiculously cheap, I'd field a full 3x5 instead of the 3x3 I field now, and wish there was some way I could take them as troops.

King Thurgun
07-08-2007, 16:58
Dark reapers are mainly just ridiculously overpriced. Their guns are good, very good even, but they shouldn't cost the same as a space marine devastator with a missile launcher! 4 SM devs with this cost the same as 4 dark reapers, have the same save, the same BS, etc. but the SM missiles are Str 8 while the reaper launcher ones are Str 5. :wtf:
Then you can factor in the benefits for the SM besides of this: higher toughness helps when being shot.
The benefits of the Dark Reapers? None as far as shooting/taking shots is concerned, except maybe they can pay through the nose to get a good exarch.
How to fix the problem? Reduce the Dark Reaper cost significantly. 5 pts is nice, but 10 is probably better. Come on, would a 25 pt dark reaper be broken?

It would absolutely be broken. You forgot to add into your equation that a) the exarch can fire his missile launcher TWICE, with BS5. All on his own, he's nearly as effective at tank killing as a Marine Devasatator Squad of 5 missile launchers. Also, you forgot to mention that all the reapers fire their guns twice. Marines are tougher, but with less shots. Reapers have more shots, but are squishy, and their exarch is a powerhouse. Seems balanced to me as is. Reducing their points would be ludicrous.

Alexandr Ulyanov
07-08-2007, 17:27
It would absolutely be broken..
Why? A good explanation would be something like: comparable units that do the same thing cost more or have bigger weaknesses; therefore, that is too cheap.



You forgot to add into your equation that a) the exarch can fire his missile launcher TWICE, with BS5.

No, I did not forget. EXARCH. FIRES. MISSILE LAUNCHER. TWICE. Also, he costs nearly 80 pts total when upgraded to do so. So, you can have 1 exarch like this or have more than 2 devastators with missile launchers instead. Roughly the same.

Or you just add 3 missile launchers to the tactical squads and outperform the single exarch for less than his points cost(marines and gun included) at shooting krak missiles and have more padding on them.



All on his own, he's nearly as effective at tank killing as a Marine Devasatator Squad of 5 missile launchers.

Wrong. He averages 1.666 (repeating) hits with his missiles, and the 5 missile launcher devastator squad averages 3.333 (repeating), or exactly double what the exarch does. You fail.



Also, you forgot to mention that all the reapers fire their guns twice. Marines are tougher, but with less shots. Reapers have more shots, but are squishy, and their exarch is a powerhouse. Seems balanced to me as is.

Yes, all reapers fire their guns twice. They're str 5 though. Okay, I'll adapt the comparison.
Against most troops, autocannons are better than missile launchers. So, we'll assume the dark reapers either didn't take an exarch or they did and his advantage is negated by the presence of a bunch of missile launchers in the marines tactical squads. So, we put a dark reaper against an autocannon dev in most situations, and the autocannon dev is cheaper, better at troop killing, and better at vehicle busting. That indicates an overpriced reaper since reapers already, and then you factor in that dark reapers are supposed to be better since they are highly specialized. (Since they can normally only take out troops well, not vehicles)


Reducing their points would be ludicrous.Give me one good reason why, please.

Spetulhu
07-08-2007, 17:49
Comparing Reapers to marines with missile launchers is silly. Surely the ordinary Reaper launcher is closer to a Heavy Bolter when thinking of what it's meant to kill? And don't forget that Marine Dev squads only get four heavy weapons.

Alexandr Ulyanov
07-08-2007, 18:12
Comparing Reapers to marines with missile launchers is silly. Surely the ordinary Reaper launcher is closer to a Heavy Bolter when thinking of what it's meant to kill? And don't forget that Marine Dev squads only get four heavy weapons.

In my last post, I compared them to autocannons which is actually a better fit than using heavy bolters for comparison. Heavy bolters are shorter range with more shots; I'd prefer to use autocannons which at least share range and no. of shots with the reaper launcher. However, I was compelled to refute claims that the double firing missile launcher exarch was cost effective, hence so many missile launcher references.

Dev Squads get 4 heavy weapons. Reapers get 5 at most. Not a very large difference there.

A bigger issue is that dark reapers have no ablative wounds to burn while devs can have quite a few if they want, hence dark reapers are much, much more fragile.

The two units are very much alike, but the dark reapers are less flexible and less tough for their points while being just about equivalent everywhere else. Therefore, they should cost less than autocannon devs.

Randy
07-08-2007, 18:19
So you think autocannons should be more expensive then a reapear launcher?

A reaper launcher isn't designed for vehicles, light or otherwise, and isn't designed for bog standerd infantry. It's designed for MEQs.

An autocannon is a hybrid weapon for infantry and light vehicles.

Also if you take a 5 man devastator squad (with rockets) which isn't as many points, it's more, then it's only just about less fragile. The stuff that's going to be killing things with a 3+ save at range will mostly be heavy weapons like repear launhcers or krak missile rounds. As such, the toughness wil make little difference.

carlisimo
07-08-2007, 18:21
I've had trouble using them too, but most of my regular opponents are MEQ armies so it's hard to resist. I use a small unit and it's enough to scare the opponent into changing his plan. Works for me.

Don't forget they're more expensive than they would be in another army because they fill in a weakness for the Eldar. It's like if Tau had something like Howling Banshees, they'd have to be really expensive or the army would be too good at everything.

Alexandr Ulyanov
07-08-2007, 18:31
So you think autocannons should be more expensive then a reapear launcher?
Uh, yes?



A reaper launcher isn't designed for vehicles, light or otherwise, and isn't designed for bog standerd infantry. It's designed for MEQs.

It's much more highly specialized as a weapon, and isn't even remotely good against some armies. (Hey look, the DE didn't bring any 3+ OR 4+ saves this game) As such, it should be a great deal for taking out those armies it is designed to fight. It apparently isn't, though the points others have made(fragility, expense, sluggishness) go farther towards proving that than my somewhat flawed comparison did.



An autocannon is a hybrid weapon for infantry and light vehicles.

Yup, and as such it is more flexible than a reaper launcher. It also is better against anything that doesn't have exactly a 3+ save.



Also if you take a 5 man devastator squad (with rockets) which isn't as many points, it's more, then it's only just about less fragile.

More expensive than what? Not more expensive than 5 dark reapers.

All marines get the T4, ATSKNF, etc. which helps to keep those guns firing.



The stuff that's going to be killing things with a 3+ save at range will mostly be heavy weapons like repear launhcers or krak missile rounds. As such, the toughness wil make little difference.
But a difference nonetheless.



Don't forget they're more expensive than they would be in another army because they fill in a weakness for the Eldar. It's like if Tau had something like Howling Banshees, they'd have to be really expensive or the army would be too good at everything.
What weakness? long range MEQ killing? That's one of the eldar strengths!
Fire prisms don't cost extra, and they can in tandem make S6 AP3 large blasts. Their normal S9 AP2 small blast also kicks MEQs around. Then there are those nasty starcannons and eldar missile launchers on all kinds of things, from tanks and light vehicles to guardian platforms.

Randy
07-08-2007, 18:36
I'll rephrase the last point you qouted. It won't make a difference against a single weapon which is a significant threat which I can recall.

And a 5 man devastator squad gets half the shots of a 5 strong reapear squad. So it SHOULD be less points. It gets less shots then a 3 strong reapear squad and is more expensive.

If you've fallen back, odds on you won't be shooting much given your lack of LoS probably.

Against some armies wh play with proper spacing, the ML isn't even remotely good. (Oh look.. those orks have come at us without any vehicles... And they're spaced out too much for frag rounds to actually kill anymore then 1..

Alexandr Ulyanov
07-08-2007, 18:58
And a 5 man devastator squad gets half the shots of a 5 strong reapear squad.
No. It gets nearly the same number with autocannons for fewer points.



So it SHOULD be less points. It gets less shots then a 3 strong reapear squad and is more expensive.

No. It gets more shots when using autocannons than a 3 man reaper squad.



If you've fallen back, odds on you won't be shooting much given your lack of LoS
Actually you missed the point of what I was saying. Dark reapers lose 3 guys, fall back, can't regroup. Marines lose 3 guys, fall back, automatically regroup, then get back into position and continue to play. If the casualties happened on the first turn this is a HUGE Difference. (no heavies left vs. 2 heavies left)



Against some armies wh play with proper spacing, the ML isn't even remotely good. (Oh look.. those orks have come at us without any vehicles... And they're spaced out too much for frag rounds to actually kill anymore then 1..
Which is why I have made most comparisons with autocannons.

Randy
07-08-2007, 20:01
The ap is better which makes reapear cannons better at its job. Simple as. The reaper cannon isn't meant to be a hybrid, it's meant to be a MEQ killer.

Marines can't take autocannons so no, an autocannon unit can't rally after half of its guys have been killed.

And I was still talking about MLs seeing how you obviously nmisunderstood me when I said that a 5 man dev squad was mroe expensive when talking about one kitted out with MLs. 4 MLs gets less shots then even 3 reaper cannons.

Captain Micha
07-08-2007, 20:15
Meqs are what the reaper weapon was made for. as was the continued existance of the star cannon. Marines are good at beating things up in sustained assualts... Eldar are like some wierd fighter that can take things out in one shot, but has a really bad glass jaw.

chaos0xomega
07-08-2007, 20:24
My regular Eldar opponent has a squad of Reapers and he hates them. They're expensive, their weapons are Heavy and they can't Fleet if they need to find a better firing position. Ultimately pointless, as he says. Why not take an extra Wraithlord instead?


I think Wraithlords are pointless, impossible to hide, and usually they don't make it anywhere anytime fast. I refuse to take them. Dark Reapers on the other hand, have enough range on their guns to block out a pretty large chunk of the board, if you deploy them wisely, moving them shouldn't be an issue. And remember, they have a wave serpent as a transport option...



I've said it before and I'll say it again: reapers are absolutely an all or nothing unit. Either take two full squads or take none at all. One unit becomes a fire magnet that can't take the heat and two small units will be ineffective from the word go.

I find that a bit excessive. One unit of Reapers is really all what I need in most cases(especially considering that I play with 3 units of Pathfinders, there are bigger firemagnets on the table...), and I'd rather use the other 2 slots for an Eldar Firestorm or Warwalkers.


4 SM devs with this cost the same as 4 dark reapers, have the same save, the same BS, etc. but the SM missiles are Str 8 while the reaper launcher ones are Str 5.

But you get two shots with the Reapers instead of 1 :D

Dark Reapers OWN at cityfight is all I have to say.


EXARCH. FIRES. MISSILE LAUNCHER. TWICE.

As does the rest of the squad...

Spetulhu
07-08-2007, 20:41
Why not take an extra Wraithlord instead?

I think Wraithlords are pointless, impossible to hide, and usually they don't make it anywhere anytime fast.

A Wraithlord is very tough, can fire two weapons on the move and still assault. It doesn't matter if it has to move in order to get a better firing lane. It's not everyone that can destroy it in one round of shooting and even fewer that can take it down in one round of close combat. Many opponents will want to kill it before it jams some important unit in CC, spending firepower that could have crippled your other Eldar units.

The reapers are basically screwed if they deploy in the wrong place.

Randy
07-08-2007, 20:49
Wraithlords are SUPERB fire magnets and have a fantastic intimidation factor. Also, with nothing but a WS it's somewhat good at pushing back your opponents deployment.

In addition it's a fantastic heavy weapons platform.

Captain Micha
07-08-2007, 20:57
Wraithlords scare me... they keep my poor firewarriors up late at night!

Randy
07-08-2007, 21:13
They keep EVERYONE up late at night.. But more fire warriors because they're pansies *-)

Alexandr Ulyanov
07-08-2007, 23:33
They keep EVERYONE up late at night..

Actually tyranids aren't worried by them; Nidzilla eats wraithlords for breakfast.



But more fire warriors because they're pansies *-)
Quoted for truth.

Anyway, wraithlords will probably get more mileage than dark reapers if only because wraithlords are:
hard to destroy
able to fight just as well right up until they die as opposed to taking casualties
able to shoot while moving(although they do have to walk)

So, wraithlords should be better at capturing points and can screen for the main force as well as providing a lot of MEQ killing firepower.

EmperorEternalXIX
07-08-2007, 23:39
Not for nothing...but...

A.) I can't cast "guide" on my devastators, ro "Doom" on their target.
B.) Unless they're using heavy bolters they get a max of four shots. Reapers can almost always get more.
C.) I don't think there even is an "Autocannon Devastator" option anywhere...if it's out there, I sure missed it, anyhow.

scopedog91
07-08-2007, 23:45
I myself like the Dark Reapers very much.
I have been playing against many Marine armies around here, or many MEQ {Sisters, Grey Knights, Necrons} and I think they work well. Like every other unit in an Eldar army, they need to be used in concert with everything around them.
I like the way they look, mostly...
Would be nice to use two squads, but those Falcons are just too tempting...