Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/17 18:27:23


Post by: Galef


It seems Reapers are universally considered a no-brainer choice for Eldar, which combined with their decent stratagems and powers, makes them a bit more powerful than their points cost should be.
Rather than making the 50+ppm, I'd like to propose a few changes with a slight points bump.

First, I would drop the special "always hits on 3+" rule. It just doesn't make sense to not be affected no matter what.
I would make Reapers have natural BS2+ like Crimson Hunters. Before you object, hear me out:

Crimson Hunter have to move with their Heavy weapons. That means they hit on 3+. Because re-roll happen before modifiers, this means Guide only allows them to re-roll 1s, as 2s naturally hit before modifiers.
This would make common tactics like embarking in a Serpent or Dropping out of the Webway less appealing as you are considered as moving in those cases. In these situations, Guide is only as affective as having an Autarch nearby.

The Second change I would make is to limit unit size to 3min-5max. This would further limit stacking special rules and stratagems. No more 10-man unit Forewarning

Finally, I would bump the base cost of the Reaper from 5ppm, to 13ppm. This combined with the 22ppm launcher would make the 35ppm total

-

So the final result is a 35ppm unit that can only have 5 models as max (the number of models in the box), thereby making less efficient use of stratagems and psychic powers that can still be affected by -1 to hit modifiers.

Thoughts?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/17 18:46:52


Post by: AnomanderRake


I'd leave them at BS3+ and make them ignore move-and-fire instead. I know that'd make Guide slightly better on them, but capping the squad at 5 models should keep that from making too much difference and you don't get to hit on 2+ against people who aren't bringing penalties to hit.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/17 20:47:21


Post by: Galef


Yeah maybe you are right.
So make their unit special rule be "ignores firing heavies while moving"
Max unit size = 5 and points bump to 35ppm.

They should still be playable without being a no-brainer

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/17 20:48:32


Post by: Xenomancers


 Galef wrote:
Yeah maybe you are right.
So make their unit special rule be "ignores firing heavies while moving"
Max unit size = 5 and points bump to 35ppm.

They should still be playable without being a no-brainer

-

That would be a good place to start.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/17 21:18:30


Post by: Elbows


I think the problem with this portion of the forum is that its target audience is people who wouldn't abuse them anyway?

Obviously if you have people in your gaming group willing to "fix" Dark Reapers for play (because honestly GW isn't going to read this forum and magically fix them according to what people discuss here), then you already have players willing not to spam them.

I own two squads of six Dark Reapers (five and an Exarch). I've taken two squads of three in a single game, and routinely take one squad of 5-6 in a normal game. I wouldn't even consider buying more. Because they're just strong enough that spamming them would make me a douchebag. Solution? Don't take bloody hundreds of them.

So, I don't personally need to "fix" Dark Reapers because while strong a few small units of them does not ruin the games I play. I would think the same of anyone who would agree on the surface to fix Dark Reapers for local play. The easiest fix? Don't spam them like a douchebag.

Are the majority of conversations on this portion of the forum hypothetical or just for discussion's sake? How often do people actually implement the rules changes we discuss here --- and more importantly how often are the rules changes (house rules) put into effect in an actual game with other players?

I don't disagree that GW will probably tack on some points to the Dark Reapers and that's fair. But even a 5-8 point bump would barely change army composition for people who are running 10 squads of them in an army. You'd just be facing nine.

I'm always a fan of house rules, but I find the best house rule is always: don't be a dick.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/17 21:36:32


Post by: Xenomancers


We seek consensus. Hopefully GW will understand consensus when it comes time to balance in chapter approved.

They have 1 more chance from me - if this next chapter approved does not fix the major issues in the game I'm just going to stop wasting my time with GW altogether. Straight up. As you can see - it's not that hard. Galef alone could probably fix the game in a week - hes got a lot of good ideas and is reasonable. Unlike GW.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/18 15:41:19


Post by: Galef


Thanx Xenomancers, that means a lot.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/19 01:18:44


Post by: Wyldhunt


 Galef wrote:
Yeah maybe you are right.
So make their unit special rule be "ignores firing heavies while moving"
Max unit size = 5 and points bump to 35ppm.

They should still be playable without being a no-brainer

-


That feels agreeable. It lets them retain their own brand of eldar "mobility" by repositioning and shooting, but people don't feel like their special to-hit penalty rules are being ignored. At 35 PPM, they're still a solid choice this edition. Leaving their BS at 3+ avoids complaints about them being BS 2+ and allows them to synergize more reliably with our various buffs. Lowering the max squad size mitigates buff stacking and possibly makes them feel less durable (even though spreading your bodies out across multiple squads generally makes them harder to take out.) People will feel better about killing off a 5th of the squad each time they get a kill.

I'm always worried people will either take away all semblance of special rules (thus leaving them feeling un-aspecty) or price them back up to being unusable as per previous editions, but I think we've found a good middle ground.

While we're on the topic, could we revisit the exarch's special rule? Reroll to-hit rolls is redundant with Maugan's aura and the Path of Command. Perhaps, with the other suggested changes in mind, an exarch could grant his unit +1 to hit units with the Flyer battle field role? So you can still hide from reapers by being camouflaged or psychically shrouded or whatever, but the exarch's rangefinder will hand out firing solutions to his unit as they take out that low-flying storm raven. Or something else entirely.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/19 15:06:23


Post by: Galef


Wyldhunt wrote:
While we're on the topic, could we revisit the exarch's special rule? Reroll to-hit rolls is redundant with Maugan's aura and the Path of Command. Perhaps, with the other suggested changes in mind, an exarch could grant his unit +1 to hit units with the Flyer battle field role? So you can still hide from reapers by being camouflaged or psychically shrouded or whatever, but the exarch's rangefinder will hand out firing solutions to his unit as they take out that low-flying storm raven. Or something else entirely.

I like where you are going with this, however I feel like handing out a rule to the whole unit might push then back into OP territory.

I think we could probably just leave the rule for the Exarch only, in which case, I would make it re-roll to wound rolls against units with the Fly rule.
Just like the Crimson Hunters.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/19 16:48:14


Post by: buddha


I'd be fine of they fixed inescapable accuracy to just ignore penalties to moving and keep their reaper launcher profile to just Str.5 -2 1dmg. They can pay to upgrade to a EML. Tempest launcher should just be D6 shots.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 15:06:21


Post by: Galef


So LVO results are in a Reaper spam definitely had an affect.

I still feel that my fixes can work:
-'Inescapable Accuracy' should be "ignores -1 to hit for Heavy weapons", not always hits on 3+
-Max unit size should be 5, not 10
-Base cost of Reaper should be 8-10ppm so that once the launcher is added, they are 30-32ppm

Not ignoring all penalties to hit and not being able to affect more than 5 models with a single buff should more than compensate for the points cost.
It should make buffs like Guide, Forewarning and Soulburst much less effective, yet keep the unit playable and comparable to units like Fire Prisms and Missile Launcher War Walkers.

These are changes I'd expect to happen in the next Chapter Approved. And honestly that change cannot happen soon enough. I don't personally like Reapers, but the pressure to use them is definitely there.
The sooner that pressure is gone (because they got nerfed a bit) the better.

My hope, however, is that they don't become useless overnight because of an over-nerf. If Chapter Approved goes any further than what I have suggested above, I'll consider it an over-nerf.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 15:39:03


Post by: Martel732


A marine with a missile launcher is 38. Even with your changes, dark reapers are a 40 ppm model because their ammo is better. 200 points for 5 heavy weapons is standard in elite lists.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 15:42:51


Post by: ChargerIIC


The problem with Reapers is that people take them for the always 3+ rule. It's a hard counter to all these -1 to hit shenagians and probably the only reason people have picked up these traditionally disliked models. You could bump it up to always hitting on a 4+, but remove the rule and they'll go right back on the shelf.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 15:46:07


Post by: Martel732


They take them because they are undercosted. If you want the current rules, they are 50 ppm.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 15:48:02


Post by: skchsan


 Galef wrote:
So LVO results are in a Reaper spam definitely had an affect.

I still feel that my fixes can work:
-'Inescapable Accuracy' should be "ignores -1 to hit for Heavy weapons", not always hits on 3+
-Max unit size should be 5, not 10
-Base cost of Reaper should be 8-10ppm so that once the launcher is added, they are 30-32ppm

Not ignoring all penalties to hit and not being able to affect more than 5 models with a single buff should more than compensate for the points cost.
It should make buffs like Guide, Forewarning and Soulburst much less effective, yet keep the unit playable and comparable to units like Fire Prisms and Missile Launcher War Walkers.

These are changes I'd expect to happen in the next Chapter Approved. And honestly that change cannot happen soon enough. I don't personally like Reapers, but the pressure to use them is definitely there.
The sooner that pressure is gone (because they got nerfed a bit) the better.

My hope, however, is that they don't become useless overnight because of an over-nerf. If Chapter Approved goes any further than what I have suggested above, I'll consider it an over-nerf.

-
If I were to make a proposal, if inescapable accuracy was revised so:

"The Ballistic Skill of models in this unit cannot be modified below 4+ when firing a ranged weapon (although they still only hit on rolls of 6 when firing Overwatch)."

It would pose a relative soft revision to the ability while not overly nerfing them. This would mean that Dark Reapers would be prone to -1 hit modifiers max, regardless of the source of the negative modifier (moving and firing heavy weapon, -hit from dark shroud, etc).


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 15:49:34


Post by: JNAProductions


 ChargerIIC wrote:
The problem with Reapers is that people take them for the always 3+ rule. It's a hard counter to all these -1 to hit shenagians and probably the only reason people have picked up these traditionally disliked models. You could bump it up to always hitting on a 4+, but remove the rule and they'll go right back on the shelf.


They're quite good even without Inescapable Accuracy. They'd be worse, yes, but they're too good right now, so they SHOULD be worse.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 15:55:51


Post by: Galef


 ChargerIIC wrote:
The problem with Reapers is that people take them for the always 3+ rule. It's a hard counter to all these -1 to hit shenagians and probably the only reason people have picked up these traditionally disliked models. You could bump it up to always hitting on a 4+, but remove the rule and they'll go right back on the shelf.

Which is why I am not suggesting to remove the rule, but rather alter it.

How about making "Inescapable Accuracy" read as follows: "Models with this rule never suffer more than -1 to hit regardless of multiple modifiers"
So if they move - 4+ to hit
If thy shoot a 'hard to hit' unit - 4+ to hit
If they moved AND are shooting a target with -1 - still 4+ to hit

So modifiers to hit still affect them, just not multiple modifiers

@Martel: I understand your point of view on this, but I feel that your suggestion (plus the general difficulty at obtaining actual Reaper models atm) would pretty much delete Reapers from competitive lists entirely (which is clearly what you want to happen). I know you will disagree, but 40-50ppm for a T3 model is just too egregious no matter how well that compares to the Marine equivalents. Bottom line is that Marines with ML are too expensive themselves, why should Reapers be as well?

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 16:05:43


Post by: admironheart


So my thoughts. I'm a 2nd edition guy. I don't like rules that change the fluff too much. Basic Tactical Marines rules and fluff have been constant.

Why not elder.

Reapers were always a unit of 3 to 7.

So a max unit of 7 seems nice....Same with Shining Spears/Warp Spiders, but enough of that. (BTW Dire Avengers should be like 15max with this line of thought)

The Reaper Ranger Finder made it so that Reapers could always hit units more reliable than other heavies.

If you take the move an fire away....IN Game they will just stand still.

If you take the 3+ away...IN Game it wont be any different than most units shooting at an Alaitoc unit...Reapers would have the same actual results as everyone else.

If you Increase the points too much. Devestator ML Marines will just take 2 or 3 'ablative' base marines to make their 33 point models outlive Reapers. 5 points is too low granted. 7 would be a good starting number as a base....maybe 8 if you consider Fire Dragons.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 16:26:32


Post by: Galef


 admironheart wrote:
So my thoughts. I'm a 2nd edition guy. I don't like rules that change the fluff too much. Basic Tactical Marines rules and fluff have been constant.

Why not elder.

Reapers were always a unit of 3 to 7.

So a max unit of 7 seems nice....Same with Shining Spears/Warp Spiders, but enough of that. (BTW Dire Avengers should be like 15max with this line of thought)

The Reaper Ranger Finder made it so that Reapers could always hit units more reliable than other heavies.

If you take the move an fire away....IN Game they will just stand still.

If you take the 3+ away...IN Game it wont be any different than most units shooting at an Alaitoc unit...Reapers would have the same actual results as everyone else.

If you Increase the points too much. Devestator ML Marines will just take 2 or 3 'ablative' base marines to make their 33 point models outlive Reapers. 5 points is too low granted. 7 would be a good starting number as a base....maybe 8 if you consider Fire Dragons.

I'd love GW to start reusing those odd unit max number, but alas, they seem dead set on using 5s and 10s

I also think you bring up another interesting difference between Reapers and Devastators: Ablative wounds. Reapers do not have this option. I'd live to just take a Reaper or 2 with just a shuriken catapult to absorb casualties. GW seems to also like to price things up that can take different options. Devs have several different weapon options. Reapers (aside from the Exarch) only have 1 weapon option
The fact that the 1 weapon option is better than all the possible options a Dev unit can take is irrelevant (to GW), thus Devs will always be more expensive.
I am not saying it should be like this, I am just saying that it like this and should NOT be a factor when trying to balance a unit.

GW over-values Devs, they need to be cheaper. Therfore, you should not use them as a base cost measurement for Reapers.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 16:33:24


Post by: Martel732


Assuming these rules changes don't happen, and GW publishes a point value fix, what do you think that looks like? As I said, that needs to be 45ppm at least, pushing 50ppm for all their bells and whistles.

"Bottom line is that Marines with ML are too expensive themselves, why should Reapers be as well?"

Marines are too expensive period. So if we balance around dark reapers and guardsmen, 80% of the units in the game become worthless. The opposite of what 8th is trying to achieve. Your suggestions are still undercosting this unit when compared to all possible alternatives in other armies. Stop it.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 16:33:27


Post by: Kanluwen


Putting it bluntly?

They need to lose their "always hit on a 3+" thing and they need to lose it hard. The Reaper Rangefinders, as showcased a few editions ago, were there to help the Dark Reapers keep a target lock on otherwise hard to hit targets.

I'm not opposed to giving them some kind of rule where the more shots they put on target, the more accurate they get--but ideally, the Reaper Rangefinders would only be boosting them up against anything that gets a "Hard to Hit" bonus.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 16:40:39


Post by: Galef


@Kanluwen: I agree. The always hit on 3+ is the biggest problem.

@Martel: If GW does nothing other than change the points cost, Reapers need to be 35ppm as they are, maybe MAYBE 40ppm, and the Tempest launcher needs to be about 5ppm more expensive for the Exarch as well. That pushes the points cost over 105pts for a min unit that is only 3 T3 models.
My fear is that if this happens, Reapers will instantly be considered garbage because now Fire prisms and WWs can put out similar damage for the same cost, but are WAAAAAAAY more durable.

The sad thing is that GW is likely to make Reapers 45-50ppm since they apparently have no intentions to make plastic Aspect warriors in the near future, so why make an incentive for players to seek out other non-GW options, like eBay?

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 16:41:33


Post by: Kanluwen


I don't have the Eldar book, but do they still pay for the heavier missiles?

If they don't pay for the Starstrike, maybe they should have to.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 16:44:17


Post by: Martel732


 Galef wrote:
@Kanluwen: I agree. The always hit on 3+ is the biggest problem.

@Martel: If GW does nothing other than change the points cost, Reapers need to be 35ppm as they are, and the Tempest launcher needs to be about 5ppm more expensive for the Exarch as well. That pushes the points cost over 105pts for a min unit that is only 3 T3 models.


Too cheap for what they can do. You lack the outside perspective of facing off against these things. T3 doesn't much matter when you have a 2+ rerollable.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 16:54:28


Post by: skchsan


 Galef wrote:
Reapers will instantly be considered garbage because now Fire prisms and WWs can put out similar damage for the same cost, but are WAAAAAAAY more durable.
So what is it about single high T, high W model vs multiple models whose sum of fractions more or less equal the high T, high W single model? Most of the armies' units function in that way.

A single high W, high T model deals better with smaller firearms but more susceptible to good high D shots.
Multiple individual low W, low T models mitigate high D weapons better but generally more susceptible to small firearms.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Galef wrote:
How about making "Inescapable Accuracy" read as follows: "Models with this rule never suffer more than -1 to hit regardless of multiple modifiers"
So if they move - 4+ to hit
If thy shoot a 'hard to hit' unit - 4+ to hit
If they moved AND are shooting a target with -1 - still 4+ to hit

So modifiers to hit still affect them, just not multiple modifiers
And I demand a quote for this. This is paraphrasing my post.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 17:15:54


Post by: Galef


Martel732 wrote:
T3 doesn't much matter when you have a 2+ rerollable.

What cheaters have you been playing? Nothing in the Eldar codex can get a 2+ rerollable save. Sure Reapers can sit in cover and/or have Protect, but at that point, why are you shooting them with bolters? Wouldn't plasma or even good ole heavy bolters be better?
The only thing that gives rerolls on saves is a CP for only 1 reroll. Hardly game-breaking.

My "fix" to lower unit size would actually go a long way to minimize the ability to buff a lot of Reapers at once. 5 Reapers at 35ppm would be 175pts, roughly equal to 1 Fire Prism or 2 WWs with MLs.

 skchsan wrote:

 Galef wrote:
How about making "Inescapable Accuracy" read as follows: "Models with this rule never suffer more than -1 to hit regardless of multiple modifiers"
So if they move - 4+ to hit
If thy shoot a 'hard to hit' unit - 4+ to hit
If they moved AND are shooting a target with -1 - still 4+ to hit

So modifiers to hit still affect them, just not multiple modifiers
And I demand a quote for this. This is paraphrasing my post.

Noted, although to be fair, I was typing this before your post was up, so I guess great minds think alike.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 17:49:40


Post by: Martel732


In cover with fortune. And all my plasma is already dead. Because Dark Reapers. They kill too quickly for their cost and are too hard to remove.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 17:53:43


Post by: Xenomancers


Martel732 wrote:
They take them because they are undercosted. If you want the current rules, they are 50 ppm.

I agree - between 45-50. I think at 50 they would be unplayable but at 45 they would be about as good as devastators per point (which are a playable but not OP unit).


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 18:05:00


Post by: Galef


Martel732 wrote:
In cover with fortune. And all my plasma is already dead. Because Dark Reapers. They kill too quickly for their cost and are too hard to remove.

Fortune is a 5+ "FNP" roll now, NOT a rerollable save. If you make the max unit size 5, than only 5 Reapers will have that, meaning you kill the unit of Reapers that ISN"T buffed. Add that with a points increase, and we have a balanced unit.

Just upping the points cost alone with NOT balance them. It makes them a suicide unit that is really good for about a turn.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 18:10:15


Post by: Martel732


I guess I should have had him look that up. You can understand why I believed him, though. They still have easy access to 2+ and FNP 5+. T3 is moot at that point.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 18:26:25


Post by: Galef


Martel732 wrote:
I guess I should have had him look that up. You can understand why I believed him, though. They still have easy access to 2+ and FNP 5+. T3 is moot at that point.
I absolutely get what you are saying. I have always had issues with players crying foul about Eldar when they just don't know what the rules actually do.

The issue with Reapers is less about the unit itself and more about how easy it is to buff 10 of them at a time. Reapers alone are easy to deal with, but they exist in an army that prides itself on buffs and shenanigans. Rather than over-react to the Reapers themselves, I am suggesting to make it harder to buff so many at once (max unit size 5), alone with a slight points increase (+8ppm to make them 35ppm total) AND making their special snowflake rule less effective in today's meta (only ever -1 to hit rather than ignoring them all entirely).

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 18:30:55


Post by: Martel732


Maybe that works. But 35ppm is such a deal for their ammo options. 3 ppm less than a marine dev, but twice as effective.

Maybe we should compare to dakkafexes or something else. I'm pretty discouraged by the LVO final.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 18:52:08


Post by: bananathug


It's not just the 3+ but that both of their forms of ammo are just bonkers good. Give them the same switchable stats as a marine ML and a regular 3+ to hit and they'd be good.

The 2 shots,s5, -2 ap, 2 damage shoot is just too good (should be assault d6, no ap, 1 damage, s4) The one shot s8, -2 ap, 3 damage is fine as long as it doesn't hit everything on a 3+ and is buffed to hell as well as impossible to avoid/shoot first. Add a special rule that if they don't move they can ignore a single -1 to hit but if they move they get a -1 to hit with their heavy version. Keep them cheaper than ML dev marines and problem solved.

The other thing that makes them too good are the strats and spells as other people are catching onto. Strength from death, webway, damn near invincible transports, move shoot move, re-deploy, additional - to hit all of them are heads and shoulders above what's available to vanilla marines (not as bad against other armies but they still seem like the best strats/spells in the game) which further pushes them down the path of OP.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 18:59:43


Post by: Martel732


"The 2 shots,s5, -2 ap, 2 damage shoot is just too good"

Primaris = autowin for the Eldar.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 19:09:58


Post by: Galef


I can agree with the secondary mode needing some tweaking. I was originally going to address that in my original post, but didn't want to get bogged down with the specifics on that.

I'd actually be cool with the second mode being a whole separate gun option, but since the model doesn't support that, I can't think it will happen.

If the secondary mode was S4, 3shots, Ap-1, 1 damage, or something similar I think it would still serve a purpose without being "too good".
You'd basically get 2 modes, 1 similar to a ML, but worse (less potential damage, the other similar to a Heavy bolter, but worse.

Another option that I think could really work (and one GW might adopt) is to FAQ the S8 mode to be damage D3, instead of straight 3 like they did with the Starcannon. If they do this AND make the S5 mode only 1 damage per shot (and still 2 shots), I really think that could address the issue of them "putting out more damage than they should)

There are just so, so many ways to fix them without nerfing them into the ground.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 19:15:49


Post by: Martel732


D3 damage and 1 damage respectively would help a LOT, and might need to remedy the need for other changes.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 19:31:34


Post by: Galef


Martel732 wrote:
D3 damage and 1 damage respectively would help a LOT, and might need to remedy the need for other changes.

Yeah, the more I think about it, I think lowering the damage in this way would almost eliminate the need for any other change

Although max unit size 5 just makes a lot of sense too.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 19:38:44


Post by: Martel732


Just so the buffs don't get silly.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 19:40:28


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Just make 30-32 points. The rules are fluffy and fit; they just need to pay for them.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 19:42:32


Post by: Kanluwen


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Just make 30-32 points. The rules are fluffy and fit; they just need to pay for them.

I wouldn't say that the rules are necessarily fluffy.

The Reaper Rangefinder is supposed to aid them in tracking trajectories and firing angles for attacking fast moving targets. It's like the Hydra Autocannon Targeting Array.

It would be one thing if, say, they had a 'mortar missile' that got some kind of ranging benefit from it(like if firing that missile, you got to reroll all failed to hit rolls against units in cover) and then another missile that was better against flying things and the like...but as it stands, it's like the Wyvern Mortar. There's no real downside to it.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 20:16:56


Post by: Galef


Another option for the "Inescapable accuracy" rule is to make it dependent on them remaining stationary. That would make hiding in a Serpent or using the Web way a more risky tactic.

Add that to the damage being D3 on the S8 mode and only 1 for the S5 mode and no points increase is really necessary.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/29 21:17:48


Post by: Kanluwen


 Galef wrote:
Another option for the "Inescapable accuracy" rule is to make it dependent on them remaining stationary. That would make hiding in a Serpent or using the Web way a more risky tactic.

Add that to the damage being D3 on the S8 mode and only 1 for the S5 mode and no points increase is really necessary.

-

Realistically?

If Inescapable Accuracy has to remain in a form near what it is now?
I'd change it to be only on the S8 mode and to require them to remain stationary and to have fired at the target previously.

If Markerlights, which are targeting lasers, only boost BS by +1? Then Reaper Rangefinders need to be EXTREMELY situational and to be extremely restrictive as well.
Alternatively, we could go the route that they chose to go for the Skitarii. Make it a Stratagem for ignoring -1 to Hit rolls, you get to ignore up to -2 to Hit rolls if you have Maugan Ra near you or something.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 03:48:58


Post by: admironheart


Reapers are supposed to be the anti tank infantry. I think most units have it. A Thunderer or Devestartor unit. Maybe the Imperial Guard don't.

A guard/Tactical marine/defender guardian all have access to one heavy weapon.

The Reapers are the Eldar Heavy Weaponry infantry.

If you get lascannons that do d6 dmg, and ML that do d6 and Reapers are nerfed to d3 damage.....wow.

I am glad you guys don't write the rules.

My reapers die every game to mortal wounds from Biovores and Hive Guard or Basilisk/Manticores.

I am all for modifiers since 2nd edition was easy math despite the designers belief we cannot add/subtract as players.

Inescapable Accuracy is not a fluff rule. I'm all for a +1 to hit for the Range Finder....so modifiers would still work....or as suggested it ignores speed to hit modifiers.

But in a Game where it is as easy to shoot a stationary BaneBlade as it is a weaving and flying jetbike going over 20" it is kinda dumb.

So I'm still waiting for how you want the elder to have a unit of infantry with heavy anti tank weapons.....BECAUSE your suggestions will turn Reapers into Bike/Terminator/etc killers and that is it. They will not be used to fight tanks anymore at all.



Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 03:51:30


Post by: JNAProductions


And Fire Dragons are...?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 04:23:27


Post by: WindstormSCR


 JNAProductions wrote:
And Fire Dragons are...?


non-useful pieces garbage in a competitive environment.

A agree with the above. there is nerf, then there is overnerf.

you think they're undercosted? sure, let's increase that slightly. NOT to the point of an ML marine, because no one uses ML marine because they're OVERcosted.

As I have said elsewhere, the problem lies in the blanket ability to ignore hit mods combined with a decent weapon. change inescapable accuracy to "Ignores the effects of the 'Airborne' ability" done, 90% of the problem solved, bump by 4ppm and see how that works. you'll still see reapers, just not anywhere near as many.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 04:43:02


Post by: Martel732


Pay 50 ppm then for all those rules.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 04:43:54


Post by: Galas


They will be overnerfed. Be sure about that. Maybe they will be buffed after that.

Or maybe don't, and GW pulls out a intelligent nerf like they did with Celestine. The more elegant balance change they have done in all of 8th edition.

But even if they aren't overnerfed, people will believe they are. Because in the min/maxing meta of Warhammer, you are the best, or you just don't are. At least in the mind of players (LVO has shown that actually 8th has a much higher variety than previous editions) Any nerf that drops Dark Reapers from their position will be received as them being destroyed and out of the meta.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 04:46:22


Post by: WindstormSCR


Martel732 wrote:
Pay 50 ppm then for all those rules.


you're being entirely unreasonable.

I've pointed out the current state of marines doesn't reflect appropriate costing.

the idea behind fixing a unit is to make it useful and valuable in a list while removing the problem, not nerf it into oblivion never to be seen again.

just because you got boned by being the first codex to be released in an edition before costing problems were apparent doesn't give you the magical right to be a salty


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 05:27:40


Post by: admironheart


 JNAProductions wrote:
And Fire Dragons are...?


7 points with no weapon. The ONLY option is then to buy the 17 point Fusion Gun. They are 4+ save vs the reapers 3+ save. So if reapers would be a base 8 points that should even things out. {that is a 3 point price increase for those that could not follow or do easy math]

Not that there is such a thing.

13 point Tac Marines are considered subpar by some.
12 point Dire Avengers seem average to most.

So for 1 point more Marines get a 1 Move slower with +1 STR +1 Toughness, ATSKNF, 3+save vs 4+save, 24" range rapid fire gun vs the 18" assault with special 6+ to wound and no Battle Focus, Pretty good for 1 point IMO.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 05:39:06


Post by: Cream Tea


Fire Dragons have the same 3+ save as Dark Reapers do.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 05:44:41


Post by: skchsan


 WindstormSCR wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Pay 50 ppm then for all those rules.


you're being entirely unreasonable.

I've pointed out the current state of marines doesn't reflect appropriate costing.

the idea behind fixing a unit is to make it useful and valuable in a list while removing the problem, not nerf it into oblivion never to be seen again.

just because you got boned by being the first codex to be released in an edition before costing problems were apparent doesn't give you the magical right to be a salty
Is he though? Something that shoots at unmodifiable BS, deals flat damage roughly equal to mathematical average of ML, and scalable without ablative wound taxes is 30% cheaper? Surely this is fairly priced. 40 ppm is the bare minimum cost, 42~46 ppm competitively costed, with 47~50 ppm starting to become overpriced but not to a point where it becomes unusable.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 06:24:41


Post by: WindstormSCR


 skchsan wrote:
 WindstormSCR wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Pay 50 ppm then for all those rules.


you're being entirely unreasonable.

I've pointed out the current state of marines doesn't reflect appropriate costing.

the idea behind fixing a unit is to make it useful and valuable in a list while removing the problem, not nerf it into oblivion never to be seen again.

just because you got boned by being the first codex to be released in an edition before costing problems were apparent doesn't give you the magical right to be a salty
Is he though? Something that shoots at unmodifiable BS, deals flat damage roughly equal to mathematical average of ML, and scalable without ablative wound taxes is 30% cheaper? Surely this is fairly priced. 40 ppm is the bare minimum cost, 42~46 ppm competitively costed, with 47~50 ppm starting to become overpriced but not to a point where it becomes unusable.



no one here with any sense is defending unmodifiable BS. an alternative with a bonus that can be canceled, sure, or that has a much more narrow scope.

once you fix that, the rest of it is easier to handle.

the other major problem is that if you balloon the cost of the unit AND remove unmodifiable BS, as soon as you hit 40ppm the answer just becomes "take a fire prism"


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 06:38:21


Post by: jeff white


 admironheart wrote:
Reapers are supposed to be the anti tank infantry.

I am all for modifiers since 2nd edition was easy math despite the designers belief we cannot add/subtract as players.

Inescapable Accuracy is not a fluff rule. I'm all for a +1 to hit for the Range Finder....so modifiers would still work....or as suggested it ignores speed to hit modifiers.

But in a Game where it is as easy to shoot a stationary BaneBlade as it is a weaving and flying jetbike going over 20" it is kinda dumb.

So I'm still waiting for how you want the elder to have a unit of infantry with heavy anti tank weapons.....BECAUSE your suggestions will turn Reapers into Bike/Terminator/etc killers and that is it. They will not be used to fight tanks anymore at all.



Actually, this was always their role - they are light armor and heavy infantry killers.
Sure, they have access to anti-tank, but this was not their primary role, not originally, as of course tanks were quite rare back in the day.
They should do well enough against light tanks, but not a land raider equivalent.
For that, the Fire Dragons are the weapon of choice, that and d-cannons and those, well, have also lost a bit of their character.
D-cannons just don;t seem so special anymore, not like in 2nd ed.

The point about movement not making a difference, this is the big deal in my opinion.
Dumbing down the rules just wrecked so much of the game.
GW should pull the plug on 8th ed. altogether,
or release 'advanced' rules or more-fine-grained rules, or perhaps just rule variants, e.g.
System 1 - play this way or System 1A, play this way or...
depending on the granularity that the players are seeking.
people seem to champion 8th for the chance to play 3000points in 2 hours, but this is what Epic was for.
GW should give options to recreate a 1500pt or less battlefield.
Reintroduce movement rates and vehicle facings,
also inviting heavy infantry,
and then you have room for the special rules that should give reapers their special character.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 08:27:23


Post by: Wyldhunt


Eh. I think we were closer to something workable on page 1 when we were basically just talking about a mild cost boost and a smaller squad size.

While I acknowledge that reapers could stand to be toned down, I'm also hesitant to nerf them to oblivion. They were basically unfieldable for a long time. last edition, they were reasonable, and not a ton has changed since then. I'm going to be that guy and play daemon's advocate for a moment.

Before Reapers could take multiple high strength weapons, they were basically unfieldable because most players don't need more strength 5 in their army. sure, reapers could always sweep through a tactical squad efficiently, but so does basically every other gun in the army. If we force reapers into a low damage niche again, we basically make them an expensive, probably redundant anti infantry option that we don't need and probably won't take.

If you make them 50 points apiece, then you have a unit with basically worse firepower than a falcon for a similar price tag with 4 (including exarch) wounds on T3 bodies instead of 12 wounds on a T7 body. And the falcon is considered one of our worst choices. So at that point, they stop being cost effective but relatively vulnerable fire support and become a suboptimal choice that you only take for fluff purposes.

Also, let's talk damage output. While pretty much everyone acknowledges that devastators are overpriced and thus a worse deal than reapers (who are probably underpriced), I feel that the differences in their weapons are severely exaggerated. On average, a krak missile does .5 more damage than a reaper launcher. So a slight edge to the marines, but basically comparable. Sometimes the damage rolls low. It happens. Rolling a 1 for damage against many targets is a lot like failing to hit/wound in the first place. But sometimes you kill that enemy rhino with two shots or that enemy venom with 1. The reliable 3 damage of a reaper launcher is great, but it also means you need to get 4 reaper missiles through to kill that same rhino instead of just 2 slightly lucky ones.

As for comparing them to dragons, dragons do more damage than reapers outside of melta range, can potentially two-shot a rhino like any other d6 damage weapon, and do significantly more damage than reapers when you're going after that primarch in your back lines that absolutely positively must die right now. So higher average and potential damage, but you have to get them close to be in range. Seems like a decent trade-off.

The "always hit on 3+" rule is great... when it matters. Generally, I put my reapers up on terrain so they have better line of sight, at which point they tend not to move around much. So in most games, the range finder is really only useful the turn you pop out from behind a building or inside a wave serpent. If you're prone to rolling a ton of 3s instead of 1's, 2's, 4's, 5's, or 6's, then that can make a huge difference. For those of us who tend to roll about a single 3 out of every 6 dice, it's significantly less big of a deal. It does negate the faction-wide special abilities of anyone playing Ravenguard, Alpha Legion, or Alaitoc, which is kind of lame, and it does interact oddly with the Culexus, which I struggle to feel bad about, but it's otherwise kind of situational. Also, I thought most people were mildly irritated at all the -1 to hit rules floating around. Is the presence of a unit that discourages playing all Alaitoc all the time really all that bad of a thing?

Any complaints of "but you can give them all the buffs" is probably more elegantly addressed by limiting squad size. This includes Strength From Death, a rule which you probably don't see a ton of since Ynnari were nerfed into the ground.

We don't need to make their guns strength 2 with 1 damage and special rules that make them BS6+ if they move at 50 points a model. We just need to make some minor tweaks and acknowledge that missile marines are overpriced.

Sorry for the rant there. I'd just rather discuss reasonable adjustments that leave a unit playable rather than over the top nerfs that render reapers unplayable. (Like they were for most of the last 20ish years.)


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 14:49:24


Post by: Galef


So to recap, I have settled on the following changes:

-S8 mode is now D3 damage instead of straight 3 (GW already did this with Starcannons in an FAQ for this very Codex)
-S5 mode is now only 1 damage per shot
-Max unit size is only 5, not 10

That pretty much solves all the major issues with Reapers without having to price them up out of viability or tweaking their special rules.
Less damage and smaller unit sizes mitigates both their effectiveness and the ability to layer buffs onto more Reapers.
Forewarning is now much less of a "delete X unit that drops in LoS of 10 Guided Reapers". 5 Reapers can do a good bit of damage to a unit with Forewarning, but it is much less likely to outright delete them

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 15:28:39


Post by: Elbows


Gotta disagree, personally. D3 damage is the bane of heavy weapons, and I don't think anyone would take Reapers with that "fix" as you call it.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 15:31:34


Post by: Martel732


Yes they would. D3 damage can still one shot custodes and such. And they are still amazingly accurate. They just can't drag down land raiders.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 15:35:20


Post by: Elbows


Nope. That would be a crap weapon choice.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 15:44:17


Post by: Martel732


Only because you are spoiled by the current incarnation. Which is worth far, far more points than its current cost.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 15:53:58


Post by: Galef


If you don't want D3 damage, then how about Damage 2 instead of 3? We could also tweak the secondary mode to S5, 3 shots Ap-2, Damage 1.

I actually agree with Martel that Reapers are just too reliable at causing damage per point. My solution is to reduce that damage, Martel's solution is to raise the points cost.
Both solutions achieve a similar affect.

Currently 6 Reapers cost about as much as 1 Fire Prism, yet easily do more damage. I am trying to fix that without jacking the points cost up to the point that Reapers become a "Why bother?" option (like the Falcon)

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 16:02:36


Post by: Martel732


Reducing damage doesn't hit your model count, so i could see why that's more attractive.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 16:32:44


Post by: Galef


Yeah that's my thinking. Lowing each shot's damage by 1 (regardless of mode) is a very small change that pushes Reapers from an Auto-take unit to a just a good unit.

This should always be the goal.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 16:49:00


Post by: bananathug


I still think that always hit on a 3+ needs to be tied to standing still.

2 shots @ s5 -2 ap 1D doesn't seem too bad for the secondary firing mode. Maybe eldar players would rather s4 -1 w/ 3 shots or -0 w/ 4 shots (assault so no - for moving?) but maybe they have plenty of s4 horde clearing shooting.

But honestly we should probably slow nerf them. Start with your settled changes and the always hit on 3+ if didn't move and then see where we're at. If they disappear give them their always 3+, if they are still a problem bump the price up 4-5 points.

Problem is with other codex dropping Tau/necrons may get the reaper remover gun (s6, -2 ap, 48" range, or something) and then they become nerfed by meta shifts. Maybe this is why GWs is reticent to implement any changes to them so far?

I feel like it is a piss poor way to release a game and agree with a lot of people that this feels like beta and 8th won't really start until everyone has a codex. I'm taking a break from games for a while, I'll try to tackle this mountain of grey plastic and all these naked bases...

I'd really like to go to the bay area open but it will be hard to start prepping/practicing an army with so much unsettled between registration and the tourney (mid July?)


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 16:52:07


Post by: jeff white


 Galef wrote:
So to recap, I have settled on the following changes:

-S8 mode is now D3 damage instead of straight 3 (GW already did this with Starcannons in an FAQ for this very Codex)
-S5 mode is now only 1 damage per shot
-Max unit size is only 5, not 10

That pretty much solves all the major issues with Reapers without having to price them up out of viability or tweaking their special rules.
Less damage and smaller unit sizes mitigates both their effectiveness and the ability to layer buffs onto more Reapers.
Forewarning is now much less of a "delete X unit that drops in LoS of 10 Guided Reapers". 5 Reapers can do a good bit of damage to a unit with Forewarning, but it is much less likely to outright delete them

-


Access to Str 8 dmg 3 costs 15ppm, max one in 3 can take the upgrade.
Str 5 is standard, heavy 2, dmg 1
unit size 3-7, or 5+exarch, something like that. Small, with 2 possible Str 8 upgrades.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 16:54:59


Post by: Martel732


That works too.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 17:03:15


Post by: Elbows


Martel732 wrote:
Only because you are spoiled by the current incarnation. Which is worth far, far more points than its current cost.


Spoiled by what exactly? I don't spam Dark Reapers. D3 damage is crap on a heavy weapon. Dark Reapers originally carried Missile Launchers. End of story. You want to bump points? Go nuts, nobody cares.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 17:08:30


Post by: Galef


 Elbows wrote:
You want to bump points? Go nuts, nobody cares.

Clearly some of us do care (and I don't even play Reapers).

Bumping points is the lazy answer. Sometimes it is the right answer, but not always.

50ppm Reapers, while an "appropriate" cost, would absolutely kill the unit.
The "right" answer for Reapers is to fix what they are capable of doing, while trying to keep them in the 27-35ppm range.

Remember that Terminators used to be 40ppm with only 1 wound. Everyone considered them garbage because it was too easy to focus fire them dead, despite having T4, 2+/5++

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 17:47:46


Post by: skchsan


 Elbows wrote:
D3 damage is crap on a heavy weapon.
And yet, nearly 99% of all non D1 heavy weapons have variable damage... except for reapers and few others. Even AM have variable damage heavy weapons FFS.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 18:56:50


Post by: Galef


 skchsan wrote:
 Elbows wrote:
D3 damage is crap on a heavy weapon.
And yet, nearly 99% of all non D1 heavy weapons have variable damage... except for reapers and few others. Even AM have variable damage heavy weapons FFS.

Exactly. And most D3 damage heavies are only 1-2 per unit (usually on a vehicle). So Reapers having not only a straight 3 damage weapon, but up to 10 per unit is obviously more powerful than 95% of all other heavy options

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 19:00:07


Post by: Galas


To be honest I would prefer 2 damage over D3 just by virtue of not rolling so many dices. But that doesn't fix Dark Reapers obliteraging primaris, terminators, bikers, etc... (Theres no problem with Dark Reapers being effective agaisnt those units, just like Plasma is. The only problem is when they do it for too cheap)


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 19:34:48


Post by: Unit1126PLL


I think d3 damage is fine.

It's certainly not GOOD damage (flat 3 is better!) but the whole point is to nerf them, and going from a d3 is about as flat a nerf as you can get from 3 damage; it's roughly comparable to going to flat 2 damage, I would say.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 19:56:23


Post by: Galef


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
It's certainly not GOOD damage (flat 3 is better!) but the whole point is to nerf them, and going from a d3 is about as flat a nerf as you can get from 3 damage; it's roughly comparable to going to flat 2 damage, I would say.

Right, but it allows the potential for 3 damage if you roll well. It makes them want to shoot at multi-wound targets. not just 2-wound ones. It also allows the potential for only 1 damage, thereby giving those 2-wound targets a 33% chance to not go splat from 1 failed save.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 20:01:37


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Galef wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
It's certainly not GOOD damage (flat 3 is better!) but the whole point is to nerf them, and going from a d3 is about as flat a nerf as you can get from 3 damage; it's roughly comparable to going to flat 2 damage, I would say.

Right, but it allows the potential for 3 damage if you roll well. It makes them want to shoot at multi-wound targets. not just 2-wound ones. It also allows the potential for only 1 damage, thereby giving those 2-wound targets a 33% chance to not go splat from 1 failed save.


Right, yes. I just meant in severity of nerf, not mechanically.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 21:49:12


Post by: skchsan


Frankly, are there any other weapons that deal flat 3 damage?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 21:52:30


Post by: Galas


Thunder Hammers, Automatic Cannons... and other things.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/30 21:59:37


Post by: Galef


 Galas wrote:
Thunder Hammers, Automatic Cannons... and other things.
Also Pulse lasers. The trick is that none of the flat 3 damage weapons both:
A) Shooting and
B) more than a few per unit.

Having a unit that can have 10 flat 3 damage shots is all but unheard of outside of Reapers. Which is why they need to be D3 damage instead.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/31 02:15:44


Post by: Wyldhunt


 Galef wrote:
So to recap, I have settled on the following changes:

-S8 mode is now D3 damage instead of straight 3 (GW already did this with Starcannons in an FAQ for this very Codex)
-S5 mode is now only 1 damage per shot
-Max unit size is only 5, not 10

That pretty much solves all the major issues with Reapers without having to price them up out of viability or tweaking their special rules.
Less damage and smaller unit sizes mitigates both their effectiveness and the ability to layer buffs onto more Reapers.
Forewarning is now much less of a "delete X unit that drops in LoS of 10 Guided Reapers". 5 Reapers can do a good bit of damage to a unit with Forewarning, but it is much less likely to outright delete them

-


That's a very reasonable set of changes that I personally would probably never field. Would I be correct in thinking that you view Reapers as an anti-heavy-infantry unit per their older incarnations? For me, reapers are the unit I look to to start hurting high wound targets on turn 1 without having to sacrifice a squad of suicide dragons or rely on 4+ to hit vehicle heavy weapons. At just d3 damage I think I'd probably invest in something with a higher damage output.

My sloppy math says that to kill a rhino, you need to do 10 wounds means you need to roll 5 damage dice means you need to do 7.5 wounds (5+ rhino saves assuming no cover) means you need to hit about 12 times (2/3rds of 12 is 8) means you need to roll 18 strength 8 attacks means you need 18 reapers means you need to spend about 486 points on reapers (not factoring in special rules for exarchs) in order to average (not guarantee) a single dead rhino. Which would be a minimum of 4 squads (so a slightly higher price tag) if we're changing the squad size to 5 max. Of course, you could get lucky and do slightly better than that, but only slightly. That just isn't efficient enough for me to take them as my long ranged support for poking at vehicles, MCs, etc. I guess you could look at them as marine hunters that occassionally chip in to help finish off straggling vehicles?

Now that said, I think you've balanced them pretty well against blaster born who basically trade the reapers' armor and range for better AP and the ability to shoot while hiding inside a transport. I'm just also one of those weirdos who considers blaster born to be kind of meh tank hunters (despite being one of the better tank hunters in the dark eldar faction).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Galef wrote:
 Galas wrote:
Thunder Hammers, Automatic Cannons... and other things.
Also Pulse lasers. The trick is that none of the flat 3 damage weapons both:
A) Shooting and
B) more than a few per unit.

Having a unit that can have 10 flat 3 damage shots is all but unheard of outside of Reapers. Which is why they need to be D3 damage instead.

-


Tank bustas with rokits. Not that that's a comparison I intend to defend.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/31 05:58:26


Post by: admironheart


I want Reapers to do ML damage like they were envisioned.

So a Marine is 13 points with 20 ml. That is 33 points.

Reapers have str 3 t 3 AND no ability to take some cheap ablative wound bodies in the unit.

So Make the Reaper launcher str4 str 8 with the latter doing d6 damage each.
Since they will die faster than Dev Marines for 2 reasons....they should remain around 28 points.
Then you can get rid of the Inescapable Accuracy.

OR add in the Reaper Range Finder and make them cost the same as Dev (they still don't have flexibility to swap out weapons, lower toughness, and cannot spend 26 points to have 2 free wound soaking bodies to pad those heavies)

So now a unit of 4 can have a good chance of wiping a Land Raider on some lucky dice.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/01/31 06:08:48


Post by: Martel732


Missile launchers are 25.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 13:40:25


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


Why sohuld Marines pay points for weapon options they aren't taking? That's insane.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 17:11:44


Post by: Kanluwen


 admironheart wrote:
I want Reapers to do ML damage like they were envisioned.

So a Marine is 13 points with 20 ml. That is 33 points.

Reapers have str 3 t 3 AND no ability to take some cheap ablative wound bodies in the unit.

So Make the Reaper launcher str4 str 8 with the latter doing d6 damage each.
Since they will die faster than Dev Marines for 2 reasons....they should remain around 28 points.
Then you can get rid of the Inescapable Accuracy.

OR add in the Reaper Range Finder and make them cost the same as Dev (they still don't have flexibility to swap out weapons, lower toughness, and cannot spend 26 points to have 2 free wound soaking bodies to pad those heavies)

Why should you "have flexibility to swap out weapons"? You're Eldar. Every unit is supposed to have some kind of specialized role tied to its weapons. The Exarchs of the squads have always had the ability to 'swap out weapons' to add a bit of differentiation to the squad.


So now a unit of 4 can have a good chance of wiping a Land Raider on some lucky dice.

Why in the hell are Dark Reapers "wiping a Land Raider"? That's NEVER been their role. They're supposed to be picking on light vehicles and things equivalent to that(such as Marines).

They're not tank hunters. That's the role of Fire Dragons.


This is why we can't have nice things, people!


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 17:48:40


Post by: Galef


 Kanluwen wrote:

Why in the hell are Dark Reapers "wiping a Land Raider"? That's NEVER been their role. They're supposed to be picking on light vehicles and things equivalent to that(such as Marines).

They're not tank hunters. That's the role of Fire Dragons.

Which I why I am holding to my suggestion that the S8 mode be D3 damage and the S5 mode be 1 damage per shot. It keeps Reapers in the role of "light vehicle/medium infantry" killer without the need to up their points cost by much (maybe 30ppm with that simple change)

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 17:57:11


Post by: Kanluwen


 Galef wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

Why in the hell are Dark Reapers "wiping a Land Raider"? That's NEVER been their role. They're supposed to be picking on light vehicles and things equivalent to that(such as Marines).

They're not tank hunters. That's the role of Fire Dragons.

Which I why I am holding to my suggestion that the S8 mode be D3 damage and the S5 mode be 1 damage per shot. It keeps Reapers in the role of "light vehicle/medium infantry" killer without the need to up their points cost by much (maybe 30ppm with that simple change)

-

I'd put the S8 mode at 2 damage, flat. That puts it at the same damage as an Autocannon.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 18:07:05


Post by: Marmatag


Only 1 weapon firing mode for free. The other costs points.

D3 damage.

Change their ballistic skill to 4+ with no penalties. or, leave it at 3+ but have them incur penalties like everyone else.

Tempest launchers increased cost.



Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 18:07:17


Post by: Unit1126PLL


Is there a reason a "light vehicle killer" is str 8?

Surely str 7 is more reasonable if your best targets are sentinels and land speeders, and your heaviest targets are rhinos.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 18:08:05


Post by: Galef


Fair enough. Keep Reapers as-is (points, stats, abilities) but -1 damage to all fire modes. Easy.

Alternatively, we could ditch the dual fire modes and just give them an Autocannon-like statline with AP -2.
36" range, Heavy 2, Str7, AP -2, Damage 2

Have the Exarch be the only model that can swap guns to either Tempest launcher or Shuricannon

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 18:10:10


Post by: Kanluwen


No matter what, I'd change the "No Penalties" to require a target to have moved a certain distance or to have boosted/advanced/whatever "It went fast" thing you want to call it.

Same with the flat 2 damage on the S8 mode.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Is there a reason a "light vehicle killer" is str 8?

Surely str 7 is more reasonable if your best targets are sentinels and land speeders, and your heaviest targets are rhinos.

That's a good question as to why. I'm guessing because it's meant to be a Krak Missile in all but name?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 18:17:27


Post by: Unit1126PLL


Well, Krak Missiles are anti-tank weapons, not anti-light vehicle weapons.

It'd be like if a historical game said that a .50 cal anti-material rifle had the same anti-tank capability as an 9K112 Kobra missile, because hey, they both kill vehicles amirite.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 18:21:14


Post by: Kanluwen


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Well, Krak Missiles are anti-tank weapons, not anti-light vehicle weapons.

It'd be like if a historical game said that a .50 cal anti-material rifle had the same anti-tank capability as an 9K112 Kobra missile, because hey, they both kill vehicles amirite.

No, I get this. That's what I'm saying here--when they put the secondary fire mode in they might have just done it as a "Hey, Imperial Missile Launchers do this--make it match, k?".

It's like how Transauranic Arquebi for the Skitarii lost their bonus to hunting vehicles(Armourbane allowed for them to roll 2D6 for armor penetration and total the results) and instead just got S7 AP-2 with D3 damage and then the generic Sniper Rifle rules.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 19:33:27


Post by: admironheart


 Kanluwen wrote:

They're not tank hunters. That's the role of Fire Dragons.


This is why we can't have nice things, people!


Says you....I have printed GW codexes and White Dwarf articles that says otherwise back in RT and 2nd ed. THEY are difinatley infantry tank hunters.

LOOk.

Every race has a foot trooper option to fire heavy weapons. Without the need for Vehicles. That has always been that way. Fire Dragons/wraithguard are close range assault units....you don't throw devestators with meltaguns in the front line.

That is what you are asking. This is the Eldars Anti tank (the Reaper Launcher WAS ALWAYS the equivalent of a Missile Launcher....always in the early days WHEN the unit was created. FACT.

If everyone else has long range foot troops with anti tank weapons...even tyranids....why don't you want elder to have it? Are you that biased?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You also have the Star Cannon which is a strong anti LIGHT VEHICLE weapon!

We DO NOT need another.

Why change the fluff because for a couple years in this reincarnation of the game you don't like the rules. That is BS
and horrible game design and player treatment! Period.

I don't even take dark reapers in my last 2 list.

FYI the Eldar player will just take a Vypers or scat bikes and shoot the blazes out of any reserves with Forwarned.

Don't dumb it down...the trick to Forwarned is how to tactically play against it. For the Marine Auspecs it is to stay out of 12" range.
For Farseer+ Reapers it is to use LOS blocking terrain OR to drop in a 'bait' unit.

The Strategem says they MUST use it IMMEDIATELY. So if they go after the bait then you can drop in your big boyz. If not then they just wasted any chance of using it as you can still hold your guys in reserves.

If your tactics are so simple that YOU must in your face alpha strike with no more planning than just dropping in then that is both the fault of the simple rules of the game and perhaps a poor quality player.

In any game you try to overwhelm your enemy with more than they can handle. In your face alpha strikes pretty much takes any build up of tactics and dumbs it down so 10 year olds can play. Use flanking attacks, combined rushes, come from multiple sides, draw the enemy out or just use cover to get into the battle...you know stuff that any war game should have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Well, Krak Missiles are anti-tank weapons, not anti-light vehicle weapons..


Exactly! The Reaper Missile Launcher was designed to fire Krak Missiles and Frag Missiles. They just changed up the names later on.

There was even a note in the book that they could be loaded with other missile types like the Imperium, but no actual rules were in place to do so unless you had a friendly agreement.

Make the Reaper Launcher a copy and paste of the ML like it always was. Add 3 points and do what you want with the range finder.

I prefer it stays the same, but no more move and fire. The Reapers are supposed to have the bulkier armor to support them while shooting....that is why they get the slower movement......Move and Fire weapons used to be a thing. Somehow work that in and make movement modifiers NOT a thing due to the Range Finder. [It is a 'range' finder not concealment finder or run from the hip shooting finder.....they implemented it too simply]


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 21:16:42


Post by: Martel732


Want to turn them into missile launchers? That's fine too.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 22:18:15


Post by: Kanluwen


 admironheart wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

They're not tank hunters. That's the role of Fire Dragons.


This is why we can't have nice things, people!


Says you....I have printed GW codexes and White Dwarf articles that says otherwise back in RT and 2nd ed. THEY are difinatley infantry tank hunters.

LOOk.

Every race has a foot trooper option to fire heavy weapons. Without the need for Vehicles. That has always been that way. Fire Dragons/wraithguard are close range assault units....you don't throw devestators with meltaguns in the front line.

Devastators can't take Meltaguns. They never have been able to. They could take Multi-Meltas but most people didn't take those, they just took Grav-Cannons instead--assuming they even took Devastators instead of Centurions.

That is what you are asking. This is the Eldars Anti tank (the Reaper Launcher WAS ALWAYS the equivalent of a Missile Launcher....always in the early days WHEN the unit was created. FACT.

The sacred weapon of the Dark Reaper is the reaper launcher, a long-barrelled missile weapon that can create a blistering firestorm with a single salvo. This is not the clumsy bombardment of other races, however, but a pinpoint volley aimed for the heart. The armour-piercing starshot missiles that the reaper launchers fire have the punch to smash through the battle plate of the Traitor Legions, tear apart Tyranid carapaces, and even wreck light vehicles. Only the most heavily armoured of foes can hope to escape.

That's from the 2012 Eldar book, the only one I own.

It also has this:
Reaper Launchers
Used to deadly effect by Dark Reaper Aspect Warriors, reaper launchers fire a fusillade of small but potent armour piercing starswarm missiles. Some Dark Reapers also sport the more powerful starshot missiles, which allow them to engage enemy tanks and fortifications with impunity.


So it's not a "standard" thing. It was a specialized missile variant that actually required you to pay an additional 8 points per model for it.

If everyone else has long range foot troops with anti tank weapons...even tyranids....why don't you want elder to have it? Are you that biased?

What "long range foot troops with anti-tank weapons" does Adeptus Mechanicus have? Tau? Dark Eldar?

Even if Dark Reapers lose their ability to engage tanks(real tanks, such as Leman Russes and Land Raiders)--Eldar don't actually "lose" their ability to engage those things. They'd still have weapon platforms and Support Weapon Batteries.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/01 23:59:14


Post by: admironheart


sigh...

Your point about the Devs and Melta guns...IS THAT THERE IS ANOTHER UNIT THAT DOES THAT! (like Fire Dragons are for the elder)

You completely prove my point. Close Assault units are indeed different roles than long range support. Thank your!

Ok now from the earliest entries of Dark Reapers :

Dark Reapers Aspect @(c) 1994
...Their black armour is made from heavy interlocked plates and they have heavy lower leg armour to stabiles their bodies so that they can aim and fire more accurately.
The Weapon relays an enhanced targeting image into the warriors helmet via the receptor vanes, making it almost impossible for the Dark Reaper to miss.


Now their weapon:
The concept is universal, and version are produced all over the galaxy by humans, orks and elder. The most usual missile type is the krak armour penetration missile,...this missile is designed specifically to crack open heavily armoured targets and is the standard anti-vehicle missile,... also popular is the frag missile.


You CANNOT get more simple than that.....they are an anti tank unit primarily!

Dark Eldar have Scourges with 4 Dark Lances. Kabalite Trueborn can have 2 DL for every 5 models(1 unit) You can spam them to have equivalent firepower.

Tau are a different entity, They have the Crisis Guard/battlesuits for their heavy support....so no real foot troopers.

Adeptus Mech is more of a mech army with robots and has a ton of imperial soup to back them up....or actually if one is fluffy, Ad Mech is there to back up the Imperial soup.{plus they are not a separate race, just a faction unlike the elder is a whole other race with not much soup options....at least with the topic concerned}

If I don't want to Wraiths or Mech in my elder lists....Then I should be able to use a SwordWind of Aspects to make a fighting force (And I count Crimson Hunters more of a Vehicle than a foot unit)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote:
Want to turn them into missile launchers? That's fine too.


PLEASSSSSE do!

so I suggested +3 points for the base Reaper cost.
and with the 22 Reaper launcher going to an EML (elder missile launcher) that is +3 more.

So that adds up to 33 points.....seems pretty good to me.

With a command reroll + DOOM.....my Reapers will deal an average of 3 or more damage well over 75% of the time now. That is way superior to the lackluster 3 dmg currently that takes forever to take down a landraider.



Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 01:43:03


Post by: Kanluwen


 admironheart wrote:
sigh...

Your point about the Devs and Melta guns...IS THAT THERE IS ANOTHER UNIT THAT DOES THAT! (like Fire Dragons are for the elder)

You completely prove my point. Close Assault units are indeed different roles than long range support. Thank your!

And I think you completely are failing to understand why I made the comment I did...

People didn't put Multi-Meltas on Devastators because it was an expensive option that required your units to get in close. You had better weapon options but even then, you had an entirely better unit option in the form of the Centurion Devastators.

It would be like if there was an option for a Wraithguard to have a Reaper Launcher.

Ok now from the earliest entries of Dark Reapers :

Dark Reapers Aspect @(c) 1994
...Their black armour is made from heavy interlocked plates and they have heavy lower leg armour to stabiles their bodies so that they can aim and fire more accurately.
The Weapon relays an enhanced targeting image into the warriors helmet via the receptor vanes, making it almost impossible for the Dark Reaper to miss.


Now their weapon:
The concept is universal, and version are produced all over the galaxy by humans, orks and elder. The most usual missile type is the krak armour penetration missile,...this missile is designed specifically to crack open heavily armoured targets and is the standard anti-vehicle missile,... also popular is the frag missile.


You CANNOT get more simple than that.....they are an anti tank unit primarily!

That's nice, I guess? It doesn't mean much these days though.

Dark Eldar have Scourges with 4 Dark Lances. Kabalite Trueborn can have 2 DL for every 5 models(1 unit) You can spam them to have equivalent firepower.

Do you not understand why these two statements are not the same as Dark Reapers?

Dark Reapers are a whole squad featuring their weapon with everyone having the same special rule present. It would be one thing if the Exarch was required to have the Tempest Launcher to 'mess up' the unit composition and encourage the player to actually think a bit harder about their range bands and things of that ilk.


Tau are a different entity, They have the Crisis Guard/battlesuits for their heavy support....so no real foot troopers.

Their Crisis Suits fill the same role as the Aspect Warriors do. They're highly specialized support troops.


Adeptus Mech is more of a mech army with robots and has a ton of imperial soup to back them up....or actually if one is fluffy, Ad Mech is there to back up the Imperial soup.{plus they are not a separate race, just a faction unlike the elder is a whole other race with not much soup options....at least with the topic concerned}

Which doesn't actually answer anything. It's just deflecting. Eldar are a "whole other race" with three soup options(Harlequin, Ynnari, and Dark Eldar) to throw into the mix.

Additionally, Adeptus Mechanicus Explorator Fleets operate on their own with no "Imperial Soup" present.


If I don't want to Wraiths or Mech in my elder lists....Then I should be able to use a SwordWind of Aspects to make a fighting force (And I count Crimson Hunters more of a Vehicle than a foot unit)

What does that have to do with anything? Nobody is saying you should be required to bring Wraith or Mech in your Eldar lists.

Dark Reapers need to be toned down. End of story. People whined and moaned about my damn Guard to the point where Conscripts and Commissars are unplayable, yet somehow you think you should be immune to having changes made?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 02:33:13


Post by: Galef


If you give Reapers the Eldar missile launcher instead of their current version, you'd also need to up the points to at least 35ppm.
That's all fine and good, but it certainly makes them lose a bit of "flavor"

Then there is the modeling problem. Reapers clearly do NOT have EMLs. Their weapon is noticeably different. This could easily be fixed with a redesign in plastic which NEEDS TO FREAKING HAPPEN SOON!
But I digress.

Really, what I'd like to see is Reapers having mini versions of the EML, i.e. D3 damage instead of D6 and the secondary mode with fewer shots.
At the end of the day, Reapers are a unit that can take 3+ Launchers in an army whose other choices can have 2 max Launchers per unit (aside from War Walkers, but you pay a ton for that).

That means that if you "just give them EMLs" the buff train will have no brakes

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 03:39:36


Post by: admironheart


Kanluwen wrote:
And I think you completely are failing to understand why I made the comment I did...

People didn't put Multi-Meltas on Devastators because it was an expensive option that required your units to get in close. You had better weapon options but even then, you had an entirely better unit option in the form of the Centurion Devastators.

It would be like if there was an option for a Wraithguard to have a Reaper Launcher.


Ok now you have it backwards. You implied that Dark Reapers don't need to hunt tanks....you said Eldar have Fire Dragons for that. Compare if I said Devestators SHOULD ONLY have heavy bolters and Auto Cannons because marines have a unit that can take Melta Guns/Plasma Guns.

It was you who are trying to take a long range anti tank unit away......I am not saying take Heavy Plasma/LasCannon/ML from Devestators.....so why are you trying to take the role Reapers have enjoyed for decades!? Just because some lame latter edition tried to revamp the fluff don't mean squat for the role the unit was created for by the Big Designers of 40K and from what the unit is currently able to do.

Dark Reapers Aspect @(c) 1994
...Their black armour is made from heavy interlocked plates and they have heavy lower leg armour to stabiles their bodies so that they can aim and fire more accurately.
The Weapon relays an enhanced targeting image into the warriors helmet via the receptor vanes, making it almost impossible for the Dark Reaper to miss.


Now their weapon:
The concept is universal, and version are produced all over the galaxy by humans, orks and elder. The most usual missile type is the krak armour penetration missile,...this missile is designed specifically to crack open heavily armoured targets and is the standard anti-vehicle missile,... also popular is the frag missile.


Galef wrote:If you give Reapers the Eldar missile launcher instead of their current version, you'd also need to up the points to at least 35ppm.
That's all fine and good, but it certainly makes them lose a bit of "flavor"

Then there is the modeling problem. Reapers clearly do NOT have EMLs. Their weapon is noticeably different


Well the models that are legal now were the ones from RT, 2nd and 3rd/4th. So the Reaper Launcher back then (a span of 3 decades) was a MISSILE LAUNCHER. Just because the kiddies now only know they were a different set of rules.....does not mean the highly sophisticated and advanced elder cannot shoot the same powerful shots out of a much smaller gun.

Maybe you should see the First Eldar Missile Launcher. It was a small and short 'barrel' with multiple firing ports.....It looks nothing like the Reaper Missile Launcher or the War Walker Missile Launcher.

Heck....I think I have like 5 or more versions of the Shuriken Cannon from jetbikes to metal, to plastic to new weird triangle thing. Same with Scatter Lasers. So if you have a hangup on how it looks.....then most of the model range which is 20+ years old should be banned with your mindset.



Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 06:57:01


Post by: Wyldhunt


Since the history of the dark reaper has been coming up off and on, I glanced over my old 'dexes to see what reapers have traditionally looked like.

2nd edition, they were in fact krak/frag missile launcher carriers with a rangefinder that gave them +1 to hit and ignored the penalties normally caused by enemy models moving quickly.

3rd, I have no idea; this is the only 'dex for eldar I don't have. 4th, they have the two-shot strength 5 profile. I started playing in 5th and don't recall anyone but myself ever fielding them because strength 5 is bad against vehicles, and no one needs more ways to kill marines.

6th, they're still toting the 4th edition guns but with the option to pay 8 points to fire a single strength 8 shot instead. My understanding is that they were usable but too expensive to really be appealing next to other units. Ditto that for 7th.

Now in 8th, they're actually probably worse against vehicles than they were in 6th and 7th (as vehicles generally get saves against them, and it now takes at least 4 failed saves to kill things that used to die after 3 failed saves), but they've received a sufficient price decrease to make them appealing for their points.

So in other words, they've been capable of mixing it up with vehicles in more incarnations than they haven't. Saying that they're "meant" to be an anti-infantry unit seems inaccurate.

Not that that should necessarily have a ton of bearing on how they ought to perform in the present and future. That said, I still don't like them as d3 damage light vehicle/heavy infantry hunters.

Our basic guns and shuriken cannons are already pretty solid against heavy infantry as are, in a pinch, nearly all of our heavy weapons, most of our HQs, most of our elites, most of our fast attacks, and most of our heavy supports. You could field reapers to take on heavy infantry, and they'd do just fine at it, but so would pretty much every other unit in our codex. But those other units would tackle heavy infantry while often also being good against other targets.

As for light vehicles... there just aren't a ton of them out there. And many of them are lumped into a small number of related factions. We'd be looking at what? Most dark eldar vehicles, harlequin vehicles, vypers, anhilation barges, and land speeders? That seems too specific to be of much use in an all comers army. And again, I can take other units that will be nearly as effective against light vehicles as d3 damage reapers while also being better against other targets. Dragons and wraith guard can take down a venom at least as reliably as they take down a land raider.

If you make their damage crummy, I just don't have much motivation to take them. Especially if you always lower their strength. Sure, you get a decent number of shots for your points, but you'll barely tickle the health bar of any target you want to use your high strength against. And if you're using your lower strength shots, there's a good chance you'd be better off using a different kind of gun entirely. Especially if you drop it down to strength 4.

I really feel like we've gotten swept up in hyperbole here. Let's pause, acknowledge that missile devastators are probably overcosted and that reapers are undercosted, and then glance at how the two compare. Not in a "your unit is broken and mine isn't" kind of a way. Just a brief comparison.

Missile devs have a higher average (3.5) and max (6) damage per shot, but will roll lower than the flat 3 damage of a reaper launcher 1/3rd of the time. Marines can take (relatively) cheap ablative wounds that die before the missile devastators, but reapers can move and shoot thus allowing them to hide from alpha strikes relatively well. Frag missiles are slightly less effective against most infantry than the strength 5 reaper shot, but have a higher max damage (for you gamblers out there). Additionally, Missile devs can instead be heavy bolter devs if you're planning on using them to clear crowds. Heavy bolters being arguably better than the strength 5 shot due to the low importance AP -1 versus AP -2 against models with poor armor saves and the fact that heavy bolters get an additional shot. For tank busting, Missile devs can potentially kill anything with 12 or fewer wounds with a couple lucky shots while reapers need at least 4 wounds to go through to kill anything in the 10 to 12 wound range. You can also opt to make those missile devs lascannon devs and wound T8 targets on 3s and have slightly better AP. Reapers don't have as many options, but they can ignore to-hit penalties. Which is really great against about 3 factions and a handful of specific units and mostly useless against everything else unless you constantly shuffling them around the table for some reason.

So with all that in mind, the capabilities of reapers compared to devs seem pretty reasonable to me. It's just that the prices might need to be tweaked, the reapers could maybe stand to have their max squad size capped, and we *maybe* want to look at the reaper rangefinder again if only because it happens to be good against options that are currently popular in the meta. (Although part of me still finds it odd that people are so annoyed by the thought of popular trends in the meta having counters.)

In the current edition, 35 points apiece for 3 to 5 reapers would be pretty reasonable in my eyes. I'd be less interested in taking them if you priced them much higher that that, but I could find a use for them.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 07:07:13


Post by: JohnHwangDD


Reapers are fair and fine - if players weren't stacking the anti-targeting stuff, the "always hits on a 3+" wouldn't matter.

As always, Eldar are a counter-reaction to whatever cheese dominates the meta - as Eldar should be. Stop playing cheese, and they aren't a problem.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 09:44:14


Post by: Kanluwen


 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Reapers are fair and fine - if players weren't stacking the anti-targeting stuff, the "always hits on a 3+" wouldn't matter.

As always, Eldar are a counter-reaction to whatever cheese dominates the meta - as Eldar should be. Stop playing cheese, and they aren't a problem.

Right, because someone running Raven Guard, Alpha Legion, or Stygies should be punished for the way that Eldar and Tyranid players can stack to hit modifiers.
All of those are restricted to -1 to Hit at 12" or further. They don't get stackable benefits like Eldar Flyers(Alpha Legion and Raven Guard both only apply to infantry units and Dreadnoughts) or Tyranid units with Venomthropes nearby.

The closest to Eldar or Tyranid benefits are Stygies Sydonian Dragoons since they have a -1 to be hit thanks to their Incense and then a -1 at 12"+ thanks to being Stygies VIII, but Dragoons have always been preferred over Ballistarii because of points and other odds & ends. Now that Ballistarii(and Rangers for that matter) have lost their Precision Shots USR from their initial inception, they became even less exciting and/or interesting.

Wyldhunt wrote:6th, they're still toting the 4th edition guns but with the option to pay 8 points to fire a single strength 8 shot instead. My understanding is that they were usable but too expensive to really be appealing next to other units. Ditto that for 7th.

Now in 8th, they're actually probably worse against vehicles than they were in 6th and 7th (as vehicles generally get saves against them, and it now takes at least 4 failed saves to kill things that used to die after 3 failed saves), but they've received a sufficient price decrease to make them appealing for their points.

When did vehicles have saves prior to this edition...? The only vehicles that had saves were Skimmers and Flyers thanks to their Jink Saves(which Reaper Rangefinders negated) or those which had Invulnerable Saves(which were few and far between).

In 6th and 7th, those Starshot Missiles(the S8 AP3 missiles) were what was intended to be used against vehicles--and because of the way that Armour Penetration worked? It had a 'hard cap' as to how far it could go since you didn't get any additional dice or anything for rolling Armor Penetration. You rolled a single D6.
To use a Leman Russ as an example, you had to roll a 6 in order to do anything to a Leman Russ's front armor. 5+ to do anything to its side armor. 2+s to do anything to its rear armor.
Against Sentinels? You're rolling 2+s to do anything to them(barring the Armoured variant which was 12 on the front facing).
You then were further capped by the damage table and the fact you didn't get any real benefits unless you were AP2 or AP1(Reaper Missiles, even the Starshots, were AP3 meaning no benefits).


Reapers don't have as many options, but they can ignore to-hit penalties. Which is really great against about 3 factions and a handful of specific units and mostly useless against everything else unless you constantly shuffling them around the table for some reason.

Let's be brutally honest here. Whether or not the Devastators have "many options" is not really a big deal when most of those options don't get taken anyways.

If you have 4 different choices of sandwiches and two of those sandwiches are presented to you on moldy bread, one is good bread but has a topping that you don't like, and only one sandwich is something you like...is there really an "option" as to which sandwich you're going to pick?

Focusing too much on the idea that "X unit has options, Dark Reapers don't!" is missing the forest for the trees when X unit isn't taking those options right now anyways.
So with all that in mind, the capabilities of reapers compared to devs seem pretty reasonable to me. It's just that the prices might need to be tweaked, the reapers could maybe stand to have their max squad size capped, and we *maybe* want to look at the reaper rangefinder again if only because it happens to be good against options that are currently popular in the meta. (Although part of me still finds it odd that people are so annoyed by the thought of popular trends in the meta having counters.)

Nobody is claiming that they should be tweaked "because they counter popular trends in the meta".

People are claiming they should be tweaked because they're a powerful unit that is undercosted for what they do. If flipping Conscripts can be bumped up to the same price as a Guardsman and Commissars can be nerfed into the ground because they were "autotake options", then Dark Reapers damn well need to be changed when they fall under the same "autotake option" heading.

They don't need to be nerfed into oblivion like Commissars and Conscripts were, but let's stop pretending that being able to ignore unit survivability traits with impunity is no big deal shall we?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 13:06:43


Post by: admironheart


As I said the Range Finder should not be negating move and shoot modifiers, it should not be negating conceal/smoke/hard to target modifiers.

It should only be used vs speed modifiers like Vectored Engines and JInk and Super Sonic Flyers.

Inescapable Accuracy was worded too simply because GW has not used modifiers for over 2 decades and they are not familiar with its effects anymore.

Replace Inescapable Accur. with Reaper Range Finder entry:

This unit does not receive penalties to targets that gain modifiers based on the targets movement, speed or ability to dodge incoming shots.

The Reaper Launcher is a Heavy Weapon, subject to move and fire and terrain modifiers such as Alaitoc or the Culexus have no bearing on it.

Change that and it makes most of the problem go away.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 15:11:39


Post by: Wyldhunt


 admironheart wrote:
As I said the Range Finder should not be negating move and shoot modifiers, it should not be negating conceal/smoke/hard to target modifiers.

It should only be used vs speed modifiers like Vectored Engines and JInk and Super Sonic Flyers.

Inescapable Accuracy was worded too simply because GW has not used modifiers for over 2 decades and they are not familiar with its effects anymore.

Replace Inescapable Accur. with Reaper Range Finder entry:

This unit does not receive penalties to targets that gain modifiers based on the targets movement, speed or ability to dodge incoming shots.

The Reaper Launcher is a Heavy Weapon, subject to move and fire and terrain modifiers such as Alaitoc or the Culexus have no bearing on it.

Change that and it makes most of the problem go away.


I appreciate what you're going for, but that rules wording doesn't actually communicate how the rule works. Does this work against dark eldar flicker fields, for instance, which are basically tossing holograms around while moving quickly enough to confuse the enemy? Does it work on the Eldar -1 to hit stratagem? And surely this should work against the lightning dodge of a succubus given that "dodge" is in the name, but it probably doesn't as that's not a "penalty." I'd definitely be open to the general idea provided it was worded in rules speak though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Reapers are fair and fine - if players weren't stacking the anti-targeting stuff, the "always hits on a 3+" wouldn't matter.

As always, Eldar are a counter-reaction to whatever cheese dominates the meta - as Eldar should be. Stop playing cheese, and they aren't a problem.

Right, because someone running Raven Guard, Alpha Legion, or Stygies should be punished for the way that Eldar and Tyranid players can stack to hit modifiers.
All of those are restricted to -1 to Hit at 12" or further. They don't get stackable benefits like Eldar Flyers(Alpha Legion and Raven Guard both only apply to infantry units and Dreadnoughts) or Tyranid units with Venomthropes nearby.

The closest to Eldar or Tyranid benefits are Stygies Sydonian Dragoons since they have a -1 to be hit thanks to their Incense and then a -1 at 12"+ thanks to being Stygies VIII, but Dragoons have always been preferred over Ballistarii because of points and other odds & ends. Now that Ballistarii(and Rangers for that matter) have lost their Precision Shots USR from their initial inception, they became even less exciting and/or interesting.


While JohnHwangDD is oversimplifying things, I do partially agree with him here. Alaitoc is hands down the most popular craftworld trait. Alpha Legion is definitely one of the most popular chaos legions. RG are probably the most popular chapter tactic with UM being taken more often mostly due to the advantages of fielding Guilliman. Having one decent unit out there that bypasses their -1 to hit gives people a small reason to consider fielding a different chapter/legion/craftworld.

As for eldar and 'nids getting stackable to-hit penalties, I'm afraid I don't see how that serves your overall point. If you dislike that those factions can stack to-hit penalties, then surely you like that there exists a unit relatively popular in the meta that counters those rules, no? Reapers ignore -1 to hit rules the way banshees and warp talons ignore overwatch shenanigans. These are useful but situational rules. It's just that they're less situational for reapers when everyone is fielding -1 to hit penalties.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 15:43:55


Post by: Wyldhunt


 Kanluwen wrote:


When did vehicles have saves prior to this edition...? The only vehicles that had saves were Skimmers and Flyers thanks to their Jink Saves(which Reaper Rangefinders negated) or those which had Invulnerable Saves(which were few and far between).

In 6th and 7th, those Starshot Missiles(the S8 AP3 missiles) were what was intended to be used against vehicles--and because of the way that Armour Penetration worked? It had a 'hard cap' as to how far it could go since you didn't get any additional dice or anything for rolling Armor Penetration. You rolled a single D6.
To use a Leman Russ as an example, you had to roll a 6 in order to do anything to a Leman Russ's front armor. 5+ to do anything to its side armor. 2+s to do anything to its rear armor.
Against Sentinels? You're rolling 2+s to do anything to them(barring the Armoured variant which was 12 on the front facing).
You then were further capped by the damage table and the fact you didn't get any real benefits unless you were AP2 or AP1(Reaper Missiles, even the Starshots, were AP3 meaning no benefits).

I apologize if my post was unclear. You're making the same arguments I intended to. I'm saying that vehicles didn't get saves against reapers in past editions whereas they do now. And in editions where hull points were a thing, many targets were as easy to wound or easier and only required you get 2 or 3 shots through to kill. So these days, we have to get through an armor save, and we often need more wounds to go through to finish the target off. As you point out, reapers weren't generally making their targets explode, so I'm focusing on how many shots it takes to get through wounds/hull points.

So to reiterate, my point is that reapers were probably fine in 6th and 7th and that their relative ability to take down most vehicles has diminished slightly. Which is not a problem but does offer some perspective on their lethality towards certian targets.


Let's be brutally honest here. Whether or not the Devastators have "many options" is not really a big deal when most of those options don't get taken anyways.

If you have 4 different choices of sandwiches and two of those sandwiches are presented to you on moldy bread, one is good bread but has a topping that you don't like, and only one sandwich is something you like...is there really an "option" as to which sandwich you're going to pick?

Focusing too much on the idea that "X unit has options, Dark Reapers don't!" is missing the forest for the trees when X unit isn't taking those options right now anyways.


Fair point. As I prefaced my post by acknowledging that devastators were overpriced, I intended to look at the units' capabilities with the assumption that we could price them such that all their options would be relevant. Perhaps you disagree. That's fair but probably too much of a tangent for this thread. To use your metaphor, those other sandwiches might be more appealing if they were made with different, lower points bread.


Nobody is claiming that they should be tweaked "because they counter popular trends in the meta".

Politely, are they not? Ignoring to-hit modifiers is relevant against a few (4?) faction rules and a smallish group of other units. So anything with hard-to-hit, venoms, starweavers, sky weavers, land speeders, vectored engines, rangers, camo cloaks, and... probably some other things. That's a large enough spread to make the rule nice to have, but it also leaves 99% of the units in the game unaffected. Would be care about the reaper launcher as much if the factions that get -1 to hit at 12+" weren't affected? If the gun ignored FNP type rules instead (thus "punishing" Iron Hands and Death Guard instead of Raven Guard and Alpha Legion), would there be as much opposition to it?


People are claiming they should be tweaked because they're a powerful unit that is undercosted for what they do. If flipping Conscripts can be bumped up to the same price as a Guardsman and Commissars can be nerfed into the ground because they were "autotake options", then Dark Reapers damn well need to be changed when they fall under the same "autotake option" heading.

They don't need to be nerfed into oblivion like Commissars and Conscripts were, but let's stop pretending that being able to ignore unit survivability traits with impunity is no big deal shall we?


I'm absolutely fine with tweaking reapers and acknowledge that they're undercosted. Just like I did in my previous post. I'm just not sure the rangefinder specifically is that big of a deal. I'd be totally fine with changing it to just letting them move and shoot or letting them have some minor advantage against bikes/vehicles that advanced or something. I look at it like this:

When melta is popular in the meta, you think twice about running vehicle spam. When hordes are popular in the meta, you have to decide whether or not to take lascannons instead of something with horde killing ability. When reapers are popular? Maybe you give a different chapter tactic a look and consider not buying the camo-cloaks.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 16:35:35


Post by: Kanluwen


Wyldhunt wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Reapers are fair and fine - if players weren't stacking the anti-targeting stuff, the "always hits on a 3+" wouldn't matter.

As always, Eldar are a counter-reaction to whatever cheese dominates the meta - as Eldar should be. Stop playing cheese, and they aren't a problem.

Right, because someone running Raven Guard, Alpha Legion, or Stygies should be punished for the way that Eldar and Tyranid players can stack to hit modifiers.
All of those are restricted to -1 to Hit at 12" or further. They don't get stackable benefits like Eldar Flyers(Alpha Legion and Raven Guard both only apply to infantry units and Dreadnoughts) or Tyranid units with Venomthropes nearby.

The closest to Eldar or Tyranid benefits are Stygies Sydonian Dragoons since they have a -1 to be hit thanks to their Incense and then a -1 at 12"+ thanks to being Stygies VIII, but Dragoons have always been preferred over Ballistarii because of points and other odds & ends. Now that Ballistarii(and Rangers for that matter) have lost their Precision Shots USR from their initial inception, they became even less exciting and/or interesting.


While JohnHwangDD is oversimplifying things, I do partially agree with him here. Alaitoc is hands down the most popular craftworld trait. Alpha Legion is definitely one of the most popular chaos legions. RG are probably the most popular chapter tactic with UM being taken more often mostly due to the advantages of fielding Guilliman. Having one decent unit out there that bypasses their -1 to hit gives people a small reason to consider fielding a different chapter/legion/craftworld.

Alpha Legion is popular not strictly because of the -1 to Hit but also because of the buffs it gives to Cultists and the Infiltration Stratagem.
Raven Guard are also popular because of the Infiltration Stratagem.

As for eldar and 'nids getting stackable to-hit penalties, I'm afraid I don't see how that serves your overall point. If you dislike that those factions can stack to-hit penalties, then surely you like that there exists a unit relatively popular in the meta that counters those rules, no? Reapers ignore -1 to hit rules the way banshees and warp talons ignore overwatch shenanigans. These are useful but situational rules. It's just that they're less situational for reapers when everyone is fielding -1 to hit penalties.

The issue is that you're talking about the fox being in the hen house. Reapers ignore the penalties to hit while at the same time being in the army that can stack the hell out of them.

If there were other units out there spread across every army that allowed for this to be done? It'd be a different story. As it stands, there isn't.

Wyldhunt wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:


When did vehicles have saves prior to this edition...? The only vehicles that had saves were Skimmers and Flyers thanks to their Jink Saves(which Reaper Rangefinders negated) or those which had Invulnerable Saves(which were few and far between).

In 6th and 7th, those Starshot Missiles(the S8 AP3 missiles) were what was intended to be used against vehicles--and because of the way that Armour Penetration worked? It had a 'hard cap' as to how far it could go since you didn't get any additional dice or anything for rolling Armor Penetration. You rolled a single D6.
To use a Leman Russ as an example, you had to roll a 6 in order to do anything to a Leman Russ's front armor. 5+ to do anything to its side armor. 2+s to do anything to its rear armor.
Against Sentinels? You're rolling 2+s to do anything to them(barring the Armoured variant which was 12 on the front facing).
You then were further capped by the damage table and the fact you didn't get any real benefits unless you were AP2 or AP1(Reaper Missiles, even the Starshots, were AP3 meaning no benefits).

I apologize if my post was unclear. You're making the same arguments I intended to. I'm saying that vehicles didn't get saves against reapers in past editions whereas they do now. And in editions where hull points were a thing, many targets were as easy to wound or easier and only required you get 2 or 3 shots through to kill. So these days, we have to get through an armor save, and we often need more wounds to go through to finish the target off. As you point out, reapers weren't generally making their targets explode, so I'm focusing on how many shots it takes to get through wounds/hull points.

So to reiterate, my point is that reapers were probably fine in 6th and 7th and that their relative ability to take down most vehicles has diminished slightly. Which is not a problem but does offer some perspective on their lethality towards certian targets.

What's the Rend value on a Reaper Launcher's different fire modes? Because that is going to affect whether or not their "ability to take down most vehicles has diminished". If it's a rend of -2 or higher, they're able to negate basically every vehicle in the game since even a Baneblade chassis only features a 3+ save.

Previously, not much was reliably "making their targets explode" and you relied on glancing things to death when possible.


Let's be brutally honest here. Whether or not the Devastators have "many options" is not really a big deal when most of those options don't get taken anyways.

If you have 4 different choices of sandwiches and two of those sandwiches are presented to you on moldy bread, one is good bread but has a topping that you don't like, and only one sandwich is something you like...is there really an "option" as to which sandwich you're going to pick?

Focusing too much on the idea that "X unit has options, Dark Reapers don't!" is missing the forest for the trees when X unit isn't taking those options right now anyways.


Fair point. As I prefaced my post by acknowledging that devastators were overpriced, I intended to look at the units' capabilities with the assumption that we could price them such that all their options would be relevant. Perhaps you disagree. That's fair but probably too much of a tangent for this thread. To use your metaphor, those other sandwiches might be more appealing if they were made with different, lower points bread.

The issue that you're missing is that all this talk of Devastators ignores the fact that:
1) The unit has a 'dud' from the start in the form of the Devastator Sergeant. He doesn't get a Heavy Weapon. Reaper Exarchs do.
2) Devastators have no native way of ignoring the -1 to Hit modifiers, at least not for the whole unit. You can have the Sergeant use his Signum to make one model in the unit be able to ignore that modifier but that's it. Captains allow for you to reroll hit rolls, not add to them.


Nobody is claiming that they should be tweaked "because they counter popular trends in the meta".

Politely, are they not? Ignoring to-hit modifiers is relevant against a few (4?) faction rules and a smallish group of other units. So anything with hard-to-hit, venoms, starweavers, sky weavers, land speeders, vectored engines, rangers, camo cloaks, and... probably some other things. That's a large enough spread to make the rule nice to have, but it also leaves 99% of the units in the game unaffected. Would be care about the reaper launcher as much if the factions that get -1 to hit at 12+" weren't affected? If the gun ignored FNP type rules instead (thus "punishing" Iron Hands and Death Guard instead of Raven Guard and Alpha Legion), would there be as much opposition to it?

Camo Cloaks don't do to Hit modifiers for anyone but Eldar. For Marines, it grants +2 to your armor save from being in cover rather than +1(Scouts then get 2+ armor saves while in cover, not 3+s).

"Ignoring to-hit modifiers" is a hugely relevant ability. It's a thing that is intended to give units that are otherwise fragile a bit of survival tools without needing to buff up their armor saves. Being able to ignore Hard to Hit(Flakk Missiles cost Guard and all flavor of Marines a Stratagem point), being able to ignore Chapter Tactics/Forge World/Craftworld/Legion Traits(although really the only faction that gets to stack Hard to Hit with their own traits is Eldar, since Chapter Tactics/Legion Traits are restricted to Dreadnoughts and Infantry), being able to ignore unit special rules all at once is a huge flipping deal.

As it stands, Dark Reapers are effective against:
Anything with a -1 to Hit penalty from their 'racial' trait like Raven Guard, Stygies VIII, Alpha Legion, or Alaitoc.
Anything with a -1 to Hit penalty from a special rule on the unit, such as things featuring "Hard to Hit" or a similar rule.

Everyone else has to make due with just leveling out against things with multiple penalties(read: Eldar) that can be leveraged.


People are claiming they should be tweaked because they're a powerful unit that is undercosted for what they do. If flipping Conscripts can be bumped up to the same price as a Guardsman and Commissars can be nerfed into the ground because they were "autotake options", then Dark Reapers damn well need to be changed when they fall under the same "autotake option" heading.

They don't need to be nerfed into oblivion like Commissars and Conscripts were, but let's stop pretending that being able to ignore unit survivability traits with impunity is no big deal shall we?


I'm absolutely fine with tweaking reapers and acknowledge that they're undercosted. Just like I did in my previous post. I'm just not sure the rangefinder specifically is that big of a deal. I'd be totally fine with changing it to just letting them move and shoot or letting them have some minor advantage against bikes/vehicles that advanced or something. I look at it like this:
When melta is popular in the meta, you think twice about running vehicle spam. When hordes are popular in the meta, you have to decide whether or not to take lascannons instead of something with horde killing ability. When reapers are popular? Maybe you give a different chapter tactic a look and consider not buying the camo-cloaks.

Again, camo cloaks do nothing for the "to hit" penalties outside of Eldar.

The Rangefinder is literally a huge deal. Nobody else gets a similar thing at this point, especially not for free. Even if it were made a 3 CP Stratagem it might still be a bit strong.

You want to make it a 'reasonable' thing? Start spreading that kind of rule into other armies. Many of them have units where it would absolutely work, such as the Guard Hydra(which historically had a "Targeting System" that allowed its hits to ignore Jink/Hard to Hit modifiers until Cruddace kept messing with things) or the Mechanicus Onager when outfitted with the Icarus Array.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 16:45:26


Post by: Galas


 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Reapers are fair and fine - if players weren't stacking the anti-targeting stuff, the "always hits on a 3+" wouldn't matter.

As always, Eldar are a counter-reaction to whatever cheese dominates the meta - as Eldar should be. Stop playing cheese, and they aren't a problem.

Oh man we are full on Eldar Apologiszm... yeah Eldar and Dark Reapers are fine thats why 5 of the top 8 of LVO were Eldar spamming Dark Reapers (That destroy armies with and without the -1 to hit trait) and Bright Lances.
Like Eldars don't have been the masters of cheese for the past editions LOL


Wyldhunt wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Reapers are fair and fine - if players weren't stacking the anti-targeting stuff, the "always hits on a 3+" wouldn't matter.

As always, Eldar are a counter-reaction to whatever cheese dominates the meta - as Eldar should be. Stop playing cheese, and they aren't a problem.

Right, because someone running Raven Guard, Alpha Legion, or Stygies should be punished for the way that Eldar and Tyranid players can stack to hit modifiers.
All of those are restricted to -1 to Hit at 12" or further. They don't get stackable benefits like Eldar Flyers(Alpha Legion and Raven Guard both only apply to infantry units and Dreadnoughts) or Tyranid units with Venomthropes nearby.

The closest to Eldar or Tyranid benefits are Stygies Sydonian Dragoons since they have a -1 to be hit thanks to their Incense and then a -1 at 12"+ thanks to being Stygies VIII, but Dragoons have always been preferred over Ballistarii because of points and other odds & ends. Now that Ballistarii(and Rangers for that matter) have lost their Precision Shots USR from their initial inception, they became even less exciting and/or interesting.


While JohnHwangDD is oversimplifying things, I do partially agree with him here. Alaitoc is hands down the most popular craftworld trait. Alpha Legion is definitely one of the most popular chaos legions. RG are probably the most popular chapter tactic with UM being taken more often mostly due to the advantages of fielding Guilliman. Having one decent unit out there that bypasses their -1 to hit gives people a small reason to consider fielding a different chapter/legion/craftworld.

As for eldar and 'nids getting stackable to-hit penalties, I'm afraid I don't see how that serves your overall point. If you dislike that those factions can stack to-hit penalties, then surely you like that there exists a unit relatively popular in the meta that counters those rules, no? Reapers ignore -1 to hit rules the way banshees and warp talons ignore overwatch shenanigans. These are useful but situational rules. It's just that they're less situational for reapers when everyone is fielding -1 to hit penalties.


Dark Reapers are destroying everything with their insane firepower for their cost. It doesn't matter if it has a -1 or not. "Yeah I'm playing agaisnt a Dark Reaper spam list, I will use White Scars Chapter Tactics that surely will help me!" No. It doesnt. The "always hit on a 3+" is just the cherry on top.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 16:51:27


Post by: JohnHwangDD


Eldar have always been a good army. The rest of you need to learn to play smarter against them. In general, that means taking a LOT more cheap bodies.

You guys playing Rocks, need to stop whining about Paper being awesome. Buy a BRAND NEW Scissors army from GW, or STFU.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 16:56:19


Post by: Galas


Yeah because Eldars arent one of the best anti horde armies of the game with their high number of shoots per point Those sexy 20-man guardian bloobs deepstriking in front of you.

JohnHwangDD, normally I don't know if you are trolling other people here or you genuinely believe what you wrote here and in other threads.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 17:13:53


Post by: Martel732


He's a troll. I ignored him a long time ago.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 17:31:31


Post by: JohnHwangDD


I'm no more a troll than Kan or Martel or the other "nerf Eldars". People who constantly whine about Eldars need to Git Gud and Learn To Play.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 18:22:52


Post by: Alpharius


This being the "Proposed Rules" section, if you (general sense) don't think Eldar need fixing, it is probably best to move on along and perhaps not post in this thread.

IF you (general sense) feel the need to post, make sure to do so within the bounds of the few rules we have here.

Specifically RULE #1.




Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 19:42:29


Post by: bananathug


I really want to block Johny (because obvious troll is obvious) but their avatar is so nice to look at I can't bring myself to do it...

So feeding the trolls, if 500+ tournament players can't crack the dark reaper code, knowing that they were going to be facing reaper spam, I'm pretty sure the answer isn't "git gud" but maybe john knows something we don't...


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 19:44:50


Post by: Goobi2


Overall, I think Reapers could be 3 pts. more expensive. 30 is a good round number for their little T3 butts. They are pretty scary, but they are far from hard to kill.

On the flip side of things, I think Devastators with Missile Launchers or Lascannons shouldn't be more than 35 pts. Another 3 pt. shift that would really help out without getting too crazy.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 20:08:19


Post by: BrianDavion


one problem with the dark reapers "ignore all targeting penalties" is it makes it ahrder for GW to produce in the future a balanced faction that "dodge tanks"

one that is lightly armored, and low toughness but makes up for this by being really hard to hit.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/02 21:39:40


Post by: bananathug


Have you guys that say reapers aren't hard to kill ever played against them competitively?

An opponent worth their dice won't let you shoot them before they shoot you so in order to engage you have to survive their alpha. Next you need to be able to engage at 36" at least, their 3+ should be a 2+.

The t3 is the least of your worries. It's the cover and the minuses to hit and the really good eldar powers that make them hard to kill. They synergize really well with the tools available to eldar players.

Webway hides 2 units of them, a serpent hides the other unit. The webway ones pop out at optimal range of their target and melt it. The other unit pops out of the serpent and kills you, bonus points if your opponent is smart enough to run them as a ynarri detachment and word of phoenix them for another round of shooting.

They are bubble wrapped with -2 to hit rangers so no deepstrike for you. Many armies do not have access to weapons that can deal with a 2+, -1 to hit infantry at 36+ inches (after surviving alpha from them because your biggest threat to them should be priority 1) regardless of the toughness. Conceal one unit so now you're -2 to hit it, strat to make the other unit -2 to hit (I think it's -1 to hit it, they have some strat that makes me not want to shoot the second unit) and hopefully they've removed the threat closest to their ynarii unit to keep that one alive.

At least that's the way they are played against me. Hell I've have the ynarii one webway portaled on top of a fortification and then move, shoot, moved into the fort meaning I can't shoot at them for 2 turns (webway my turn 1, in the fortress my turn 2).

Start throwing guides, dooms and WoP around and an OP unit turns into a "I'm not playing against those again" unit.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/03 00:42:30


Post by: Wyldhunt


 Kanluwen wrote:

The issue is that you're talking about the fox being in the hen house. Reapers ignore the penalties to hit while at the same time being in the army that can stack the hell out of them.

If there were other units out there spread across every army that allowed for this to be done? It'd be a different story. As it stands, there isn't.

So what you're saying is that it's a good thing the rangefinder exists to help counter those occassional armies that can really stack to hit penalties, and it would be great if we spread a similar rule to other factions? Sounds good to me! ;D

 Kanluwen wrote:

As it stands, Dark Reapers are effective against:
Anything with a -1 to Hit penalty from their 'racial' trait like Raven Guard, Stygies VIII, Alpha Legion, or Alaitoc.
Anything with a -1 to Hit penalty from a special rule on the unit, such as things featuring "Hard to Hit" or a similar rule.

Everyone else has to make due with just leveling out against things with multiple penalties(read: Eldar) that can be leveraged.

Sure. But would you say that all those things combined make up more or less than 10% of the units you'll see on the table? Let's say it's right around 10% and assume for simplicity's sake that most such units only have a -1 to hit as stacking penalties are mostly an eldar thing. That would mean that against 1/10th of the units you go up against, reapers will hit one extra time for every 6 shots they fire at just shy of 30 points apiece. So for every 162 points of reapers you take, you'll land 4 strength 8 hits instead of 3 against 1/10th of the targets you're likely to face. That just doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me. But again, I'm not married to the rangefinder, and I'm in the "nerf reapers slightly" camp.

Also, while it stinks that marines (and chaos marines?) have vehicles that don't benefit from their chapter tactics, this actually means that the reaper rangefinder is even less relevant against those armies. Sure, the reapers will still have a leg up against your little guys, but the strength 8 shot will be performing basically the same against your rhinos, predators, etc.


You want to make it a 'reasonable' thing? Start spreading that kind of rule into other armies. Many of them have units where it would absolutely work, such as the Guard Hydra(which historically had a "Targeting System" that allowed its hits to ignore Jink/Hard to Hit modifiers until Cruddace kept messing with things) or the Mechanicus Onager when outfitted with the Icarus Array.

Sounds good to me. Fluffy. Provides more counters to various penalty-providing rules. Let's do it.


What's the Rend value on a Reaper Launcher's different fire modes? Because that is going to affect whether or not their "ability to take down most vehicles has diminished". If it's a rend of -2 or higher, they're able to negate basically every vehicle in the game since even a Baneblade chassis only features a 3+ save.

Previously, not much was reliably "making their targets explode" and you relied on glancing things to death when possible.


It's -2, which means most vehicles get a 5+ against it. Which means you'll ignore 1/3rd of the wounds I toss your way. A rhino takes 4 unsaved wounds for reapers to kill, so I'lll need to do about 5 or 6 wounds to you to take down that rhino. My point was that reapers did not rely on making things explode and thus had to glance things to death. Which they could do more easily than they can kill the same targets now. Which is fine. My only point in bringing this up was to point out that their offensive power hasn't actually gone up all that much (though it has increased as a result of them getting cheaper). I'm definitely not saying they're trash. I'm just saying they weren't evaporating people in tournaments in the past, and now they actually have to work a little harder to take down a heavier target.


The issue that you're missing is that all this talk of Devastators ignores the fact that:
1) The unit has a 'dud' from the start in the form of the Devastator Sergeant. He doesn't get a Heavy Weapon. Reaper Exarchs do.
2) Devastators have no native way of ignoring the -1 to Hit modifiers, at least not for the whole unit. You can have the Sergeant use his Signum to make one model in the unit be able to ignore that modifier but that's it. Captains allow for you to reroll hit rolls, not add to them.

So let me preface this by reiterating that I do in fact believe devastators are too expensive and reapers are too cheap.
1) I'm not forgetting about him.You're right that he doesn't bring any offensive power to the table, and I do personally prefer an exarch to a sargeant and more reaper launchers rather than more ablative wounds. That said, I'm fairly sure the sargeant is less expensive than the exarch (even though the exarch is free for some reason), and there is an advantage to being able to sprinkle in some relatively cheap ablative wounds, especially if one of those wounds can provide a modest buff to another model in the squad. The reapers have the better deal, sure, but I feel it's disengenuous to act as though the sergeant doesn't have his up-sides.
2) I won't pretend that the rangefinder isn't nice to have, but I don't personally find it to have an enormous impact most of the time. On average, a 10 man reaper squad will 1 or 2 extra times against a target they would normally have a -1 to hit. If you're buffing them with Guide or something else that provides rerolls, then the ignore penalties rule matters even less because you have a good chance of converting that miss into a hit anyway.






Automatically Appended Next Post:
bananathug wrote:
Have you guys that say reapers aren't hard to kill ever played against them competitively?

An opponent worth their dice won't let you shoot them before they shoot you so in order to engage you have to survive their alpha. Next you need to be able to engage at 36" at least, their 3+ should be a 2+.

The t3 is the least of your worries. It's the cover and the minuses to hit and the really good eldar powers that make them hard to kill. They synergize really well with the tools available to eldar players.

Webway hides 2 units of them, a serpent hides the other unit. The webway ones pop out at optimal range of their target and melt it. The other unit pops out of the serpent and kills you, bonus points if your opponent is smart enough to run them as a ynarri detachment and word of phoenix them for another round of shooting.

They are bubble wrapped with -2 to hit rangers so no deepstrike for you. Many armies do not have access to weapons that can deal with a 2+, -1 to hit infantry at 36+ inches (after surviving alpha from them because your biggest threat to them should be priority 1) regardless of the toughness. Conceal one unit so now you're -2 to hit it, strat to make the other unit -2 to hit (I think it's -1 to hit it, they have some strat that makes me not want to shoot the second unit) and hopefully they've removed the threat closest to their ynarii unit to keep that one alive.

At least that's the way they are played against me. Hell I've have the ynarii one webway portaled on top of a fortification and then move, shoot, moved into the fort meaning I can't shoot at them for 2 turns (webway my turn 1, in the fortress my turn 2).

Start throwing guides, dooms and WoP around and an OP unit turns into a "I'm not playing against those again" unit.


That sounds pretty nasty, and I can definitely see a lot of armeis struggling against it. That said, that sounds like a lot of eggs in one basket. Assuming we're talking about 3 squads of 10 reapers (to maximize your buffs), we're looking at...

810 points for the reapers
~127 for a cheap wave serpent, though mine tend to get more expensive with upgrades.
132 for Yvraine (who, if I recall correctly, will prevent whatever detachment she's in from benefitting from <Craftworld> traits. )
40 points for a cheap Conceal warlock
100 for a farseer on foot
120 points worth of ranger to have a minimum of 2 squads, although I don't feel you screen that well with just 10 rangers.
So that's 1,329 points out of a list that has almost all of its offense wrapped up in 3 squads. If you want to add Fortune to the mix, you'll need another Farseer for another 100 points. I'm not saying that won't hit like a ton of bricks, but it is a huge investment.

Then, you're looking at...
3 Command points to deepstrike two of those reaper squads
2 Command points to intercept something (which you're not doing while all your reapers are in the webway or a transport)
2 command points to make a unit -1 to hit for a single shooting phase
1 Command point to move a single squad 6" after it shoots.

So if your opponent is doing everything you describe, they're looking at spending between 5 and 8 command points before their second turn rolls around. The stuff priced out above could be turned into a batallion and a a spearhead pretty easily, but that will still only get you 7 total. Assuming they add 1 or 3 more CP with the leftover points, they'll still have basically blown their load by the end of turn 2 with the tactics you've described.

Which isn't to say that the army you're describing doesn't sound brutal. It just sounds like a very expensive one trick pony. Yes, they'll shoot the snot out of you on your way to them, but they're basically out of luck once you reach them. Even falling back and shooting (if you let them) will be a further drain on their resources. A couple of deepstriking blood letter squads rerolling their charges could be enough to shot down one or two reaper squads pretty effectively.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/03 01:59:45


Post by: admironheart


any shooting at reapers is nasty.

Guardsmen, termagants, orks...any blob with enough dice make mincemeat of 3+ T3 dudes.

The thing is most are taking a big monster/vehicle or elites.

The counter to Reapers is lots of small arm fire.

Too many players rely on too few choices.

It reminds me of chess. I destroy a lot of players that are pro's at the Queen and Rooks, but really really lack with Knights, Bishops and PAWNS.
I suck at using a Queen....so I counter with what I'm good at.

If Dark Reapers are coming out of reserves/transports....have your own unit to counter them.

Forwarned only works in conjuction with a Farseer. So if he don't have the 1st turn relic to reserve from then he will need the farseer in a transport or a jetbike.

IF he don't have that then you can easily figure out where and what unit of Dark Reapers will Qualify for that Strategem.
Eliminate that unit.

Once you do that then your reserves can come in and shoot the crap out of the other unit.

Play the long game. Don't over react to the Eldar. Don't let him dictate your moves. Stay in Control and force him to play to what you give him.

A few distraction blobs work.

So many big monsters in the Nids normally take up all the shooting anyways.....Find the best blob unit that can get close to the reapers, spam them and shoot them.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/03 02:14:23


Post by: Galas


Stop saying the Dark Reapers problem is a "git gud" problem. It isn't, LVO has shown that. The final was Dark Reaper spam vs Dark Reaper spam FFS. All what you are saying would be good assuming Dark Reapers were balanced. Then, they could have counterplay. But they don't have it. Because people isn't taking just Dark Reapers. What Dark Reapers can't kill the rest of the Eldar army surely can.
Imperial Guard is one of the strongest armies right now and even they can't compete with Dark Reaper Spam and Eldars. And are you saying Imperial Guard doesn't use a lot of cheap bodies? The "counter" agaisnt Dark Reapers?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/03 11:57:58


Post by: Shadenuat


Putting random or just dumb propositions from haters and people who never even played that unit, like 50 ppw and crappy weapons, aside, when we speak about things that look reasonable - mainly changing squad to size of 3 to 5, we need to concider something.

The reason why this change looks reasonable is entirely due to synergies, not just Reapers themselves, mainly the Ynnari double tap + Guide & Stratagems. This is due to already solid damage many Eldar units do being magnified further by them.

But if we go into that thinking, what other units are too powerful and could use a smaller squad size? Shining Spears? Then someone would argue, double-tapping 10 Dragons is too much. So make them also most of 5 models per squad? How about Guardians? 20 Guardians make some decent shooting. Double tap that for 80 shots with rending. Swooping Hawks? Actually tournament viable, 80 Lasblaster shots. Wraithguard with D-Scythes or Wraithcannons? Etc., etc.

As long as that synergy between eldar factions exist, you either balance all Eldar for Ynnari, or do not. If you do not, double activations take Eldar unit's already conciderable damage (because that's what they are about - mobility and focus fire) into stratosphere. If you do, everything without Ynnari would end up underwhelming. So everyone would keep taking Ynnari.

That's even if we concider that 40K should be balanced around sportshammer and tryhards who take 30 reapers. Note that Reapers were already 36 ppw in Index. They were dropped by 33% of their cost almost. Whatever that meant.
Personally, I'd begin with adding that 20-30% extra back. The further you go, the closer you'd be to butchering the unit. However, it would not solve Ynnari & Alaitoc. Because double activations & hit penalties are larger threat to game balance than any single unit. I mean, why SHOULD unit be balanced because a faction doctrine exists? From game design point, every other doctrine should be just as viable, and, say, Biel-Tan Reapers (who would be a lot easier to kill for IG, for example) shouldn't suffer price increase because Alaitoc Reapers are too powerful - and so on.

And are you saying Imperial Guard doesn't use a lot of cheap bodies?

Does every IG player finish every game though, instead of running out of time on turn 3? Tournaments are tournaments. It is not unknown for absolutely identical lists to end up on top 3 and on the last places at the same time, for example.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/03 20:37:04


Post by: Wyldhunt


 Shadenuat wrote:


But if we go into that thinking, what other units are too powerful and could use a smaller squad size? Shining Spears? Then someone would argue, double-tapping 10 Dragons is too much. So make them also most of 5 models per squad? How about Guardians? 20 Guardians make some decent shooting. Double tap that for 80 shots with rending. Swooping Hawks? Actually tournament viable, 80 Lasblaster shots. Wraithguard with D-Scythes or Wraithcannons? Etc., etc.

As long as that synergy between eldar factions exist, you either balance all Eldar for Ynnari, or do not. If you do not, double activations take Eldar unit's already conciderable damage (because that's what they are about - mobility and focus fire) into stratosphere. If you do, everything without Ynnari would end up underwhelming. So everyone would keep taking Ynnari.


Currently, you can only do a given soul burst action once per turn, and most of our (craftworld) melee units are not all that great at killing things in melee. So most of the time, you're only getting a huge boost in damage when you soulburst with a shooty unit. Most of the units you've described have relatively short range thus making soul bursting difficult at the moment. Dark reapers are uniquely good at taking advantage of Word of the Phoenix because they have such a long range. So Word of the Phoenix on reapers means you basically double the unit's value. Using it on fire dragons means you've spent resources to get the dragons within 12" of a decent target and to get Yvraine or the Yncarne within range of the dragons. Ditto wraith guard. It's still a good combo, but it requires more of an investment to pull off while ynarri reapers are doing their thing from across the table. 80 shot hawks and ynnari spears are both things that I suspect people will become more aware and wary of with time.

That said, I get the impression GW has decided they don't like their own Soul Burst rules, and I won't be surprised if we see a massive overhaul of said rules at some point. Although balancing aeldari units against Ynnari rules might warrant its own thread.



Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/04 02:01:12


Post by: Kanluwen


BrianDavion wrote:
one problem with the dark reapers "ignore all targeting penalties" is it makes it ahrder for GW to produce in the future a balanced faction that "dodge tanks"

one that is lightly armored, and low toughness but makes up for this by being really hard to hit.

This isn't necessarily true. Dark Eldar Wyches, Imperial Assassins, and Harlequins(to throw some examples out there) have traditionally received an Invulnerable Save that represents their speed and agility.

In any regards there's a reason why I suggested that Dark Reapers get something that has to do with the target moving a set distance in order for Reaper Rangefinders to 'trigger'. It can be fluffed as the Rangefinder needing a certain amount of time in order to properly plot/calculate a trajectory for the target.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wyldhunt wrote:

So what you're saying is that it's a good thing the rangefinder exists to help counter those occasional armies that can really stack to hit penalties, and it would be great if we spread a similar rule to other factions? Sounds good to me! ;D

That's not what I'm saying at all, if I'm going to be honest. Even if I'd rather see the skill put out into more places I do feel like it just has no real business being a "one size fits all" thing.



Sure. But would you say that all those things combined make up more or less than 10% of the units you'll see on the table? Let's say it's right around 10% and assume for simplicity's sake that most such units only have a -1 to hit as stacking penalties are mostly an eldar thing. That would mean that against 1/10th of the units you go up against, reapers will hit one extra time for every 6 shots they fire at just shy of 30 points apiece. So for every 162 points of reapers you take, you'll land 4 strength 8 hits instead of 3 against 1/10th of the targets you're likely to face. That just doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me. But again, I'm not married to the rangefinder, and I'm in the "nerf reapers slightly" camp.

Also, while it stinks that marines (and chaos marines?) have vehicles that don't benefit from their chapter tactics, this actually means that the reaper rangefinder is even less relevant against those armies. Sure, the reapers will still have a leg up against your little guys, but the strength 8 shot will be performing basically the same against your rhinos, predators, etc.

The problem with this is that at the same time Reapers are negating the enemy's "To Hit" penalties...they're benefiting from their own.





It's -2, which means most vehicles get a 5+ against it. Which means you'll ignore 1/3rd of the wounds I toss your way. A rhino takes 4 unsaved wounds for reapers to kill, so I'lll need to do about 5 or 6 wounds to you to take down that rhino. My point was that reapers did not rely on making things explode and thus had to glance things to death. Which they could do more easily than they can kill the same targets now. Which is fine. My only point in bringing this up was to point out that their offensive power hasn't actually gone up all that much (though it has increased as a result of them getting cheaper). I'm definitely not saying they're trash. I'm just saying they weren't evaporating people in tournaments in the past, and now they actually have to work a little harder to take down a heavier target.

Honestly, the only difference between now and then is that vehicles get a save. It's pathetic that they're still able to kill vehicles as easily as you're suggesting they can.

So let me preface this by reiterating that I do in fact believe devastators are too expensive and reapers are too cheap.
1) I'm not forgetting about him.You're right that he doesn't bring any offensive power to the table, and I do personally prefer an exarch to a sargeant and more reaper launchers rather than more ablative wounds. That said, I'm fairly sure the sargeant is less expensive than the exarch (even though the exarch is free for some reason), and there is an advantage to being able to sprinkle in some relatively cheap ablative wounds, especially if one of those wounds can provide a modest buff to another model in the squad. The reapers have the better deal, sure, but I feel it's disengenuous to act as though the sergeant doesn't have his up-sides.

The only upside that a Sergeant brings to a Devastator Squad is the Signum, which allows a single Devastator to add +1 to their Hit roll against a target.
Devastators are 13points per model, including the Sergeant.
The only options the Sergeant can bring though? Various melee weapons and a Combi weapon.


2) I won't pretend that the rangefinder isn't nice to have, but I don't personally find it to have an enormous impact most of the time. On average, a 10 man reaper squad will 1 or 2 extra times against a target they would normally have a -1 to hit. If you're buffing them with Guide or something else that provides rerolls, then the ignore penalties rule matters even less because you have a good chance of converting that miss into a hit anyway.

Have you ever stopped to consider that the reason it's not seeming to have an enormous impact most of the time is because your opponents just gave up on using any of the units with negative to hit modifiers when you have Dark Reapers?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/04 06:42:20


Post by: Wyldhunt


 Kanluwen wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wyldhunt wrote:

So what you're saying is that it's a good thing the rangefinder exists to help counter those occasional armies that can really stack to hit penalties, and it would be great if we spread a similar rule to other factions? Sounds good to me! ;D

That's not what I'm saying at all, if I'm going to be honest. Even if I'd rather see the skill put out into more places I do feel like it just has no real business being a "one size fits all" thing.

As in it should e a penalty mitigator instead of an "always hits on 3s" rule? Something like, "A model equipped with a rangefinder never suffers penalties on to-hit rolls greater than -1?" I'm not opposed to that or to a mechanic that goes after "dodge" rules. We just need to word such a thing well.



The problem with this is that at the same time Reapers are negating the enemy's "To Hit" penalties...they're benefiting from their own.

Blame it on late night posting and being tired, but I'm not sure I'm following your point here. If you're opposed to models benefitting from to-hit penalties, then rules like the reaper range finder should be encouraged and possibly proliferated throughout other armies. If you're opposed to to-hit penalties being mitigated, then what's wrong with reapers benefitting from such penalties? Is it specifically that you don't want reapers or possibly eldar in general to benefit from to-hit penalties? Or perhaps that you feel there should be no way to mitigate such penalties but that to-hit penalties should cap out at -1 or something? My apologies, but I'm not sure what you're getting at here. It sounds like you're simultaneously saying you don't like when people ignore to-hit penalties but that you also don't like when other people benefit from their own to-hit penalties. I'm sure this is not your point.





It's -2, which means most vehicles get a 5+ against it. Which means you'll ignore 1/3rd of the wounds I toss your way. A rhino takes 4 unsaved wounds for reapers to kill, so I'lll need to do about 5 or 6 wounds to you to take down that rhino. My point was that reapers did not rely on making things explode and thus had to glance things to death. Which they could do more easily than they can kill the same targets now. Which is fine. My only point in bringing this up was to point out that their offensive power hasn't actually gone up all that much (though it has increased as a result of them getting cheaper). I'm definitely not saying they're trash. I'm just saying they weren't evaporating people in tournaments in the past, and now they actually have to work a little harder to take down a heavier target.

Honestly, the only difference between now and then is that vehicles get a save.


"The only difference between now and then is that vehicles ignore a certain number of your somewhat expensive shots." I mean... yes? That's not an inconsiderable difference. But again, I'm not saying they're bad against vehicles they're quite good against them. My entire intention when originally raising this particular point was to draw attention to the fact that, against most vehicle targets, reapers are now relatively less good at killing said vehicles. In other words, "If they weren't too good against vehicles last edition and are worse against vehicles now, that suggests they might not be problematic against vehicles."


It's pathetic that they're still able to kill vehicles as easily as you're suggesting they can.

What makes you say that? It's a heavy weapons squad carrying missile launchers. Would you say it's pathetic that devastators can kill vehicles as easily as they can? Reapers are worse at it than those devastators. Now granted, reapers are also less expensive, so perhaps you're saying that the reapers are too good at killing vehicles for their points. There's a 13 point difference between a reaper and a missile dev. So I'm curious, what is your ideal killing power to points ratio? Are missile devs priced perfectly? Or does the sweet spot lie somewhere in that 13 point and 0.5 damage difference between these models? And if that sweet spot happens to be about halfway between the two, say at 34 or 35 points, then I'd be happy to concede that that would be a good price range for reapers. Just like I did several posts ago.


So let me preface this by reiterating that I do in fact believe devastators are too expensive and reapers are too cheap.
1) I'm not forgetting about him.You're right that he doesn't bring any offensive power to the table, and I do personally prefer an exarch to a sargeant and more reaper launchers rather than more ablative wounds. That said, I'm fairly sure the sargeant is less expensive than the exarch (even though the exarch is free for some reason), and there is an advantage to being able to sprinkle in some relatively cheap ablative wounds, especially if one of those wounds can provide a modest buff to another model in the squad. The reapers have the better deal, sure, but I feel it's disengenuous to act as though the sergeant doesn't have his up-sides.

The only upside that a Sergeant brings to a Devastator Squad is the Signum, which allows a single Devastator to add +1 to their Hit roll against a target.
Devastators are 13points per model, including the Sergeant.
The only options the Sergeant can bring though? Various melee weapons and a Combi weapon.

Cutting in half the number of times one of your models misses isn't nothing, and neither is having a relatively cheap wound to sacrifice before touching your more expensive models. Reapers are better off, but I wouldn't mind having 13 point ablative wounds for my pricier models. Let me put it this way: if I could take 13 point ablative wounds for my reapers, I would. Heck, I have a shuriken cannon reaper exarch that I picked up recently and will start fielding for that very purpose. I don't see the sergeant as a "dud" so much as a "mandatory extra life power up." But perhaps you simply don't like spending points on ablative wounds. That's perfectly valid.



2) I won't pretend that the rangefinder isn't nice to have, but I don't personally find it to have an enormous impact most of the time. On average, a 10 man reaper squad will 1 or 2 extra times against a target they would normally have a -1 to hit. If you're buffing them with Guide or something else that provides rerolls, then the ignore penalties rule matters even less because you have a good chance of converting that miss into a hit anyway.

Have you ever stopped to consider that the reason it's not seeming to have an enormous impact most of the time is because your opponents just gave up on using any of the units with negative to hit modifiers when you have Dark Reapers?


I can't say that I have stopped to consider such a thing, but let's do so now. Mulls it over for a minute. Nope. In regards to my personal experiences, that theory doesn't hold water.
a.) I pointed out my (probably flawed) math for why I hold this view. Where -1 to-hit penalties are concerned, you're looking at 1 in 6 reapers hitting an extra time. If you have a rule to allow rerolls of failed to-hit rolls of 3 (like Guide or that one relic), then you're looking at an even smaller difference. If that 1 in 6 extra hits is the straw that breaks the camel's back, then how would you feel about increasing the cost of a reaper with a launcher by 1/6th of their total cost? It would generally have the same impact.
b.) I've seen plenty of models fielded at local tournaments that have to-hit penalty rules. As far as I can tell, no one has abruptly stopped fielding flyers or culexuses... culexusi... cule... Nobody seems to be going, "I was going to field this venom or this flyer, but then I heard someone in town has a non-zero number of dark reapers."
c.) Even my most regular opponents, knowing that I will field reapers, continue to use things like flyers and malanthropes and such even as they tweak their lists to be more powerful in take-all-comers environments. In other words, knowing that I will field dark reapers has not discouraged people from fielding models with to-hit penalties against me because they feel the benefits of the to-hit penalty are worth it against most units/armies even if my own army happens to have a few models that will ignore those to-hit penalties.

So no. As far as I can tell, no one is specifically avoiding taking those units due to my reapers. And even if there was a psychological effect that was convincing them to do so, it still wouldn't impact my point regarding the difference in hits such a rule actually makes.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/06 18:55:02


Post by: skchsan


Math aside, you have to realize how powerful of an ability 'Inescapable Accuracy' is.

It ignores move-and-fire heavy weapon penalty - akin to PotMS.
It ignores 'Hard to Hit' innate to fliers.
It ignores -hit modifiers granted by Chapter Tactics and units like Dark Shroud.

An ability that's akin to abilities granted to the most powerful of the units, that ignores inherent defensive capabilities that's normally mitigated by dedicated AA platforms, and that which nullifies a Chapter Tactics costing 8 ppm is outright outrageous.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/07 07:14:44


Post by: pismakron


Dark Reapers needs to have their damage output lowered. Increasing their point cost would just make them an even glassier glass-cannon.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/07 22:26:02


Post by: Galef


pismakron wrote:
Dark Reapers needs to have their damage output lowered. Increasing their point cost would just make them an even glassier glass-cannon.

Ding! Ding! we have a winner!


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 05:20:32


Post by: Johnbox24


Inescapable accuracy could be made into a stratagem for 1 CP. Cheap enough for 1 unit to use without too much discomfort when necessary but still prevents senseless spam due to the one of a kind stratagem per phase rule

Hell, it could even be a 0 CP stratagem and still work that way


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 13:55:46


Post by: Shadenuat


Stratagem idea is nice. Especially since aspect warriors just don't have any reasonable amount of stratagems dedicated for them to use.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 14:02:22


Post by: Elbows


pismakron wrote:
Dark Reapers needs to have their damage output lowered. Increasing their point cost would just make them an even glassier glass-cannon.


And again, no. Eldar are glass cannons, and Dark Reapers have always been glass cannons. They've also always been armed with proper missile launchers until GW retro'ed that for a while. Stop trying to make them into something they're not.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 14:26:29


Post by: skchsan


Johnbox24 wrote:
Inescapable accuracy could be made into a stratagem for 1 CP. Cheap enough for 1 unit to use without too much discomfort when necessary but still prevents senseless spam due to the one of a kind stratagem per phase rule

Hell, it could even be a 0 CP stratagem and still work that way
I love this 0 CP concept. It's not a game changer but puts limits to how many times the OP-ness of certain units can be used in matched play.

If the main special abilities for units became stratagems, it could potentially promote diversity of units instead of min-maxing the most efficient units.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 14:42:59


Post by: Martel732


 Elbows wrote:
pismakron wrote:
Dark Reapers needs to have their damage output lowered. Increasing their point cost would just make them an even glassier glass-cannon.


And again, no. Eldar are glass cannons, and Dark Reapers have always been glass cannons. They've also always been armed with proper missile launchers until GW retro'ed that for a while. Stop trying to make them into something they're not.


50 ppm it is, then.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 15:19:50


Post by: Galef




No other Aspect Warrior comes close to 40ppm, so why would Reapers?
All Aspect Warriors (except Crimson Hunters) are a single Eldar + Armour + Wargear + Special skill.
Spears are rightly the most expensive as they are "equipped" with Jetbikes and could easily be bumped to 35ppm

Reapers should really be in between Spears and Spiders in terms of cost. The rules should then reflect that cost (i.e. make the Launcher put out less damage)
Add to this a max unit size of 5, and not only are Reapers putting out less damage, but you can only put buffs on 5 of them at a time.

Still a glass cannon, but not a diamond incrusted gold-lined glass cannon.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 15:22:29


Post by: Martel732


Because that's how they play in practice with no changes to damage.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 15:33:12


Post by: Galef


Martel732 wrote:
Because that's how they play in practice with no changes to damage.

And my point is that they SHOULDN'T play that way in practice. They need to be toned down, not priced up.
There is a tangible difference between those 2 nerfs. One makes the unit balanced, the other relegates the unit to a dust collector.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 15:48:01


Post by: Martel732


I'm replying to the other guy's suggestion of no nerfs. I agree with your fix.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 15:52:50


Post by: Galef


Martel732 wrote:
I'm replying to the other guy's suggestion of no nerfs. I agree with your fix.

Right, sorry.

In any case, I don't see any real "fixes" coming soon. In all likelihood, we are just going to get a Chapter Approved price increase.
If GW was smart, they would see the obvious opportunity they have to just update all the Aspect Warriors to plastic and release some sort of update to the rules accordingly.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 15:54:45


Post by: Martel732


Are these guys finecrap or metal right now?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 15:57:22


Post by: Galas


Why don't give Dark Reapers a +1 to hit units that have moved more than 10" in his turn?

That goes with their lore of having tools to track down fast moving targets. And remove the "always hit on a 3+"


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 16:21:00


Post by: Turnip Jedi


I'm in the lower the damage output a sliver, just putting the points up means a switch to bikes, spectres etc, also hoping more data from big events is considered before any changes as one meta break out isn't a big enough sample


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 16:46:36


Post by: thejughead


Part of the issue not being discussed is the Ynarri detachment allowing them to shoot twice and benefit from stratagems and psychic powers. Ynarri should lose <Craftworld> keyword, IMO.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 17:26:07


Post by: Galef


 thejughead wrote:
Part of the issue not being discussed is the Ynarri detachment allowing them to shoot twice and benefit from stratagems and psychic powers. Ynarri should lose <Craftworld> keyword, IMO.

I have addressed this issue. It is one of the main reasons I think Reapers should be max unit size 5, not 10.
Ynnari can only do a certain kind of Soulburst once per turn, so "Shoot twice" can only be done by 1 unit per turn.
5 models shooting twice with less damage per shot is WAAAY less powerful than 10 models shooting twice at their current output.

Martel732 wrote:
Are these guys finecrap or metal right now?

Reapers are currently failcast and constantly out of stock.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 17:29:06


Post by: Martel732


Of course they are.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 17:29:43


Post by: thejughead


Well you should also be talking about shining spears as well. They can move/charge over 80 inches while killing two/three units a turn. Again, all tied to Ynarri detachment and <Craftworld> abuse.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 17:32:50


Post by: mokoshkana


 thejughead wrote:
Well you should also be talking about shining spears as well. They can move/charge over 80 inches while killing two/three units a turn. Again, all tied to Ynarri detachment and <Craftworld> abuse.

This thread is about "Fixing Dark Reapers"


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 17:36:23


Post by: JNAProductions


 Elbows wrote:
pismakron wrote:
Dark Reapers needs to have their damage output lowered. Increasing their point cost would just make them an even glassier glass-cannon.


And again, no. Eldar are glass cannons, and Dark Reapers have always been glass cannons. They've also always been armed with proper missile launchers until GW retro'ed that for a while. Stop trying to make them into something they're not.


They're far too good right now. They either need to go up in price, or be adjusted to be less powerful. Do you disagree with that?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 17:46:56


Post by: mokoshkana


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Elbows wrote:
pismakron wrote:
Dark Reapers needs to have their damage output lowered. Increasing their point cost would just make them an even glassier glass-cannon.


And again, no. Eldar are glass cannons, and Dark Reapers have always been glass cannons. They've also always been armed with proper missile launchers until GW retro'ed that for a while. Stop trying to make them into something they're not.


They're far too good right now. They either need to go up in price, or be adjusted to be less powerful. Do you disagree with that?


I think Shadenuat hit the nail on the head:
 Shadenuat wrote:
Putting random or just dumb propositions from haters and people who never even played that unit, like 50 ppw and crappy weapons, aside, when we speak about things that look reasonable - mainly changing squad to size of 3 to 5, we need to concider something.

The reason why this change looks reasonable is entirely due to synergies, not just Reapers themselves, mainly the Ynnari double tap + Guide & Stratagems. This is due to already solid damage many Eldar units do being magnified further by them.

But if we go into that thinking, what other units are too powerful and could use a smaller squad size? Shining Spears? Then someone would argue, double-tapping 10 Dragons is too much. So make them also most of 5 models per squad? How about Guardians? 20 Guardians make some decent shooting. Double tap that for 80 shots with rending. Swooping Hawks? Actually tournament viable, 80 Lasblaster shots. Wraithguard with D-Scythes or Wraithcannons? Etc., etc.

As long as that synergy between eldar factions exist, you either balance all Eldar for Ynnari, or do not. If you do not, double activations take Eldar unit's already conciderable damage (because that's what they are about - mobility and focus fire) into stratosphere. If you do, everything without Ynnari would end up underwhelming. So everyone would keep taking Ynnari.

That's even if we concider that 40K should be balanced around sportshammer and tryhards who take 30 reapers. Note that Reapers were already 36 ppw in Index. They were dropped by 33% of their cost almost. Whatever that meant.
Personally, I'd begin with adding that 20-30% extra back. The further you go, the closer you'd be to butchering the unit. However, it would not solve Ynnari & Alaitoc. Because double activations & hit penalties are larger threat to game balance than any single unit. I mean, why SHOULD unit be balanced because a faction doctrine exists? From game design point, every other doctrine should be just as viable, and, say, Biel-Tan Reapers (who would be a lot easier to kill for IG, for example) shouldn't suffer price increase because Alaitoc Reapers are too powerful - and so on.

Eldar have always been about synergy. Most (not all but most) units in the Codex, when viewed individually, are not that bad. When you start tacking the buffs, strategems, etc on top, is when things start getting pretty insane. I've only been playing Eldar since the tail end of 6th, but it has been my humble opinion that the struggle has been around balancing the synergies. Ynnari compounded that by adding a whole new level of crazy synergy. As that faction is currently a part of the game, it has to be taken into account when we talk about fixing Reapers, but we also have to consider a balanced fix that doesn't make Craftworld Reapers trash because the proper balance was done for Ynnari. Galef has some solid ideas for this, but as Shadenuat noted, Reapers received a point reduction in the Codex. I remember thinking it was unnecessary at the time, and the proof has definitely been in the pudding on that one.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 17:49:35


Post by: thejughead


Le sigh!

mokoshkana wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
Well you should also be talking about shining spears as well. They can move/charge over 80 inches while killing two/three units a turn. Again, all tied to Ynarri detachment and <Craftworld> abuse.

This thread is about "Fixing Dark Reapers"


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 17:54:36


Post by: Martel732


36 ppm is way too cheap, but it would be a start.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think 36 ppm is way too cheap, but it would be a start. I don't list 50 ppm lightly.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 17:55:42


Post by: Galef


mokoshkana wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
Well you should also be talking about shining spears as well. They can move/charge over 80 inches while killing two/three units a turn. Again, all tied to Ynarri detachment and <Craftworld> abuse.

This thread is about "Fixing Dark Reapers"

Indeed this thread is about Reapers, but I have stated before that I think Spears should also be capped at 5 models per unit

I also feel that this statement is disingenuous: "can move/charge over 80 inches while killing two/three units a turn" as this also requires a Psyker to can a power in order to work. You pay the points for the Psyker too and it is hardly a garunteed power to go off.
The same logic applies to Reapers. the biggest issue with them is being able to stack buffs on them. If you reduce their unit size, buffs to not work as efficiently. Reapers also need their damage output lowered.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 17:58:26


Post by: Martel732


There is no heavy support in the game that can do what reapers do for 36 ppm. Thats before buffs and craftworld bonuses.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 18:08:13


Post by: mokoshkana


Martel732 wrote:
There is no heavy support in the game that can do what reapers do for 36 ppm. Thats before buffs and craftworld bonuses.

Absolutely agree, but there are numerous other units that cannot do X for the cost of Y. This isn't chess, so one armies pawns will not be a 1 to 1 match with the other armies pawns. That is not to say that Reapers don't need adjusted because they absolutely do. It does however need to be done in a manner which allows them remain relevant as opposed to putting them on the bench. Just look Wraithknights for what happens when a unit is overnerfed to the point of making it useless. WK's were broken in 7th so 8th fixed it by making them unusable for their points cost. Raising Reapers to 40ppm will do just that.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 18:12:41


Post by: Martel732


40 is still too low to be a fair unit. 200 pts for 5 of these guys is a steal. Go look at what other factions get for 200 pts.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 18:28:55


Post by: mokoshkana


Martel732 wrote:
40 is still too low to be a fair unit. 200 pts for 5 of these guys is a steal. Go look at what other factions get for 200 pts.

Obliterators (3 for 195) are pretty amazing for their points. Should we go ahead and raise the points for that unit too? They can deepstrike where needed, and if I am not mistaken, they can use a Strategem to shoot twice in the same turn. With a 24 inch range, they can get their firepower where its needed pretty easily.

When you look at what Reapers provide, you have to remember that they struggle in close combat. Marine equivalents, while not as brutal in shooting abilities, get +1 str and tough. Reapers can be tied up in close combat, although that isn't easily accomplished.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 19:44:56


Post by: Martel732


Close combat means nothing still. Even with BA, you can force me to charge chumps.

"isn't easily accomplished" is a bit of an understatement.

Maybe oblits are undercosted. They don't get used enough as far as I can tell to make a clear determination.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 20:07:05


Post by: thejughead


I guffawed at the assertion that Eldar fail psychic tests they want to pull off. Yeah its pretty much automatic, like 90%.

 Galef wrote:
mokoshkana wrote:

I also feel that this statement is disingenuous: "can move/charge over 80 inches while killing two/three units a turn" as this also requires a Psyker to can a power in order to work. You pay the points for the Psyker too and it is hardly a garunteed power to go off.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 20:23:37


Post by: Galas


mokoshkana wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
40 is still too low to be a fair unit. 200 pts for 5 of these guys is a steal. Go look at what other factions get for 200 pts.

Obliterators (3 for 195) are pretty amazing for their points. Should we go ahead and raise the points for that unit too? They can deepstrike where needed, and if I am not mistaken, they can use a Strategem to shoot twice in the same turn. With a 24 inch range, they can get their firepower where its needed pretty easily.

When you look at what Reapers provide, you have to remember that they struggle in close combat. Marine equivalents, while not as brutal in shooting abilities, get +1 str and tough. Reapers can be tied up in close combat, although that isn't easily accomplished.


Actually yes, Obliterators are too cheap for what they can do, and even more with the slaanesh mark and shooting double stratagem. One unit being OP doesn't justify Eldar units being OP. When to justify the "power" of Dark Reapers you jump to the most OP unit in other very competitive Codex... yeah.

And I'm sorry but the fact that they struggle at close combat is just... a non issue. It could be a issue if they had 20" range and they need to be close to the enemy to do their job. But they have 48" range. They aren't gonna be charged by anything if you know how to deploy.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 20:33:03


Post by: Galef


 thejughead wrote:
I guffawed at the assertion that Eldar fail psychic tests they want to pull off. Yeah its pretty much automatic, like 90%.

It's 50/50 actually. The power in question is NOT cast by a Farseer and is level 7. The only way to reroll any part of it is to use the CP reroll.

Do you play Eldar? Have you tried this tactic? Well, I have and it fails about half the time.
It is this kind of assumption that keeps driving the Eldar hate and I do not appreciate it.
Please, let's all try to make an effort to know the rules. Sometimes you might find they have limitations.

-


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 21:04:53


Post by: mokoshkana


 Galas wrote:
mokoshkana wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
40 is still too low to be a fair unit. 200 pts for 5 of these guys is a steal. Go look at what other factions get for 200 pts.

Obliterators (3 for 195) are pretty amazing for their points. Should we go ahead and raise the points for that unit too? They can deepstrike where needed, and if I am not mistaken, they can use a Strategem to shoot twice in the same turn. With a 24 inch range, they can get their firepower where its needed pretty easily.

When you look at what Reapers provide, you have to remember that they struggle in close combat. Marine equivalents, while not as brutal in shooting abilities, get +1 str and tough. Reapers can be tied up in close combat, although that isn't easily accomplished.


Actually yes, Obliterators are too cheap for what they can do, and even more with the slaanesh mark and shooting double stratagem. One unit being OP doesn't justify Eldar units being OP. When to justify the "power" of Dark Reapers you jump to the most OP unit in other very competitive Codex... yeah.

And I'm sorry but the fact that they struggle at close combat is just... a non issue. It could be a issue if they had 20" range and they need to be close to the enemy to do their job. But they have 48" range. They aren't gonna be charged by anything if you know how to deploy.

I never attempted to justify Reapers being overpowered. I agree with Galef in his assessment of some tweaks.

Additionally, outside of Shining Spears, I haven't heard or seen too much discussion surrounding other Eldar units being over the top, but I could be wrong. Either way once Reapers are adjusted, the next best Eldar unit will see increased utilization and the discussion will start about how that unit is too powerful and needs nerfed. That is the nature of games like this. Players who want to field a winning army will gravitate towards the better stuff, especially when it is in a tournament setting. Every army has its great, good, mediocre, bad, etc units. The problem with Eldar is that the army excels at utilizing synergy, which compounds the screams of OP due to the fact that its quality buffers can make the great units OP, the good units great, the mediocre units...you get the point.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 21:12:32


Post by: Galas


Yeah, thats the nature of games like this. But when you keep nerfing the very, very powerfull stuff, and then lists stop spamming it, and you see varied lists with different units, because theres no auto-take unit that is better than everything else, then thats the point we should try to reach. Or GW at least.

Of course balance can't be achieved just by nerfing the OP stuff, you need to buff the weak too, and redesign the units /rules that just don't work.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 21:16:08


Post by: mokoshkana


 Galef wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
I guffawed at the assertion that Eldar fail psychic tests they want to pull off. Yeah its pretty much automatic, like 90%.

It's 50/50 actually. The power in question is NOT cast by a Farseer and is level 7. The only way to reroll any part of it is to use the CP reroll.

Do you play Eldar? Have you tried this tactic? Well, I have and it fails about half the time.
It is this kind of assumption that keeps driving the Eldar hate and I do not appreciate it.
Please, let's all try to make an effort to know the rules. Sometimes you might find they have limitations.

-

I feel like this is a theme with non-Eldar players. Assumptions are made that each Eldar army, regardless of how its built, can do everything at all times, when that is just not the case. Eldar armies have limitions, every unit in an army cannot have an across the board -4 to hit. With Alaitoc, at best you can get a sizable amount of -2 through Shadow Specters, Warp Spiders, Rangers and flyers, but after that you have one shot at Conceal (which doesn't work on flyers) and one use of Lightning Reflexes to improve that -2 modifier. Some of the best psychic powers in the Eldar arsenal (Protect/Jinx/Quicken/Conceal) are cast by Warlocks who don't get to reroll psychic tests.

Many people know a lot of the Eldar rules in a broad sense, but they don't know the specifics of those rules. What then happens is we end up hearing that an Alaitoc army was a flat -4 to hit across the board for all units and how that is incredibly broken. If that were true, I would absolutely agree, but its not. If it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is the case.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Galas wrote:
Yeah, thats the nature of games like this. But when you keep nerfing the very, very powerfull stuff, and then lists stop spamming it, and you see varied lists with different units, because theres no auto-take unit that is better than everything else, then thats the point we should try to reach. Or GW at least.

Of course balance can't be achieved just by nerfing the OP stuff, you need to buff the weak too, and redesign the units /rules that just don't work.

The most powerful stuff will always be spammed in tournaments. There will be a few different iterations of lists, but the meat and potatoes will be the same. People are actively looking to min/max in those settings, and where there is a will, there is a way...


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 21:25:25


Post by: Galas


People is trying to min/max, yeah. Theres always gonna be tiers, and even a 5% advantage will be enough for tournament players to spamm that unit. But when the disbalance is low, different lists emerge, and skill is more important.

Assuming that theres always gonna be a "op unit" that is gonna be spammed doesn't get us anywhere. Is like a pseudo justification of some units being OP.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 22:47:11


Post by: pismakron


 Elbows wrote:
pismakron wrote:
Dark Reapers needs to have their damage output lowered. Increasing their point cost would just make them an even glassier glass-cannon.


And again, no. Eldar are glass cannons, and Dark Reapers have always been glass cannons. They've also always been armed with proper missile launchers until GW retro'ed that for a while. Stop trying to make them into something they're not.


Fine by me. Then they should be 13+25 points per model, and then add another 7 points for the inescapable accuracy rule. 45 points per model with Heavy 1 str8 AP-2 dam D6, or Heavy D6, str 4 Ap0 dam 1. That sound about right. It is probably also where GW will be heading, which is a shame.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/09 23:55:20


Post by: Elbows


I'd take all day, every day before a Strength 8, -2 Save, Damage 2 weapon.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/10 00:10:28


Post by: mokoshkana


pismakron wrote: Fine by me. Then they should be 13+25 points per model, and then add another 7 points for the inescapable accuracy rule.

On what planet is a base Reaper 13 points with their signature rule? A Fire Dragon is 7 without their gun and they have melta bombs too. You're saying a Reaper without their special rule is worth an 8 point increase and then 7 points on top of that for the rule? That's definitely going to ensure they are never played again.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/10 08:18:11


Post by: pismakron


mokoshkana wrote:
pismakron wrote: Fine by me. Then they should be 13+25 points per model, and then add another 7 points for the inescapable accuracy rule.

On what planet is a base Reaper 13 points with their signature rule? A Fire Dragon is 7 without their gun and they have melta bombs too. You're saying a Reaper without their special rule is worth an 8 point increase and then 7 points on top of that for the rule? That's definitely going to ensure they are never played again.


Elbows wants reapers to be like devastators with missile launchers, and they are 38 points per model, and that is without the very powerful inescapable accuracy rule. I agree that they will rarely be played again if they are made that expensive, and even if they were, it would only be in alpha-strike gamble lists which is not exactly what the game needs.

I said earlier that reapers needs to have their damage output reduced, but not their point costs increased. Glass cannon units only works well if they are melee units, fast units or have short range weapons. Like fire dragons and, in fact, most other Eldar infantry. Glass-cannon units with 48" range will always be hard to balance properly. They are either too good or too fragile with almost nothing in between.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/10 13:51:16


Post by: Ice_can


Just a thought here based loosely on what I remember of the fluff for dark reapers, but rather than make them as points inefficient as marine devs (and destroy any concept of flavour).
How would eldar players feel about an additional special rule

Recoil compensation any model with this rule can not fire heavy weapons if it moved during the owning players last turn.

Doesn't make reapers dust collector's, but removes the to my mind the uterly unfluffy always running around reapers.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/10 14:31:42


Post by: jeff white


In all of this, what ever happened to the Eldar being a dying race,
so mustering 20 Dark Reapers would be... unlikely as all get out,
given that they would have been targeted by everyone for a long time beforehand, due their scary potential to wreck face.
Same with wave serpents.
Seems to me that Reapers could stay OP,
so long as GW capped them at say 1 unit of 5 dudes max every 1500points.
Wave serpents should be 3 max for every 1500, and have to pay extra for working shields.



Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/11 07:49:03


Post by: AnomanderRake


 jeff white wrote:
In all of this, what ever happened to the Eldar being a dying race...


When have logistics ever impacted on the tabletop? How is Guilliman able to be in literally every battle the Ultramarines fight? Why do Guardsmen have more plasma guns than Marines? Why can't the Inquisition afford power armour anymore?


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/11 17:50:50


Post by: Shadenuat


so long as GW capped them at say 1 unit of 5 dudes max every 1500points.
Wave serpents should be 3 max for every 1500, and have to pay extra for working shields.

Eldar players could also pay their opponents for every points increase in cash. Say, 10$ for every 500 points of Eldar they are allowed to play today.
That would show em.


Fixing Dark Reapers @ 2018/02/11 18:56:39


Post by: Wyldhunt


 jeff white wrote:
In all of this, what ever happened to the Eldar being a dying race,
so mustering 20 Dark Reapers would be... unlikely as all get out,
given that they would have been targeted by everyone for a long time beforehand, due their scary potential to wreck face.
Same with wave serpents.
Seems to me that Reapers could stay OP,
so long as GW capped them at say 1 unit of 5 dudes max every 1500points.
Wave serpents should be 3 max for every 1500, and have to pay extra for working shields.



You seem to have an oddly-specific expectation for the population of a given craftworld's aspect shrines. Eldar are dying off in the sense that their population was once comparable to the imperium's current population. The current eldar population may or may not be comparable to the current Tau population. It's not that there's only a couple dozen eldar left; it's more that the distance they've fallen can be very keenly felt by the way things generally keep getting worse for them, the way other species keep infesting planets that ought to be their birthright, the way craftworlds occassionally get wrecked when the eldar once had the means to obliterate threats that can wipe them out now.

The path of the dark reaper is one of the six most popular aspect paths in all of asuryani society. Why would it be unfluffy for a craftworld to scrape together 20ish guys with reaper launchers? And why do you feel that some of the longest-ranged warriors in an army notorious for its ambush tactics, durable skimmer transports, and psychic generals would be especially susceptible to being whittled down by preliminary enemy fire?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Galef wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
I guffawed at the assertion that Eldar fail psychic tests they want to pull off. Yeah its pretty much automatic, like 90%.

It's 50/50 actually. The power in question is NOT cast by a Farseer and is level 7. The only way to reroll any part of it is to use the CP reroll.

Do you play Eldar? Have you tried this tactic? Well, I have and it fails about half the time.
It is this kind of assumption that keeps driving the Eldar hate and I do not appreciate it.
Please, let's all try to make an effort to know the rules. Sometimes you might find they have limitations.

-


This. Thank you, Galef. WC7 on a warlock or spirit seer is far from a sure thing. You actually can give them rerolls a couple of ways (a Biel-Tan relic or the Seer of the Shifting Vector warlord trait), you're still generally going to fail a clutch power here and there even if you do invest command points, warlord traits, and relics into trying to roll a 7.

@Galef: I apologize if I missed your response to my question earlier, but would you say it's fair to say that you see reapers specifically as an anti-light vehicle hunter? If so, how would you respond to my concerns that such a role may be too niche to be viable in TAC lists? Also, I feel like asuryani don't really have anything other than reapers that can fill the "sit back with anti tank guns and hit the enemy tanks from across the map" role. Our tanks are all rather pricey for the amount of anti tank firepower they can put out, and war walkers seem like they would evaporate to return fire while also paying points for an outflank ability that they probably don't want to use if you're utilizing them in a fire base role. Do you feel I'm underestimating the anti-tank abilities of Damage 2 (possibly Strength 7) reaper launchers? If not, how do we fill the gap that such a reduction in damage would create?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote:
Close combat means nothing still. Even with BA, you can force me to charge chumps.

"isn't easily accomplished" is a bit of an understatement.

Maybe oblits are undercosted. They don't get used enough as far as I can tell to make a clear determination.


Meh. As I play more and more games, I find it increasingly difficult to buy into the idea that units are unchargable this edition. Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but my experience continues to be that taking out the chaff the turn before you go for your big strike works just fine. I've also found hordes of 'nids (genestelaers mostly) to be sufficient to rush my gunlines and make it in against my reapers. Sure, I can screen my units, use forewarning, etc., but that only goes so far. I know you play in an anti-Blood Angels hellscape where BA automatically lose every game, but I've plenty of games of 8th where melee does violent and terrible things to gunlines. Which isn't to say that melee doesn't have its issues or that screening isn't a thing, but... well... People around here seem to make it work.