Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The main problem is that Heat Lances are not a good gun because of the lack of S8. S6 and short range makes them weak against most mech, as Landraiders are not nearly as common as Rhinos and Razorbacks. Even within the 9" two-dice range, there's a good chance to fail to pen, as opposed a meltagun. So, to use them, you're looking at sending units that aren't cheap, can't use them in great numbers, are frail, have to get close, and then can't rely upon them nearly as much.

Reavers are better than Scourges as Heat Lance delivery systems, largely because the turboboost helps with positioning/survivability and the jetbike assault move can maybe limit return fire if positioned well. But the lack of a 4+ save HURTS and, in all honesty, you can get better anti-vehicle fire through dark lance/blaster saturation and still have better survival. A suicide unit, to me, has to be nearly 100% effective or so cheap you can throw it away. Reavers are NOT that unit.

If you want to use Reavers, the bladevane attacks with melee capability seems much more effective, but even there I would much rather have a nice Beastmaster unit. Reavers are just sweet models that really do very little.

Skarboy wrote:The main problem is that Heat Lances are not a good gun because of the lack of S8. S6 and short range makes them weak against most mech, as Landraiders are not nearly as common as Rhinos and Razorbacks. Even within the 9" two-dice range, there's a good chance to fail to pen, as opposed a meltagun. So, to use them, you're looking at sending units that aren't cheap, can't use them in great numbers, are frail, have to get close, and then can't rely upon them nearly as much.

Reavers are better than Scourges as Heat Lance delivery systems, largely because the turboboost helps with positioning/survivability and the jetbike assault move can maybe limit return fire if positioned well. But the lack of a 4+ save HURTS and, in all honesty, you can get better anti-vehicle fire through dark lance/blaster saturation and still have better survival. A suicide unit, to me, has to be nearly 100% effective or so cheap you can throw it away. Reavers are NOT that unit.

If you want to use Reavers, the bladevane attacks with melee capability seems much more effective, but even there I would much rather have a nice Beastmaster unit. Reavers are just sweet models that really do very little.

What he said.

Reavers may be a few points cheaper than a unit of blaster true-born with a dual splinter cannon venom.....but the blaster true-born aren't virtually automatically dead like the reaver jetbikes after shooting.

Most games see me move trueborn up 12", disembark, fire, and the next turn re-embark to start moving around 6" to fire.

Skarboy wrote:The main problem is that Heat Lances are not a good gun because of the lack of S8. S6 and short range makes them weak against most mech, as Landraiders are not nearly as common as Rhinos and Razorbacks. Even within the 9" two-dice range, there's a good chance to fail to pen, as opposed a meltagun. So, to use them, you're looking at sending units that aren't cheap, can't use them in great numbers, are frail, have to get close, and then can't rely upon them nearly as much.

I have to disagree here. In the three games that I've had my 6 man, 2 Heat Lance Reaver unit I've only ever failed to penetrate once (and that was a glance that wrecked a dakka pred thanks to AP1). Yes they are weaker than meltaguns against anything but AV14 but the 2D6 is so strong and the Reavers' mobility usually allows me to get rear armour so that penetrating has been a cinch. Plus couple that with the longer melta range of 9" and it has been pretty reliable. With BS4 I have never missed both shots though I know I will eventually (my Marine meltaguns are notorious for ones) but so far the Reavers Heat Lances have almost always inflicted acceptable damage. I know that the lists haven't been very strong but that has no bearing on the actual performance of S6 melta vs armour. They are very fragile which is why I have kept them in hiding until there is an opportune moment but I have yet to see what happens when that moment does not present itself.

Saldiven wrote:

Powerguy wrote: They definitely aren't better in every category, Reavers are much more mobile, more likely to kill armour, often more survivable, have a better anti infantry ability (discounting the Venom) and pack a punch in assault to name a few.

If Reaver Jetbikes are close enough to the opponent to make effective use of their Heat Lances (within 9"), their survivability becomes some number approaching a limit equal to zero.

T4 with a 5+ save in a unit not likely to exceed six models isn't going to survive one round of rapid firing from a Tactical Squad or equivalent. It'll also die to a charge from any even mediocre assault squad.

The big problem with Heat Lances is how close you have to be. With the exception of the Talos, all the models that can carry the HL are not terribly survivable to return fire.

Recently, when I've been forced by points limits to field FA slot choices, I've opted for Scourges with Haywire Blasters. They have decent mobility as jump troops and are easy to get in a location with a cover save. They're not great for killing vehicles, but do a pretty good job of keeping 'em from shooting at me while I focus my kill shots on those vehicles I need dead. Lastly, the 24" range lets me stay back a bit while other portions of my army get up in my opponent's face.

+1. Reavers are more of a suicide unit, and an expensive one at that. They do kill AT pretty well.

*Note: All math performed against AV12 only
I played with the math,
2 Heat lances 78% to get a pen. - (156 points for 6 reavers)
3 Darklances/Blasters 66% to get a pen - (105 ravager) (136 for 3 trueborn with blasters on a venom)
4 Darklances/Blasters 90% to get a pen - (168 for 4 trueborn w/ blasters on a venom) (141 for 3 trueborn w/ blasters on a raider)
5 Darklances/Blasters 112% or 1 + 12% chance for 2 (173 for 4 trueborn w/ blasters on a raider)

The heat lance has a 50% chance of wrecking/exploding vs the DL/Blaster's 33%. Those numbers to wreck/explode are:
2 Heat lances 39% to get a wreck/explode. - (156 points for 6 reavers)
3 Darklances/Blasters 22% to get a wreck/explode - (105 ravager) (136 for 3 trueborn with blasters on a venom)
4 Darklances/Blasters 30% to get a wreck/explode - (168 for 4 trueborn w/ blasters on a venom) (141 for 3 trueborn w/ blasters on a raider)
5 Darklances/Blasters 37% or 1 + 12% chance for 2 to wreck/explode(173 for 4 trueborn w/ blasters on a raider)

So it looks like 4 and 5 DL/ Blasters get more rolls on the damage chart, but the heat lance is still more likely to kill something in the long run, although, everything is still on a 6 sided dice, so the percentages never work properly. You would basically just round to the nearest 16%, in which case, the following are nearly identical on actual dice:
2 Heat lances
4 Darklances/Blasters
5 Darklances/Blasters

Maybe Games Workshop should look at converting to a D20 system. It would be a lot simpler, allowing for more fine tuned balancing, and not a 16% jump to the next level of killiness.

SonicPara wrote:

Skarboy wrote:The main problem is that Heat Lances are not a good gun because of the lack of S8. S6 and short range makes them weak against most mech, as Landraiders are not nearly as common as Rhinos and Razorbacks. Even within the 9" two-dice range, there's a good chance to fail to pen, as opposed a meltagun. So, to use them, you're looking at sending units that aren't cheap, can't use them in great numbers, are frail, have to get close, and then can't rely upon them nearly as much.

I have to disagree here. In the three games that I've had my 6 man, 2 Heat Lance Reaver unit I've only ever failed to penetrate once (and that was a glance that wrecked a dakka pred thanks to AP1). Yes they are weaker than meltaguns against anything but AV14 but the 2D6 is so strong and the Reavers' mobility usually allows me to get rear armour so that penetrating has been a cinch. Plus couple that with the longer melta range of 9" and it has been pretty reliable. With BS4 I have never missed both shots though I know I will eventually (my Marine meltaguns are notorious for ones) but so far the Reavers Heat Lances have almost always inflicted acceptable damage. I know that the lists haven't been very strong but that has no bearing on the actual performance of S6 melta vs armour. They are very fragile which is why I have kept them in hiding until there is an opportune moment but I have yet to see what happens when that moment does not present itself.

No offense, but your rebuttal is very weak if you're basing it off three games against lousy opponents/lists. My opinion is based off of mathematical analysis of odds, as well as over 150 games with various DE builds with the new codex, and going four for four in tournament wins (best general, at least) since January. My in-game proof is tested against tournament players as well as my regular gaming group which consists of three of the very top players in my metro area (over 2 million population). I don't say that to be arrogant, just to tell you I'm not pulling my opinion out of my backside. My suggestion to you is to stress test them more (more games, better opponents) and then come back when you have more substantial proof. I have a feeling that you will change your tune once the law of averages returns to normal and/or play against some opponents who don't yield you their rear armor and short range to dispose of them, or allow you to bury a 150+ point unit while not pounding on the rest of your handicapped army.

Bear in mind, I'm not saying you should never use Reavers, etc., but I am advocating at least having informed consent about the reality of their power. Exaggerating their effectiveness based off a couple games isn't doing yourself any justice.

Saldiven wrote:

Powerguy wrote: They definitely aren't better in every category, Reavers are much more mobile, more likely to kill armour, often more survivable, have a better anti infantry ability (discounting the Venom) and pack a punch in assault to name a few.

If Reaver Jetbikes are close enough to the opponent to make effective use of their Heat Lances (within 9"), their survivability becomes some number approaching a limit equal to zero.

T4 with a 5+ save in a unit not likely to exceed six models isn't going to survive one round of rapid firing from a Tactical Squad or equivalent. It'll also die to a charge from any even mediocre assault squad.

The big problem with Heat Lances is how close you have to be. With the exception of the Talos, all the models that can carry the HL are not terribly survivable to return fire.

Recently, when I've been forced by points limits to field FA slot choices, I've opted for Scourges with Haywire Blasters. They have decent mobility as jump troops and are easy to get in a location with a cover save. They're not great for killing vehicles, but do a pretty good job of keeping 'em from shooting at me while I focus my kill shots on those vehicles I need dead. Lastly, the 24" range lets me stay back a bit while other portions of my army get up in my opponent's face.

Except you should never be ending your move within 9" of ... anything really. The 6" jump back means you should always be jumping yourself out of rapid fire and assault range, I thought that was pretty obvious really. If its a unit in a transport coming after you they have to disembark to fire (which is fine because you plan for that, at which point the rest of your army eats them) and there are a limited number of units which can catch you in assault. In both cases they still catch Trueborn who are 18" away just as easily. The 6" jump back is really the biggest difference in their mobility (because moving 36" is of limited use in game) and is what keeps them alive as well.

You should also be getting cover almost all the time, you have no reason not to jump into terrain because you have no fear of killing yourself. You have more chance of getting cover than Trueborn because you are are more mobile (particularly in terms of setting up the shot, 18" vs 12" of movement turn 1 assuming both units want to fire) and aren't quite so limited by having to jump out next to the Venom. Unlike Trueborn you can also use Raiders or Venoms to get cover (Trueborn just stand under them). I was also factoring in the significantly increased chance of getting a Pain Token into their survivability, 1/6 chance with Drugs and much better anti infantry ability compared to the Trueborn (all their anti infantry ability is from the Venom which doesn't get Pain Tokens). Obviously you can't rely on this, but its not something you should ignore either.

@ ThePhish. If we take the most common scenarios they both come out as being suicide units if you want to look at things that way. In or out of cover the Reavers are slightly harder to kill than the Trueborn, T3 5+/4+ cover vs T4 5+/4+ cover with 4 ablative wounds. Your Mathhammer is fine up until the stuff about rounding, 39% does not suddenly become the same as 30%. If you want to be really thorough you can also look at stuff like distribution curves, which will show that the AP1 of the Heat Lance skews everything upwards and gives a more reliable/closer distribution while the Trueborn have a much more variable damage output but a higher maximum theoretical damage (which is of limited use really, a tank can only be dead once).

Spellbound wrote:Njal and the dread are close to 450 points of mistake - that's like 1/3 the army.

Thats 45% of the army, the SW list was only a 1000pt battle.

I too have also found 6 reavers with 2 heat lances to be pretty effective. (Often outperforming my ravagers, which seem to get the caress of enemy fire-power pretty quickly!)

I'm sure that mathematically other options work better. But, for my play style and the fact I love the models, I will continue to field them.

Sure, they can be taken down with bolters, but so can most DE vehicles; it's the speed I love. If my opponent can still lay down the hurt from turn three onward, I'm usually in a whole world of trouble!

Horses for courses, I guess.

I've had pretty good lucky keeping reavers alive, on paper they seem like easy kills, but when used correctly, they can be VERY frustrating to kill. Once they get a pain token, especially so. 3+ or 4+ cover save, followed by FNP roll is what you should strive for. As for getting pain tokens in the first place? Fly over some easy to kill squad, like a kroot screen or SM scouts. Or just pay for a harmie, or get lucky on drugs.

I use them mostly for anti infantry duty honestly, I give them heat lances so they can occasionally kill tanks, but mostly I just have them turbo over stuff, looking for a shot where I can melta and jump into cover. Some games I never get the shot, but thats usually ok, they do their damage, and adsorb more than their fair share of shooting.

I really don't like Reavers. You need at least 6 of them to do anything worthwhile and giving them FNP is a waste. The only use I see of them is taking 2x3 Reavers, Turbo-boosting behind terrain on Turn 1 and using them to kill light backfield stuff. But even then, that's around 120 points that is extremely easy to kill.

You mention that you need units of 6 to be worthwhile (which I agree with) and then suggest taking units of 3? Even one unit of 6 Reavers can be useful, most of the time you aren't going to be able to afford 3 units of Trueborn, 3 Ravagers and 3 units of Reavers (without seriously impacting your scoring units anyway) but adding a single unit of Reavers to 3 Trueborn/3 Ravagers to take out priority targets is much easier to afford.

Giving 6 a Pain Token with a Haemonculi is probably a waste, a unit that size is going to try and get tokens from Drugs or running over/finishing off infantry units. Giving 9 Reavers a Pain Token to start is most definitely worth it though and lists built around such units can be pretty scary.

Dashofpepper wrote:Reavers may be a few points cheaper than a unit of blaster true-born with a dual splinter cannon venom.....but the blaster true-born aren't virtually automatically dead like the reaver jetbikes after shooting.

Most games see me move trueborn up 12", disembark, fire, and the next turn re-embark to start moving around 6" to fire.

How are Reavers in any way less survivable than Trueborn if you're getting the Trueborn out of their transports within blaster range? Reavers are toughness 4, can JSJ, and have more models in the unit...

Fetterkey wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:Reavers may be a few points cheaper than a unit of blaster true-born with a dual splinter cannon venom.....but the blaster true-born aren't virtually automatically dead like the reaver jetbikes after shooting.

Most games see me move trueborn up 12", disembark, fire, and the next turn re-embark to start moving around 6" to fire.

How are Reavers in any way less survivable than Trueborn if you're getting the Trueborn out of their transports within blaster range? Reavers are toughness 4, can JSJ, and have more models in the unit...

I explained that earlier in a post.

Point allocation in the codex points to other units for efficiency. Trueborn kill vehicles on turn one. RJBs kill vehicles on turn two+. If you have RJBs, you're not being efficient somewhere - those points could be better spent.

By the time you get through heavy supports, troops, and HQs....you don't also have points to max out elites with trueborns *AND* tack in RJBs - unless you're beyond the 2k point game. So your choices are RJBs or....something that I consider to be more efficient. What are you going to give up to get RJBs? The example I used was a Kabal. Blaster warrior venoms, blaster trueborn venoms, or ravagers.

In answer to your question about survivability....blasters shoot from out of assault range. While there are things with an 18" assault range, blasters don't hop out of transports in front of them. I'm willing to risk assault against fleet units - they still need to roll 6s to move, run and assault to get to my trueborn. Trueborn are a 9" threat, with the ability to get 15" away from their target after shooting. 15" is better assault range than 18". Trueborn are also putting out more shots than reaver jetbikes. More things are dead on the first turn. Dark Eldar survivability isn't in T4, or JSJ, or having more models - it is in killing the enemy so that they can't retaliate.

One special weapon per three models vs. four special weapons per four models. One has an alpha-strike and one does not.

Trueborn are more survivable than RJBs because they have better range, an alpha-strike, more shots, an easier time judging maximum range based on deployment type and simple math (for example, a 12" deployment zone with an 18" range on your guns....you only need to see where your opponent deploys with respect to their 12" line to understand how far you need to move to be in range.

To me, playing Dark Eldar is an exercise in brutality. Obscene, horrific brutality. Reaver Jetbikes don't fit the profile.

Reavers are great for their ability to bladevane. Unit of 6
4 x D3 S4 hits and 2 x D6 S6 hits. A unit causes an opponent to cover himself with movement. Two units can decimate a squad or MC in the movement phase. They are great but they are a glass hammer. T3(+1) and Sv 5+ does not yield tough unit to take out.

I like them but I am going to switch to trueborn in venoms ASAP and only pull them out occasionally to surprise an opponent.

I was just about to post in this, and say "I assume the lists you played were terrible", but was beat to the punch.

Try more games with them against people who know how to build good lists, and prove us wrong.

As a Dark Eldar and Marine player myself, I'm interested to see if they actually do well. As many have said before me, pretty much any other choice in the DE codex is better than Reavers.

By the time you get through heavy supports, troops, and HQs....you don't also have points to max out elites with trueborns *AND* tack in RJBs - unless you're beyond the 2k point game. So your choices are RJBs or....something that I consider to be more efficient. What are you going to give up to get RJBs? The example I used was a Kabal. Blaster warrior venoms, blaster trueborn venoms, or ravagers.

Then use some wracks for troops? Warrior blaster units are not all that great, not worth investing all your points in them over wracks in my (albiet limited) experience.

Haemonculus
3x 3x blaster true born in venom
6x 3 wracks in venom
3x 6x RJB w/ 2x heatlance
3x Ravagers w/ flicker fields.

1871 points. Enough to do any number of tweaks (more blasters, whatever). Could even drop on RJB and get beasts and baron with points to spare.

Also Here is a decent illustration of reavers at work. Looked to be mostly bait in his games but other batreps they provide cover also.

Powerguy wrote:Except you should never be ending your move within 9" of ... anything really. The 6" jump back means you should always be jumping yourself out of rapid fire and assault range, I thought that was pretty obvious really. If its a unit in a transport coming after you they have to disembark to fire (which is fine because you plan for that, at which point the rest of your army eats them) and there are a limited number of units which can catch you in assault. In both cases they still catch Trueborn who are 18" away just as easily. The 6" jump back is really the biggest difference in their mobility (because moving 36" is of limited use in game) and is what keeps them alive as well.

You should also be getting cover almost all the time, you have no reason not to jump into terrain because you have no fear of killing yourself. You have more chance of getting cover than Trueborn because you are are more mobile (particularly in terms of setting up the shot, 18" vs 12" of movement turn 1 assuming both units want to fire) and aren't quite so limited by having to jump out next to the Venom. Unlike Trueborn you can also use Raiders or Venoms to get cover (Trueborn just stand under them). I was also factoring in the significantly increased chance of getting a Pain Token into their survivability, 1/6 chance with Drugs and much better anti infantry ability compared to the Trueborn (all their anti infantry ability is from the Venom which doesn't get Pain Tokens). Obviously you can't rely on this, but its not something you should ignore either.

@ ThePhish. If we take the most common scenarios they both come out as being suicide units if you want to look at things that way. In or out of cover the Reavers are slightly harder to kill than the Trueborn, T3 5+/4+ cover vs T4 5+/4+ cover with 4 ablative wounds. Your Mathhammer is fine up until the stuff about rounding, 39% does not suddenly become the same as 30%. If you want to be really thorough you can also look at stuff like distribution curves, which will show that the AP1 of the Heat Lance skews everything upwards and gives a more reliable/closer distribution while the Trueborn have a much more variable damage output but a higher maximum theoretical damage (which is of limited use really, a tank can only be dead once).

The 6" jump out will get you out of assault range of most things in a transport, yes, unless they have fleet. There's no way you'll get out of rapid fire range though. If you're on the edge of 9", move 6", you're only 15" away. Rapide fire is 12", disembark is 2-2.5"ish. They wouldn't have to move but an inch or 2 at the most to rapid fire.

I don't disembark trueborn except on turn 1 if my opponent has deployed on the line, in which case whatever I'm shooting at shouldn't be shooting back at me, allowing them to embark turn 2. Rarely does it come up that I need to disembark them again later.

39% actually does become the same as 30% when rounding to the nearest die roll percentage. See, 1/3 is 33%. 1 more die roll is 50%. 39 is closer to 33 than to 50. Granted, it's still dice and gak happens.

I can see where DoP and some of the other posters are coming from with some of the negatives for Reaver's. I personally enjoy playing with them and tend to hide them out first turn and wait until I open up a transport of the other players with something juicy, and then turbo-boost over them with bladevanes and cluster caltrops to try to finish off whatever lived after the transport explosion. Basically a can-opener and go get it type of approach.

They also seem to draw a lot of attention early, and with their solid cover save from turbo boosting can often be used in a decoy type manner to get my other units in better\less contested positions.

I personally like putting blasters on them instead of heat lances after the range limitation to get the melta effect put me into some sticky situations. In addition to the added range having a S8 shot puts many things into instant death range that S6 does not.

I still feel they are the best FA option, but that isn't saying a lot really as the FA slot seems to be one of the weaker slots for DE.

Phish if you're doing your math right you shouldn't have to round to the nearest 16%, even if the math on a given discrete roll gives you a (for example) 55% chance to succeed, that is still correct - similar to having something like a 25% chance to get two heads in a row even though a coin can only flip heads 50% of the time - the math you're doing (for things like pens and wounds) entail multiple rolls so youre aren't going to take x/6 to ''round it out'' to something that would be achievable on the tabletop.

This report seems to portray Reavers as very effective. While some of the armies they encountered were pretty nonoptimized, they still did well in games against strong tournament armies-- indeed, the author cited them as the "man of the match" unit several times.

Fetterkey wrote:This report seems to portray Reavers as very effective. While some of the armies they encountered were pretty nonoptimized, they still did well in games against strong tournament armies-- indeed, the author cited them as the "man of the match" unit several times.

I have played a list with 3 of them and found them to be either game winners or a total waste of points. They are opportunistic - if your opponent isolates a squad (where another squad is not in a position to countercharge the opposition), they will win you the game. With 3 units of 6 we are talking an average of 24 S4 and 21 S6 hits every turn. A demon prince or lord is going to take about 14 wounds. It will die. A squad of 5 terminators will take around 30 wounds. On average it will die. Reavers impose a discipline on your opponent and if he doesn't respect that, then the reavers will make him pay for it.

The issue is @ 200 pts per squad and we are only talking toughness 4 with Sv 5+. Until they have a pain token, they have no business shooting at anything because they need that turbojet 3+ save. That means your blaster and heat lance options are pretty worthless until at least turn 3.

I dunno, Reavers seem like just another incinerator target to me.

DAaddict wrote:

Fetterkey wrote:This report seems to portray Reavers as very effective. While some of the armies they encountered were pretty nonoptimized, they still did well in games against strong tournament armies-- indeed, the author cited them as the "man of the match" unit several times.

I have played a list with 3 of them and found them to be either game winners or a total waste of points. They are opportunistic - if your opponent isolates a squad (where another squad is not in a position to countercharge the opposition), they will win you the game. With 3 units of 6 we are talking an average of 24 S4 and 21 S6 hits every turn. A demon prince or lord is going to take about 14 wounds. It will die. A squad of 5 terminators will take around 30 wounds. On average it will die. Reavers impose a discipline on your opponent and if he doesn't respect that, then the reavers will make him pay for it.

The issue is @ 200 pts per squad and we are only talking toughness 4 with Sv 5+. Until they have a pain token, they have no business shooting at anything because they need that turbojet 3+ save. That means your blaster and heat lance options are pretty worthless until at least turn 3.

I play a wazdakka biker army and reavers are one of the few units that can wipe a full bike squad out in one turn with out assaulting, granted they die the usually die the turn after, but it's rather frustrating when you just have to let a unit die