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.

Reivers are a bit all over the place, conceptually. It strikes me that they are meant to be able to either blunt a charge from the enemy(the LD modifier within a certain range and carbines) or set up for one on your part(the Shock Grenades denying Overwatch).

I think if the LD modifier was changed to casualties inflicted rather than just at a certain range, it would go a long way to alleviate that problem.

With the new CA missions I think small units of Reivers with grapple hooks may have a place as small easy to hide objective grabbers.

Reivers are actually pretty good. People are playing them wrong if they fail to see their use.
A unit of 5 with grav Chutes is only 100 points. This isn't far off from an Assasin or a similar unit.

You drop these guys in mid game and pick off light objective campers in the enemy deployment and score line breaker.

The Carbines are currently better options imo as you still get full shooting at a 24" range and 12 attacks in cc from a small squad of 5.

Not every unit is measured in raw killing power. This is a mistake people often make due to lack of experience and tactical know-how. This is a cheap way to clear out that pesky unit hiding out of line of sight, back in the enemy deployment. These guys cost less than Assault Marines and don't require a transport. Their use is obvious and effective. Just don't send them out after dedicated Elites and expect magic.

lol. Yeah, only 20 points a model, what a deal!

 Ishagu wrote:
Reivers are actually pretty good. People are playing them wrong if they fail to see their use.
A unit of 5 with grav Chutes is only 100 points. This isn't far off from an Assasin or a similar unit.

You drop these guys in mid game and pick off light objective campers in the enemy deployment and score line breaker.

The Carbines are currently better options imo as you still get full shooting at a 24" range and 12 attacks in cc from a small squad of 5.

Not every unit is measured in raw killing power. This is a mistake people often make due to lack of experience and tactical know-how. This is a cheap way to clear out that pesky unit hiding out of line of sight, back in the enemy deployment. These guys cost less than Assault Marines and don't require a transport. Their use is obvious and effective. Just don't send them out after dedicated Elites and expect magic.

LOL
What unit are you going to clear for that price?

I always thought that Reivers are to Scouts as Primaris are to Tactical marines.

GW created "upgraded" units to sell models rather than improve scouts and tactical marines. It just bloats the codex.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Reivers are actually pretty good. People are playing them wrong if they fail to see their use.
A unit of 5 with grav Chutes is only 100 points. This isn't far off from an Assasin or a similar unit.

You drop these guys in mid game and pick off light objective campers in the enemy deployment and score line breaker.

The Carbines are currently better options imo as you still get full shooting at a 24" range and 12 attacks in cc from a small squad of 5.

Not every unit is measured in raw killing power. This is a mistake people often make due to lack of experience and tactical know-how. This is a cheap way to clear out that pesky unit hiding out of line of sight, back in the enemy deployment. These guys cost less than Assault Marines and don't require a transport. Their use is obvious and effective. Just don't send them out after dedicated Elites and expect magic.

LOL
What unit are you going to clear for that price?

Ironically other Space Marine squads

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Reivers are actually pretty good. People are playing them wrong if they fail to see their use.
A unit of 5 with grav Chutes is only 100 points. This isn't far off from an Assasin or a similar unit.

You drop these guys in mid game and pick off light objective campers in the enemy deployment and score line breaker.

The Carbines are currently better options imo as you still get full shooting at a 24" range and 12 attacks in cc from a small squad of 5.

Not every unit is measured in raw killing power. This is a mistake people often make due to lack of experience and tactical know-how. This is a cheap way to clear out that pesky unit hiding out of line of sight, back in the enemy deployment. These guys cost less than Assault Marines and don't require a transport. Their use is obvious and effective. Just don't send them out after dedicated Elites and expect magic.

LOL
What unit are you going to clear for that price?

Eldar scouts, min squads of reapers using the tempest launchers to stay out of sight, guard mortars?

They are god awful, and I have no idea what GW sees their role as. I'd like to see their knives treated as power weapons, or their number of attacks doubled. Either event would bring their points cost into line with their effectiveness. As it stands, they are strictly worse than intercessors in every way, except deepstrike, which they pay for.

The real problem is that the current Primaris range is quite stiff, with very few options. It's a crime that one of those options is of no use, especially when they could be so cool. Pack em up and wait another year.

You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

 Ishagu wrote:
You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

Great. So go to a big name tournament and get some consistent results for us.

Bremon wrote:
lol. Yeah, only 20 points a model, what a deal!

True. But you can construe any unit as bad value of you try hard enough.
Try looking at it in a different light.

10 points per wound in your opponent's deployment zone. Not even scouts are that cheap.

 Ishagu wrote:
You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

Just because a unit is awful doesn't mean its impossible to put some in an army and win some games with them. Two 5-man squads would be something like 10% of your army.

You're second paragraph is just you jumping to conclusions to suit your narrative. I've come to my opinion of Reivers through independent analysis and actually using the unit in games and seeing how poorly they perform.

You enjoy using them, and have even had some luck doing that. And that's great, I genuinely hope you're having fun. That doesn't stop them being an extremely poorly tuned unit.

 Ishagu wrote:
You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

You can't make an appeal to independent thinking when literally the only thing you're bringing to the table is anecdotes.

Zustiur wrote:

Bremon wrote:
lol. Yeah, only 20 points a model, what a deal!

True. But you can construe any unit as bad value of you try hard enough.
Try looking at it in a different light.

10 points per wound in your opponent's deployment zone. Not even scouts are that cheap.

When a ton of weapons are d2. those aren't really 10 wounds. more like 6,5.

 Ishagu wrote:
You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

Let me take a wild guess how you used them, dropping them in the enemy's backfield as a distraction and/or charging them into units that stray to close to tie them up.

Between that or just dropping them onto unoccupied objectives there's definitely a couple uses for them. They're just entirely mobility based.

YeOldSaltPotato wrote:
Let me take a wild guess how you used them, dropping them in the enemy's backfield as a distraction and/or charging them into units that stray to close to tie them up.

Between that or just dropping them onto unoccupied objectives there's definitely a couple uses for them. They're just entirely mobility based.

QFT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm spoilt I suppose. DW lets me drop a squad of Intercessors in to do that same job, just better, for less points,, with trimmings if I so desire, at the cost of 1cp.

That's the problem in a nutshell though. The only viability Reivers have is derived from the stiffness & slowness of a standard Primaris list. Give that list some more options in terms of movement and Reivers would have zero functionality.

 Ishagu wrote:
You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

Just because you won with them doesn't mean anything, do you understand what a representative sample is? There are money reasons you might have won, your opponents were crap, maybe they all knew one another and took acid before playing, maybe you are a very good player, lucky etc, Its like saying 'I've never seen lightning strike someone; therefore that doesn't happen".

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

Just because you won with them doesn't mean anything, do you understand what a representative sample is? There are money reasons you might have won, your opponents were crap, you are a very good player, luck etc, Its like saying 'I've never seen lightning strike someone; therefore that doesn't happen".

It kinda does when you’re calling them the most pointless unit in the game. You can’t say they’re pointless, then when someone points out their purpose and use say “well your opponents might have been gak” to invalidate it.

 grouchoben wrote:
That's the problem in a nutshell though. The only viability Reivers have is derived from the stiffness & slowness of a standard Primaris list. Give that list some more options in terms of movement and Reivers would have zero functionality.

That's probably part of what makes it so easy to see when trying to build a pure primaris list. Frankly if they gave them melta bombs I could have an absolute field day with them, but for some reason they didn't give the infiltrating saboteurs ways to blow things up...

phillv85 wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

Just because you won with them doesn't mean anything, do you understand what a representative sample is? There are money reasons you might have won, your opponents were crap, you are a very good player, luck etc, Its like saying 'I've never seen lightning strike someone; therefore that doesn't happen".

It kinda does when you’re calling them the most pointless unit in the game. You can’t say they’re pointless, then when someone points out their purpose and use say “well your opponents might have been gak” to invalidate it.

There pointless because everything they are good at can be done with inteccessors, if you give them assault bolters they are obviously going to play as well as inteccessors, so yeah 100% pointless. They are good for sitting on objectives but they are elites and don't have objective secured and that's it, they are supposed to be a CC unit, striking behind enemy lines, which they suck at

Karol wrote:
20pts inefficient melee and shoting hybdrid, when did I seen those. Well at least they have 2 wounds and not one. Would they be better if they got access to 2 fists per 5 dudes, or some sort of assault hellblaster weapon ?

Assault plasmas, like those on Inceptors and a Power Fist option on a Sgt would make the unit actually awesome


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ishagu wrote:
You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

You can achieve more by deepstriking Intercessors (if you're DW or SW), pay 1 CP and have a better unit (also a troop slot filler) do the job


Seriously, if they would occupy the troop slot, like Scouts do, I could justify them

It's sad because for me they're aesthetically the best new model to come out for space marines since the primaris advent

 Dovis wrote:

Karol wrote:
20pts inefficient melee and shoting hybdrid, when did I seen those. Well at least they have 2 wounds and not one. Would they be better if they got access to 2 fists per 5 dudes, or some sort of assault hellblaster weapon ?

Assault plasmas, like those on Inceptors and a Power Fist option on a Sgt would make the unit actually awesome


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ishagu wrote:
You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

You can achieve more by deepstriking Intercessors (if you're DW or SW), pay 1 CP and have a better unit (also a troop slot filler) do the job


Seriously, if they would occupy the troop slot, like Scouts do, I could justify them

It's sad because for me they're aesthetically the best new model to come out for space marines since the primaris advent

Exactly being elite makes them as useless as Wolf Scouts. If Wolf Scouts where troops I'd take them in a heartbeat. Primaris are expensive units and all the troops you can take matter, there is no point spending slots on units like reivers, that are pointless. I'd rather take a unit of skyclaws than reivers, which is what I do.

 Ishagu wrote:
You guys say they are awful. Funny, I've taken lists with two 5 man squads into GT and Major sized ITC and ETC tournaments and have finished with 3/4 wins out of 5.

Independent thinking is in short supply these days unfortunately and everyone is rushing to copy net lists.

Congrats on your 60+% win rate with a self imposed Reiver handicap.

Zustiur wrote:

Bremon wrote:
lol. Yeah, only 20 points a model, what a deal!

True. But you can construe any unit as bad value of you try hard enough.
Try looking at it in a different light.

10 points per wound in your opponent's deployment zone. Not even scouts are that cheap.

Yet the scouts are more durable for the points, accomplish more by shooting, and fill a Troop slot (or 2 for those points).

No stratagem required to deliver them. People are completely missing this aspect. Scouts are certainly not more durable as you'll need to pay for camo cloaks to even get the same save in cover, and ignore cover isn't hard to com by either.
Get Reivers into position on turn 2 or 3 when the opposing player's fiepower has been diminished.

10 wounds in cover with a 2+ save become very hard to dislodge when your army is reduced to half it's size and the most threatening units have been dealt with.
10 points per wound delivered behind enemy lines without the use of Strats or Transport. They job is NOT to kill tough units.

So many haters in here who don't really understand the game and only measure the effectiveness of something by how many models it can kill. . Maybe stop following tournament meta lists and play for yourself and see.
These guys certainly aren't the best infantry in the Imperium's arsenal, but if all you care about is the top choice then you'd be better be playing Guard with a Castellan. I play more often than most and see the finer details that a lot seem to miss, but it's fine to ignore them. There are plenty of meta lists online for people to copy.

They are one of the few primaris models I considered getting as I liked the model but ultimately I couldn't justify it they suck.

 Ishagu wrote:
No stratagem required to deliver them. People are completely missing this aspect. Scouts are certainly not more durable as you'll need to pay for camo cloaks to even get the same save in cover, and ignore cover isn't hard to com by either.
Get Reivers into position on turn 2 or 3 when the opposing player's fiepower has been diminished.

10 wounds in cover with a 2+ save become very hard to dislodge when your army is reduced to half it's size and the most threatening units have been dealt with.
10 points per wound delivered behind enemy lines without the use of Strats or Transport. They job is NOT to kill tough units.

So many haters in here who don't really understand the game and only measure the effectiveness of something by how many models it can kill. . Maybe stop following tournament meta lists and play for yourself and see.
These guys certainly aren't the best infantry in the Imperium's arsenal, but if all you care about is the top choice then you'd be better be playing Guard with a Castellan. I play more often than most and see the finer details that a lot seem to miss, but it's fine to ignore them. There are plenty of meta lists online for people to copy.

Like CFE player i want to have unit like Reivers, give me give me.

 Ishagu wrote:
No stratagem required to deliver them. People are completely missing this aspect. Scouts are certainly not more durable as you'll need to pay for camo cloaks to even get the same save in cover, and ignore cover isn't hard to com by either.
Get Reivers into position on turn 2 or 3 when the opposing player's fiepower has been diminished.

10 wounds in cover with a 2+ save become very hard to dislodge when your army is reduced to half it's size and the most threatening units have been dealt with.
10 points per wound delivered behind enemy lines without the use of Strats or Transport. They job is NOT to kill tough units.

So many haters in here who don't really understand the game and only measure the effectiveness of something by how many models it can kill. . Maybe stop following tournament meta lists and play for yourself and see.
These guys certainly aren't the best infantry in the Imperium's arsenal, but if all you care about is the top choice then you'd be better be playing Guard with a Castellan. I play more often than most and see the finer details that a lot seem to miss, but it's fine to ignore them. There are plenty of meta lists online for people to copy.

Mate you are just all types of wrong here, no one is missing anything, they are not a good unit. "They can be deployed 9inch's from an enemy" big whoop. Its like Burna boyz, they are gak now, but you can still get use out of them putting them in a trukk and sending them to burn something to death, doesn't mean they are a good unit. We all know exactly what they can do, they aren't a complex or original unit. Even their anti-overwatch isn't new.

 Ishagu wrote:
No stratagem required to deliver them. People are completely missing this aspect. Scouts are certainly not more durable as you'll need to pay for camo cloaks to even get the same save in cover, and ignore cover isn't hard to com by either.
Get Reivers into position on turn 2 or 3 when the opposing player's fiepower has been diminished.

10 wounds in cover with a 2+ save become very hard to dislodge when your army is reduced to half it's size and the most threatening units have been dealt with.
10 points per wound delivered behind enemy lines without the use of Strats or Transport. They job is NOT to kill tough units.

So many haters in here who don't really understand the game and only measure the effectiveness of something by how many models it can kill. . Maybe stop following tournament meta lists and play for yourself and see.
These guys certainly aren't the best infantry in the Imperium's arsenal, but if all you care about is the top choice then you'd be better be playing Guard with a Castellan. I play more often than most and see the finer details that a lot seem to miss, but it's fine to ignore them. There are plenty of meta lists online for people to copy.

You're missing the point of the debate completely.

They are poorly designed from the datasheet standpoint, that is an objective fact and that fact is being lamented here.


Reivers are a specialist unit, that isn't particularly good at their specialty.

 Ishagu wrote:
No stratagem required to deliver them. People are completely missing this aspect. Scouts are certainly not more durable as you'll need to pay for camo cloaks to even get the same save in cover, and ignore cover isn't hard to com by either.
Get Reivers into position on turn 2 or 3 when the opposing player's fiepower has been diminished.

10 wounds in cover with a 2+ save become very hard to dislodge when your army is reduced to half it's size and the most threatening units have been dealt with.
10 points per wound delivered behind enemy lines without the use of Strats or Transport. They job is NOT to kill tough units.

So many haters in here who don't really understand the game and only measure the effectiveness of something by how many models it can kill. . Maybe stop following tournament meta lists and play for yourself and see.
These guys certainly aren't the best infantry in the Imperium's arsenal, but if all you care about is the top choice then you'd be better be playing Guard with a Castellan. I play more often than most and see the finer details that a lot seem to miss, but it's fine to ignore them. There are plenty of meta lists online for people to copy.

When you say something like 'I play more often than most and see the finer details that a lot seem to miss', youre not gonna get many people to respect your opinion, as it does come across as a little condescending and narcissistic (you don't hear the guys who actually win major events, making statements that come across as this pompous).

But lets assess revers for the use that you are suggesting... and see what alternatives are available.

So the alternatives must be...
1. relatively cheap per wound, with a space marine toughness.
2.have some form of mobility, ideally a 'deep strike' like option.

The first alternative that springs to mind is suprisingly space wolf scouts... Similar deployment options, similar cost per wound, much higher damage output per point, and due to being 1 wound per model are less suceptible to any mid / heavy weapons that the enemy might decide to bring to bear / this is leveled vs the slighly worse save, So I will consider this unit superior, just due to its offensive power being almost double that of the revers (oh and they have options to be threatening to other things)

The second alternative that springs to mind is the eversor. It has a similar point cost per wound, it is cheaper as a unit, has the default of character protection, is much more effective at clearing back field infantry with its damage output. Again I would consider this a superior option.

The third alternative Space wolf intercessors, basically the same as revers with a strategem for deployment, yet with a cheaper cost and objective secured in order to take objectives off opponents better.

The 4th is the culexus, which while less offensively capable than the eversor, is by far the more reliably durable choice.


If playing imperium, and ignoring self imposed single codex stuff, there are imo many better options to fulfill the battlefield role that you're looking for (not that I am convinced that such a role is worth 1/20th of my total points cost).

The two assassin choices are IMO much much better options, as they will also generally be useful to you if your opponent also doesn't have vulnerable backfield units, sitting on high value objectives, which they are leaving open to backfield deepstrike attacks.