Tethlis' Army Blog, The Old World

[Curu Olannon]

The thing with Reavers is that they're a special unit. As such, I find that it's always hard to sacrifice points somewhere to make them work. If you find that your Lions and PG can do their job with the proposed size reduction, I'm sure they'll be a very nice unit for you. However, if you can make the elite infantry work without those extra models, are Reavers the best way to spend these points?

Questions like this I like to approach by considering armies that are tough to beat. In your case, I'm not sure what the worst matchups are. What do you think?

[Ptolemy]

Hey Tethlis,

More and more our lists are starting to look the same. At some point we'll probably just meet in the middle and play the exact same thing!

I've had great success with 19 PG and 18 WLs. I'm finding that the points I save being reinvested into the second unit of Dragon Princes has worked great.

In answer to some of Rod's questions, I definitely can provide some insight:

That said, I think it comes down to a few questions which you can probably answer yourself the best:
- How does losing a rank from the PG affect their role (can they still break steadfast for most units for instance)?
Absolutely. The PG break steadfast (assuming you aren't dealing with 10 rank slaves here) by killing 7-10 models per turn (Prince's attacks included)and losing 2-3. That sort of trade off has you removing steadfast on all but the largest units in 1 turn, max 2 turns for the 30 man units.
- How does it change the survivability of the PG unit? In how many situations would having more/fewer models have mattered?
Hardly ever. Even with 19 models, the PG still function like they are 38 models. Thinking of PG as 2 wound elves is an excellent way to understand their durability. Most enemy players will prefer not to shoot them when you have so many other easier targets on the field. The presence of the general in the unit only deters the shooting further, figuring that panic is all but impossible anyway. You have Shield to protect the White Lions (who will draw most of the fire).
- How much do the 2 extra attack from the WL matter? Will it change their role on the battlefield?
This shouldn't matter. Those 2 lost models are simply ablative wounds at this point since you have only two ranks of attacks anyway. Where PG win combats through zero-sum gaming (if you don't wound the PG, you lose the combat), WLs win through efficiency (super high % of hits will wound). In other words, White Lions don't *need* more attacks to succeed. I will say that having more stubborn models, however, is never a bad thing.

Rod

As for Reavers, they were my other serious thought instead of my second unit of DPs. Tell you what Tethlis. I'll run a few more games with dual DP unit. You run a few with Reavers and lets compare notes in our respective blogs. I had a HUGE amount of success against an Orc player recently with my 2nd DP unit (see my blog) in my last game. I'm interested to see how a second unit of heavy cav works for this style list compared to a support of light cav. The effective 30'' of movement the Reavers can have in turn 1 is scary, particularly with the free reforms.

I like the Reaver idea because I've come to accept the fact that with only two eagles in an army, they can no longer serve as warmachine hunters. They are dedicated redirectors and nothing else. Reavers would be remarkably better at warmachine hunting thanks to their ASF rerolls. I wouldn't bother with the bows. Keep them cheap, you'll be tossing them away to the enemy in nearly every game.

[Tethlis]

A rematch! I tweaked my list slightly, as discussed, in order to try out the reavers:

-Prince with great weapon, Radiant Gem of Hoeth (Light), Armor of Caledor, Guardian Phoenix
-Archmage with Annulian Crystal, Foliarath's Robe, Shadow
-BSB with great weapon, Armor of Silvered Steel
-12 Archers with musi, std, Banner of the Eternal Flame
-12 Archers with musi, std
-34 Spearmen with fc
-18 White Lions with fc, Banner of Sorcery
-19 Phoenix Guard with fc, Gem of Courage, Razor Standard
-5 Dragon Princes with musi
-5 Ellyrion Reavers with musi
-Great Eagle
-Great Eagle

I was facing down a list that was similar to last time, but with the units bulked up and another mortar added:

-Arch Lector, War Altar, Sword of Fate, Enchanted Shield, Speculum
-Level 4 with Life
-BSB with Armor of Meteoric Iron
-Warrior Priest with heavy armor, Dragonhelm, great weapon, barded warhorse
-Warrior Priest with Armor of Silvered Steel, great weapon
-Engineer
-Engineer
-50 Halberdiers, full command
-15 Swordsmen detachment
-10 Knightly Order, fc and great weapons
-16 Outriders with musician
-Mortar
-Mortar
-Mortar
-Cannon
-Cannon
-Steam Tank

We ended up with battleline (sometimes I think he uses a rigged dice when he rolls for it, it's all we seem to generate against each other) and terrain gave us a building heavy configuration that would provide my Eagles with some cannon cover but wouldn't have much additional impact. A marsh and forest took up some space in the middle, but there was quite a bit to block line-of-sight.

For spells, I ended up with a standard useful configuration of Miasma, Enfeebling Foe, Pit of Shades, Mindrazor (a pair of doubles on Pendulum gave me great flexibility there) and I took Shield of Saphery as usual. My opponent ended up with Earthblood, Flesh to Stone, Throne of Vines and Dwellers.

Deployment
My opponent's list changes were meant to grief me a bit, but the loss of his disposable drops hurt him tremendously. He was placing key drops right off the bat, and the Outriders were down early also, meaning that I knew where his entire battle line was by the time I was done placing Eagles and Archers in obvious places. The Reavers obviously went opposite his warmachines, but I found that I had a chance to deploy the Phoenix Guard and White Lions out of range of his mortars but still in a position where they could go after his combat units. By the time I won the roll for first turn, I knew how this game was going to end.



High Elf Turn 1
I have to say, I already love the Reavers. Granted, this might be their most favorable matchup, but I was still impressed by their speed. Vanguard, followed up by an 18 march (plus the reforms necessary to get around that building) meant I could threaten his shooting units immediately. I had a bit of a choice to make; get within 12 inches, within minimum range of the mortars, but risk grapeshot, or else stay out of grapeshot range but get pounded by three mortars (and possibly both cannons on the Eagle.) I decided to take my risks with the grapeshot.

The rest of my army cruised forward, the White Lions entering the building to use it as a shortcut forward to keep pace with the Phoenix Guard.

Magic fired up a nice 5/6 phase, giving me 12 dice to my opponent's 10. He let me have the 5+ Ward on the Spearmen, attempted to stop Miasma on the Outriders (now Ballistic Skill 1), and failed to stop my non-IF Pit of Shades on the Steam Tank which promptly sank into a hole. Excellent, although I did have the Archmage in a great place to charge out and tie up the Steam Tank if it had become necessary.

Shooting with the Archers was negligible; low rolling and good armor saves only dropped one.



Empire Turn 1
With the Stank dead, and me crowding his gunline, my opponent started his grumbling. There was some very slight shuffling of his units, but generally he didn't move much. His magic was a wash; contained by the Annulian Crystal. Grapeshot managed to kill 3 Reavers and wound the Eagle twice, but the Miasma on the Handgunners stopped them from contributing anything meaningful.



High Elf Turn 2
My Reavers and Eagle charged the two closest mortars, the White Lions exited the building, the Phoenix Guard advanced towards the knights, and the second Eagle/Dragon Princes/Spearmen created an opportunity for redirecting and a countercharge if my opponent tried to advance. My idea here was to use the Phoenix Guard to smash the cavalry, assisted by the White Lions as needed, then get them in to finish the Halberdiers and finished the game.

For magic, a 4/4 split ended up with 9 dice for me, 8 for him. He was worried about Pit tearing big holes in his lines (50/50 chance to kill a human) so he let me have my way with Miasma on the Outriders and the 5+ Ward on the Spearmen, leaving me with 5 dice to his 9. I promptly ended my magic phase and left him feeling silly.

Shooting, the Archers fluffed their roles against the Outriders. You'd think they would be a perfect target for the Archers, but I tend to be challenged when it comes to rolling 4+

In combat, the Reavers ran over their warmachine, while the Eagle broke his and both my units overran into the last mortar and a cannon.



Empire Turn 2
My opponent seemed confident his knights could threaten my Phoenix Guard, and declared that charge as well as a supportin charge into my Eagle from his engineer. He also brought his War Altar over to possibly provide support next turn. His magic came to life a bit with a 4/3 Winds roll that ended up being his 6 versus my 5. He 6-diced boosted Dwellers on the White Lions, for some reason, with a stellar non-IF casting total of 31 which I wasn't able to stop. 9 Lions were eaten by gophers.

For shooting, his only unengaged warmachine misfired but his Outriders managed to grit their teeth through Ballistic Skill 2 and gun down two Dragon princes.

Combat was delightfully satisfying; the Prince and BSB killed 4 Knights, the Phoenix Guard another three, my BSB took a wound in return and my Phoenix Guard shrugged off everything else, and the Knights dashed for the table edge and were promptly run down with an impressive pursuit roll. My Reavers took out their cannon, the Eagle tied up the last mortar, and the Reavers reformed to face the final cannon.



High Elf Turn 3
The picture below shows the start my Turn 3, with my Phoenix Guard positioned to flank the Halberdiers and no other real threats on the table. At this point, my opponent called the game.



Result:
Overwhelming win for the High Elves

Coming up: Skaven and Dwarves

[Brewmaster_D]

Hey Tethlis!

Now that's more like it! Well done all around. I know it's been observed before, and normally I try withold from making personal comments about players, but this game really illustrates that this is a guy that writes nasty lists, but doesn't really know how to play them.

Things you did well:

- Dropping the Tank into a pit almost immediately - classic!
- Deploying your key troops out of range of the Mortars
- Used your fliers and fast cavarly to exploit an opening he left for you to assault his artillery right from the get-go
- Drew his knights into a losing battle

Things he did poorly:

- Deployed his artillery in a limiting and vulnerable position, leaving a great channel open to you down the flank. Even the slightest angle on those outriders, and he would have had great defense for all of those valuable artillery pieces
- Forgot to shoot his outriders turn 1? Seems like they did nothing
- Grossly overestimated the hitting power of his knights
- As you mentioned, he dropped his key supporting units from his list, giving you the deployment advantage

Well played Tethlis - this must have been oh so sweet for you after the last match

One question I have is how the Outriders managed to shoot the Dragon Princes on Empire Turn 2? Seems like they'd be both out of range and unable to see them.

Thanks for the Report! Justice is served!

D

[Curu Olannon]

Impressive, you made it look easy! I do believe however that this opponent of yours has tremendous room for improvement, whereas you seem to make fairly few mistakes and rarely any big ones.

More than anything, I think this battle highlighted 2 things:
- The importance of 1st turn against a shooty list
- The importance of deployment advantages

I do believe that Reavers shine in these kinds of matchups. To me, this implies that one must evaluate whether this kind of matchup is the worst ones for you. Personally, I believe it's not. It's definitely not the best, but I believe it's far from the worst: Ogres and Daemons would, in my opinion, be harder. Do Reavers have any good roles to fulfil against these armies? Initially, I doubt it, as neither sport any soft targets. If this is true, then Reavers need to do something else - and they need to do it better than Eagles - to be worth taking. Do you imagine they have such a role to fulfil, e.g. redirect multiple times due to being fast cavalry?

[dabber]

We all appear quite satisfied to read about this win. It really does look like this guy is not actually very good at Warhammer. He doesn't seem to make good decisions on the table, and seems dependent upon his things crushing the enemy easily.

As always going first against heavy shooting is huge. Combine that with your great luck in the first magic phase, and you had this in the bag. STANKs are not supposed to die that easily to Pit of Shades - it usually scatters off the target! Mainly a 3-spell magic phase on turn 1, with no miscasts, will win a lot of games.

He did really deploy terribly. I like that you dropped main troops out of mortar range, but even if they could shoot 72" and do average damage to PG/WL on turn 1, I think you have him. With the STANK gone and the Popemobile blocked by his own troops, he has 3 islands of units (knights, infantry, shooters) that stand completely alone.


Curu, why do Reavers really shine here? Vanguard does not allow them to reach artillery any faster than an Eagle. Or if it does (enemy goes first), they have to be really really exposed to be in position for an immediate charge. Either unit has a good chance to charge on turn 2. They do hit harder when they reach, but they also lose hitting power rapidly when shot at. A pair of Eagles can take 4 wounds and still be at full offense, or have one Eagle blow apart by heavy firepower for half offense, while every round Reavers take is less damage output. And when Reavers take wounds, they take panic tests.

[Curu Olannon]

Curu, why do Reavers really shine here? Vanguard does not allow them to reach artillery any faster than an Eagle. Or if it does (enemy goes first), they have to be really really exposed to be in position for an immediate charge. Either unit has a good chance to charge on turn 2. They do hit harder when they reach, but they also lose hitting power rapidly when shot at. A pair of Eagles can take 4 wounds and still be at full offense, or have one Eagle blow apart by heavy firepower for half offense, while every round Reavers take is less damage output. And when Reavers take wounds, they take panic tests.

Good question!

1. Reavers can charge T1 if you do not get T1 and there are viable targets within range. This alters your opponent's deployment plans or gives you a tremendous advantage
2. Reavers can utilize mid-board terrain BEFORE the game has even begun! This is huge as they'll be that much closer AND protected
3. Reavers can perform multiple rules against an army like Empire: multiple redirects (due to fast cav) and psychological impact are their main advantages

Eagles are of course a really wonderful unit, but people know them very well because everyone takes them. At the moment, I cannot see any other matchup that is more favourable for Reavers. I could, of course, be missing a few points, especially since I've never fielded Reavers, ever.

[~Milliardo~]

The lack of movement on your opponents part on that crucial turn left me in disbelief as I scrolled down... just... why didn't he... he could've... what?

Great report Tethlis! You took advantage of all the mistakes, and opened him up for some more yourself. I think you really stressed him out by crowding him so quickly... there was the report you posted, but I think you won this one psychologically as well - you swarmed him so quick he froze up, and the pictures are just further evidence of a loss that was already fated from the outset.

[Tethlis]

Thanks all. This game definitely shied away from my analytical approach to polishing my list, and felt more like a home-town bar fight, but I was glad to be able to generate this result and get back to focusing on other opponents and other matchups.

Hey Tethlis!
I know it's been observed before, and normally I try withold from making personal comments about players, but this game really illustrates that this is a guy that writes nasty lists, but doesn't really know how to play them.

Good call, D, and I think you're right on the money here. He's very much an Ebay gamer; buys up an army that seems strong, tries to min/max its potential strengths, and get the most out of it before finding a new project. As you mention though, this kind of approach to the game doesn't allow him to build up much familiarity with an army or develop a strong fundamental foundation for good tactics. With the Outriders, he did shoot them on Turn 1, but their Ballistic Skill 1 due to Miasma meant they couldn't hit much of anything and did no notable damage.

One question I have is how the Outriders managed to shoot the Dragon Princes on Empire Turn 2? Seems like they'd be both out of range and unable to see them.

That shot there was made at extreme range, and my diagram may be slightly out of place. As I recall, not all of the Outrider unit could even fire on the Dragon Princes, so he was like 22 or 23 inches from them at the time he pulled the trigger.

Impressive, you made it look easy! I do believe however that this opponent of yours has tremendous room for improvement, whereas you seem to make fairly few mistakes and rarely any big ones.

Thanks Curu. I definitely don't maintain any misconceptions about how my opponent played this one. This made my last lost to him all the more difficult to stomach; he's still got a long way to go before he's using everything in unison, as opposed to a simple point-and-click approach to using units and overall lists. The fact that he dropped his only disposable drops (the two handgun units) to buy another mortar is a perfect symbolic allegory for how little he seems to get it, and how much he just tries to cheese people in order to score the win.

More than anything, I think this battle highlighted 2 things:
- The importance of 1st turn against a shooty list
- The importance of deployment advantages

I do believe that Reavers shine in these kinds of matchups. To me, this implies that one must evaluate whether this kind of matchup is the worst ones for you. Personally, I believe it's not. It's definitely not the best, but I believe it's far from the worst: Ogres and Daemons would, in my opinion, be harder. Do Reavers have any good roles to fulfil against these armies? Initially, I doubt it, as neither sport any soft targets. If this is true, then Reavers need to do something else - and they need to do it better than Eagles - to be worth taking. Do you imagine they have such a role to fulfil, e.g. redirect multiple times due to being fast cavalry?

Yes, this is great commentary, and echoes my own sentiment after the game. The Reavers perform beautifull when it comes to taking out a warmachine list with "typical" warmachines, so they have their uses versus Empire, Dwarves to some extent, Greenskins, Brets, Skaven, Tomb Kings, and any Elf player who actually decides to take a bolt thrower. All things considered, and as you rightly mention, those aren't our most difficult matchups by a longshot (except Skaven). It does mean that Reavers will have a roll in a broad spectrum of matchups, but it won't help us with the really tough stuff. As you say, this means that Reavers have to fulfill a strong secondary role in order to justify their place in a take-all-comers list. Against some of the combat-hybrid warmachines out there (ironblaster, Hellcannon), or warmachines with a tough character stat line (Anvil o' Doom, Cauldron of Blood) they won't have much impact as well.

I'll likely continue to try the Reavers, and test their effectiveness versus other options I could buy for the same points (the 6.5 elite infantry I could get for the same cost are tempting) as well as what I can paint in time for my next tournament.

We all appear quite satisfied to read about this win. It really does look like this guy is not actually very good at Warhammer. He doesn't seem to make good decisions on the table, and seems dependent upon his things crushing the enemy easily.

Thanks dabber, and I agree with all of these points.

As always going first against heavy shooting is huge. Combine that with your great luck in the first magic phase, and you had this in the bag. STANKs are not supposed to die that easily to Pit of Shades - it usually scatters off the target! Mainly a 3-spell magic phase on turn 1, with no miscasts, will win a lot of games.

Yes, my actual plan was for the Archmage to advance inside the Spears, and dash her out to engage the Stank once it started to close with my lines. Pit of Shades actually killing the Stank was a nice benfit, since I mostly was hoping to use it as a Dispel Dice magnet that would let me get other useful spells off, but I won't complain about the Stank going down.

He did really deploy terribly. I like that you dropped main troops out of mortar range, but even if they could shoot 72" and do average damage to PG/WL on turn 1, I think you have him. With the STANK gone and the Popemobile blocked by his own troops, he has 3 islands of units (knights, infantry, shooters) that stand completely alone.

It was certainly a surprise to see his line so stretched out, considering that he basically outdeployed me in my last game where he was able to get away with having the artillery tucked into a corner and unprotected because their wasn't much to threaten it. This game changed that dynamic tremendously, and I wonder how differently things would have been if I wasn't able to crowd his shooting units so quickly.

Curu, why do Reavers really shine here? Vanguard does not allow them to reach artillery any faster than an Eagle. Or if it does (enemy goes first), they have to be really really exposed to be in position for an immediate charge. Either unit has a good chance to charge on turn 2. They do hit harder when they reach, but they also lose hitting power rapidly when shot at. A pair of Eagles can take 4 wounds and still be at full offense, or have one Eagle blow apart by heavy firepower for half offense, while every round Reavers take is less damage output. And when Reavers take wounds, they take panic tests.

These are good points too, and I think Curu addresses them well. The Panic test they had to make after the first Empire shooting phase made me really nervous; failing Ld8 isn't too tough, and that would have changed things pretty significantly if the Reavers had Panicked.

The big question is to figure out what other role Reavers can serve besides light warmachine hunting and serving as a fairly expensive redirector. I can see them suicide-charging into enemy units to take out unprotected Level 2s, but there's always a good chance the Level 2 will survive and I may not necessarily be gaining much by initiating that kind of sacrifice. For this list specifically, perhaps a third Eagle is the answer, which still leaves me with a few extra points to buy more White Lions or something similarly useful. A third Eagle could have done something similar to the Reavers here, I believe.

Great report Tethlis! You took advantage of all the mistakes, and opened him up for some more yourself. I think you really stressed him out by crowding him so quickly... there was the report you posted, but I think you won this one psychologically as well - you swarmed him so quick he froze up, and the pictures are just further evidence of a loss that was already fated from the outset.

Great observation, ~Milliardo~. When I finished the report, I scrolled back through to check my work, and I thought "oh dang, I forgot to move the Empire units in Turn 2". Then I recalled that he did actually lock up and not move much of anything, and I do think he was actually panicked at the quick approach of the Elves.

I appreciate the replies from all, and to recap my takeaways from this game:

-Identify the warmachine and movement advantage of Reavers.
-Identify that smaller elite units still fulfill their role well, as Ptolemy mentioned in his last post. Obviously it was something of a quick game, but the Phoenix Guard performed to perfection.
-Phoenix Guard are wildly underestimated. I already know that they're a terrific unit, but my opponent thought the Phoenix Guard would be easy targets and that only my two combat characters would pose any kind of threat. The consistency of the Phoenix Guard, plus Razor Standard, actually makes them a strong killing unit versus a variety of targets. The Ward Save was lovely as well, as always.
-Shadow + Shield of Saphery covers a lot of very valuable bases, and creates a terrific "misleading" magic phase. Between Pit and Mindrazor, I'm finding that it's easy to Panic an opponent with just one spell, allowing me to get all my support spells into play with relative ease.

[Ptolemy]

Well, not much didn't go right for the Asur this game! Good show!

Obviously, I'm most interested in the functionality of the Reavers as that is the largest deviation in this list from the previous one.

- I was very impressed by the relative speed of the unit. Its one thing to know that they can move 12'' in a vanguard followed by 18'' free reforming march but its quite another to see it happen. How did the deployment of the unit go? Did he make a mistake by plopping the warmachines down early? Were you forced to deploy the reavers earlier than desirable?

- I think you were right to risk the grapeshot. Even if the whole unit died, its one less turn of the cannon set up to rip a shot down the flank of your WLs.

- Curu brings up a point about armies that don't have warmachines or those with warmachines of insane toughness. Can the Reavers serve a role in such a game? Such opponents include Daemons, WoC, Ogres, Lizards and Beastmen. What do Reavers do against such armies that Eagles can't do cheaper?

- If you had to give the Reavers an alternate task in this game (ie - not hunt the warmachines) what would you have done with them?

Other thoughts:
- He actually was very lucky to even HAVE a steam tank in the list. If he didn't, that warmachine cluster is one of the best targets I've ever seen for a large Pit of Shades. That being said, that Stank was doomed. Even if it didn't get hit with a pit, you had your mindrazor to take care of it and the PG to deliver the killing blow.

- Any thought on sending the DPs into the halberdiers to assassinate the level 4 on Turn 2? Did he really have no Ward save at all? Seems like an easy kill. Certainly didn't end up being necessary.

- The PG are once against unstoppable. Your inclusion of the BSB was, I thought, very wise. I assume this was to increase the number of attacks going against the Steam Tank in an eventual CC. The WLs could have handled anything on that flank by themselves anyway. The PG would make the most out of his additional hitting power. He made the blunder that even veteran players do, they assume that Str 4, T3 troops can't be that bad.

-Like yourself, I tried out my dual DP unit list against a Warhammer novice. It was an equally one sided victory for me and didn't display much about how the dual DPs would work so I didn't bother writing up a report. However, I'm find the DPs very solid. Particularly against Ogres, they performed very well. I'm wondering how I would have used Reavers instead against a standard OK list as Curu mentioned.

[Swordmaster of Hoeth]

Hi Tethlis!

Good to see such a crushing victory against Empire army even if partially due to incopetence of its general. There is not much to add about the battle that has not been already said so I just jump to few points I wanted to comment and then add a little about Reavers

1. What did mortars do in turn 1? With 3 of them they should be able to hit something.

2. Were the second cannon next to first? It seems it is an invisible one on the diagram

3. I believe there is a slight mistake in your army list, as it states the Prince took Light magic while you obviously took High.

As to the Reavers I would like to stress out the importance of looking at the unit on its own and its potential usefulness to particular army. Constant comparing them to Eagles, just because some of the roles of both overlap simply limits your imagination as what light cavalry can do for the army. They are not mainly redirectors as Eagles are and they are more just war machine hunters. You are not comparing Dragon Princes to Eagles, after all, despite the fact both units are support regiments in this army and that DP can also perform war machine hunting.

In my opinion the most important thing light cavalry brings to the army is flexibility. Especially when fully equipped (that means with bows too!). It is easy to miss that but often their speed and ability to shoot means you can inflict that last wound on the unit/lone character. I hunted down last Flamer and lone Bray-Shaman this way. Not game winning stuff but definitely useful. Their flexibility also lies in the fact they can be good in close combat but I have found out they are even better at keeping the pressure and staying out of combat but constatly making a threat for a charge. With S4 and re-rolls to hit they are potentially dangerous to some units and they can add a wound or two on top of CR bonus from attacking from the flank or rear. They will keep the enemy guessing if you are going to comitt them or not and it is up to you when to do it. Even against a powerful foe their support in close combat can make a difference. And to annoy the enemy more they keep shooting at his force. Yes, they might not be very efficient but it is more psychological warfere here. The enemy usually reacts in some way to units behind his back especially when they attract its attention with shooting. It can force your enemy to make some mistakes and Reavers can dance around them and avoid engaging.

As to tough armies and roles Ellyrians can perform there. Ogres often have Sabertusks and Gnoblars as their own cheap diverters. Reavers are very good at clearing them out while your more powerful units do not waste their might on such threat. Even if OK player does not sport them a flank attack of reavers against a flank of single line unit such as Maneaters could be an option and as I said before, just by making that threat you force the enemy to act differently. I haven't used Reavers properly against Deamons just yet (or was unlucky with flee rolls) but they too have some unit potentially vulnerable to their charge. Single Fiends, furies, flamers attacked from the flank if formed in single line or even depleted bigger regiments engaged from the front can suffer from timely charge of light horse. Against Beastmen I risked hunting down Bray-Shaman in a chariot and then proceeded to finish off other lone characters. Their riders too are vulnerbale. And by forcing them to flee you position light cavalry as a unit to be charged next instead of more powerful regiment which might not like taking a charge itself (like DP) and which would waste a lot of time by fleeing from the charge of the enemy. While reavers rally and are back in the game straight away.

I haven't played against Lizards just yet but in general I believe that ss long as you treat Reavers as an annoying wasp that distracts the enemy from your main units and prevents them to focus you are using them correctly.

[SpellArcher]

Agree with Swordmaster. Feigned Flight can be very useful. Any enemy with powerful infantry blocks you don't want to fight head-on calls for Reavers. I have a suspicion this may work slightly less well in a heavy infantry list but it's worth testing IMHO.

[Curu Olannon]

I agree with Swordmaster that giving them bows hugely ups their possible roles, for example catching a Sabretusk or threatening that mage leaving his unit.

However, I'm unsure of how this'll impact armies such as Daemons (who have virtually none of these weaknesses) and Skaven (again, none of these weaknesses) which are both really hard matchups.

Taking the earlier example of a lone fiend - if you get the charge (big if, seeing as he has M10) you're looking at causing ~2W before the horses attack. The fiend's I6 means you lose the re-roll. Note that this is rounded up, so it's by no means a strong counter, not to mention how much you'll lose in return and how much cheaper the fiend is.

Granted, with bows you can harass it somewhat safer, but if that's their only use save from redirecting, I believe it's a sub-optimal choice compared to archers + eagles, in this specific matchup. Again, it's a question of what can the Reavers do that other elements cannot? If the question is that the few things they can perform in a hard matchup are overpriced, then I believe they're not a valid choice. With Folariath's robe as well, you're quickly looking at ~100 ineffective/sub-optimal points vs Daemons. Trust me, you do not want to face DoC with a 100 points disadvantage.

I guess my initial conclusion agrees with SpellArcher, I think the Reavers may work less well in a heavy infantry list compared to MSU style armies. However, as I have zero experience with Reavers, I would very much like to see them in these specific situations to properly gauge their potential.

[SpellArcher]

What you can do is park the Reavers a few inches away from a Daemon block (worth considering the +D6 banner though of course) and invite him to charge. It'll restrict his marching without giving up 50pts for an eagle. Tends to work better on a flank as then you're messing his flank up and ideally you have fast hard stuff going forward on the other flank as Reavers don't slow single units quite as reliably as a sacrificial eagle.

But of course proper use of Vanguard etc. too.

[dabber]

What you can do is park the Reavers a few inches away from a Daemon block (worth considering the +D6 banner though of course) and invite him to charge.

Average flee distance from swiftstride is about 9 inches. Average charge distance is about 12 inches (5+7). So you have to be more than 3 inches away to have a (very roughly) 50-50 shot at living. I think those odds suck. You really need to be more like 6 inches away if you expect to escape, in which case they will often prefer to walk the 5" straight at you and let their light support elements kill the Reavers. I have seen far too many examples of people planning to flee charges and getting caught because charging units move much faster than fleeing units in 8th. In fact, I have trouble thinking of ANY example of fast cavalry fleeing a charge, rallying, and repeating, except when the player doing the charging was making a clear mistake.

[Curu Olannon]

In general, I agree that they are better for multiple redirecting than an eagle. However, as dabber pointed out, this is often a risky proposition and might not always be favourable.

As for support elements killing Reavers - they can just as easily kill Eagles so I don't see a big advantage either way.

[dabber]

As for support elements killing Reavers - they can just as easily kill Eagles so I don't see a big advantage either way.

That was in relation to fleeing/holding a charge, not to the unit doing the baiting. If the plan is the bait holds, the bait is going to die, and the enemy support units don't matter (they mattered earlier in the game, but not on that turn). If the plan is the bait flees, a decent Daemon army has a variety of options to kill the bait anyway. Basically I see trying to flee a charge against Daemons as generally unlikely to be useful - holding and dying will often be strictly better.

[Brewmaster_D]

I also find fleeing to be somewhat situational in this edition as more often than not the opponent has another unit they can redirect to. If the redirect is crucial, ie delaying a countercharge, at this point the Reavers must still sacrifice themselves, in which case they are forced into the role of an expensive eagle.

I love that they're getting some playtime, but at the end of the day, they still need to be regarded as somewhat more situational than Eagles - there's always a use for eagles, whereas there's going to be times you're loving the Reavers, and other times you wish you just had an eagle.

In the hands of some of the fine generals on this board, though, I expect to see them do some wonderful things!

D

[Swordmaster of Hoeth]

The "problem" with Reavers is that they do not have as straightforward role to play as other units. They are not heavy hitters as DP and not pure redirectors as Eagles. That means their use is and will be difficult. Are they overpriced as a unit, no matter what? Maybe. But in the end there is also a place for units you like and can be still useful and a place for units which are more solid in use without doubts for their utility.

If I were to expand my army to 2500 points I would try to include second unit just because I like them but also because I think 2 units can do some interesting tricks where one cannot. Main thing being double feigned flight where you position 2 units in a such way that enemy has to charge one then the other and both have a chance to flee. Then your enemy is slowed down and you can repeat that next turn. It is of course situational but it is additional tool you can use.

In Fiend vs Reavers situation it is not perfect either but not many things are. The idea is, however, that without reavers Fiend has free room to do whatever it likes. No one forces you to charge it from the front. And it is still not that good when you charge it from the flank. But if you can move Reavers to it's flank then your enemy has to take it into account and the Fiend might not be able to march. Little things but may matter in the game. As I have mentioned before, you pose a threat but do not commit your light horse and by doing so you limit the choices your enemy has. Regiments usefulness is not only in its ability to kill stuff.

Against Skaven it can also be situational but remember that Storm banner does nothing to Reavers speed while turns Eagles into jumping chicken.

I have also mad another observation which might be useful in order to keep Reavers alive. If you present them as the early target and the rest of the army is too far away the enemy will try to kill them. It means that it might not be such a good idea to move them too fast too early unless you can make sure you will go past enemy shooters (like against Bretonnia where you have first round and can race across battlefield and out of sight of any archers). Or at least present some other targets. Instead use vanguard to take cover and wait for better opportunity. This what Tethlis did in his last battle and it payed off greatly.

I doubt Reavers will be a "must have" unit. But I assure you they are great to use (although not that easy) and they might sometimes surprise you with their effectiveness

[Curu Olannon]

Sounds like a reasonable conclusion Swordmaster. Indeed your point about 'cost-effective vs what I like to use / what I use well' is very valid. Basically, it doesn't matter if Eagles are the best unit we have beyond any doubt if someone simply cannot use them well! Anyways, I believe we've covered the theoretical grounds rather well now. All that remains is to see this in action

looks at Tethlis and wants to know when the next games are

[SpellArcher]

in which case they will often prefer to walk the 5" straight at you and let their light support elements kill the Reavers. I have seen far too many examples of people planning to flee charges and getting caught because charging units move much faster than fleeing units in 8th. In fact, I have trouble thinking of ANY example of fast cavalry fleeing a charge, rallying, and repeating, except when the player doing the charging was making a clear mistake.

Firstly, we are High Elves, very good at killing the enemy's light support elements. No way do you allow yourself to get caught. The combat block moves up to the Reavers but does his shooting/magic kill the whole unit in one turn? Unlikely (except Flamers!) and if it does, he's not killing your other stuff, that is part of the Reavers' job. Flamers are going to hurt something you've got anyway.

I also find fleeing to be somewhat situational in this edition as more often than not the opponent has another unit they can redirect to. If the redirect is crucial, ie delaying a countercharge, at this point the Reavers must still sacrifice themselves, in which case they are forced into the role of an expensive eagle.

You don't keep other stuff nearby. The Reavers typically operate alone, in advance and between the centre and one of the flanks. They go hand in hand with a refused flank strategy. You keep eagles within 20" as backup if things go wrong.

Again I agree with Swordmaster, Reavers are not better than eagles but they can do things eagles can't. The two are complementary in the right list. Two eagles and five Reavers is a set-up I've seen in several good lists.

[Brewmaster_D]

You don't keep other stuff nearby. The Reavers typically operate alone, in advance and between the centre and one of the flanks. They go hand in hand with a refused flank strategy. You keep eagles within 20" as backup if things go wrong.

I think this is the very definition of situational - the Reavers are great redirectors during a refused flank when there are no other units nearby to redirect to. This is one scenario in a game that will throw you all sorts of unexpected scenarios.

My example was one of a situation where their utility would swing the opposite way, and force you to sacrifice more points than you otherwise would have had to.

Don't get me wrong here, I love Reavers, and in some of the battle reports I've read their use was downright inspired. However, I think it's important to know the limitations of our own troops and avoid looking at them through rose covered glasses. When you know where a unit will be less efficient, you can be focused on keeping them in situations where they are.

I think Curu's arguments is that there are certain armies that in the hands of a good player simply don't present the opportunity for Reavers to operate in their best roles. This is something that needs to be accepted when selecting them in an army list. With Eagles there will always be a role to fill, and they are our cheapest option. However, with the Reavers it will be more polar. There will be scenarios like the game above where they absolutely excel, and then there will be games where 2 eagles would have provided you with more overall utility and options.

Again, not saying that they're going to do a bad job, just that there are many situations where the eagles will be do the same thing cheaper or better (flying movement comes to mind).

D

[Ptolemy]

I think Curu's arguments is that there are certain armies that in the hands of a good player simply don't present the opportunity for Reavers to operate in their best roles. This is something that needs to be accepted when selecting them in an army list. With Eagles there will always be a role to fill, and they are our cheapest option. However, with the Reavers it will be more polar. There will be scenarios like the game above where they absolutely excel, and then there will be games where 2 eagles would have provided you with more overall utility and options.

Again, not saying that they're going to do a bad job, just that there are many situations where the eagles will be do the same thing cheaper or better (flying movement comes to mind).

D

Agreed.

Also, I'm not sold at all on the idea that putting bows on Reavers make them more useful. You are making a unit that is likely to be sacrificed at some point in the game more expensive in the hopes that there may be an instance where 5 BS 4, STR 3 shots will net a return. As Brewmaster points out, very situational. I have a 10 man unit of Archers who do that for me.

I'm still interested in how quickly they can reach the backfield. No one doubts that they can be useful against warmachines. I still think we are looking for something convincing on how they are used when there aren't warmachines to hunt.

[Swordmaster of Hoeth]

Oh boy, so many words to show some nice ideas and even more words to show some examples from the battles and all it takes is "I am not convienced" to throw it all out of the window The funny part is I was not even trying to convience anybody, just sharing some thoughts and a little experience. Especially that more economically orientated forum members didn't not provide any before as taking Reavers does not pay off

Ah well, that will teach me not to get too excited about an opportunity to advertise one of my favorite units too much

[dabber]

Anyone able to link to reports with successful use of Reavers, particularly using them to flee and/or when they do not go first?


Tethlis' blog isn't really the place for this question, but we were just talking about it, and I don't have a better place to put it!

[SpellArcher]

I think Curu's arguments is that there are certain armies that in the hands of a good player simply don't present the opportunity for Reavers to operate in their best roles. This is something that needs to be accepted when selecting them in an army list. With Eagles there will always be a role to fill, and they are our cheapest option. However, with the Reavers it will be more polar. There will be scenarios like the game above where they absolutely excel, and then there will be games where 2 eagles would have provided you with more overall utility and options.

This is fair comment but to take the Daemons example, if the block moves 5" and the Flamers shoot the Reavers you are ahead compared to the block killing a 1" eagle, reforming and the Flamers shooting something else. Now a good player will likely have Fiends and/or Furies but it's not so simple. Just as the Reavers may not have perfect opportunities for restricting movement, so the FF's may be busy RBT hunting or diverting HE combat units. I believe that in most games Reavers have that role to fill and in the others you can improvise. I fully agree with taking an eagle or two first but I'd have a unit of Reavers before possibly a second and definately a third eagle. Four eagles is a different strategy I feel.

I use bows but that's for the look of the thing, I'm not sure if they're a good idea or not to be honest. Useful now and then.

My summaries are not full battle reports like Tethlis' but:

http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=35203
http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=37107

To expand a little:

Game 1 vs Friendly Skaven

Got the first turn and Vanguarded the Reavers forward solo centre-right, blocking a Warlord+Clanrat block and a Slave block. Charged backwards but returned to continue the job. Mildly useful here.

Game 2 vs Old Tomb Kings

Went second but more drops let me overlap his bowline with the Reavers. Vanguarded forward and outflanked his line, taking out (along with frontal 5xSilver Helms) a Liche Priest archer bunker, Catapult and hitting a Casket near the end. So more like Tethlis' use here. Very handy.

Game 3 vs Double Seer Skaven

Went second, Vanguarding the Reavers forward centrally to slow his blocks. Trouble behind them with Gutter Runners meant I pulled them back to counter this but they were shot and panicked to death. Too close for sling stand and shoot I'd forgotten about the throwing stars!

Game 4 vs Daemons

Went second, Vanguarding the Reavers forward to counter a Bloodletter block. He might have caught them with the extra move banner but instead advanced and shot them with Flamers. The advance though took them no closer to my main force and the 'letters had no major effect on the game. Not bad here I'd say but the rest of the army died horribly!

Game 5 vs Old Ogres

Went second, Vanguarding the Reavers forwards to block a modest, centrally deployed Gutstar. Were charged back so slowing the enemy to about 5", I then eagled it in the following turns, it didn't see combat. Reavers taken out by magic missiles but they bought me longer to use my eagles.

Game 6 vs Goblins

Went first but was out-deployed and ended up sacrificing them to slow a huge unit of Spider Riders after I ran out of eagles. Not great.

Game 7 vs Lizardmen

Won first turn and Vanguarded forwards to hold up a flank for two turns after his first shooting round only killed four and I passed the Panic. Quite handy.

Game 8 vs O&G

Deployed badly on my left. Pretty ineffectual.

Game 9 vs Vampires

Here the infantry blocks were targets rather than to be avoided and no war machines to hunt. Placed the Reavers on my left as a distraction, four died to a Terrorgheist Scream but I hid the last guy and saved the points.

So a bit hit and miss I guess but please bear in mind that this was in the hands of a mediocre player with a soft list! Enough to show they have potential if used better I feel.

Apologies for going into it in such depth Tethlis but at least it shows some potential uses.

[Ptolemy]

Oh boy, so many words to show some nice ideas and even more words to show some examples from the battles and all it takes is "I am not convienced" to throw it all out of the window The funny part is I was not even trying to convience anybody, just sharing some thoughts and a little experience. Especially that more economically orientated forum members didn't not provide any before as taking Reavers does not pay off

Ah well, that will teach me not to get too excited about an opportunity to advertise one of my favorite units too much

Didn't mean to come off rudely, I apologize .

I guess what I meant to say is that I'm still looking to see how a unit of Reavers (in place of some other choice, like an eagle and spare infantry) will help me win games that I am currently losing.

I got flogged tonight against Skaven. He got off IF 13th on me in three straight turns. His worst miscast result was 5 dead skaven and a wound on the bell. Clearly, Reavers or not, I wasn't winning that game.

However, I'm trying to figure out if Reavers (or any other choice) can help do one of two things - 1) Turn a minor victory into a solid victory and/or 2) Turn a minor loss into a draw or win.

Against armies with standardized warmachines, I totally see how they could accomplish both. I guess I'm just concerned how they do that against armies without warmachines in a way that Eagles are not better at.

[~Milliardo~]

I think in certain lists, they don't work well. They're not a 'plug and play' unit - they don't work well just thrown into an existing list without building the rest of the list to take advantage of them.

With a MSU build, or a build that has a lot more drops, they're incredibly more useful.

[pk-ng]

I think in certain lists, they don't work well. They're not a 'plug and play' unit - they don't work well just thrown into an existing list without building the rest of the list to take advantage of them.

With a MSU build, or a build that has a lot more drops, they're incredibly more useful.

+1
Agree.

[SmithF]

Greetings! Great battle reports, I've been following these for a while now. So thanks for that.

The battle has been thoroughly discussed, but it was the comments on the usefulness of Reavers that motivated me to post.

Feigned flight still has its uses, especially if you factor in intervening friendly units that will boost your flee move and make it impossible for the enemy to catch you. If you also count the fact that an enemy unit can only redirect once, you've got a pretty decent unit. I have found that the musician upgrade and their ability to move once rallied tilt the balance in their favor, when compared to an eagle.

I haven't got any recent high elf battle reports to portray this, but a WoC game provides some visuals as to what I'm suggesting:

Explanations: Orange lines are original charges, yellow lines are flee reactions and red lines are redirected charges. (in the end nothing made contact with my battle line, btw)

Here the fast cavalry (dead centre) fled the redirected charge from the saurus and forced them to stumble forward a couple of inches. On the next turn, they rallied and moved up to block them again. An eagle wouldn't have rallied (I rolled a 9 for the rally, and he wouldn't have been able to move again and block the big scary unit.

Just like dabber said, parking a reaver unit 3" away gives you a 50/50 chance of escaping from the charger. However, this changes if you factor in the reform; a unit of 5 reavers can just as well block a wheel and prevent charges while presenting its flank. That means that by reforming around its centre to flee away from the enemy, it will gain another 1,5" and greatly augment its chances of survival. Here's a link to an old thread where I was discussing this and other tactics one could import from 7th edition into 8th. The diagram concerning the feigned flight is a bit off, as seen in the discussion, but the basic idea is sound:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=292321

(I used to post there as Happy_doctor)

Great discussion so far, the reason I decided to join Asur.org was that threads like this spawn actual tactics and usually do not degenerate into "how to fix this or that" topics.

Smith