Reaper and tantalus costs/ rules

take with salt but believable



Tantalus is largely the same but is 310 pts now.
Reaper went up to 170 pts, down to 10 wounds, lost a couple attacks and the "no advancing" effect on it's gun. But now the blast mode is heavy 2d6 S6 -1 1 dmg and the beam mode is heavy d6 S8 -4 3+d3 dmg. Dark techno reapers are doing on average 6 dmg per shot now

I hope no salt because it is Splintermind's review of the book.

Tantalus lost the leadership buff, lost double move from sails, gained flat advance 12"

hmmm was hoping for something more for the tantalus, same rules with 310 point cost sounds still overcosted with all the crap flying around in the game right now...
Do they keep coven keyword?

Tantalus is still not worth it even at 310 and with the nerfs to it even less so. It really needs to be at 250pts now.

The reaper is still going to be taken depending on what the Coven/Wych traits are. For Kabals its going to be compared to the Ravager so points will win out (If the Ravager is still 145 for lances vs the Reaper 170, thats a 25pts difference, over 3 of those is 75pts. Enough for another unit).

The Great thing is, we can assume Lances are finally fixed.

DevilDoll wrote:

Do they keep coven keyword?

Yes

Reaper- Assuming dark lances get D3+3, I think I would prefer raiders/ravagers now. The extra resilience on the Reaper was nice, but the special rule on the gun that prevented advances was unique and useful. Sad to see it go.

Tantalus- I think the points drop may be a trap. Sure, with dark technomancers bumping the guns up to D3, they look like perfect Primaris killers, but doing the math on how many Eradicators the Tantalus can kill versus how many Eradicators are needed to kill the Tantalus is depressing. For anyone with the model, is it too big to reliably deepstrike on 9th edition boards using screaming jets? I like the idea of packing it with 16 mandrakes and guaranteeing they all get to shoot, but with a model that size I imagine it is very easy for an opponent to screen it off the table.

For the Asuryani changes, I am intrigued by the Wraithseer becoming a proper psyker and moving to heavy support. A spearhead detachment of the Yncarne and 3 Wraithseers to complement my Coven isn't crazy, is it?

Why still compare just the firepower? 310 is the cost of the entire Tantalus, not just the weapons.
I think it is pretty good now, until you don'use it just for shooting.


Hey wait: did they nerf the cargo capacity? Is the Tantalus still able to carry fly infantry?

Cerve wrote:

Hey wait: did they nerf the cargo capacity? Is the Tantalus still able to carry fly infantry?

Yes! they dit it.
"This model cannot transport Scourges and Skyboard models"

Darklord wrote:

"This model cannot transport Scourges and Skyboard models"

"Sic transit gloria mundi.."
I really loved the idea of carrying Hellions!

Raiders could Transport Hellions for about 6 months or so at the start of 8th, it was the most fun I had in 8th honestly. I even had a couple raiders with custom hellions on them (It was a WIP so not full painted, it has been long removed now sadly)

I do miss hellions being rideable. GW really needs to fix them to make them more fun.




But back on topic, nothing here makes me happy to bring a Tantalus still, so it will sit on my self I guess for another year.

With the general nerf overall, I don't find the Tantalus so bad honestly. I mean, I see the Leviathan nerf, I see the Tantalus at 310 points, I think "uhm that seems fine".
In 9th there's less long range shooting and more melee/short range shooting. He is fast, is a transport, do MW in melee, he can even strip some wounds on melee too (ap-2 D2 even at WS 4+) and his shooting is solid). If you add it to other Ravagers/Reapers it is an additional threat and a distraction for the other boats.
And at 310 points the thing is doable.

I will give it a run

I'm fairly new to the game, but seriously, i always thought that the Forgeworld models should only be played in ''Apocalypse'' scale of game.
My thinking is that in matched play they are the ones (Forgeworld models) that complicate the balance of the game.
After reading your reviews, it satisfies me! Cause now, you're not wrong anymore to play the Ravagers over the Reaper. Now, it's up to you to choose what you want to play, be it the Reaper or Ravagers or Tantalus, you wont be wrong for taking any of them.
The point cost now really means something IMO, like 300 pts of forgeworld are now equal to 300 points of regular models (is it not the main reason they have created the point system??)
But again, i'm still green to this game, so my opinion may be totally wrong, but i still feel anyway that Forgeworld models are not meant for Matched play......unless they continue to balance (call it nerf if you want) them.

Kalmah wrote:

I'm fairly new to the game, but seriously, i always thought that the Forgeworld models should only be played in ''Apocalypse'' scale of game.
My thinking is that in matched play they are the ones (Forgeworld models) that complicate the balance of the game.
After reading your reviews, it satisfies me! Cause now, you're not wrong anymore to play the Ravagers over the Reaper. Now, it's up to you to choose what you want to play, be it the Reaper or Ravagers or Tantalus, you wont be wrong for taking any of them.
The point cost now really means something IMO, like 300 pts of forgeworld are now equal to 300 points of regular models (is it not the main reason they have created the point system??)
But again, i'm still green to this game, so my opinion may be totally wrong, but i still feel anyway that Forgeworld models are not meant for Matched play......unless they continue to balance (call it nerf if you want) them.

I'd say forgeworld is more just speciality units. It's going into the arcane, odd, or otherwise ill-known units that aren't for mainline production. Some units are very much parts of armies, for example the malanthrope or sky slasher swarms, but then you have some that I'd agree you shouldn't feasibly take, (and generally can't either) like warlord or revenant titans.

Kalmah wrote:

I'm fairly new to the game, but seriously, i always thought that the Forgeworld models should only be played in ''Apocalypse'' scale of game.
My thinking is that in matched play they are the ones (Forgeworld models) that complicate the balance of the game.
After reading your reviews, it satisfies me! Cause now, you're not wrong anymore to play the Ravagers over the Reaper. Now, it's up to you to choose what you want to play, be it the Reaper or Ravagers or Tantalus, you wont be wrong for taking any of them.
The point cost now really means something IMO, like 300 pts of forgeworld are now equal to 300 points of regular models (is it not the main reason they have created the point system??)
But again, i'm still green to this game, so my opinion may be totally wrong, but i still feel anyway that Forgeworld models are not meant for Matched play......unless they continue to balance (call it nerf if you want) them.

Far from it, FW was made b .c GW didn't want to make certain models in plastic b.c the tech was not there. Many units like were FW in the past but now are plastics like Trygons, Flying Tyrants, many chaos models, some marine units (like the WW). Almost all of FW are just normal units.

There is a weird bias that people think FW is pay to win or broken units, but no, in reality GW's core has had 10x the amount of OP units and is way more Pay to win than FW has ever been. Heck at one point in time the best unit in the game was our RWF's you know the 18$ model that people wanted 120 of.....

The problem with FW now is at one points ALL players required it for at least 5-10% of their units in the books, but now GW is shifting away from that to only specialist games which hurts the lot of us that did buy FW over the years and new players looking to buy. I had a FW army that is now completely gone.

Did anyone hear about Hornets? Warp Hunters? Lynx? Skathhatch? I used to ally in these models, but I do not know the new rules.

Historically (from 3ed edition to 8th edition) FW has had a few OP models/rules that broke the game. It is very frustrating when someone puts a model on the table that you have never seen, and proceeds to tell you all the rules it has slowly throughout the game.

"Oh, now that you have Deep Striked that unit I now get a free round of shooting at it"

"By the way, my model has 25 attacks that re-roll everything, it was probably a mistake to charge your Terminators into it"

"This unit actually double moves and ignores enemy models, so I can just ignore that screen you put up"

If the model was in the Codex, I feel that it is fair game. If the rules are hidden behind a pay wall, and your opponent proceeds to interpret the rules in a way that benefits themselves (you cant double check because nobody brought the fething rules with them), it just leads to real hard feelings.

Currently there is a lot of 40k media coverage, so the community generally knows what a Dedereo Dred can do. Historically it would be a big mystery that would just go "gotcha" and win the game. I still hate FW for that, even if it is a relic of previous editions

EDIT: I do like that the Reaper is now damage: 3+D3 instead of D6. Once the Ravager gets this upgrade it may be worth taking triple lances again.

Hey I just realized we are probably getting new Night Shield rules.  The Tantalus used to have a Night Shield, but now it is equipped with a Twilight Field, which currently does the same thing.  The Reaper, however, still has a Night Shield but refers to the codex for the rules.

Edit: Well, not EXACTLY the same thing. The Night Shield gives a 5+ invulnerable save against ranged weapons. The Twilight Field gives a 5+ invulnerable save against ranged ATTACKS. I can't think of a non-weapon that is a ranged attack that doesn't do mortal wounds, though.

fisheyes wrote:

Historically (from 3ed edition to 8th edition) FW has had a few OP models/rules that broke the game. It is very frustrating when someone puts a model on the table that you have never seen, and proceeds to tell you all the rules it has slowly throughout the game.

"Oh, now that you have Deep Striked that unit I now get a free round of shooting at it"

"By the way, my model has 25 attacks that re-roll everything, it was probably a mistake to charge your Terminators into it"

"This unit actually double moves and ignores enemy models, so I can just ignore that screen you put up"

If the model was in the Codex, I feel that it is fair game. If the rules are hidden behind a pay wall, and your opponent proceeds to interpret the rules in a way that benefits themselves (you cant double check because nobody brought the fething rules with them), it just leads to real hard feelings.

Currently there is a lot of 40k media coverage, so the community generally knows what a Dedereo Dred can do. Historically it would be a big mystery that would just go "gotcha" and win the game. I still hate FW for that, even if it is a relic of previous editions

EDIT: I do like that the Reaper is now damage: 3+D3 instead of D6. Once the Ravager gets this upgrade it may be worth taking triple lances again.

Sadly many players most of the time just ignore even worst units b.c they are in a GW codex opposed to FW book. Say 5th GK's, early 6th Necrons, 7th Wraithknight's, and so on.

8th was really the true first time FW was so dominating. The 7th Wraithknight even to this day I would say is leaps and bounds worst than 8th FW IH Dread, b.c when played with real GW missions you can easily beat it, it was only so extreme b.c of a certain house rule set. Where the Wraithknight was just good no matter what.

My MAIN issue with FW is that the rules are not easily accessable to all. Its my own fault if I dont know what is in the Space Marine codex. When a guy shows up with half his points in "Lazer Destroyer" tanks and "Quad Mortar" something, then proceeds to tell you what it does as he destroys your army, just feels bad.

It also makes it easy for "less scrupulous" players to abuse the rules and/or just make things up. Not like you can call them on it, since you dont have the rules yourself. (TBF this was more prevalent in previous editions before the internet 40k coverage got as good as it is today)

fisheyes wrote:

My MAIN issue with FW is that the rules are not easily accessable to all. Its my own fault if I dont know what is in the Space Marine codex. When a guy shows up with half his points in "Lazer Destroyer" tanks and "Quad Mortar" something, then proceeds to tell you what it does as he destroys your army, just feels bad.

It also makes it easy for "less scrupulous" players to abuse the rules and/or just make things up. Not like you can call them on it, since you dont have the rules yourself. (TBF this was more prevalent in previous editions before the internet 40k coverage got as good as it is today)

If an opponent is a d*ck, just be a d*ck yourself and state you need to have the printed book of everything he uses.

Okay but I'm fairly sure that if your opponent turns up without the rules for their models, they shouldn't be playing? At my LGS and tournaments you have to bring your rules if you want to join.
If your opponent does bring the rules, you should be able to ask them to read them

Sarcron wrote:

Okay but I'm fairly sure that if your opponent turns up without the rules for their models, they shouldn't be playing? At my LGS and tournaments you have to bring your rules if you want to join.
If your opponent does bring the rules, you should be able to ask them to read them

In a lot of friendly and semi-friendly games, it's common to not bring rules. Then, there is that a**hole that abuse of it and cheat.

fisheyes wrote:

My MAIN issue with FW is that the rules are not easily accessable to all. Its my own fault if I dont know what is in the Space Marine codex. When a guy shows up with half his points in "Lazer Destroyer" tanks and "Quad Mortar" something, then proceeds to tell you what it does as he destroys your army, just feels bad.

It also makes it easy for "less scrupulous" players to abuse the rules and/or just make things up. Not like you can call them on it, since you dont have the rules yourself. (TBF this was more prevalent in previous editions before the internet 40k coverage got as good as it is today)

This is the same for ALL RULES AND ALL UNITS though.

If I don't know what a certain unit does in Admech its up to me to ask and up to my opponent to show me the rules.

Its not every players duty to learns every units rule in the game. This is why we bring our rules to games and print lists with all the units so we can have our opponent know.

dumpeal wrote:

Sarcron wrote:

Okay but I'm fairly sure that if your opponent turns up without the rules for their models, they shouldn't be playing? At my LGS and tournaments you have to bring your rules if you want to join.
If your opponent does bring the rules, you should be able to ask them to read them

In a lot of friendly and semi-friendly games, it's common to not bring rules. Then, there is that a**hole that abuse of it and cheat.

But that is the same for a Marines books or a FW book, anyone can not bring rules and just lie. I'm not going to buy and read up on all 20+ factions books in the game. Its up  to my opponent to bring his rules regardless of the unit/army/book.

Guys....everyone use Battlescribe (:..

Cerve wrote:

Guys....everyone use Battlescribe (:..

This is the way

Yes, in todays world we all just use Battlescribe. But believe it or not, there was a time before "smartphones" and "Battlescribe", when you just met up with random people at your LGS and tried to have a fun time.

Sometimes you would have a great experience against a really cool dude with an amazing painted army who explained its mechanics if you asked. Other times you would go up against a dude with a beautifully painted army, who would then proceed to ask you if it was OK to play their ____ unit. Once the game got underway the dude turned into a Mon-Keigh and proceed to tell you up is down and black is white.

Sometimes you would get paired with a rodent in Mon-Keigh flesh who would lie thru their teeth about everything and would force you to leave in disgust.

Now we have Battlescribe, and all sorts of podcasts/youtube people who are giving constant info on what is out there. For some reason, the amount of Mon-Keighs out there has seemed to lessen. For this I am eternally grateful to the Dark Muses

[EDIT]
Back on topic, I am glad that the Reaper has not been locked to <Kabal> as many of us had feared. Has anyone tried out the model with the new damage profile?