BR27: The Black Buzzards VS Blood Angels Mech - 1500pts

Another battle report, this time against Vasara (who will playing Dark Eldar for Finland in this years European Team Championship). In this game he was using his Blood Angels.

The Armies:

Black Buzzards (DE)

HQ
Succubus, venom blade, haywire

ELITE
4 Grotesques, aberration, venom blade
Raider

TROOPS
10 Warriors, cannon
Raider
10 Warriors, cannon
Raider
10 Warriors, cannon
Raider

FAST ATTACK
9 Reavers, 3 blasters, arena champion, venom blade
9 Reavers, 3 blasters, arena champion, venom blade

HEAVY SUPPORT
Ravager
Ravager

Blood Angels (BA)

HQ
Mephiston

ELITE
Sanguinary priest

TROOPS
10 Assault marines, 2 flamers, jump packs, sgt with lighting claw
5 Assault marines flamer, sgt with melta bomb
Lasplas razor
5 Assault marines flamer, sgt with melta bomb
Lasplas razor

FAST ATTACK
Baal Predator, twinlinked assault Cannon , heavy bolter sponssons
Baal Predator, twinlinked assault Cannon , heavy bolter sponssons

HEAVY SUPPORT
Predator, auto cannon, las cannon sponssons
Storm Raven, hurricane bolters, multi melta, assault cannon

Mission: Crusade (3 objectives)
Deployment: Dawn of War
Night Fight on first turn: Yes
First Turn: BA
Warlord Trait DE: Divide and Conquer (-1 to reserve)
Warlord Trait BA: Tenacity (warlord and his unit has FNP within 3" of objectives)
Combat Drugs: Grav Lotus (+1 S)

Objectives
The blood angels got to deploy two objectives out of three deploying the first in the midfield in open ground, this would make it hard for me to capture as my troops wouldn't be able to stay on it for long without cover. It also looked like a good point to project board control from with his army. I deployed mine in my forest. Vasara deployed the final objective in his forest.

Deployment:

The blood angels castled in a corner with as much stuff out of sight as possible and the two baals in a position to move forward and apply pressure. One razorback had an assault squad and a priest in it the other was empty. The storm raven in reserve was transporting the other small squad of assault marines. I deployed all my warriors in the central forest, and hid my raiders behind the forest and out of range. With one ravager deployed behind the fuel tank on the left.

Scout Move:

The baal predators scouted forward.

Turn 1 (BA):

The transports moved forward, one moving flat out the other popping smoke. Mephiston stayed out of sight behind the razorback and the assault troops shuffled. The left baal predator fired into the top ravager and glanced it. The right baal predator tried to get a shot on the ravager but the angle would mean a 2+ cover save (when combined with stealth from night fight) so instead fired into the warriors on the objective who went to ground and took no casualties. No first blood.

Turn 1 (DE):

The ravager on the left flanked the Baal and got a shot on side armour, scoring one penetrating hit destroying a heavy bolter. The other ravager and all the raiders (7 lances) fired into the other Baal and managed two glances (thankfully neither glance was saved, seriously, 10 lances and I managed one pen and two glances before saves?!). No first blood.

Turn 2 (BA):

The storm raven didn't come on. The Baal and the razorback on the left fired into the ravager on the left destroying it. The other razorback and the auto/las predator fired into the other ravager removing two hull points. Mephiston move up behind the razorback on the right. The assault troops shuffled and the baal predator on the right stunned the raider carrying the succubus and the grotesques.

Turn 2 (DE):

The reavers didn't come on. The ravager managed to wreck the baal predator. The three raiders failed to do any damage to either the other baal predator or the razorback behind the forest.

Turn 3 (BA):

The combined fire of the baal predator, the two razorbacks and the auto/las predator finally managed to down the ravager (go jink saves!), one of the razorbacks lost a hull point to gets hot!. Mephiston continued to move up behind the razorback. The large assault marine squad hugged the board edge in anticipation of the reavers and the storm rave came on and used PotMS(power of the machine spirit) to destroyed the grotesque raider with it's multimelta (inflicting two wounds on the grots) and shacking the raider near the warriors.

Turn 3 (DE):

The reavers came on, one of the squads took out the last baal predator and the other squad fired into the razorback behind the forest but failed to damage it, they then jumped back behind the oil tank with their eldar jetbike move. Two of the raiders fired into the same razorback to no effect. The shaken raider moved up to block mephiston and the razorbacks.

Turn 4 (BA):

The storm raven rotated 90 degrees and fired everything into the reavers killing six of them, the survivors held. the two razorbacks and the auto/las predator destroyed another raider. Mephiston continued to advance behind his razorback and the assault troops moved up.

Turn 4 (DE):

The two raiders fire into the razorback inflicting a single glance. The large reaver squad turbo boosted to the bottom left corner making sure to stay out of the flamer threat bubble from the assault marines, and the charge threat bubble of mephiston. The small reaver squad turbo boosted to the right of the central ruin. The grotesques and succubus managed to charge the razroback that the raiders failed to destroy making it explode.

Turn 5 (BA):

The storm raven went into hover mode and fired into the warriors at the back, who went to ground, killing two. It used PotMS to fire its assault cannons into the one reaver on the right that it could see killing it. The razorback fired its las cannon at the warriors but missed. The assault marines disembarked from it and fired at the grots but failed to hurt any. The jump pack assault marines secured the objective and got two bolt pistols into range, which managed to kill the last reaver on the right. The predator reversed back and fired into the reavers on the left killing two. The marines inside the raven disembarked, fired into the grots wounding two and charged. Mephiston also charged the grots. In assault Mephiston challenged and the aberration that accepted was cut down. The grots and the succubus killed four of the marines winning combat by 1. The marines and mephiston held.

Turn 5 (DE):

One warrior squad moved forward to get into rapid fire range of the marines on the objective (with the priest), killing three of them. The second warrior squad finished them off leaving nothing for the third squad to shoot. The raiders fired into the storm raven scoring two penetrating hits, but both were jinked! The reavers bladevaned the assault marines ensuring that the two closes models were the two flamers, sniping them both and killing another marine. They also contested the objective and scored line breaker. In assault the marine sgt. challenged. The succubus accepted and cut him down, while mephiston slaughtered all the grots (S10 weapon thanks to psychic power). The succubus fell back and managed to get away thanks to I8!

At the end of turn 5 the score was DE VPs: 4 (1 objectives, line breaker) BA VPs: 1(first blood). However the game didn't end!

Turn 6 (BA):

The storm raven reversed and fired into the warriors in the open killing five of them. It used PotMS to fire it's assault cannon into the reavers, killing two. The razorback fired into the warriors on the objective, who went to ground and didn't take any casualties. The predator fired into the reavers, killing one. The assault marines fired at the reaver but didn't kill any they then assaulted, three of the four reavers died to hammer of wrath (at I10) and the champion died in a challenge. The assault marines consolidated 5" and managed to get back onto their objective (as the charge had pulled them off it). Mephiston fired his plasma pistol at the warrior, who went to ground, and survived unscathed. He then charged, the 24 poison over watch managed to inflict 3 wounds (average is 2), however mephiston rolled a triple 1! failing all his saves! Leaving him on two wounds. He made the charge and slaughtered five warriors who then broke and were cut down. He consolidated 3" to contest the objective.

Turn 6 (DE):

The succubus rallied and snapshot her haywire grenade at razorback removing its last hull point and wrecking it. The two warrior squads fired at mephiston killing him. The raiders turned so they could shoot mephiston or the storm raven, and ended up shooting the storm raven, but missing both shots.

At the end of turn 6 the score was DE VPs: 4 (1 objectives, slay the warlor) BA VPs: 4(1 objective, first blood). However the game still didn't end!

Turn 7 (BA):

The storm raven didn't move and fired into the succubus, however couldn't draw line of sight with it's left hurricane bolter or his assault cannon! The succubus went to ground and survived. The raven used PotMS to fire his assault cannon into the warriors who went to ground and took a casualty.

Turn 7 (DE):

The raiders fired into the storm raven making it explode spectacularly.

A Draw!

DE VPs: 4 (1 objectives, slay the warlor) BA VPs: 4(1 objective, first blood).

Overview

That has to be one of the best games I have played this edition! A big thanks to Vasara, a pleasure to play and a fantastic player who taught me a lot this game.

Now onto post game analysis.

Blood angels mechanised armies are actually quite intimidating. They can put a tone of early pressure on with baal predators. The army is surprisingly fast meaning it will get most of its firepower where it wants when it wants. Mephiston is a great area denial piece with his 24" threat bubble and his ability to stay safe and out of sight behind a razorback/rhino/predator. He completely shut down my grotesque unit (force weapon/ability to make himself S10) meaning I didn't really know what to do with them. He also made me play very conservatively with my reavers. The Storm raven with bloodstrike missiles and twinlink multimelta is an absolute air superiority beast, and can really put out a lot of firepower with its hurricane bolters and assault cannon.

Now I won the roll off and decided to go second, for two reasons, it was nightfight, and I wanted to reserve my reavers (to keep them same from decent of angel flamers). I also find when I playing a new opponent with an army list I'm not very familiar with going second allows me to see how they are going to play. Keeping the reavers in reserve also means I don't commit them until I have worked out my opponents battle plan (though that wasn't quite the case this game).

The next part is going to mainly focus on mistakes made on the Dark Eldar side. When you have such a close game I find you notice a lot more mistakes than you otherwise would.

My deployment was ok, not great, but not terrible, either way I'm not going to go over that (as it would be an article in itself, that I'm not confident or experienced enough to write). The only point that I would like to highlight is I honestly didn't expect the baal to get a bead on my leftmost ravager behind the oil tank. So when you pre-measure remember to do it properly!

I survived the first round of blood angel shooting without giving up first blood. However I made a terrible mistake and that was assuming that my ravager would be capable of taking out that baal on the left. I over estimated my lances and was punished for it. My positioning was also terrible trapping myself between his army and the board edge. The picture below shows what would have been a far more sound manoeuvre.

The ravager on the left sacrifices shooting AV11 side armour for survivability (as once the predator is destroyed noting in the blood angel army can shoot it. The ravager on the right protects itself from the auto/las predator outside the picture (it would have to drive round the left of the central objective to get a shot (funnelling into the dark eldar fire lanes). This position allows it to target both baal predators. The raiders swing round so that they too can target either baal predator and also force the existing BA vehicles to manoeuvre round the central objective. Three of the raiders do have to take a dangerous terrain test as a result, however even if some do fail and get immobilised the forest rules will still grant them a 5+ cover save from the left side. Maneuvering like this would have practically guaranteed first blood to the dark eldar.

Turn 3 when the reavers came on, I made a big mistake and that was shooting the predator and the razorback, they only managed to take out the predator, and as a result it left them with a 4+ cover save in the flight path of the storm raven. Not a good trade, considering my ravagers were already dead so the baal didn't have much it could shoot effectively (as the warriors could go to ground). The move illustrated bellow may have been smarter.

This would have given them a 3+ cover save and although the raven could still go after them it would have dragged it away from the rest of my army, and force it to enter hover mode next turn or fly off the board. This would have presented a tougher choice to Vasara. It also would have allowed them to threaten the predator and assault marines next turn. The marines relied on mephiston for protection, and he could only protect them if he stayed back, meaning he would not be able to threaten my warriors/grots, again presenting another tough choice for Vasara.

This next paragraph doesn't cover a mistake but instead illustrates the hidden power of reavers. They were able to contest the objective and get line breaker meaning I would have won had the game ended on turn 5. But not only that, they were able to snipe both flamers making the assault marines less of a threat. The picture bellow shows how I positioned the reavers so that the two special weapon marines were the closest models to the reavers and therefore would be the first two to be removed (you use the final position of the reavers to determine wound allocation when bladevaning).


Turn 6 I made a mistake with the my Succubus that should have lost me the game. All I needed to do after she rallied was use her 3" rally move to move to the edge of her crater. I could have then strung a single warrior in the open and she would have joined their unit. This would not have prevented the warriors from rapid firing mephiston (it would have stopped her throwing her haywire grenade, but the two raiders could have taken care of that razorback instead). This move would have meant she would have had a 3+ cover save from going to ground (Same as the warriors), but would also have been able to look out sir, giving her an extra layer of protection against the storm raven's shooting on turn 7. As show in the picture below.


On Turn 7 I shot the raven, the smarter move as Vasara pointed out to me would have been to shoot the assault troops, two casualties would have caused a moral test, which though remote could have won the game by making them fall off the objective.

Wow the overview section is almost as long as the report itself! Sorry for the wall of text but I thought going over my mistakes might be helpful to others.

Another big thanks to Vasara for a great game!

Hope you enjoyed the report.

Yea the one thing I also forgot about Baal predator is that it is a fast scout vehicle ( so 12in of movement prior to turn 1 and then another 12in with the ability to fire two weapons at full bs) cost me the game lol

As a BA player, It's realy refreshing, to see BA list that don't suck, and actualy sticks together, and makes me feel, like I realy would like to play it. I also realy liked the pattern of his infantry movement.

As always fun matchup. Thanks for working out the whole batrep, and hope to see another soon

great batrep as always. I look forward to more! I have some games coming up, I may try to use that program to make a batrep.

Thanks for all the nice comments guys!

ravenizer wrote:

As a BA player, It's realy refreshing, to see BA list that don't suck, and actualy sticks together, and makes me feel, like I realy would like to play it. :)I also realy liked the pattern of his infantry movement.

To be honest it's nice to play an opponent who has a thorough understanding of how DE work. I find our army is somewhat uncommon and a lot of players underestimate us or don't know how to deal with us. It's the little things like on turn 3 Vasara made sure his assault troops hugged the board edge before the reavers came on as mephiston was no longer in range to protect them.

Excelent report again mush. It shows my flaws clearly. I should have let Mephiston charge on his own to the grots and succubus and camp marines from arven to the objective. That way Mush Would have had difficulty to remove both squads from central objective with shooting alone.

One smaller mistake was juumper placement on the objective. Should have protected better my flamers. Good that the sarge survived. It didn't affect the outcome of the game though. At least in a negative way for me.

Third major mistake was not concentrading Ravens Firenze to succubus on T7 when Mush accidentally offered win for me by leaving her alone in front of my Raven. 4 twinlinked S6 shortseissa Would have been murder to her even in 3+ cover.

Anyway a great game and well done introduction from Mushkilla to the Vassal for me. Next time I guarantee to do better with my BA against fragile faeries ;-)

Vasara wrote:

Excelent report again mush. It shows my flaws clearly. I should have let Mephiston charge on his own to the grots and succubus and camp marines from arven to the objective. That way Mush Would have had difficulty to remove both squads from central objective with shooting alone.

One smaller mistake was juumper placement on the objective. Should have protected better my flamers. Good that the sarge survived. It didn't affect the outcome of the game though. At least in a negative way for me.

Third major mistake was not concentrading Ravens Firenze to succubus on T7 when Mush accidentally offered win for me by leaving her alone in front of my Raven. 4 twinlinked S6 shortseissa Would have been murder to her even in 3+ cover.

Anyway a great game and well done introduction from Mushkilla to the Vassal for me. Next time I guarantee to do better with my BA against fragile faeries ;-)

Vasara, will you be sharing your ETC list? Still waiting for all the lists to be released by ETC.

Great report, Mush - and interesting analysis following it.

Your point about your turn 1 shooting phase was to be in a better position with your lance fire so you more stuff could target the Baal on the left and make sure it gets dead? Yep, good point.

Interesting point about the reavers. I'd have probably been tempted to go after stuff straight away (as you did), since they arrived a little late and I would have been keen to get them into the action, as well as getting rid of that pesky baal pred.

When you bladevaned the assault squad, would shooting then assaulting them have been the better option (if you could reach)? They would have been protected against counter-attacks. Maybe i'm underestimating the abilities of BA assaulters?!

Overall, your big hitters needed to get at infantry units and there just weren't many you could get at. Mech lists are usually tougher for DE to deal with, and this shows why.

And certain flyers are still OP at the moment too; that 'Raven just did pretty much whatever it wanted!

Squierboy wrote:

When you bladevaned the assault squad, would shooting then assaulting them have been the better option (if you could reach)?

They were well out of reach, 24+" away if you look at BA turn 5 (bellow).

The game was going badly for me, and I didn't see me winning if it carried on past turn 5. The important part about the bladevane was not that it killed the flamers, that was just a nice bonus. What mattered was that it denied his objective and got me line breaker meaning had the game ended on turn 5 (33% chance) I would have won. The only reason the game ended up a draw (aside from mistakes on both sides) was that ridiculous overwatch against mephiston. So at the time that move was my last realistic chance of winning.

Squierboy wrote:

Overall, your big hitters needed to get at infantry units and there just weren't many you could get at. Mech lists are usually tougher for DE to deal with, and this shows why.

Mech is a real pain, but its so much worse when you add an area denial piece like mephiston. Maybe I should have run the reavers on the board and used jump shoot jump and the central LoS blocking terrain piece to threatening mephiston behind his razorback. Its hard to say.

I'm actually reconsidering heatlances for the reavers. Having a 250+ point unit waste a turn that it could be using to reposition, assault or bladevane, for a 46% chance to stun an AV12 tank or worse with blasters and reduce their cover save to a 4+ seems like a bad move. Not to mention people don't tend to be scared of blasters.

Heatlances on the other hand cause fear (75% chance to stun an AV12 tank or worse), I don't even have to shoot them. If a tank is 21" or less away its going one direction and that's away from those reavers. That sort of control is a great thing to have, especially if you were never going to go after that tank in the first place.

I find my reavers tend to be in the thick of things and that I rarely use my reavers as AT, but when I do want to use them as AT I need them to be reliable.

On the other hand blasters causes instant death on T4, ignores FNP on T4 and wound T5-6 on 2s.

So it's a tough one. Though switching the blasters for heatlances would free up enough points for me to replace that succubus with and archon (shadow field/venom blade).

Decisions decisions...

Big fan of the tactical notes at the end of the rep. Awesome, well done!

Vasara wrote:

One smaller mistake was juumper placement on the objective. Should have protected better my flamers. Good that the sarge survived. It didn't affect the outcome of the game though. At least in a negative way for me.

In hindsight, I should have made sure the sargent was the third closest model, that way if I killed him (assuming he failed his LOS!) the jumpers would have taken their leadership test at LD8 (not huge but would increase their chances of running off the board).

Vasara wrote:

Third major mistake was not concentrading Ravens Firenze to succubus on T7 when Mush accidentally offered win for me by leaving her alone in front of my Raven. 4 twinlinked S6 shortseissa Would have been murder to her even in 3+ cover.

She would have been toast.

Skari wrote:

Big fan of the tactical notes at the end of the rep. Awesome, well done!

Thanks Skari, it was partly inspired by the tactical corner segment in your reports. Normally I just do a small overview but this game was so close I found myself noticing loads of mistakes. I'm sure I would be a much better player if every game was as close as this one!

I'm a huge fan of tactical notes. I just reread your whole post again to see if could glean more insights on the use of reavers. Also ... were you happy overall with the succubus or do you think an archon would have been better.

egorey wrote:

Also ... were you happy overall with the succubus or do you think an archon would have been better.

The succubus is too much of a liability as your warlord, I only took her because I didn't have the points for a venom blade archon (Even if I downgraded the aberration it left me at 1501pts ). It's another reason I'm thinking of switching to heatlances so I can run an archon.

Really great report mush. As a pretty new player to dark eldar ( got two marine armies so de are very different to use) I find your reports to be very helpful as a guide on tactics with certain units. Great write up on the after battle review. Even loss/Draws can be turned to your advantage if you understand where you went wrong and learn for next game. Really enjoyable read and the vassal pics help alot to illustrate your game and break up the text. Cheers

Great report again, I wish I would have gotten to watch that match!

For a moment I thought you were going to stay at your starting positions, Mush! You were very static at first.

Also I think you called your raiders as ravagers a few times there.

spellcheck2001 wrote:

Really great report mush. As a pretty new player to dark eldar ( got two marine armies so de are very different to use) I find your reports to be very helpful as a guide on tactics with certain units...

Thanks for the positive feedback. Good to hear you are finding them useful. Sadly my list doesn't have the largest unit diversity (no venoms, wyches, incubi, beasts, baron or flyers). The reavers also make it play somewhat differently to a more "traditional" Dark Eldar army. But for me they are one of the most fun units to use in all of 40k.

Mngwa wrote:

Also I think you called your raiders as ravagers a few times there.

Thanks for pointing that out, went over the report and edited the all the ravager raider mix ups (at least I think I got all of them).

Mushkilla wrote:

I'm actually reconsidering heatlances for the reavers.

I still use them, but I only have one reaver unit & I need the reliability of the melta AT when I do go after a tank.

Mushkilla wrote:

I find my reavers tend to be in the thick of things and that I rarely use my reavers as AT, but when I do want to use them as AT I need them to be reliable.

Yes, this is the thing; they are best going after infantry, but once they've bladevaned, are usually in a great position to shoot up some tanks if needed. Heatlances really cause your opponent to react to the threat that they cause.

Mushkilla wrote:

On the other hand blasters causes instant death on T4, ignores FNP on T4 and wound T5-6 on 2s.

Ahem, I'll just gloss over those drawbacks! Anyway, I have other units that can deal with those kind of threats. Just out of interest, how many times have your blasters caused intant death? Or really contributed much to high toughness threats that your poison can't deal with? Vs tyranids, perhaps but what else?

Should be interesting to see how a change to a core unit like this alters the dynamic of your games! Oh, and I do agree that an archon would be better for you, if only to get a shadow field & make your HQ tougher to kill.

The risk of heat lances is a myth ...

The real risk of using either blasters or heat lances is actually not turbo-boosting the squad.

read my thread - last post - I spell it all out, lol. And the fact it gets you the points for an Archon - big bonus. Might have won you your game.

Squierboy wrote:

Yes, this is the thing; they are best going after infantry, but once they've bladevaned, are usually in a great position to shoot up some tanks if needed. Heatlances really cause your opponent to react to the threat that they cause.

Yeah that's the big appeal for me.

Squierboy wrote:

Just out of interest, how many times have your blasters caused intant death? Or really contributed much to high toughness threats that your poison can't deal with? Vs tyranids, perhaps but what else?

Tyranids, Tau battle suits, ravenwing bikes (wounding on 2s rather than 3s) spring to mind.

Squierboy wrote:

Should be interesting to see how a change to a core unit like this alters the dynamic of your games!

Yes it will be interesting, I always knew at some point I would be tempted by heatlances again, but whether I will end up sticking with them is another mater.

egorey wrote:

The risk of heat lances is a myth ...

I wouldn't go that far, I think going out of your way to use heatlances is risky (as you are more likely to end up in assault range, or rapid fire range), however using them opportunistically when you are already near a tank after bladevaning another target is not.

egorey wrote:

[b]The real risk of using either blasters or heat lances is actually not turbo-boosting the squad. [/b

I agree, like I said a few posts earlier reducing your cover save from a 3+ to a 4+ is a big deal. Especially if you don't plan on assaulting.

egorey wrote:

And the fact it gets you the points for an Archon - big bonus. Might have won you your game.

I don't think the archon (unless he had a huskblade) would have changed much this game. The heatlances also wouldn't have made a difference, as had I positioned my army better turn 1, I would have not tried to shoot any vehicles with the reavers turn 3 anyway.

It's not this game that is making me reconsider heatlances moreso looking over my last 11 reports (BR17-27), I have noticed I rarely used my reavers to take out tanks, and when I did I was within 9".

I use heat lances on my reavers and AT scourge squad...i think its the melta that gets me as a first army space marine player haha. Reavers allow for nice positioning on tanks and even at str6 when you roll 2 dice its pretty easy to get over 10 and 12 for the bigger stuffs.  My 2 cents.

ligolski wrote:

I use heat lances on my reavers and AT scourge squad...i think its the melta that gets me as a first army space marine player haha. Reavers allow for nice positioning on tanks and even at str6 when you roll 2 dice its pretty easy to get over 10 and 12 for the bigger stuffs.  My 2 cents.

The bad thing about these melta is that you need to get close. And if the target explodes you could easily die to the explosion.

Love your batreps mush, good reading and good learning.

This is true but consider this:

Most imperial armies with just regular meltas have to get within 6" we only have to get to 9" well out of explosion range. We do loose 2 strength but hey we also have the lance rule so I'd say this is a nice tradeoff especially against heavier armor. Melta is considered excellent for imperial armies so I'd say why can't ours be great as well. I feel that it is worth it. It's also AP1 which is awesome. On reavers it should be cake to get to 9" and then eldar jetbike rule away from stuff in the assault phase.

Wow, great fight! I really enjoyed the read.

ligolski wrote:

Most imperial armies with just regular meltas have to get within 6"  we only have to get to 9" well out of explosion range.  We do loose 2 strength but hey we also have the lance rule so I'd say this is a nice tradeoff especially against heavier armor.  Melta is considered excellent for imperial armies so I'd say why can't ours be great as well.  I feel that it is worth it.  It's also AP1 which is awesome. On reavers it should be cake to get to 9" and then eldar jetbike rule away from stuff in the assault phase.

My issue is that you never get the 9"+2d6 unless you want to leave your heatlances at the front of the unit. In reality you get 7-8" as you are going to want to leave some reavers in front of the heatlances, ideally you want the heatlances at the back of the unit. Sure you move them to the front in your movement phase and then to the back in the assault phase, but that still leaves your unit closer to the enemy unit than 9"+2d6.

Still I'm going to give them another try. Not sure how effective they will be against armies with lots of flamers. But we will see.

Blind_Baku wrote:

Wow, great fight! I really enjoyed the read.

Thanks Baku, good to see your back in Commorragh.

Cracking read as always mush, i love your reports.
However, just a quick point with regards to the reavers and linebreaker during turn 5:
Correct me if im wrong, but doesnt linebreaker state a contesting unit must be entirely in your opponents deployment zone? It didnt look as though the reavers were.