|
IMPERIAL TITANS: "LUCIUS PATTERN" FIRE SUPPORT REAVER
It would appear that the
humble Fire Support variant of the Reaver has been much maligned
of late, aspersions cast on its viability as worthy unit for an
Imperial force when compared to other units. As I add such a
variant to my own Imperial forces, I look at a few reasons why
such judgements may be a little hasty.
One of the most often
asked questions about the fire support Reaver is “why take one”?
On the face of it, the 6BP that the three missile launchers
deliver would appear to be a poor investment based on the
Reaver’s points cost compared to say an Imperial Guard Artillery
Company. In many respects I wouldn’t disagree, however there are
a few things about the Reaver that are worth taking into
consideration. Firstly as a massive War Engine the Reaver cannot
be suppressed until it has accumulated more Blast Markers than
its starting damage capacity. This makes the Reaver a lot
tougher than your average row of Basilisks which will turn on
turn very quickly lose their power advantage. The second
consideration is the fact that the Reaver missile launchers do
not lose a turn reloading in comparison to a Manticore. They
will lay down 6BP each and every turn until broken or destroyed.
Taking into account both of these factors can actually make the
Fire Support Reaver a dangerously underestimated unit to an
unwary opponent and certainly worth considering for important
‘suppression’ missions. As a final consideration being a Legio
Titan the Reaver has an initiative of 1+ compared to the
Imperial Guard Artillery’s initiative of 2+. This may not seem a
big deal but when the chips are down I would rather know that my
Reaver will deliver the goods turn after turn even in the face
of heavy enemy fire, something even the most staunch Imperial
Artillery Battery cannot guarantee once the shells start
falling. My final point in defence of the poor Reaver is I have
seen numerous Artillery Companies wiped out by being quickly
over-run by a fast moving enemy assault force, however I have
yet to see a Titan troubled by such events. Unlike the fragile
artillery batteries which need protecting against enemy
engagement actions, the Reaver is more than capable of defending
itself against all but the most ferocious assault, simply
‘walking out of combat’ stamping the enemy into tiny pancakes as
it moves on to maul yet another formation.
In summary, an Imperial Guard Artillery Company will probably
deliver the goods on turn one, but five turns later I’d bet a
bottle of Sakra that the Reavers missile barrage will still be
dealing out punishment long after the Imperial Artillery has
fallen silent. So does this mean the Reaver is in fact better
than the Artillery Company after all? In truth no, just
different. Both formations have their strengths and weaknesses,
however I do think only a foolish commander would discard the
Fire Support Reaver just on the strength of barrage points alone
without considering its true battlefield worth.
Until then, happy
gaming.
|
