40K: LVO Shows No One Knows How To Deal With Ynnari

Ynnari are the kings of the meta, and no one knows how to stop them.

If the Las Vegas Open showed us one thing, it’s that the Ynnari, supported by Dark Reapers, are at the top of the North American meta. Not only did Ynnari containing lists make up a significant portion of the top players but the top table on the last round came down to a virtual mirror match between Ynnari lists. Despite plenty of warning, no one could top this list.

The List

The winning list (you can read more about how it works here) is a blend of Ynnari and Alaitoc units, and focuses on using Dark Reapers and Shining Spears for maximum effect. This list, played with a lot of skill by Nick Nanavati took the top prize at the LVO this year. It was not a surprise. Similar lists have been cleaning up across the country, and a number of similar lists also did well at the LVO. No one could stop this list and it seems the only real challenge the list faced was in a mirror match vs a similar list. This is the list too beat.

It’s Not a Surprise

This list doing well was not a surprise. Back in early December, two months before LVO, we wrote about the core combo that makes this list work. Between then and LVO we talked about various aspects of this list. We even streamed local events in both December and January that were won by lists similar to Nicks. All that is to say that this list, and its power, was well known going into the LVO. In fact talking to players before LVO most assumed it was the list that was going to win. Everyone knew it was going to happen, and then, almost inevitably – it won.

No One Has Come Up With A Way To Beat The List

LVO saw many of the best players in North America playing their hearts out. Not all of them ran Ynnari/Alitoc list. All of them knew that this type of list was going to be heavily featured. Yet the fact is, as the results show, even with months to prepare no one came up with a real counter to this type of list. If the best players couldn’t figure out a counter, that’s a problem.

But Abe, I Totally Beat This List

It’s at about this point that I am sure people will start shouting about how they totally beat this list. Or their friend did. Look, anecdotal evidence is great, and this list is by no means unbeatable. No list is, but the fact remains at a tournament level means it has no real weakness or counter. Yes it takes a good player to get the best out of it. Yes Nick, who won LVO, is a top player. A bad player can certainly lose with this list, but at that point the weakness is the player not the list . If there are good counters to this list they have yet to be effectively used in a major tournament. When it came down to it, no one could beat this list.

What The Point?

While this list is not unbeatable its one of the most broken lists I’ve seen since the good old days of the Leafblower. Confronted by this list the best players either choose to run it themselves or were crushed by it. Not one, but two of this same list advanced to the finals of one of the biggest events in North America. Nor is this an isolated incident as this type of list has been cleaning up at smaller events across the country for the past several months. It’s a list that seemingly does not have a real counter. As such its a big issue for the game. It’s never healthy for a meta when one particular type of list becomes too dominate. While we’ve seen other powerful lists in 8th, but none have been so specific, or dominated so much for so long.


GW will most like address some of what makes this list tick in the March FAQ. It’s also possible that one of the new books will provide a counter for the list. I however find that unlikely. This list is a pretty psychic heavy and the next three lists are known for being weak vs pyskers. Moreover the new Dark Elder Codex is likely to simply provide this type of list with more toys and options. What I would like to see is the community from the top players down to the newbies really take the list seriously and figure out solid counters. So lets put our thinking hats on and get to work.

How would you deal with this type of list? Let us know down in the comments!


  • Oskar Drabikowski

    You chit-chat how strong this army list is but can you be more specific? How it works?

    • NagaBaboon

      I don’t know if the author edited his post because of your comment or if you just missed it but there is a link to an article which explains how it works embeded in this article.

    • ellobouk

      Generally speaking, uses Ynnari and Eldar nonsense to maximise the damage output of the reapers to blast all the things off the table, and the hyper abuseable loopholes that subfaction specific strategems don’t need a full detachment to unlock, and Ynnari units retain their and keywords…

      Generally speaking, expect all of this to change in March, and a whole lot of tabletop ready dark reapers to be on ebay shortly after

  • Jack

    There is an easy way to stop them. 1: Beat the other play with a blunt weapon so they are unable to play. 2: Use same Blunt Weapon to destroy their models

    • Zingbaby

      This guy… he gets it.

    • Drpx

      It’s called a nerf bat.

      • Jeremy Larson

        Regular bat works better.

        • Reven

          Personally I find the crackle of fire both removes models while adding neat scorch marks to terrain.

  • Jasko

    Friends at BolS, I know your favorite word is “meta”, but I’ve reached a point where I need some help. It’s either a language barrier thing, or I’m just not as big a geek as I thought. What is the meaning of the word “meta” in the sentence “[…] are at the top of the North American meta”? Did you mean “tournament scene”?

    • barry sadler

      (of a creative work) referring to itself or to the conventions of its genre; self-referential.
      “the enterprise is inherently ‘meta’, since it doesn’t review movies, for example, it reviews the reviewers who review movies”

      • Jasko

        Thanks for the help!
        Mhmmm, still not entirely convinced though 🙂 I understand the utilization like in the example with the enterprise, it’s similar to metacritic (or metacrawler), but I fail to see the connection to the “North American meta”. Ah well, who cares, I know what the author meant, all good.

        • barry sadler

          I think that ‘status quo’ or “praxis” are more appropriate terms but buzz words have power I guess

          • Muninwing

            as a shortened version of “metagame” it’s used correctly.

            the game within the game. in other words, the listbuilding that some people rely upon to win their games on the tabletop for them.

        • James Regan

          meta is what is used because of the self referential- because tough army lists like this, when they say they ‘lack hard counters’ what is meant is that they aren’t counterable by other competitive lists, as the meta has to counteract itself.

          A good example might be that, given buying trends towards the new shiny, the tournament scene contains a lot of casual players, bad players, or fluff bunnies, turning up to tournaments with a lot of primaris, even though they don’t seem to have been featured as a top tier tournament army, and some regard them as second tier units even within their own codices. Still, the rule the tournament scene, the meta is that you’d need to be able to win against the guys bringing their new shiny stuff as well as top teir tournament armies, so a list that struggled with multi-wound 3+ save guys is going to struggle, even if it has several massive advantages against non-space marine armies.
          Hence, the tournament scene is self referencing, and will, occasionally, when theory crafters have been making miss-steps, get completely taken by surprise by someone who suddenly realised their painstakingly themed and converted grot rebellion army got them onto the top tables, as the self referencing nature of the meta is that lists are built only to counter things that are also common within that meta (like the primaris example above)

      • NagaBaboon

        I’ve never been entirely sure it was used right by everyone but it does make sense when you think of what is decribed as a ‘meta list’. They are beig looked at from the outside instead of the inside, they aren’t lists made in the spirit of the games fluff, they’re lists which are tailored to get the most from the points, you have to ignore what you know of the lore as they don’t make any sense otherwise.

    • Bakvrad

      Meta by how I learned it is something above something else. So lists that are used more frequently then others can fit into such description
      But anyway: words can get different meanings over the time, and „meta“ has been used in this manner for at least 15 years when I still played different kind of tournaments: yugioh, warhammer, Pokemon etc.
      So i guess it won’t leave the scene anymore (as well as fluff :D)

      • Jasko

        Haha, very true, fluff is meta’s cousin 😉

    • J Mad

      Meta: Most Effective Tactic Available

      • Jasko

        Interesting. Never heard that one. And certainly something very different to the greek meta. But it would make a lot of sense! I guess we now need the author to state whether he used it as an acronym.

        • J Mad

          Well, players in comp want to use the BIS “Best in Slot” units (another term that is used instead of Meta).

          Meta will change and shift as well example: if Dark Reapers are the current Meta, other players will learn to counter them and they are no longer be meta due to being counter (They might be BIS, but they are now NOT Meta b.c they are no longer the Most Effective Tactic Available), so it is still correct word usage both ways.

        • Koen Diepen Van

          Meta as most effective tactic available come from game theory. It´s still means sort of the same. It´s about how the factors at a higher lvl determine what happens at a lower lvl.

    • It’s short for “meta-game”. “Meta-” is a prefix generally meaning “at a higher level of abstraction”.
      This often involves a level of recursion or self-reference, so a meta-joke is a joke about how humour works; meta-data is data about lower level data.
      The game is about what you do with your army against the opponents army. The meta-game is things like how you choose your army, based on what armies you expect most opponents to bring.
      (So in this case, yes, it basically means “tournament scene”)

    • Damistar

      All the following suggestions and clever acronyms aside, you are basically correct. Meta is a repurposed word used to describe the shifting unit/list supremacy in the tournament circuit. It is constantly evolving as new codexes, units and FAQs are released and the WAAC crowd gloms onto the new hotness that can grant them victory. And then come the inevitable articles about unbeatable lists and comments about how GW can’t do game balance.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      Think of it in terms of card games. There will always be decks that rise to the top. They are the decks that win the fastest and are the most reliable. Since they are so fast and so reliable, they become popular. Once they reach a critical mass, they start defining tournament scenes.

      The Meta is just a concept of what decks are most popular.

      Once that is known, people start building anti-meta decks, decks that are specifically built to beat the meta (most popular decks).

      In terms of 40k, meta would include the lists, armies, units and weapons that are most popular.

      • Muninwing

        importing ideas from CCGs is one of the worst things that has happened to tabletop wargames…

        the whole mindset spawns the worst min/maxing and the least amount of fun for an opponent. it’s all about the player in a vacuum, trying to be clever, instead of playing a game with another human being.

    • Herne Fichter-Cathcart

      meta in this context is not an actual word it is an acronym M.E.T.A. the acronym stands for Most Effective Tactic Available.

  • Sir Postalot

    Wasn’t Ynnari unfairly nerfed to dust according to the comments a few months ago ?

    • J Mad

      A full Ynnari army was, not a small detachment of 2 insanely good units. (Dark Reapers, Shiny Spears).

      Thats why you don’t see Harlequins in top 50 much anymore b.c they went all Ynnari just to stay viable.

      Ynnari as an Ally is still very strong, but it will get nerf again, but this time in a good way (and how it should have been from the start) Ynnari wont be able to use Stratagems from CWE/Quins/DE (At least we are thinking GW will do that).

      • ZeeLobby

        Yeah. It’s really because when you allow these take anything combos, you almost need varying points costs when you ally things together. Some things by themselves should cost X points, but when it’s easy to throw them in with another unit which triples their effectiveness, they should really cost Y. Nerfing them just means you then never see them outside of that combo. Your stated nerf would help the situation, but still doesn’t prevent armies that have access to soup, and intended weaknesses, from just filling the gaps in their weakness with allies. Sadly the easiest solution would just be to take away allies, or go back to the Allied Detachment, but I don’t see GW doing either.

        • Reven

          I would love to see allies die, limited in an ally detachment, or a return of the 6th Edition Allies table. Though the last one would probably be considered too complicated.

      • LankTank

        Lol”To stay viable”. The difference is Eldar faction players are arrogant neta chasers hence why they play eldar and can only take the same list. However I still see word bearers and imperial fist players despitr the lack of competitive “viability” cause those players still have souls XD

        • J Mad

          And thats why you dont see them in top. This is top tournament talk not your friends basement. And no its not Eldar players, its just people that want to win, the BA player that came in 3rd is an IG player.

          • LankTank

            My Daemon incursion list smokes Dark Eldar Reaper spam, Wide spread IG armies, Bobby G gun platforms etc. But then it could get literally slapped apart by Green Horde and tbh I am wondering about it’s ability against a compact IG gunline (never danced against it). Would this list then lack viability because it is good against alot of current meta lists but then struggles against less commonly seen lists? No.
            And in that same stream of thought their are PLENTY of competitive Eldar lists that don’t rely on the singular use of only Shining Spears, Dark Reapers and Emo-elves cause I have been beaten by an excellent Iyaden player for example. Reaper spams are just good against other notorious meta spam lists (primarchs, hellblasters etc) So to then say that ALL other lists other than small variations of reaper list lack “viability” is showing a lack of creative thought.
            BTW NZ houses don’t have basements.

          • J Mad

            “Bobby G gun platforms” yes b.c we see in the top at tournaments now…..

            IDK why you are even ranting at me, Yes as a Full Harlequins Ynnari only army its not viable anymore, even tho you can soup, you dont have Stratagems, Harlequins can not keep up with the fire power.

            Even without Ynnari, CWE will still be in the top b.c Shiny Spears and Dark Reapers are extremely cheap for what they do and the Powers helps them still (Guide/Doom/Quickening).

  • Boondox

    I guess retyping the list in the body of the text would require too much effort?

    • HeadHunter

      Sorry if you can’t view pictures on your 20th-Century device.
      I’m sure your Blackberry was cool, like, 10 years ago.

      • mac40k

        Hmm, I’m reading this on a brand new LG 43″ LED TV with the browser zoom set to 150% from about 5 ft. away and I still had to squint to read the list in the pic. Or maybe you’re just “that guy.”

  • JFC

    Ahhh another nerf the Reaper article… BoLS seems to have been triggered. #nerfthereaper #allreapersmatter #meandreaperstoo

    • Pl4gu3 B4st4rd

      -Butthurt Reaper-player spotted-

      • ZeeLobby

        “This is uh… the fluffy craftworld I created where uh… everyone follows the path of the reaper!”

        • BaronVonYoloing

          You say that yet if someone did make a Craftwolrd Altansar army (where Maugy-Ra comes from) I’d probably allow it. Maybe even be impressed.

          • ZeeLobby

            Haha. True.

      • JFC

        Lol… It’s like you know me…

    • Sir Postalot

      I don’t like most of these Nerf unit X articles but reapers are just too point efficient. I have never seen them not kill multiple times their point value in a game.

  • Brandon Prouty

    why doesn’t game workshop just start implementing selection limits like other games. . . really good unit? 0-1, troops : unlimited. i mean the answer is staring them in the face

    • James Regan

      they used to have them, but people wanted to be able to theme their armies, and field more of their favourite models- the issue is, most pickup games in stores etc., where players might not know each other so well, end up using matched play limits in order to have ~roughly~ fair games, and so GW tends to notice if there’s suddenly a problem with guys unable to field their coolest models. Hence why they removed the old force org charts and 0-1 limits. Imagine playing a game today where your opponent could field a maximum of 2 HQ’s in the entire army? The list above has 8!

      • I don’t get the problem. They could easily have those restrictions only be for tournaments.

        • James Regan

          the issue is that they tried to do that- 3 ways to play: open (no force restrictions) narrative (not the same force restrictions), and matched. How many games do you see using open play in stores/FLGS’? while there’s been a bit more give to using power level rather than calculating up your points, most people use matched play rules, because they want to play like tournaments.

        • ZeeLobby

          Tournament players are one of the few segments of customers who will possibly buy multiple armies in a year, especially if power creep exists. . Your more likely to stumble into a broken combo (cause let’s be honest, I’m not sure GW even knows how to make something broken), when you allow everything everywhere. The more brroken combos you release, the more likely tournament players chasing the win will jump around to new armies to take advantage.

          I don’t think GW would ever want these kind of restrictions in the tournament scene. That said, it’s something tournament organizers could definitely do. It’s how many comp systems were created in the past for GW systems.

      • benn grimm

        Rubbish. They just wanted to sell more models and realised force org limitations did just that; limit sales, so in the bin they went, along with any pretence of either balance or lore adherence. Just lots of spamming of the ‘coolest models’.

        • James Regan

          yes. that’s true- but why did they limit sales? because people would otherwise have bought more of the models they wanted to buy. It’s not like force org charts went away and everyone started buying multiple copies of the units they didn’t like or want (apart from maybe the very top tier of competitive players, but there simply aren’t that many people on the bleeding edge of WAAC balance)

          • ZeeLobby

            Uh. That’s exactly what happened. Most hobbyists enjoy painting one or two of a model they like. Most fluff lovers like taking Highlander type lists. And yet when those restrictions we’re removed we started seeing 6 units of scatbikes, 5 riptides, etc. A person may have “their thing” but when you make a game where some units are stupidly broken, and you can take multiple of them with no penalty (heck the formations gave bonuses!), The whole game just shifts in that direction. No one likes losing constantly, regardless of their goals. Introduce one player in a group who starts using powerful unrestricted combos, and everyone slowly gravitates.

          • benn grimm

            The direction is clear nowadays, buying multiple copies of big models has been promoted for a while now, in the new release deals, in the rules, in ‘casual’ conversation with gw staffers; ‘ Haha, yeah, you know what would look even cooler than an (already overly expensive) Great Unclean One? 3 Great Unclean Ones! It’s all about the rule of cool dude!’ Whereas before they had lore explaining why no, you can’t have two boss commanders as a force needs just one, now you can have ten! Ain’t that so cool!

            Of course people didn’t start buying things they didn’t like, they just bought more copies of the thing they did like. Like Wraithknights. Or assassins. Or Wolf Lords. The limitations were there previously for a good reason; the guy writing the rules knew more about creating a fun game than the guy in marketing and used to have the authority to make games with the integrity of the rules/lore immersion taking precedence. When that changed, it all changed, leading us to some of the truly horrible builds of this (and last) edition, not just played in tourneys, but popping up regularly in casual play also.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, that’s a perfect description

        • Anggul

          Can’t agree on the lore front. Units are more lore-accurate now than they’ve been in a long long time.

          • benn grimm

            I was referring (probably a bit obliquely) to lists like that Goatboy custodes, 10 Sheild captain monstrosity, multiple assassin lists or armies that have all the special characters in the universe in one place. Not really sure what you mean about units being more lore accurate now?

    • J Mad

      Comp Scores, we need comp scores.

      • Koen Diepen Van

        Doesn´t help as much as you would think. Restricting things or using comps scores just makes something else the best. The problem is is that the game is broken at a fundamental lvl.

        • J Mad

          You’ll never 100% fix anything, but you can help it in many ways. Comp scores will help. Soup is here to stay, instead of saying soup should go (Not saying this is your opinion using it as an example), we should look at how to balance soup.

          Same for detachments and stratagems, IMO stratagems shouldnt be able to be spammed, most armies are taking cheap (but still useful) troops like scouts/kabals for bubble/anti ds, and good HQ’s to gain + CP.

          With soup and how Detachments are, stratagems, etc.. there is literally no downside to just taking BiS oh 3 different armies (this necessarily isnt a bad thing, but is unwanted by many).

          Forcing a Comp score for each detachment will greatly help this.

          What if Battalion force 20% in troops? 3 units of Kabals are now only 5%, well you need 4x that amount.

          What if Battalion only let you have MAX 20% points in Elite/Fast/Heavy? And Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard only raised it to 30%? Now you cant have 2 Battalions and your 1 really good Spearhead for 900pts of Heavy units, you’ll only be able to take 600pts, but are also forced to take 400pts in Troops.

          This is heavily shift how lists are mad and will have over all less Stratagems.

          Some armies could have a rule to ignore it only for that army (like Custodes or DW) due to how their army is built.

      • Muninwing

        we need a secondary balancing metric, aside from points.

        we also need points to actually be representative, and equal. the Eldar and Dark Eldar have some weapons that are effectively equal, but for some reason the points don’t line up.

        for those who try to use the whole “well, internal balance…” argument, with the Eldar being the source of the two beaststick unbalanced units right now, it makes little sense that they’d have the cheaper version.

        even if points were more reliable, we need something that can govern the messiness.

        i honestly think that Command Points are done right for stratagems, but exactly wrong for listbuilding. no unit or list should give you CP, but they should be earned by achieving objectives during the game. running more detachments should not grant you more CP, but instead should COST CP — one for each now detachment, more for the keywords that do not line up. Imperial Soup should penalize you for accessing more disparate elements, not reward you with more CP.

        imagine if a given mission (or the generic ones) had CP costs, listbuilding did too, and maybe certain units that cause issue. every LoW maybe requires one CP to include, or perhaps SCs (both, and Robbie G firebases go the way of the dodo). maybe you can buy a new Detachment with one, or two if it doesn’t match up with all keywords. maybe certain missions make flyers, or characters (maybe just character psykers), or fortifications cost CP…

        then, you could say “i want to play a 2000 point game with 5 CP to start, and you could make choices — do you want all five? do you want to spend them all on goodies? knowing you can earn some more in play, but might start with none, would definitely change how the game unfolds. there might be a rush to grab the objectives that grant CP, or a hurry to complete certain objectives.

        but then the focus is again on play, not on listbuilding. something that the spiralling meta is really bad at.

    • ZeeLobby

      Profits. They can’t sell you 6 of something OP unless you can play 6 of them. It’s really that simple. It was a trend started in 6th with formations and detachments, and now they’re probably afraid to invalidate all those purchases.

      • Anggul

        That doesn’t make sense. They get the money whether you buy six of the same unit or six different units of equal value.

        • ZeeLobby

          Even though many of these spammable units tend to be newer units (big stompy $100+ ones)?

          Also from another post: “Your more likely to stumble into a broken combo (cause let’s be honest, I’m not sure GW even knows how to make something broken), when you allow everything everywhere.” I honestly don’t think they think about unit rules all that much. By allowing everyone to take as many of anything as they want, they pretty much guarantee that things that turn out strong will already be spammable and ready for sale.

          To make all units attractive would require them knowing how to internally balance a faction, which they’ve clearly never done, even back in the no allies day. Easier to just let you spend money on the stronger stuff and have it offset the underselling units.

          • Anggul

            They aren’t though. Rarely are broken units the new ones. When Riptides, new Broadsides, Centurions, and Windriders released I guess?

            Not much else. Dark Reapers certainly aren’t new. Wave serpents and Warp Spiders weren’t. Definitely not space marine bikers or Tzeentch screamers and flamers. Cultists nope. And so on.

          • ZeeLobby

            Well the rest of my comment is probably the real reason.

        • Muninwing

          you’re right. people always assume that GW is making a money-grab, regardless of the actual effects or logistics.

          it’s a great joke, but sad that some people assume it’s true unequivocally.

  • Fergie0044

    Dark reapers will get a cost increase in the next FAQ or Chapter approved.
    Ynnari will get their own codex which will put a stop to eldar units effectively getting two chapter tactics bonus at once.
    The world will continue to spin.

    • zeno666

      Probably in the Errata You Have To Pay For (aka Chapter Approved).
      And that cashgrab is almost a year away!
      To the eBay and buy all the reapers, then rule the meta mehehehe (skeletor laughter ™)!!

  • Rainthezangoose

    I dont play 40k 8th hardly as I think its the worst edition to day so far. Unless i’m mistaken is the Ynnari just a Eldar ‘soup army’. How is a faction drawing from two books any more ‘unfair’ then say imperial soup which can draw from half of the current codexs? What I’m I missing here?

    • ZeeLobby

      Well, you pointed to one of the two major problems concerning factions right now, the fact that some have a much larger soup bowl than others. What your missing is the lack of balance. I honestly doubt many soup conditions were even playtested before release. The first year or two of 8th will involve people finding and utilizing these imbalances to smash face (aka playtesting the game) and after some iterations of Chapter Approved they’ll hopefully be less prevalent.

      • Rainthezangoose

        I just wish the games was a single army again. It doesn’t take a genius to see the unbalance. There is a bunch of single factions, a single soup of three books and then the massive imperial soup bowl. I think the whole thing needs to be scraped. Either allow people to take ONE faction. Or allow people to take one small detachment from a different book, where you get the UNITS and not the abilities or stratagems.

        • ZeeLobby

          I mean it’s what I’ve been saying since allies and formations/detachments were added. Allies and the imbalanced soup were at least manageable back when an allied detachment was the best option you had, which only provided one unit in each slot basically. Now it’s just a free-for-all, and most people I see using it aren’t fluff players who wanted to create a themed army, but people who want to win using it to fill intended weakness in their armies, or to spam/combo some ridiculous unit.

          I’m just not sure GW will ever make this change, and it’s probably way too hopeful they’ll do it right after the launch of 8th. I was hoping it would actually be part of 8th, restricting things back down again, but it basically wasn’t.

        • Anggul

          Or just do it how AoS does it: Only 20% of your points can be allies.

          • Simon Chatterley

            Except you can still build a full soup army in AoS.

            Grand Alliances are still very much a thing

          • Muninwing

            at least there’s more than one army in every Grand Alliance.

            it’s not like there’s “Grand Alliance: Just Orks” like in 40k

            we really need fewer allies options, not more. or the ability to take more, but at a cost.

          • Koonitz

            Yes and no. First, you can take units from ANY army in your list. You could have a Stormcast Eternal Unit standing next to a necromancer and a block of skeletons, if you wish.

            However, there are no detachments. Just your one list. And to benefit from alliance or faction specific special rules, your ENTIRE ARMY must be from that alliance or faction (barring the afor-mentioned 20% allies, which are themselves only available if your army is faction-specific, and are limited to faction-specific allies).

            For instance, as I play Disciples of Tzeentch, for me to benefit from my Fate Dice rule, Tzeentch artifacts, and Tzeentch command traits (warlord traits), my entire army must be Disciples of Tzeentch, or no more than X points in my limited list of allies (which is far more restricted than “all chaos”).

            I could make a Grand Alliance Chaos army that focuses on Tzeentch, but has a few other units, too. But then I lose my fate dice, Tzeentch artifacts and command traits. I would have to use the Grand Alliance Chaos army ability, artifacts and command traits.

            If I took even a single model or unit outside grand alliance chaos, I’d get NO special rules or benefits whatsoever.

            Now, imagine an imperial soup list where all but 400 points had to come from Imperial Guard and only Imperial Guard? Sure, someone could take Guilliman in that list, but he’s so many points, that’s ALL of your allied allotment in one model.

          • ZeeLobby

            Which would be cool. I’d like the FW only 25% of your army can be LoW too.

          • Muninwing

            my solution in 6th/7th that i thought would level the playing field somewhat was a secondary balancing mechanic. funny enough it’d work better here in 8th — in addition to the starting points, you should be able to set starting CP… and spend those to get access to certain advantages.

    • KingAceNumber1

      There’s a lot of technical aspects to this, the first of which is that eldar craftworlds don’t work like SM legions – Ynnari doesn’t replace any keyword, so you can mix a billion craftworlds into an Eldar detachment, have it be Ynnari, take advantage of Soulburst, and STILL use every craftworld-relevant strategem. You lose out on CW rule bonuses, but only for that detachment, so everything else catches Alaitoc for -1 to be hit and goes in a separate detachment.

      For instance, Saim-Hann shining spears in ynnari detachment get access to both Soulburst and the Saim-Hann strategem that allows them to move, advance, and charge, and then after the charge if they kill the target (spoiler, they will) they can either move 16″ for free or unload a ton of melta, shuriken, and lance shots into whatever’s around.

      If the Ynnari keyword replaced the Craftworld keyword and (obligatory mention) reapers get a points hike, a lot of the reason this list is dominant would go away.

  • Angus MacKenzie

    Kill it with fire! …then post it on Youtube…

  • King Renegado

    Unbeatable? Uh-huh, okay.
    *Laughs in mass deep striking hotshot lasgun*

    • HeadHunter

      “When all else fails, bring a brighter flashlight and a thicker t-shirt”. Um, OK. 😀

      • King Renegado

        All about getting close enough to negate the -1 to hit and rend the armor my friend.
        Plus, having 4 plasma guns or 4 hotshot volley guns is nice too.

    • Price Vanderburg

      So you can shoot his rangers? And lose one unit to forewarned?

      That army exerts huge board control and you’re not going to deepstrike in range of anything valuable.

      • King Renegado

        Forwarned can only be used once in my movement phase. I will gladly saccrifice a unit of whatever if it helps me accomplish destroying a value target, taking control of/ contesting an objective.
        I think you greatly underestimate the chaos that 10+ units of deep strikers can bring to your opponent’s carefully thought out plans.

      • King Renegado

        To be clear, I am not saying I can defeat this list every game, I am just saying it isn’t unbeatable. If you have the ability to get in range of and damage what you need to damage, and control objectives that you need to control, this list isn’t as scary as the author makes it out to be.

        On a side note, I think reapers need a nerf to their inescapable accuracy rule, and I think a 6 to hit should always be a hit, and I definitely think that forewarned should be nerfed to be identical to the tempestus scion stratagem (can only be used against an enemy arriving within 12″, and is resolved at -1 to hit when used)

  • Doug Crawford

    People using this list should be redaqualid for being netlisters in magic its the worst thing to be called. That might stop the half a dozen of these lists that are always brought by these so called top players, how can you be a top player if you can’t wright and play your own army.

    • benn grimm

      What’s a redaqualid?

      • ZeeLobby

        Might be something like “drawn and quartered”?

        • benn grimm

          Think on second glance it’s sposed to be ‘ridiculed’…

      • Patriarch

        It’s like a covfefe, but more slippy.

        • benn grimm


      • Commissar Molotov

        It’s what the government does to secret documents before releasing them to the public, silly.

    • Seismic Ghost

      As a counterpoint, if you’re going for the top prize, why would you show up with gear that under-performs?
      If A: The only threat to this list is also this list, and
      B: You’re willing to spend money to make money and win tournaments, then
      I suspect the next big tournament will (sensibly) consist of only this list, as only this list has a chance of beating this list and thus winning.

      • Koonitz

        If that’s the reputation that tournaments get (build this netlist or you won’t win), you know what will happen.

        Thus are the only people to show up to these events those who are willing to buy, assemble and paint the latest META powerhouse netlist, because no one else wants to either a) put the effort in, or b) play against that.

        Lo, the event loses money and shuts down.

        You know full well that kind of attitude would drive people away and kill the tournament scene.

        No one wants that.

        Well, not everyone. I don’t attend tournaments anymore, so I wouldn’t mind playing the pretentious, arrogant narrative player laughing at the plight of the dying tournament scene for a day or two.

    • Anggul

      They can. They just both came to the same conclusion that this was the best kind of army currently playable.

      The ‘netlisters’ don’t make it to the top. It’s one thing to take a list you saw on the internet and bash severely weaker lists. It’s another to then beat the guys who are actually skilled at playing it.

    • KingAceNumber1

      “how can you be a top player if you can’t wright (sic) and play your own army”

      Ask the MTG tournament scene

  • Rich

    Honestly, the winning list seems pretty balanced. It features a lot of classic eldar units, 6 troop choices, a total of ~11 different unique units, with only 2 units appearing more than twice, one of which is a troop choice! Yes, obviously this player picked a range of the stronger options available to them, but they did win a major tournament, so what can you expect? This is hardly the 9 plagueburst crawler lists or the 15 obliterator lists I’ve seen in the past. The only unit I see even potentially overrepresented at all is Dark Reapers, and even there they only have 17, 2 large units worth. Nobody at all would complain if a marine player brought 17 terminators or 17 bikes or even a gunline with that same number of marine devastators and this honestly seems no different. I’d totally be ok nerfing dark reapers a bit but to call this list totally unbeatable and out of balance seems to be severely missing the point.

    • Fergie0044

      True, but I think one of the main issues with the list is that it can use the ‘chapter tactics’ of both craftworld and ynnari on the same unit, plus the craftworld strats, allowing for some extremely powerful combos.

    • Karru

      As Fergie said, the problem in this list comes from the fact that they get two “chapter tactics” at the same time. Take the Shining Spears for example, they can use the Saim-Hann Stratagem that allows them to Advance and Charge on the same turn, but they also gain the Soulburst ability, giving them huge damage potential.

      Just removing the ability to combo the two together would help a little, but Dark Reapers do need a point increase.

      • Viper666.Qc

        If aDetachment includes any YNNARI units, it is
        no longer a Craftworlds Detachment and will
        not gain either Craftworld attributes (p.116)

        • Karru

          Ah, but you forget my boy, Stratagem is not the same thing.

          Saim-Hann Stratagem can be used on ANY Saim-Hann Unit, no matter what their detachment is and all you need to do is have at least one Craftworld Detachments in your army. Guess what the first Detachment is?

        • Fergie0044

          But can still use the strats.

          • Simon Chatterley

            One of the biggest issues I’ve found is people really can’t get there heads around how Battleforged and Stratagems function.

            Ynarri get the Ynarri keyword and a Craftworld keyword. A pure Craftworld detachment unlocks the stratagems. Ynarri then use them…mostly the silly shoot you when you arrive and the charge you after advancing…

    • Hrudian

      Completely agree. It’s not as spammy as some other netlists.

    • ZeeLobby

      Yeah, I mean there’s definitely 2 parts to this. It’s great that it’s not spammy, but if taking one of everything in your faction lets you steam roll others, isn’t that still bad for the game? Eldar have always been a couple ridiculous pegs up on other factions. When they can run a mix of stuff and still dominate, it probably still needs some toning down. In this case maybe removing the ability to share tactics is enough.

  • benn grimm

    Just avoid it and the people running it.

    • HeadHunter

      Sadly, not an option in tournaments, unless “let the Wookiee win” is your overall plan for the event.

      • benn grimm

        True, which definitely contributes to my motivation for(mostly) avoiding comp play this edition. I like a good tourney, but I like immersion and (at least the illusion of) a fair game better.

    • Drpx

      Can’t avoid them at a tournament. And it seems tournaments are the direction this hobby is being pushed towards. We even have freaking Twitch streams of it now.

      • Koonitz

        It’s only going that way because people focus on matched play so much.

        Play a few narrative games with friends.

        The other sad truth is that narrative games tend to be more personal, because you put a bit more of yourself into it through storytelling. You can talk all you want about it online, but if they don’t understand or care about your style of storytelling, they just won’t get you.

        Matched play, however, is a gameplay style that is easy to talk about and share online across the world and people will understand.

        I think that factor contributes to how popular it is online and with pick-up games at the FLGS.

        ’cause let me tell you, among my friends, NOTHING is more popular than a good narrative campaign.

  • Coltcabunny

    I know how to beat it. When it comes to your turn, walk off and get an ice cream and eat it in front of your opponent until the clock runs out. Worked at a WMH tournament with a MMM list.

    • Drpx

      A curious game. The only way to win is not to play.

    • Koonitz

      Slow-playin’ so hard you got Mei-ulted.

  • How many Ork armies did this beat?

  • I’m kinda disappointed the “winning list” consequently misspelled Ynnari as Ynari and Alaitoc as Aliatoc. Gotta play it, but can’t actually name what you’re playing, I guess….

    • Kabal1te

      Let’s be honest, who cares how GW spells things anymore? There is for instance nothing that will make me stop calling them dark eldar.

      • SYSTem050

        True but GW named them in the first place so you are still calling them by something selected by GW. Admittedly from an existing stock trope.

      • Oh, I completely agree on those IP-protectable names. I’ll call Lizardmen Lizardmen and Orcs Orcs, not Seraphon or Orruks. I wouldn’t bat an eye over a list being titled Dark Eldar instead of Drukhari, or not following the silly Aelves/Aeldari trip – at least the original names are still recognizable and were only changed to fit in with what the lawyers advised.

        However, with a tournament list, you should expect people to clearly name what they’re fielding, and that they consistently get the spelling wrong tells me that they just don’t give a damn and only play for the gamebreaking combos and couldn’t care less about the faction or what their toy soldiers are called. It’s the epitome of mindless powergaming to me.

        • Anggul

          Aelves was fair enough, it’s ye olde spelling just like daemon, faerie, etc. and you pronounce it the same.

  • Warrior24_7

    Figure out solid counters huh? That must mean “tactics” or a great new list. All I’ve read are whining about nerfs and point increases, and that’s all you’re going to get.

    • Drpx

      But that is a tactic. Politicians and lawyers use it all the time.

      • SYSTem050

        It’s the F1 school of though

        Option 1 spend millions developing a new piece of tech

        Option 2 spend thousands getting your opponents improvement declared illegal

  • Red_Five_Standing_By

    Dark Reapers are one of the least skill intensive units in the game, especially when paired with Altioc’s chapter tactic.

  • Commissar Molotov

    Aw, man. They’re gonna nerf my reapers, and I play Craftworld Eldar – so that’s really the only thing I’ve got going for me.

  • Heinz Fiction

    Ynnari give Eldar a bad name…

  • Rob brown

    The issue (as always) isn’t the unit, it’s the stacking of stratagems and psychic powers, and using army abilities enabled from other codices.

    The fix in this case however is simple. As has already been mentioned in previous forums – limit Reapers to 5 man squads. It does nothing to spoil the reapers but reduces the effect of the stratagems and psychic powers.


    • Warrior24_7

      So now you just have more squads…

      • Rob brown

        Only one of which can be effected by the key psychic power or stratagems.

  • GrimBarker

    Is your point, Abe, that armies should just tie all the time? Eldar won at the LVO because the lists were designed to win at the LVO. Some of the players don’t even normally play Eldar (I think the infamous Tony is one of them). These same top players can be heard testifying in various podcasts that though Eldar did very well, they do not think the army is OP, and yet here you are, Abe, broken recording it again. Eldar won because they could capitalize on the missions, claim objectives, deny opponents the same ability, and hard counter Daemon Primarchs and AM lists that otherwise probably would have done a lot better at the tournament. In which case, your article would have been how OP Chaos and Imperium keywords are. You can keep repeating your opinion till one more minute closer to midnight: it will not change the fact that you are wrong.

    • ZeeLobby

      How many times have I heard the winners say they don’t think their army is OP… LOL. Played into wave serpent spam at many events back in the day, and half would say “it’s really not that good” as they removed my army, and the other half would apologize. No one wants to have those 7 models they just bought, or in this case 30 Dark Reapers, nerfed, especially if it provides them an easy-button to winning (which is why they are there). Are these lists unbeatable, no, definitely not. But do they cream 80 percent of the rest of the game, definitely. No one is asking for 50/50 splits of every army. People just want to feel like they have a chance regardless of faction.

      Warmachine/Hordes just had a major event, and win rate for most factions into other factions was around 50%. And everyone still seems to have a great time, and not tie every game… Anyone who assumes people wan’t “perfect balance” or “chess” just isn’t part of the actual conversation, and is trying to set up an impossible scenario to discuss.

      • GrimBarker

        40k has had other major events than the LVO as well. Last time I checked, Eldar did not win all of those, and Dark Reaper/Ynarri “combo” has been usable since day one, in fact it was better before the Ynarri nerf. So…weird.

        • ZeeLobby

          I mean that’s kind of a simplistic argument. First, we’ve been getting new codexes monthly, everything is in flux right now. Second, finding broken combos take time. It’s not like leafblower showed up day one. 3rd. This list abuses “chapter tactics” in a way most armies can’t. 4th, the latest codex made reapers cheaper I’m pretty sure.

          All these aside, you can do the basic math. it’s a ridiculously good combo compared to what most other armies offer. just becasue no one figured it out before doesn’t mean it can’t dominate now…

          • GrimBarker

            finding broken combos does not take time. if it did, they would not have faq’d the chaos codexes within a week of the codex dropping. articles on BOLS are often finding “broken combos” before the codexes even go on pre-order. So six months seems like a rather long time… My argument is simple: just because you say OP doesn’t mean OP. Compared to what “most armies have to offer”…? Because Chaos can’t bring it, AM isn’t disgusting, Tyranids aren’t a beast on the tabletop… give me a break. Nids can give hive guard reroll 1s, hide em behind any old rock, because they don’t need to see and they ignore your cover. Then Single Minded Annihilation for 2CP, and shoot them again. Much cheaper than Yvraine, and it’s not like you don’t have like 15 CP with a Nids list. That’s one example. Most codexes have some sneaky awesome insanity if you’re clever. The points drop on Reapers was probably a mistake, but that’s about the only part of this power combo that needs a tweak. Otherwise, play on Eldar/Ynarri, play on!

          • ZeeLobby

            It’s just faster now cause it’s so easy. Just because one combo was broken right after a codex dropped doesn’t mean it’s the only broken combo. I mean personally I don’t see why they get to use two faction tactics. I think it goes against the whole concept of keywording they developed. That plus the points drop is what makes them broken. And sure. I can list a bunch of armies and call them OP, but Tyranids/Chaos/etc. didn’t make up 4 of the top 10 armies of LVO. I mean anyone can choose to ignore that, but is it wise to?

      • Warrior24_7

        Sooo… Your answer is? Exactly, you dont have one except “nerf”. You were asked to come up with a hard counter to this list. That means another type of list or tactic, NOT crying for rule changes EVERYTIME “you” lose.

        • ZeeLobby

          I think better clarification on which “chapter tactics” can be used would help. This is a pretty unique instance that imo is abusive (using chapter tactics from two different keywords on a single unit). I think that would go a long way to fixing the problem without nerfing anything.

          • Warrior24_7

            Not to beat a dead horse (it wouldn’t care anyway, it’s
            dead) but that IS a nerf. You just changed the rules so the list would be illegal. Instead of, finding a way to beat this list on the tabletop, you just want rule changes, that’s your answer. It’s sad because this list is posted for all to see and prepare for. This list is no longer a surprise. The Custodes jet bike spam list may be a good counter to this, DE Ravager and Dark Lance spam may be a counter to Cutodes jet bikes , Wave Serpentsw/ Bright Lances and Fire Dragons should beat the Custodes bike spam by turn 3, Harlequins should beat them down too if they can get close enough. “This” is what we should be doing, coming up with counters instead of nerfs.

          • ZeeLobby

            So to change the rules in any way is basically a “nerf”. Man, we should all just be playing 1st edition. I mean everything was downhill since then XD.

          • Warrior24_7

            Not at all, you want “specific” nerfs and bannings targeting certain armies and lists. All because someone found a cool combo. You don’t want to try to out play this person, you don’t want them playing with this at all! It’s not right. So what’s next, where does it stop? The next person who wins a tournament is the new target? Rinse and repeat. I’m shocked that you can’t see how silly this is.

          • ZeeLobby

            I’m just curious, but have you like, ever played any other game system or video game. I don’t know how you live in a world where things aren’t fixed/balanced. Like do you just quit if it’s unfair? (you’ll probably say you never quit, but that’s not true…). I mean more power to you if you’ll just beat your head into a wall repeatedly.

          • Warrior24_7

            I play video games all of the time, I’ve been playing “Warhammer” since 1997! I’m an old gamer. I don’t like the vast majority of the rules of this game. Why you can’t “truly” assault from a “assault vehicle”, or fly, flying is a pivot like motion and “assaulting” is well, getting out and standing there or you can’t get out at all! I could go on, but that is not the point. The point is…”it is what it is”. We ALL play under the same rules. I DO NOT want cookie cutter armies, I don’t want to go back to “ban”hammer where nerfs and bannings ruled the day, You could buy the models, you just couldn’t “legally” play with them, yes, “that happened”!

            I “hate” all of the different places to find rules.

            Why do you “hate” having to learn to how play your army. You are doing the same thing that you’re accusing these power players of doing, looking for an easy win. If you ban everything that he can do against you, then you can easily win the game! It takes no effort, no skill, or ability on your part at all.

    • Stable Abe

      What am I wrong about? That the list won at LVO? That the top table was both this list? That people at LVO and in the meta have a hard time beating this list? Those are all pretty well proven facts.

      I never said all armies should tie all the time, I said people should put their thinking caps on and figure out a good counter to the list.

      • GrimBarker

        First, you are using 1 example: the LVO. Someone had to win the LVO. Your article could have been the same regardless of who won, just by writing about say Endless Poxwalkers instead of Dark Reapers, or reroll bubbles as another example. Because you only use one example, there is no way to gauge whether Eldar doing as well as they did was because of OP, or because of other factors, like match ups, time limits (Tyranid players were often not able to finish more than two turns), or just fluke conditions. For example, if Chaos or Imperium win every ITC event during the year, but Eldar always wins the LVO, does that still make Eldar “King of the Meta”? Finally, many of my comments are because I (and I don’t think I’m alone) am annoyed at the constant string of articles that do nothing but whine about tournaments. The game is not dominated by tournaments, or tournament players, and yet most of the articles on this site focus on little else. This is not, to iterate my point, your first article about this subject. Rehashing articles that may not have even been appreciated the first time around is going well past the “a bit much” and into the “do you even like the game at all?” category. BOLS in general is fairly toxic when it comes to 40k. These are the constant types of articles on here. So after 8 months of this, I think it’s time that readers start piping up that you should change how you are doing things. Check out some of the comments in the “…GW has your back” article and you’ll find similar sentiments by people other than myself.

        • Stable Abe

          Lets talk about this.

          so too your first point. LVO is not the only example I used. Maybe you missed it but I talked about not just LVO, but also a trend we’ve seen in other events across the country and at two local events we’ve streamed. Following the links I put in the article you can find this one – http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/12/40k-meta-houston-we-have-a-dark-reaper-problem.html which talks about Reaper based lists used in other events. So hardly just talking about LVO here.

          Of course I did focus on LVO because its the most recent large event, it had most of the best North American players at it and its what people care about right now.

          (side notes great comment on that article I linked: “I would take these results wirh a grain of salt.

          The first list was pre Ynarri nerf.

          The second list was at the GW grand tourny and they were not using the chapter approved updated rules. So the player was able to stash all of his dark reapers in Wave Serpents and was essentially guaranteed to go first. Well, short of somebody seizing.

          The real test will be the LVO. If somebody wins by spamming dark reapers that will be the justification for dark reapers to be toned back somehow. However, I doubt a list like the second will do very well with ITC rules and missions.” well we can see how that worked out.)

          As for your 2nd point:

          Well I am sorry if you took this article as whining about tournaments. Other than saying this happened at tournaments I don’t talk much about them in the article. I don’t think I’m whining about anything at all, just looking at how powerful this list is. I’m not (and don’t say) it should even be nerfed, I’d rather players figure out counters to it.

          I talked about LVO and tournaments this week, because LVO just happened, and talked about an LVO list last week but none of the other 14 articles I’ve written this year were about tournaments, I’ve covered lists, tactics, fluff, news. hopes and dreams and general game rules.I can’t speak for all the writers here, but I cover a lot of topics.

          But hey! If you don’t want “whining about tournaments” and having to ask yourself “Do these people like 40K?” you can always tune into our twitch channel ( https://www.twitch.tv/belloflostsouls?no-mobile-redirect=true ) every week you can see me and other BoLS folks playing non competitive games, talking tactics and having a blast. Maybe that would be more to your enjoyment.

          • GrimBarker

            Lol. K, u win. I’m not into beating heartbeat impaired equines.

          • Stable Abe

            YAY I won on the internet! What do I get? Surely not just this feeling of emptiness?

          • GrimBarker

            If I have offended you personally, you have my apology if that is what you are looking for. I’m hardly the only one voicing opinions like this, but some of the things I say are targeted at a very vocal community of doom and gloomers that are quite abundant in these comment sections. Eventually you feel like you should speak up because trying to ignore it gets tiring. 40k is a cool hobby. The new edition is exciting. I read negativity in your article and you say that was not the intention. So I’m sorry.

  • Adelaide Lee Rosa

    1- Deep strike chaos sorcerer (or Daemon Prince) + tough melee unit (max size possessed, khorne berserkers, etc).

    2- Warp time to 3-4″ away from Dark Reapers.

    3- Profit.

    • Anggul

      That’s why chaff is a thing. Stops you from getting to them.

    • KingAceNumber1

      Well… the rangers are building about a 24″ buffer between your viable deep strike zones and the corner where the reapers are camped, so it’ll take two turns to get there, and farseers can reroll denies. It’s not as easy as you make it sound.

  • Simon Chatterley

    Bizarrely Tyranids are a great hard counter. My mate did really well against Eldar on the whole as they rely to a point on Psychic and Nids are great at Psychic denial.

    Issue is lots more people were playing Eldar than Nids…so the hard counters were rarely met

    • KingAceNumber1

      There’s a lot of talk about flyrant spam being ascendant as a counter to this list.

      • Simon Chatterley

        Which is exactly what my mate was running. 6 Flyrants to be exact and he considered Eldar a really good match up for him

        • KingAceNumber1

          Yep, 5-6 seems like the ideal number. They’re just a very efficient model when duplicated, and bring a lot of tools to deal with what Eldar do well.

          My teammate is considering bringing Nids to Adepticon just to spoiler out the Eldar matchups.

          • Simon Chatterley

            My solution was “get more Obliterators”. It’s inelegant and spammy but it works out ok

          • KingAceNumber1

            I need to start playing with them. As a Chaos devotee I’ve had no reason to own them before, but Tzeentch oblits are legitimately worth the inclusion with Flickering Fire on them from the daemon tree. I just wish they fit in my Ksons detachment, souping irks me.

          • Simon Chatterley

            Mine are Black Legion and run with Abaddon. Mark of Slaanesh for the old double shooting with rerolls to hit. They mostly clear whatever they go against. I say mostly as in 2 games they came up short. So I decided to add more then tbh.

            If in doubt, shoot stuff more.

  • I beat this list with muh orrucks

  • Krd Da Levitator

    – Run tournaments with Highlander -rule
    – If the tournament is with 2000p, Ynnari has fe. 1850p to use or even less…we tried this in one (7th ed) tournament and it helped a bit, but the strong units were still rampaging…i think the Highlander -way would be the one i used, if organized a tournament…

    • Muninwing

      highlander is gimmicky, kills certain themed lists that have to spam (rather than doing it for advantage), and don;t really address many of the balancing issues.

      i thought it was a silly format for the last couple editions, that really hasn’t changed.

  • Spacefrisian

    Split fire, drop there units to 1 or 2 models and rinse and repeat, or make them run through morale, cause if they run, and aren’t Nurgle related they aint dead.

    As for meta, go get youre friends its time to Robattle till you drop, lose control and reach the top.

  • jordan stein


  • MPLepisto

    LVO is not Warhammer 40,000. It’s a 40K derivative using some of the same rules. How can one draw conclusions about 40K whilst playing a game that is not 40K? It’s a terrible basis to use for ‘balancing’ the game.

    Play Matched Play and use the Organised Events rules found in the 40K rulebook, play 5+ battle rounds per the rules, play with the terrian density and variety from the rulebook, etc. Simply, play with all the rules before declaring something ‘broken’.

    Would that solve some issues?

  • MechBattler

    Step 1 – Warhound Titan.
    Step 2 – Drink opponent’s tears.