Personal Decks

[KCU Master 2007]

Summoner Wars has been in my hands for about 2 weeks now and I have gotten in almost 20 games. I've certainly developed a liking for some units over others and I'm sure you all have too. I was wondering who has begun switching out commons in each deck for extras of another common after multiple purchases.

I've begun making a few decisions and they still need play tested but this is what I've come up with so far.

Elves:
10 Warriors
4 Guardians
4 Archers

While I like the auto wounding of Guardians and the extra range of Archers, the Warriors are cheap and powerful attackers with a high mobility due to Blaze Step.

Orcs:
7 Fighters
7 Smashers
4 Shamans

I hate the Shamans, they are simply too unreliable. I did keep a few just in case but mainly for magic.

Dwarves:
8 Spearmen
6 Defenders
4 Engineers

The spearmen are probably my favorite unit due to their range base and Thrust ability when in melee battle. The defenders do their job very well as do the Engineers; however since the Engineers are so situational I've found that I would be better off with a couple extra Spearmen.

Goblins:
6 Fighters
4 Slingers
8 Beserkers

I dislike the Slingers more than the Shamans. Keep a couple for Starting Set up and for magic but make room for the more powerful Beserkers that can team up with Fighters for a lot of attacks each turn.

What are some of your ideas for customized decks this early in the game's life?

[Jexik]

I haven't given it much thought yet, although I mentioned in that KQ thread that I was thinking of dropping Krung for Khan Queso the next time I play. Unfortunately, that won't be until Saturday. I still only have one of each set anyway, so it'll be a little while before I do any commons-adjusting. I also really like Smashers. "keeping guys for magic" doesn't seem like a good idea though- any card can be used for magic, so you might as well put in stuff that you'd prefer to use. I can certainly see how having a few ranged guys is worth it though- so keeping some Slingers/Shamans around for that purpose should be useful. I like the current mix on the Phoenix Elves, because the Guardians are significantly tougher.

[marcsanti]

I totally agree with the Dwarf set up. Spearman I believe are one of the better units. Defenders are great too, they can tie up your opponents movement phase, and with their 2 in life, can fair pretty good against the 1 attack commons.

One thing to keep in mind with the Goblins though is their Event cards. The 3 goblin rage and 2 goblin rush can only be used on 0 cost goblins, so make sure to have plenty of those out so the events aren't put to waste. Unless dropping those down for magic works best for you, that would probably help bring out your Berserkers faster.

Overall I like where you're going with the deck building, helps me narrow a few ideas down.

[Creationist]

For the elves I would take out one of the warrior and guardian and replace them with archers. Also I'd replace an Orc Fighter with a Smasher. Other than that, I agree.

[Hogg]

Last time I played I used Goblins. I dropped Blarf for KQ and put 10 Fighters in the deck. I think I used 4 each of the Slingers and Berserkers.

I don't think I'll use many Engineers when I play Dwarves unless I'm specifically targeting walls that game. The Spearmen are more appealing to me.

[Quintaton16]

Elves:
10 Warriors
4 Guardians
4 Archers

While I like the auto wounding of Guardians and the extra range of Archers, the Warriors are cheap and powerful attackers with a high mobility due to Blaze Step.

Orcs:
7 Fighters
7 Smashers
4 Shamans

I hate the Shamans, they are simply too unreliable. I did keep a few just in case but mainly for magic.

Dwarves:
8 Spearmen
6 Defenders
4 Engineers

The spearmen are probably my favorite unit due to their range base and Thrust ability when in melee battle. The defenders do their job very well as do the Engineers; however since the Engineers are so situational I've found that I would be better off with a couple extra Spearmen.

Goblins:
6 Fighters
4 Slingers
8 Beserkers

I dislike the Slingers more than the Shamans. Keep a couple for Starting Set up and for magic but make room for the more powerful Beserkers that can team up with Fighters for a lot of attacks each turn.

What are some of your ideas for customized decks this early in the game's life?

These all seem like you are simply taking large amounts of your favorite units to the others' expense. While I see this as an okay tactic for armies you really like, I'm not sure how well they will really do. Especially the last two. Dwarves and Goblins cannot function without large numbers of Defenders and cheap units, respectively. Although Spearmen are the hardest-hitting unit, the Defenders are the ones absorbing hits, so they should be the focus of the army. And I'm not sure how any army, but especially Goblins, can function with 8 cost 2 units. They are based entirely around cheap hordes, so Berserkers in my opinion should be used in small numbers.

You are of course welcome to make any changes you want, but overall the base decks are tactically very well balanced. You have to carefully consider the changes you make.

My deck building strategy thus far seems to be the exact opposite of yours. Instead of taking lots of my favorite units, the Warriors, I went for weird tactics. I don't even know if it will work at all, but it is a very different style than most Elf decks.

The one I have is:

4 Warriors
7 Archers
7 Guardians
Maybe sub Khan in for Fire Drake or Maelena (for when the enemy comes too quickly. The Elves really lack a cheap multikill unit like the Berserkers, unless you count Burns.)

My strategy with this deck is to hang back with everything. With the super range of the Archers, I will try to snipe units out of the center, focusing on ranged units so the opponent will be forced to come to me. By the time they slog through all the Archer fire, most 1 life units should be dead and 2 life commons hopefully will have at least one wound. This of course makes them easy prey for the Guardians. Ideally, I will have Kaeeseal to convert some units, and walls on either side of the battlefield for the couple Warriors to troubleshoot. Khan, again, is for when there are too many to handle.

[KCU Master 2007]

Yeah...those units I do have larger amounts of tend to be my favorites. However, they are my favorites because they tend to work for me.

There are lot of times when I play Elves that I burn an Archer or Guardian from my hand for magic wishing it was instead a Warrior.

You may be right about the Beserkers in the Goblin army, but I think that is mainly because swarm/horde armies don't mix well with me. The Goblin army is one that I was unsure about and after I try it a few times may revert it back to its original make-up.

As for putting in KQ, I typically drop: Fire Drake, Krung, and Gror. I like the Goblin Champions too much to put him in there.

[woodoo03]

Summoner Wars has been in my hands for about 2 weeks now and I have gotten in almost 20 games. I've certainly developed a liking for some units over others and I'm sure you all have too. I was wondering who has begun switching out commons in each deck for extras of another common after multiple purchases. ... What are some of your ideas for customized decks this early in the game's life?

I'm sorry - I haven't received the games yet (living in Germany means waiting...). Could you tell me how the original distribution of commons is in the 4 factions? And why do you feel the need to customize those numbers? And how can you customize - do you need more original games, or are more cards included as needed? (didn't I order enough?:confused:)

Thanks, woodoo03

[Truth]

I'm sorry - I haven't received the games yet (living in Germany means waiting...). Could you tell me how the original distribution of commons is in the 4 factions? And why do you feel the need to customize those numbers? And how can you customize - do you need more original games, or are more cards included as needed? (didn't I order enough?:confused:)

Thanks, woodoo03

The distribution of commons can be found on these pages: http://www.plaidhatgames.com/product.html
http://www.plaidhatgames.com/product2.html

I think that I did my best to offer what I felt was the best spread for each faction. People are just speaking to the possibility of tweaking the numbers if you had more copies of the the starter set cards, it really isn't necessary.

[Hogg]

The decks are fine the way they come. I just feel the need to mess with things. :)

[ewabbie]

...I hate the Shamans, they are simply too unreliable. I did keep a few just in case but mainly for magic...


This comment really hit home. I played my first game last night with the Shamans and I swear they always had one die that was a one or a two. Who would have thought when rolling a six sided die you would roll so many ones and twos!!:mad:

[Quintaton16]

It all boils down to luck. I've had a game where a Shaman killed at least four Goblin commons in consecutive turns without missing once. The Shamans are like the rest of the Orcs: they rely heavily on chance, but they rock when they are lucky. there is only a 4 in 9 chance of inflicting a wound, but 2 life, 2 attack and range is still killer for only 1 cost to summon.

[Mr Migraine]

This comment really hit home. I played my first game last night with the Shamans and I swear they always had one die that was a one or a two. Who would have thought when rolling a six sided die you would roll so many ones and twos!!:mad:

I was actually wondering if anybody thought the same way. Even with their summon cost of one and their life of two, I don't trust chance and would rather rely on Smashers and Fighters.

[A_Train]

I think the Shaman's even out. They're two health points mean they can take a hit, which no other ranged common can do. And they should be used to target multiple healthed commons, or champions. If you're attacking single hit commons with the Shamans, you're doing it wrong, IMO.

[Quintaton16]

The Tundra Orcs are all about taking chances. If that's a problem for people like me then we can play the Elves and everyone is happy. The Shamans are specialized, but less so that Guardians and a whole lot less than Engineers, and they cost less magic that Guardians. My biggest problem with the Orcs so far is that I use too many Fighters. They are by far my least favorite Orcs (although to be fair that's also a product of my horrible risk-assessment skills).

[Incognito]

I really like how the Elves are just out of the box. With the Orcs, I think that I would maybe prefer to sub in a Smasher instead of a Fighter so that the count was:

7 Fighters
6 Smashers
5 Shamans

because I always feel like I don't have enough Smashers if I discard one for magic in a pinch.

[Mr Migraine]

I think the Shaman's even out. They're two health points mean they can take a hit, which no other ranged common can do. And they should be used to target multiple healthed commons, or champions. If you're attacking single hit commons with the Shamans, you're doing it wrong, IMO.

They certainly do. I'm not implying that they are overpriced or weak, however I would rather not take double-or nothing shots.

[killercactus]

I'm a bit late to this party, but here's what I think I'd use for each Faction if I changed up the decks:

Phoenix Elves

Warrior x 10
Archers x7
Guardian x1

If I didn't have to use a Guardian, I wouldn't. Precise is cool and all, but I'll trade the Life point for the Summoning point and Blaze Step. Most of the time, a Warrior is going to get you the same attack (or more) than a Guardian will, and I can get more Warriors onto the board.

Tundra Orcs

Fighter x7
Smasher x6
Shaman x5

I really like the Smashers for a 2-cost Common - very tough to take out with one attack. I also like the Shaman more than most - 1 Magic for a ranged attacker with 2 Life and Attack is strong, even if he misses a lot.

Cave Goblins

Fighter x9
Slinger x7
Berserker x2

I'm almost the same boat here as the Elves, but for a different reason. 2 of Sneeks' Events target only 0 Cost Goblins, so I want a lot of those. Plus, I usually find myself saving my Magic for Goblin Champions rather than Berserkers, although they are very solid.

Guild Dwarves

Spearmen x9
Defender x8
Engineer x1

I've never played the Dwarves, but even if I want to get rid of Walls, I think I want the more versatile Spearmen using their 2 attack instead of Engineers.

[Quintaton16]

I'm thinking of an Orc build focusing on tons of life. Right now I think:

Smashers x7
Shamans x7
Fighters x4

In the future I might even consider more Smashers and fewer Fighters, but Fighters are helpful when you need to burn through lots of Goblins. The idea is that your units are so hard to kill. Killing one Smasher and putting two wounds on another is, in my opinion, a very good turn--and it gets you one magic. Especially with Reinforcements, you should be able to rush Smashers in faster than they can be killed. Shamans are for when you need more units for less Magic, and they are still tough to bring down.

I don't agree with everyone knocking the Dwarves' non-Spearmen. The temptation is to run things forward to kill enemies, but played well Dwarves can slowly dominate, and that relies on Defenders and Engineers. You cannot stress enough the value of two life, and in so many ways Defenders are so annoying for opponents. Last game I took out Maelena very quickly by spamming one Defender at a time next to her and attacking her with Oldin. They also work very well teamed with Spearmen. It is so easy to tie up an entire section of the board with one or two Defenders forcing the opponent to attack it instead of easier targets like Spearmen that pose greater dangers and yield Magic faster.

[killercactus]

I'm all for Gladiatrons - I mean Defenders. They're presence alongside ranged attackers seems awesome. I just like the Spearmen a bit more. Engineers are the ones I seem to want to take out, but I've never played the Dwarves so I'm not sure how efficient they can actually be at Wall-killing. I'm thinking I'd end up usually just burning Beseige the Walls for Magic, even with Engineers in the deck.

[Quintaton16]

Never underestimate the power of wall-killing. I'v just finished my third game in which I won because of an early wall-killing. A Besiege The Walls coupled with a Heroic-Feated Engineer and a couple more attacks can finish off a Wall very quickly, and in all three of the games where I've managed it, my brother did not Summon anything the rest of the game. In only one of those games did he even draw a Wall before I finished him off.

Against Orcs, too, you can get a lot of free Magic. In a different game against Orcs, I didn't even attempt to go for Walls until my brother had all six walls out. From there one BTW killed all three Ice Walls, Gror with Heroic Feat put on three wounds, and the other BTW killed the normal walls, giving me a ton of extra Magic.

I see your point with replacing the Engineers, but personally if I attack Walls at all, I make it all out. In that case, I want as many attack dice as I can get.

[TheLion]

I agree with Quintaton16, attacking walls is a good strategy, especially with the dwarves.

If you can destroy a wall early, you will probably win the game, unless the opposing player can get a wall out very quickly.

Even with decks other than the dwarves, attacking walls is a good way to force your opponent to take action against the card attacking the wall.

Also, having played the decks for a bit, I don't see any real need to change the deck make up.

[killercactus]

I agree with Quintaton16, attacking walls is a good strategy, especially with the dwarves.

If you can destroy a wall early, you will probably win the game, unless the opposing player can get a wall out very quickly.

Even with decks other than the dwarves, attacking walls is a good way to force your opponent to take action against the card attacking the wall.

Also, having played the decks for a bit, I don't see any real need to change the deck make up.

I can see the benefits of attacking a wall, but is it worth losing the Magic you could be getting by attacking opponent's Units, and letting your opponent gain Magic by killing yours? Maybe it is - I've never tried it. I could see how it could be with the Dwarves early game, especially with a draw of Beseige and/or Heroic Feat. But, remember that an Engineer starts on the battlefield. If I plan on destorying an early Wall, that Engineer should suffice when combined with Events, right?

I guess I should go check the Dwarf starting card again to see how exposed to attack that Engineer is....

[TheLion]

Who said I'm giving my opponent free magic when I attack a wall (by exposing cards to attack)? :)

I guess it depends on how the game evolves. If an opposing player is playing cautious, then I will try to draw them out by attackng their walls. I've taken down walls and exposed an opposing players middle late in the game, and that can make things very uncomfortable for them.

Dwarves are a little different because they can take out a wall early. That can be really hard to come back from in a game. If the situation is right, I will go for their wall, in the very least they have to expend resources to defend it, and that can mean magic for me (attacking the attackers of the Engineer).

[Quintaton16]

To begin with the Engineer isn't in danger too badly. The problem is that to get to the opponent's main Wall he needs at least two moves. While he's coming up, I bring the two Defenders in: one in front of him to take fire, and the other to block up the newly-summoned units from the Walls. The problem is that by the time the Engineer gets there, one of his Defender guards is almost certainly dead. Not only that, but since you are spending all your moves getting Defenders in place, you get almost no attacks in, meaning not many allies to keep up the attack. That means that he will get one attack, with Heroic Feat if you are lucky, and then get killed. It's a start, but attacking Walls is a suicidal job. I still love doing it and it works more often than not if I get the right combos, but it is not for the faint of heart.

[Jexik]

I've really started to like going for wall destruction in 1v1's lately.

I'm thinking of trying a 9/2/7 or 8/2/8 split when I get around to getting a second set of starters. (Defender/Spearman/Engineer). It might be more doable if another ranged champion comes out for the Dwarves or Mercs.

One simple trick that I enjoy- get your opponent's walls down to 3 life left (6 wounds on) before you play BtW. If you summon Thorkur or another ranged unit, you can probably snipe a Summoner who was hiding behind a wall, or at least get whatever guys were adjacent to that wall forward quite a bit more.

[Lord_AndraK]

This comment really hit home. I played my first game last night with the Shamans and I swear they always had one die that was a one or a two. Who would have thought when rolling a six sided die you would roll so many ones and twos!!:mad:

I Feel your pain I too have experienced in improbable bad luck to the extent that i know hate Shamans

If i can afford it im going to try putting smashers in there place, ROCK ON SMASHERS!

[Tidus]

The common thing kind of makes me wonder if the original summoners from the starter sets will have their own seperate faction decks (like vanguard/Fallen kingdom).... or maybe just packs of the commons.

[Quintaton16]

I'm not completely sure I understand the question, but I'll give it a shot.

So far, we know that existing factions will get reinforcement packs that include new Commons and Champions, as well as a whole bunch of Mercenaries that can be subbed in.

There will also be new Faction packs like the Vanguard and Fallen Kingdom packs, except instead of Ret-Talus, they will include "Warmarshal Brond, Summoner of the Guild Dwarves" (no, that's not a tease, I'm not a playtester, I have no idea what the next Dwarf Summoner will be like) with his own Events and some Commons and Champions. We have been told that these will be released after the new Factions like Cloaks and Jungle Elves have been released and Truth doesn't have any new factions that he thinks we want more.

So I think that the answer to your question is no. I have asked whether there will be new Reference Cards/Event sets for existing Summoners, and the answer to that is no, so I think for Grognack and Elien you are stuck with the Reinforcement Packs (not that that's necessarily a bad thing).

EDIT: all this is coming from this (http://www.plaidhatgames.com/sum_forums/showthread.php?t=342&page=3) thread, pages three and four.

[KCU Master 2007]

If i can afford it im going to try putting smashers in there place, ROCK ON SMASHERS!

I did this. I pulled all my shamans (except one) and dropped in more smashers and fighters (cheaper and easier to get out in a pinch). I really like this more than having shamans in there and will probably keep it that way.

I haven't really changed the other decks yet.

[Quintaton16]

I have a very ambitious Orc deck idea from back when the winners of the Design-a-Merc came out. I call it "All You Need is Life"

It goes something like this:
Fighter x2
Stoneclad Brawlers (that is their name, right?) x6
Smashers x6
Shamans x4

Or something along those lines.

The idea of course is to make the opponent work for every kill, beyond even what the Orcs normally can do. This was actually developed before the Vanguard previews, so it's already kind of obsolete. I still like it though, especially since the Brawlers synergize so brilliantly with Ice Walls.

I understand the antipathy for Shamans, but they are still perhaps my favorite Orc Unit (much better than those Fighters. Ick.) Two attack, two life and range for only one Magic is so insane I still can't quite wrap my mind around it. Even if they never kill anything, they are hard to ignore and even harder to deal with. I strongly suspect that you guys will rethink your position very much when Vanguards start hitting the table in a couple weeks.

[KCU Master 2007]

My wife loves the Shamans, we played tonight and she killed a unit (or at least damaged a champion) at least 80% of the time. It was crazy. I do like them and tried using them, but they are simply not reliable enough for me.

[Lord_AndraK]

I hate Shamans infact im ordering a second starter pack just so i can replace all but the starting setup one for smashers!

The Lone Shaman Deck
8x Fighters
9x Smashers
1x Shaman

Even then ill just leave him on the back line to take the occasional pot shots when i have a spare attack, or maybe even as a meat shield... or fury spring board... he he eh eh!

[Dromar]

I love Shamans. You'll love Shamans too once Vanguard comes out. All their commons have 2 life, they heal any partial injuries, and can redirect melee attacks. AND most of their commons cost 2. It's pretty much the best case scenario for the Shaman.

[KCU Master 2007]

Only if you can manage those to hit on both dice. I know the odds but I seem to always be on the end that misses.

[Jexik]

Played a game with the Vanguard against my nephew recently, and as others have said, the Shamans work great against all of their commons. If the FK/Vanguard are more popular than the CG, I could maybe see a deck like this being good:

9x Shaman
7x Smasher
2x Fighter

Then sub out someone, maybe Blagog or Krung, for KQ, to try to get the cost curve down a little.

[Tidus]

Multiple Shamans actually seems okay, they are cheap and durable. When their attack does work, it hurts. They could prove to be a good swarm team along with the beefy Smashers.

I would like to try experimenting with the Vanguard and Fallen Kingdom sometime soon.

[Jivatma]

I've seen this a lot on these board(s). Everybody always talks about offense offense offense When comparing units. But honestly - look at it from your opponent's perspective? What units would you NOT want to see? Smashers and Shamans? Why? Because they're hard to kill and they hurt. Fighters tend to be a one-turn unit and thus free magic.

I honestly like the current distribution of all factions.

[Jexik]

I've seen this a lot on these board(s). Everybody always talks about offense offense offense When comparing units. But honestly - look at it from your opponent's perspective? What units would you NOT want to see? Smashers and Shamans? Why? Because they're hard to kill and they hurt. Fighters tend to be a one-turn unit and thus free magic.

I honestly like the current distribution of all factions.

Yeah, that was part of my thought behind my deck. Fighters are probably my least favorite Common for the TO's, yet some people swear by them. If you've got 3 of them out, you're bound to score some furies and put a lot of pressure on the other guy.

[Jivatma]

Yeah, that was part of my thought behind my deck. Fighters are probably my least favorite Common for the TO's, yet some people swear by them. If you've got 3 of them out, you're bound to score some furies and put a lot of pressure on the other guy.

Fighters have their place of course. But with 2 dice i'm almost guaranteed 1 hit (excluding shamans). Fury is nice and funny as all hell when it starts working, but I'd much rather just roll 2 dice. Especially against factions like Elves and Dwarves.

[gamjuven]

I am liking most of the natural builds of the decks as usually there are situations where I could see myself using any of the units, but some changes I think I will be making once I get the FK and Vans are as follows:

For the FK I think I will be maxing out on zombies. The ability to keep on bringing back units is huge, and having more of them means getting more out there, having them die, only to have a limitless pool of more zombies to get. I would not be too afraid to trash some to pay for summons either. I think I would get rid of at least one reaper, but mostly the skeletal archers to bring the zombies to 10. I think it would work really well (especially against CG). I can't wait to try them out.

For the Vanguard I think I would drop the priests and put in 2 guardian knights (max), then keep adding archers in. I just don't like healing in Summoner Wars. I don't think it's worth it, and I'd rather have Guardians. There is a chance I might keep the priests in favor of archers but I know I want as many guardians as possible. I also think the vanguard are likely to be the faction where I will try out mercenaries first as well. But perhaps I need to play them more first.

Edit: Now that I'm thinking about it I might want to drop the engineers (from dwarves) in favor of a combination of the other commons in that faction. The wall-busting strategy is devastating if it works, but I think it is too reliant on really good luck to be a proper strategy and I have only once come even close to pulling it off (still didn't actually ever deny the option of summoning). I just don't think you should rely on it in a game and it would be much better to have spearmen or guardians.

[Jexik]

Edit: Now that I'm thinking about it I might want to drop the engineers (from dwarves) in favor of a combination of the other commons in that faction. The wall-busting strategy is devastating if it works, but I think it is too reliant on really good luck to be a proper strategy and I have only once come even close to pulling it off (still didn't actually ever deny the option of summoning). I just don't think you should rely on it in a game and it would be much better to have spearmen or guardians.

I agree that engineers might go on the chopping block in my decks, but disagree about wall destruction. I've seen it come up a lot.

[darkbladecb]

I think I would get rid of at least one reaper, but mostly the skeletal archers to bring the zombies to 10. I think it would work really well (especially against CG). I can't wait to try them out.

For the Vanguard I think I would drop the priests and put in 2 guardian knights (max), then keep adding archers in. I just don't like healing in Summoner Wars.

The wall-busting strategy is devastating if it works, but I think it is too reliant on really good luck to be a proper strategy and I have only once come even close to pulling it off (still didn't actually ever deny the option of summoning).

I just want to throw out the following:
1) I'd replace Reaper before I replaced Skeletal Archers. Their magic denial abilitiy is second only to Dark Sacrifice in terms of importance to the FK, in my opinion. It is devastating and can be absolutely infuriating to kill 3, 4, 5 archers and have NO magic from them while your opponent kills your units back and builds an enormous magic surplus ... and then brings them all back to life. You can stock up on Zombies. I just think Reapers are less important.

2) Do remember you need a FEW Priests, as otherwise some of Sera's event cards will be worthless (as they boost Priests' attack ... which can be pretty awesome when played at the right time).

3) Whenever I play any faction not the Guild Dwarves, I get really sad that I don't have any copies of Besiege the Walls in my deck. Breaking walls is awesome. Once your opponent's start realizing they only need as many units on the board as they can attack with, there are turns when you are only going to be able to attack 1 or 2 units ... making a free attack on a wall much more appealing and blowing it up that much more fun. =)

[Quintaton16]

I agree completely with maxing out Zombies for several reasons. First, Infect requires you to have a Zombie in your Discard pile, and why wouldn't you want a free 2-cost Common? Second, Ret-Talus' Raise the Dead costs 2 no matter what you Summon, so you want plenty of Commons that are worth 2.

The question is what to drop for the extra 4 Zombie Warriors. I'm leaning toward

2x Skeletal Archers (required)
10x Zombie Warriors
6x Reapers,

but I'm not yet sure.