PDA

View Full Version : GW's on Dwarf's or not?



Eatainel
16-03-2008, 18:37
I'm starting to build a new 7th edition Dwarf army and have a question. So far the regiment I have painted up is using shields. For one aesthetically I like the look more than GW's and for two they seem a bit better in game terms as Dwarfs are likely to never ever get the charge. And if the enemy is decently choppy they can shred your front rank and leave you no attacks left. Meaning that unless you have a character or standard with Rune of Slowness the only way to use GW Warriors or any Dwarf troop with GW's is to countercharge an enemy locked in combat with a more durable troop. Is this correct a correct assesment or am I missing something? Because if this is right it seems more durable troops are preferred. I really would like to try some Hammerers in this army but if they aren't gonna actually get to hit the enemy they don't seem worth taking over Ironbreakers for example.

Mista Wu
16-03-2008, 19:16
i havent played dwarfs, but imo u dont need your whole army to have shields. just plan well, use a shield-equipped unit to take the charge, then use hammerers for a countercharge.

Nagash333
16-03-2008, 19:53
Great Weapons can be an excellent choicen (certainly hammerers, practically bloody imoveable!).

There are a couple of ways to get round the striking last:

a) character with always strikes first
b) anvil of doom

Lennart.nevanoja
17-03-2008, 11:43
Great Weapons is extremely useful if you have units of 10 models. because then you have the maneuverability to charge the flanks or act as charge directors and in combination with anvil of doom thy get real nasty.

with kind regards

Stu
17-03-2008, 12:06
With dwarfs you almost never strike first anyway so GW will give you the +2st Bonus without a penalty (at least that is how I like to see it)
Usually I use shields for extra protection from shooting and in sometimes in cc but afterward in come the big axes

marv335
17-03-2008, 12:17
Heh, I took out an entire unit of Knights of Blood Keep with a unit of dwarves with great weapons at the weekend.
Well worth having.

shartmatau
17-03-2008, 13:52
I think its smart to give half your units GWs and shields. These units have the option of either. The other half only has shields. It takes good placement and moving but works wonders.

GrogsnotPowwabomba
17-03-2008, 14:56
Hammerers > Ironbreakers. They are more versatile than Ironbreakers and will hold in almost all situations (even Ironbreakers could not withstand a Blood Knight charge, for example).

I honestly don't understand the point of Ironbreakers. Hammerers with Shields are the same cost, and can do so much more... T4, Heavy Armor, & Stubborn at Ld 9 means they can receive a charge, and then in later rounds of combat swing those great weapons to good effect.

I would not use great weapons on Dwarf core units, however (Warriors, Long Beards, etc.) unless you have a very specific purpose in mind.


With dwarfs you almost never strike first anyway so GW will give you the +2st Bonus without a penalty (at least that is how I like to see it)

Yeah, but not using your shields means more Dwarfs will die, adding to your opponent's CR. I tried Longbeards with great weapons for awhile, but rarely did I see the point in actually using the great weapons. I think they are too costly and not worth it the majority of the time.

Dwarfs best win combat through static CR combined with characters. Therefore, I think minimizing casualties is the best path (and cheaper)...

Crazy Harborc
18-03-2008, 00:33
I use Dwarves with GWs. S5 hits are worth the risk. Heck, if the opponent charges my Dwarves, I do have the choice to go for the shield save. Just about half the time, opponents are only hitting with a S4 or only 3. That's when I gamble and use their GWs to strike back.

When it works all the times it didn't work are forgotten.:D

vorac
18-03-2008, 03:17
GrogsnotPowwabomba thats not neccessarily true in my first game with Blood Knights a unit of Ironbreakers held after i annihilated 9 of them because of a rune that allows them to be stubborn on 4+ and immune to fear, it helped that the lord was with them but thats besides the point.

Peril
18-03-2008, 05:16
I find that Dwarves (for me) are all about static res and CR denial, so I almost always have shields. Even on my Hammerers (If you take a Lord its a no brainer IMO) I rarely use the Great Weapons. Many units can take down T4/5+ guys. My lord is there to do the killing work, and I would rather keep my units from edging closer to "below half" status.

With small units with Great Weapons - I find that they just get charged by a unit of Dire Wolves or something and autobreak. When I play Dwarves I HATE losing any units so I don't like even chancing it.

However, on Quarrelers - LOVE Great Weapons. Your opponent will seriously reconsider attacking a unit of Stand and Shooting xbowmen who are WS4 T4 guys with GWs unless they are bringing serious heat. If they DO, you can seriously make them pay. I take 15 to 20, with Standard and Musician and stick'em on a hill. Expensive, but my opponent can almost never get VPs for them.

Eatainel
18-03-2008, 13:16
Hmm all great suggestions so far so I think the best solution is one unit purely equipped with shields and another with GW and shields. That'll give me the 3 solid infantry blocks I want and love. Now to add a fourth or not...that is the qeustion.

GrogsnotPowwabomba
18-03-2008, 15:44
GrogsnotPowwabomba thats not neccessarily true in my first game with Blood Knights a unit of Ironbreakers held after i annihilated 9 of them because of a rune that allows them to be stubborn on 4+ and immune to fear, it helped that the lord was with them but thats besides the point.

Why not just use the Hammerers, who are Stubborn always (not just 4+), can take the same fear immunity rune (or get it for "free" with a Lord joining them), and can use great weapons in that situation (Ironbreakers get a 6+ save against the Blood Knights attacks, which is not nearly as good as hitting with the great weapons). The unit will probably be cheaper as well since it has less runes to make it stubborn, etc.

brettz123
18-03-2008, 17:47
I'm starting to build a new 7th edition Dwarf army and have a question. So far the regiment I have painted up is using shields. For one aesthetically I like the look more than GW's and for two they seem a bit better in game terms as Dwarfs are likely to never ever get the charge. And if the enemy is decently choppy they can shred your front rank and leave you no attacks left. Meaning that unless you have a character or standard with Rune of Slowness the only way to use GW Warriors or any Dwarf troop with GW's is to countercharge an enemy locked in combat with a more durable troop. Is this correct a correct assesment or am I missing something? Because if this is right it seems more durable troops are preferred. I really would like to try some Hammerers in this army but if they aren't gonna actually get to hit the enemy they don't seem worth taking over Ironbreakers for example.

If the unit that charges you is good enough to actually chew through an entire rank of dwarves are the shields really going to matter that much?

Moepho
18-03-2008, 19:24
However, on Quarrelers - LOVE Great Weapons. Your opponent will seriously reconsider attacking a unit of Stand and Shooting xbowmen who are WS4 T4 guys with GWs unless they are bringing serious heat. If they DO, you can seriously make them pay. I take 15 to 20, with Standard and Musician and stick'em on a hill. Expensive, but my opponent can almost never get VPs for them.


I've been wanting to try something similar with Rangers...glad to see it works!

GrogsnotPowwabomba
18-03-2008, 19:37
If the unit that charges you is good enough to actually chew through an entire rank of dwarves are the shields really going to matter that much?

No, but I think that is the exception rather than the norm...

Huw_Dawson
18-03-2008, 19:43
Hammerers > Ironbreakers. They are more versatile than Ironbreakers and will hold in almost all situations (even Ironbreakers could not withstand a Blood Knight charge, for example).

I honestly don't understand the point of Ironbreakers. Hammerers with Shields are the same cost, and can do so much more... T4, Heavy Armor, & Stubborn at Ld 9 means they can receive a charge, and then in later rounds of combat swing those great weapons to good effect.

I actually use them without shields myself - I use the points I save for engineers for my bolt throwers. :) The fact is that anything that eats through a front rank of a Hammers unit is probably a bunch of knights, and I'd much rather be holding a big hammer than a shield against a knight...

- Huw