PDA

View Full Version : War of the Beard Oh yeah Duffman



dreameater
28-02-2009, 20:22
Okay I have returned to the hobby, and I love dwarves and the High elves but, I can't make a descion which one to choose and I have a few question to ask about them.

1.) Are both of the army books 7th ed.
2.) What there syles of play.
3.) Are they both competitive.
4.) Are there any cheesy builds in them to avoid.
5.) Which one is the mosy popular.
6.) Any info on them fluffwise.

Thanks in advance

:-) Dream :-(

Lord Malorne
28-02-2009, 20:38
Okay I have returned to the hobby, and I love dwarves and the High elves but, I can't make a descion which one to choose and I have a few question to ask about them.

1.) Are both of the army books 7th ed.
2.) What there syles of play.
3.) Are they both competitive.
4.) Are there any cheesy builds in them to avoid.
5.) Which one is the mosy popular.
6.) Any info on them fluffwise.

Thanks in advance

:-) Dream :-(

1)They are both 7th, though the Dwarf book was released begining of 7th/end of 6th. Though it is made for 7th regardless.

2)(Quick overview, people know more...)

Dwarf, gunline (thats out of the way) tough heavily armoured warriors that are hard to break, good artilary and can have lots of anti magic.

High Elves, fast (ASF rule afterall) works well in support of each other more so than most armies, can have good magic and have many fast moving units.

3)Yes, both can be very good.

4)Don't know, one player for each here so 50/50 here, being that HE's were released more recently likely they are played more.

5)Look in their books.

Stuffburger
28-02-2009, 20:47
A caution against dwarves- a lot of people find the universal M3 and reliance on gunlines as their most competitive build very frustrating. They have excellent rock hard infantry and if you're willing to accept slightly fewer wins a low to medium shooting army can be fun to play with. Thorek also gets a lot of hate.

Elves are very quick, with everything M5 or better, and ASF. Some people dislike the ASF, saying it makes the game less tactical. Universal T3 is another complaining point. Teclis is a SC people whine about, as are dragon-heavy lists.

I'd go elves- more variety of models, much better movement and more viable builds.

sroblin
28-02-2009, 22:07
3.) Are they both competitive.

Yes, both are competitive; although the limited mobility of the dwarves is being looked on with less favor these days.


4.) Are there any cheesy builds in them to avoid.
Armies relying on the special character Thorek have drawn a notorious amount of ire. In general, dwarven lists that are only made up of ranged attackers can be a bit unpleasant.

The Star Dragon prince and heavy cavalry army for High Elves has drawn some complaint for its ubiquity; and mage-heavy lists including Teclis are also considered kind of nasty. Whether they are in fact cheesy can be debated, but they definitely consitute 'power builds' which can be tiresome after sufficient repetition.

5.) Which one is the mosy popular.

I see more threads on high elves, these days, though it would be fair to accuse me about bias. But that is my honest opinion.
6.) Any info on them fluffwise.
The wikipedia pages are unusually verbose, but the armybooks are really the best source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_(Warhammer)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Elves_(Warhammer)

High Elven history forms more of a cohesive epic tale IMO because they are more unified, it is about a people trying to correct for the sins of their past. Dwarf fluff is more episodic, and is fundamentally about people who wish to avoid change.

decker_cky
28-02-2009, 22:53
And Dwarfs don't need a gunline. You can make a very solid combat army with them, particularly using the anvil to improve your mobility.

Mireadur
28-02-2009, 23:19
Too bad the anvil is the g-heyst thing on earth, its a pity that such a nice model gets such unpleasant and anticlimatic rules. It can really make your oppononent dislike playing games where it is involved.

Condottiere
01-03-2009, 02:06
If you like movement, it's Elves; if you like absorbing blows and punching back harder, it's Dwarves.

decker_cky
01-03-2009, 04:19
Too bad the anvil is the g-heyst thing on earth, its a pity that such a nice model gets such unpleasant and anticlimatic rules. It can really make your oppononent dislike playing games where it is involved.

Only if you use the special character. With normal rules it's very well balanced. And I don't think there's really anything about it that makes it particularly homosexual.

Mireadur
01-03-2009, 11:16
Affecting 3 enemy units for 2D6 S4 hits anywhere on the game board on a simple roll of 4+ is totally retarded, wheter you like it or not.

On a 2+ all army gets to reroll fear and terror (what with LD9 and 10 is almost inmunity) or just a 4+ to make you inmune and have rerolls on panic and BSB effects all across the battlefield.

The 3rd power is as retarded as the other 2 but i guess its not worth mentioning.

Im curious about what the word ''balanced'' means for you. However, i have never talked about unbalance but rather retarded and unfun rules. What kind of strategy game is to reduce a total ownage or not on the enemy army to a roll of 4+?

Rather just do the roll on the start of the game to see who wins, you could even save the time of deploying the armies.

Lemonbrick
01-03-2009, 11:37
Mireadur - dude thats a lot'o hate for the anvil dude and the information is not entirely correct + the cost of an anvil in 2k of points means you could buy another unit of beards for the cost of it.
- but thats the topic (flame war?) for another thread I think ;)

getting back to the pointy ears and beards

Both armies are built for the 7th edition but I think the High elves are more 7th edition.

I think your choice is down to feel of what you like to paint and play

elves tend to be light colours while dwarfs tend to be darker with chain mail

in play terms do you want magic ? if so your choice is made
do you want artillery ? if so your choice is made
(if you want both you will have to go empire ^^)
do you want horsey's ?
ask your self these kind of q' i think

both races have cool background and character

personally i'm stroking my beard and smok'in my pipe and sharpening my axe! dwarfs ftw

enyoss
01-03-2009, 11:52
As a High Elf player I would say that the features I like about the army are the fast movement and the hard hitting, yet somewhat fragile, elite infantry. With the new book there are lots of builds which work well, and all but one of the units are worthwhile (poor silverhelms :().

As Dwarf opponent, I would say that their strengths are definitely their durability. Even a core unit of 20 clansmen are frustratingly hard to kill in combat... it's like wading through treacle. Basically, they play exactly like their character, stubborn and relentless.

On a side note, and without getting too drawn on this, I wouldn't worry too much about a regular anvil being broken. It's irritating, but that's just the way the cookie crumbles*. Plus, the movement anvil power is really useful if you want to forego the gunline and put some emphasis on combat, which will generally make for a better game for you and your opponent.

Finally, and I say this as a High Elf man (... a man's man, if you will ;)), read their background histories, as the rich High Elf background is what lured me from playing Dwarfs way back in 4th edition, and I've never looked back.

* Note: I'm saying this from the perspective of a Wood Elf player as well, who pretty much get the worst deal from Wrath and Ruin.

Mireadur
01-03-2009, 14:36
Just want to clarify that the information given above is 100% correct as i have given it with the book in front of me.

Dont get me wrong, i love dwarfs, and thats the reason why i hate the anvil rules so much :p

Anyway and back on topic. Im saddened to say that the dwarven book was only built with 7th ed in mind ''in the moment it was written'', but later on GW changed its policy regarding some aspects of the game such as minimun models to form up a rank and auto-hit rules (organ gun).

Unit costs however, are pointed up reflecting the 7th ed standarts.

Models and fluff wise, they are 2 armies that will satisfy you to the extreme. Rules wise i fear not: both armies are more criticized for its flaws than its right decissions.

selone
01-03-2009, 14:40
Don't you think dwarves are getting more and more punished for their lack of mobility and over-reliance on gunlines? It seems that the only real competitive build is the thorek anvil of doom gunline build which I imagine isn't fun to play against. Whereas H.Elves have more options IMO.

Leogun_91
01-03-2009, 20:14
Affecting 3 enemy units for 2D6 S4 hits anywhere on the game board on a simple roll of 4+ is totally retarded, wheter you like it or not.The two orc shamans (one great and one normal) I get for the same points and same ammount of characters slots can often do better than that and as you need ancient power to be that good they are less likely to blow up.


On a 2+ all army gets to reroll fear and terror (what with LD9 and 10 is almost inmunity) or just a 4+ to make you inmune and have rerolls on panic and BSB effects all across the battlefield..The re-roll to fear and terror is normally not worth it you still autobreak from fear and it only starts becoming attractive when you´r oponent has succesfully cast doom and darkness or gone heavy on auras of dark majesty.




The 3rd power is as retarded as the other 2 but i guess its not worth mentioning...My orc shamans can still do better than that and with a higher base mobility, the dwarfs need something to move which is not true for O&G and VC which both have powers to do so.


Im curious about what the word ''balanced'' means for you. However, i have never talked about unbalance but rather retarded and unfun rules. What kind of strategy game is to reduce a total ownage or not on the enemy army to a roll of 4+?That is not true, in 2000pts games where the enemy is an army with very few units with very low saves it could be true but you only ever get one anvil and it effects the rest of the army so much that you must really choose carefully what to do each round, and if you choose to use ancient it is less reliable than a cannon with no engineers or runes.

decker_cky
01-03-2009, 21:27
Ancient power is a gamble, so it's a tactical decision whether to go for the ancient power and risk the anvil, or to play it safe and just boost a single unit. It makes the lists you can make more flexible, but costs a lot of points in doing so. To me, that's a balanced choice.

Mireadur
01-03-2009, 22:19
Im getting out of this thread, sorry for transforming it into an anvil debate guys =)

Good luck with with that greatly balanced artifact!