PDA

View Full Version : On Dwarven Rangers



Keller
10-07-2009, 13:28
I am planning on starting a small dwarf army for our local shop's 1000 point league. Where it escalates from there, I can't even hope to guess. So, in looking at dwarves, I am planning on adding some Rangers to my collection and am wondering:

What type of unit works best for Rangers? Is it Quarrelers, Warriors or Long Beards? What type of unit do you prefer, and of what size and what equipment?

I am leaning a bit toward Quarrelers at the moment, due largely to my like of scouting ranged-units. However, with move-or-fire weapons combined with their slow movement, I worry that they will not add much to my force beyond what a normal unit of quarrelers would.

Mephaine
10-07-2009, 13:44
Bonuses I see with Rangers is that you get closer to your foe and can set up some nice march blocks with the unit plus give them Great Weapons, if I remember right, you can easily threaten the enemy flank. "Oh you charge me, well I stand and shoot and then chop you into nothing." So yah Quarrelers I would say as rangers but if you got spare parts fromother kits add them in, green stuff some cloaks and campign gear.

Keller
10-07-2009, 14:27
Yeah, I am planning on doing some light conversion work to represent them as Rangers, so I was wonderin what unit to do it to. If I just make them normal and play as scouts, I could just pick whatever unit whenever I wanted, but I don't want to do that.

BlackViper
10-07-2009, 14:27
If you want to take rangers, don't bank on them actually popping up on your opponent's flanks or rear.

In order to use the scouts rule you have to set up out of sight and in area terrain (if memory serves correctly). Since rangers no longer have move through cover, that means they're going to spend several turns shifting around in terrain trying to achieve something. That tends not to work so well with move-or-fire weapons.

On the other hand, it does allow you to set up in your own deploment zone after you've seen your opponents forces. Something that can be handy in its own right, but obviously comes at a price.

The other great thing is that it gives your warriors or longbeards access to throwing axes; Strength 4 (or 5!) ranged attacks. They make a great charge response or a nasty surprise for unsuspecting opponents!

Keller
10-07-2009, 15:38
IIRC, Scoutting just has to be 10" away and outside of LoS. So one could hide behind terrain and gain the advantage of scouting w/o being slowed by being in the terrain itself. I will have to doublecheck, though.

The late deployment is helpful too, in case one cannot scout or it would not be advantageous to do so.

I had considered the Throwing Axes, though was not really thinking of them as a stand-and-shoot response. I am begining to really like the idea of warrior scouts. Perhaps a small unit of 12 in a 2x6 formation to fight enemies while the main force advances?

Atzcapotzalco
10-07-2009, 16:20
In only a thousand points, the lower cost and heavy armour of warriors makes them a good option, but you really should be thinking in terms of having them in position to support the main force after a couple of turns worth of movement rather than trying to fight enemies by themselves.
Crossbows are also a a good option however, and combine well with the scouting rule-remember having seen how your opponent's deployed, you always have the option of setting them up normally, but having seen where you most want the extra missile fire-very useful to a low movement army.
Espescially if they lack crossbows, throwing axes are one of the big reasons to field rangers-unlike your other missile troops, the ability to move and fire means they aren't entirely dependant on an enemy ending their movement in your arc of sight.

Dead Man Walking
11-07-2009, 00:15
Do yourself a favor and choose another theme, you happened to pick the worst unit in the entire dwarf book. You have to set up out of sight in terrain, oh and you cant move and fire or move through terrain very quickly. You also cost more points than most elite units cost per dwarf.

Of course you can do it anyways, but you should take this advice before you start;
1. Place your army on the table, try to get in thier deployment.
2. Ask your opponent to hold you down.
3. Punch yourself in the face repeatedly until you collapse.
4. Wake up after your opponent has left for the day.
Trust me, its far less painful.

fishound7
11-07-2009, 11:25
If your hell bent on using rangers this is how u do it. The game starts when placing terrian not in deployment. If in a tournament where the terrian is set up prior its not even worth rangers. Place a forest 10" away from either sides deployment edges (meaning in the middle but to a side). That ensures that your rangers actually have a place to be put.

One use is make a 10 man unit of dwarf warrior rangers with gw and shield and just put them in the forest and have them do nothing but march block anything that goes near that forest. Last 2 turns of the game have them march out and contest corners or claim table edges your choice. Thats Almost worth the points.

I've really tried to make rangers work and be worthwhile but I want to say more then most of the time they end up in my deployment area. They are just not worth it imo. Miners do a WAY better job then rangers and for cheaper. But that takes up a special slot. So if you have spare points you can get ghetto miners (rangers). You also shouldn't have spare points in a dwarf army as for me its always a points crunch.

Condottiere
11-07-2009, 19:04
I've seen players take Rangers and park them in terrain in the middle of the board, but I've also seen them get wiped out. The best observation I can make is that if they can delay something rather nasty from reaching you, or prevent your opponent from taking over terrain that would greatly discomfort you, Rangers may be worth their cost.

lcfr
12-07-2009, 02:15
I have to second Dead Man Walking. Rangers are a poor choice imo (especially quarreler-rangers that cost 15pts/model), and don't provide a dwarf army with anything that miners can't just as well achieve. If you are absolutely deadset on fielding them, be very conservative with their Scouts rule; that is, just because they're Scouts doesn't mean you should always deploy them as Scouts!

Keller
13-07-2009, 17:03
Thanks for all of the input, everyone.

I am a little disapoint to hear that Rangers are largely not worth their points, though I had somewhat guessed they were not the most cost-effective units in the list. I will try some out for a few games, but I will probably end up using Miners more, if they reflect what most people suggest here.

Thanks again!

Peril
13-07-2009, 19:31
If they could move through forest without penalty they would be worth taking. As it is, they are pretty bad (luckily you don't pay alot of the upgrade). The good news is plain old Quarrelers with Great Weapons are great.

Condottiere
13-07-2009, 19:42
That's true - they're solid and reliable. I can use them as a gunline/anvil. though a little costly.

Atzcapotzalco
15-07-2009, 14:00
Accepting that crossbow dwarves with great weapons are a good unit, I fail to see how it can then not be worth the token extra cost to allow them to deploy as scouts, just for the advantage of seeing the enemy deployment before placing them-the chance that they might gain access to a good position outside your deployment zone is something of a bonus on top of that.

Condottiere
15-07-2009, 14:50
I don't think anyone would doubt their utility, it's just the price that you pay for it might not be worth it. The Dwarven armies can bunch up and those extra points might be used to strengthen their primary defence line.

Peril
15-07-2009, 19:03
Exactly. A spread out Dwarf army is a soon-to-be-tabled Dwarf army.

Mercules
15-07-2009, 19:40
I see misinformation is running wild again.

Scouts need to deploy more than 10" from the enemy, out of line-of-sight, and in or behind terrain. Plop impassible terrain on each side of the center and deploy your scouts behind it facing left of right. If anyone passes by the terrain you are in a flanking position and might be able to hold them up while your other dwarves get into a charge position. Basically they just plug up an opening in terrain without blocking your shooting.

Entropolus
15-07-2009, 22:00
Its a lot harder in practice to place a 10 man, single rank unit sticking out behind a piece of terrain and keep the entire unit out of the line of sight of the enemy.

BeatTheBeat
15-07-2009, 22:48
My 1000 pts list is built around a block of 15 longbeard rangers with throwing axes and a thane, the rune of slowness, and rune of challenge. This unit makes short work of anything! They have held up to CoK, vampires, flanking varghulfs, literally anything! They have actually never fled, believe it or not. Yes, they are hideously expensive in an already expensive army, but I tend to use them to hold one flank while the rest of the army handles itself...

Yes. They are _that_ good. Here is my list if you want to try it out:

Thane
Great Weapon, Shield
Rune of Stone, Rune of Resistance, Rune of Challenge
126 pts


15 Longbeard Rangers
Full Command, Shields, Great Weapons, Throwing Axes
Rune of Slowness
315 pts

10 Warriors (used kind of like an empire detachment to the larger block)
Shields, Great Weapon
110 pts

25 Warriors
Full Command, shields
250 pts

5 Miners (used either as second "detachment" to big block, or as anti-warmachine/missile troop threat)

Gyrocopter

...go on, try it :)

Keller
16-07-2009, 16:09
Its a lot harder in practice to place a 10 man, single rank unit sticking out behind a piece of terrain and keep the entire unit out of the line of sight of the enemy.
Yes, but one can deploy in several ranks, then reform into whatever formation seems appropriate when you move to get LoS. One would have to move anyway, since you must be out of LoS to scout in the first place.



My 1000 pts list is built around a block of 15 longbeard rangers with throwing axes and a thane, the rune of slowness, and rune of challenge. This unit makes short work of anything! They have held up to CoK, vampires, flanking varghulfs, literally anything! They have actually never fled, believe it or not. Yes, they are hideously expensive in an already expensive army, but I tend to use them to hold one flank while the rest of the army handles itself...

Yes. They are _that_ good. Here is my list if you want to try it out:

Thane
Great Weapon, Shield
Rune of Stone, Rune of Resistance, Rune of Challenge
126 pts

No Rune of Brotherhood? So you just take ranger-upgrade to have the throwing axes then?

Mercules
16-07-2009, 18:11
Its a lot harder in practice to place a 10 man, single rank unit sticking out behind a piece of terrain and keep the entire unit out of the line of sight of the enemy.

Correct, it is a lot easier to deploy 3 wide so you are like so.

rrr
rrr
rrr
.r.

That chunk can fit behind a lot of terrain. If you have throwing weapons then you simply use Change Formation to expand frontage by up to 5. So you can then change to a 5x2 formation, once you have your first turn, or if you really want a lot of shots expand out to 8 wide and throw your axes.

BeatTheBeat
16-07-2009, 20:39
No Rune of Brotherhood? So you just take ranger-upgrade to have the throwing axes then?

Sometimes, yes! That list was my latest incarnation, but I've tried using Brotherhood as well, and actually most often did.