PDA

View Full Version : Do you want Dogs of War back?



Mr. Gobbo
08-01-2010, 22:47
Would you want Dogs of War to become an official army list again, and why or why not?

Sorry about the title typo. It should be "Do you want Dogs of War back?"

Bard Harlock
08-01-2010, 22:50
No. It makes it too easy to fill in the gaps in your army; gaps that may be there for balance reasons. It also removes some critical thinking and strategy from commanders.

ETA: Hmm, reading the responses following mine, I do see a legitimate reason for this army as a whole. Perhaps if it was just a separate army on its own and not an army for hire by other armies: meaning we wouldn't see dwarves hiring wizards, WoC hiring shooters, etc.

Hypaspist
08-01-2010, 22:51
Based on the fact that it's the fantasy army I would feel most at home playing, then yes. (as a self contained mercenary force, not as something for others to cherry pick from)

Ishivia
08-01-2010, 22:52
Aye, I do.

The whole concept of a mecernary army is rather cool, along with the regiments of renown the army just screams "Nice" :P

Further more, it's a good army for those of us, who have a hard time sticking with just one army, since it's basically a lot of different races mashed together :P

~'shiv

Red Metal
08-01-2010, 23:18
As a stand-alone army, no.

Though, it would be nice if certain units were added to other army lists as Special Character types or Rare units.

Davo
08-01-2010, 23:27
They appeared a bit after my time since I last played.

Was it basically just a you get some cool looking regiments with a nice background to put in your army book?

Asp
08-01-2010, 23:29
as an auxiliary army: no, for balance reasons

as a stand-alone army: principally yes, but in reality no: i would rather have some other than a 3rd human army

gorenut
09-01-2010, 00:22
I'd like it back as both a stand alone and as a choice for other armies to pick and choose from. I think its very fluffy and gives people an excuse to convert/paint elements that wouldn't normally be in their own army. With DoC out and about.. I don't see how anything else can be more broken than them.. but I suppose as an extra measure, just add a "with opponent's permission" or something.

Grimstonefire
09-01-2010, 01:08
I think dogs of war should come back, but not as a complete army in themselves.

I'd like them to expand the idea to include 'regiments of reknown' that are directly relevant to each army.

So for example; beastmen could take a really famous regiment of centigors with bows or something. Dwarfs with additional hand weapons, empire infantry with repeater handguns. That sort of thing.

They wouldn't all have models released, but people would have balanced rules to point to.

_toast_
09-01-2010, 01:14
two thumbs up. I would love to see them come back. Not so much as attachments for other armies, but rather a full on army. Mostly just for the models :P

Justicar_Freezer
09-01-2010, 01:17
I'd like to see the Dogs of war brought back as both a stand alone army and as additionial units to other armies. One of the reasons is because one of the guys in my group has an entire army of Dogs of war and I'd like to see him get updated rules for it. The other reason is I think they made an interesting addition to the armies of Fantasy. They weren't just another human army they had bits of every race including dwarves, lizardmen, high elves, dark elves, halflings, and Ogres. That and I don't think a few more well thought out human armies would be a bad thing for fantasy.

Just my 2 cents.

Goldenwolf
09-01-2010, 01:40
I don't think so.

As an army they were ok. As people using them to fill gaps in their armies it made the game more predictable, and certain combinations were used a lot to offset an armies weaknesses.

Concentrate on what we have, and maybe bring out a new army, rather than dredging up something that was broken and discarded.

I know that the minis looked nice, but I like the game to be about tactical leadership rather than who has the most money to fill out their army.

Just my thoughts

Bloodknight
09-01-2010, 01:50
I'd like to see them back as a standalone army. Hell, I've got 9K of them and I'll be damned if I have to fit all that stuff into an Empire army - the most logical but also most boring choice in WFB. I'd even probably have to divide them into an Empire army (what's with my pikemen? booo!), a Chaos army (all those Norse need a job), a Dwarf army and a weird mix of Elven armies, just going from the RoR I own.

That said, I'd be pretty angry if they made me the guy who gets/got two armies squatted already and had to live in fear of a 3rd one being squatted, too (although the Dark Eldar at least are out of that danger).

sulla
09-01-2010, 02:01
It should be "Do you want Dogs of War back?":) Not really, no. But I would love a regiments of reknown book stuffed full of characterful mercenary regiments to join the other armies.

It would be a great way to expend the warhammer backstory without actually having to design entire armies for Cathay, or Araby of the south pole or...fishmen.;)

RGB
09-01-2010, 02:08
Absolutely.

Both as supplemental units (but with more restrictions depending on the army) and also as a Tilean/Estalian themed stand-alone army.

They were one of the best looking model ranges ever produced, and had a very nice generic flexibility. All they need is a good magic item list and they're still viable.


I know that the minis looked nice, but I like the game to be about tactical leadership rather than who has the most money to fill out their army.

Then don't play Warhammer, because it's not about tactical leadership, it's about writing a winning list from one of the newest-released books. Adding a DoW cavalry unit to a dwarf army doesn't even begin to compete with the DE reverse ward save, for example.

mr.kislev
09-01-2010, 05:09
yes the models were pretty cool.

Condottiere
09-01-2010, 05:43
Yes.

Oh, requires a longer answer.

Basically as a stand alone force, and supplementary to other armies under prescribed conditions.

snurl
09-01-2010, 06:07
Yes.
Oh, requires a longer answer.
Basically as a stand alone force, and supplementary to other armies under prescribed conditions.

I agree 100%. The merc. army is a great idea, one that should not have been abandoned in the first place. There should be rules in their book about just who can hire whom, so that balance is not upset.

amysrevenge
09-01-2010, 07:04
I'd like to see them back as a stad alone army too.

I'd like to see some very selective readmittance of RoR for hire as well. Something on the order of 1-3 armies allowed to hire each RoR, without really allowing people to completely plug the holes in their books. ie. I'd like to have my Dwarfs hire a refurbished unit of Slayer Pirates, but I don't think they should be able to hire any wizards or cavalry.

Braad
09-01-2010, 07:20
I think they are quite nice, both as standalone and reinforcements for other armies. Though I do think that the restrictions could have been a bit sharper, like, less choice for each army. With the old list, some units could be taken by nearly any army, and that should be gone.

Condottiere
09-01-2010, 07:57
Geographical restrictions would be fun.

Hrokka `Eadsplitter
09-01-2010, 11:36
No. For example, dwarfs don't have cavalry and aren't supposed to have it, so DoW just justifies to taking units you normally wouldn't need if you could play your army.

snurl
09-01-2010, 11:38
No. For example, dwarfs don't have cavalry and aren't supposed to have it, so DoW just justifies to taking units you normally wouldn't need if you could play your army.

This is why there should be limits on just which army can hire what.

The Red Scourge
09-01-2010, 11:50
Sure they should get back.

And I want my chaos chaotic, not this racial purity -shtick they have at the moment :p

zak
09-01-2010, 13:04
Yes, but with restrictions so the balance of armies and the game in general are not upset.

Condottiere
09-01-2010, 13:30
I'll be honest, creating balanced restrictions that can be justified by fluff will be difficult.

tortoise
09-01-2010, 13:46
I'm rather glad DoW is gone as an army.

I hate the idea of picking units to cover the weaknesses of your own army and as a standalone force they don't look like they gel at all.

I'd rather GW concentrated on the existing single race armies.

Griefbringer
09-01-2010, 14:10
Would you want Dogs of War to become an official army list again

My latest copy of the DoW army list (from Chronicles 2004) has a rather noticeable label "official rules" printed on the top. Looks official enough to me, thank you very many.

On the other hand, the Bretonnian army book that came out a few months later, has no such label anywhere.

So my DoW list is probably more official than my Bretonnian army book.

Elannion
09-01-2010, 17:19
I would like to see them back in both forms, though there would have to be restrictions on RoR but that wouldn't be too hard. Just a note though, there is a difference between the DoW army which was stand alone in its own right and RoR, DoW i don't remember really being used to fill gaps anymore than any other army (if i remember correctly back in 5th edition you could take allied units from basically any army anyway). They do need to address the idea of what a DoW army is though, because in part it seemed like they were trying to creatle a tilea estallia army and in part it was a mish mash of mercenaries. I do like the idea of an army though that is flexible and allows for great oppertunity for fluff developement and conversion as someone said.

High Loremaster
09-01-2010, 18:11
Yes.


I would like to see them back in both forms, though there would have to be restrictions on RoR but that wouldn't be too hard.

This. Don't let Dwarfs take cavalry, don't let Elves take cannon, etc. It'd be pretty simple to explain in fluff, and wouldn't get too confusing.

burad
09-01-2010, 19:20
Yes,
though I'd want to see it as two distinct things:
Regiments of Renown that can be taken as individual mercenary units, and mercenary allies that must be used as a homogenous allied contingent only, with their own leader.
RoR would not include wizards or artillery; a mercenary allied army could have everything.
And a book could call it all Mercenary Princes or Princely States, and have some more fluff about all those southern states the various pieces come from, and give options/lists for princely-state-based armies as well, so you could have, for example, a Tilean army.

Bac5665
09-01-2010, 19:37
I don't really want them back, but if GW did them right, it wouldn't bother me.

First of all, I hate the idea of taking units in other armies to cover weaknesses, and GW WILL let more than a few devastating combos come out the door if they did this.

But beyond that, Warhammer has too many armies as it is right now. Some armies wait far too long for new minis as it is and if we're adding in another army, I'd wanting something much cooler than a third human(-ish) list. Chaos Dwarves come to mind :D

danny-d-b
09-01-2010, 19:38
yes, it would be great to see as both a stand alone army, and some extras to certent armys

yes chaos shouldnt' have access to say shooters or stuff, but they should the bearmen

dwarfs shouldn't have access to cavalry, but the slayer pirates and goblin hewer they should

and its diffrent to see a dragon under 2000 points, the high elves do it, and there asnil wandering around

plus then you have pikes, which are usedful/ fluffy everywhere (spet perhaps the dwarfen mines, but they have enough defenceive infantry)

so yes, games workshop should bring them back in my view

sadly I can't seeing them doing so

Baggers
09-01-2010, 19:42
As an army of mercenaries. Most definitely, I love the idea of ragtag units of pikemen consisting of different races and types.

As additions to armies. Yes and no. I don't mind them if they fit the fluff and theme of the army. But crossbows and cannons in a chaos army don't so restrictions. Though I do like the idea of famous units being a choice like Bugman's Rangers or Menthil shades.

howie
09-01-2010, 19:45
But beyond that, Warhammer has too many armies as it is right now. Some armies wait far too long for new minis as it is and if we're adding in another army, I'd wanting something much cooler than a third human(-ish) list. Chaos Dwarves come to mind :D

That is a proper load of tosh:p, Chaos has 3 armies already and Dwarves already have an army.

It's only one more Human army, The Elves have three armies and no one complains about them. It'd be perfectly fine to have them, just get rid of some of the more stupid things.

Bac5665
09-01-2010, 20:10
That is a proper load of tosh:p, Chaos has 3 armies already and Dwarves already have an army.

It's only one more Human army, The Elves have three armies and no one complains about them. It'd be perfectly fine to have them, just get rid of some of the more stupid things.

Chaos should be 1 army again, for warriors, Daemons and Beasts as one. So Chaos having 3 armies is part of the problem. But Chaos Dwarves and Dark Elves are separate from chaos in important ways, and should remain separate.

darker4308
09-01-2010, 20:18
It was a hard army to balance ... so a lot of the stuff had to be overcosted. I am glad that took it out. Let them finish off all the models for the major armies and then work on fluff.

Tymell
09-01-2010, 20:26
I'm kind of in two minds about it.

On the one hand, I do like the concept, and there were some very flavoursome creations in there. The option of helping your force out in some area could be fun too.

On the other hand, there already are a lot of Fantasy armies to support, one more could just split the attention even more. And, as some have said, they can sometimes make armies a bit less characterful by allowing armies to bypass their weaknesses.

All told, I think I'd like them back but with limitations. Make the regiments more limited in which armies can take them (not so strict as only 1 army per unit, since that somewhat ruins the point, but just a handful) and keep them as always rare choices. After all, a Dwarf army with 1 cavalry unit doesn't suddenly become a mobile force, it just gains something in that area. Warriors of Chaos gaining the Hellcannon didn't suddenly turn them into a shooty army, and so on.

As a standalone force I don't think I had enough experience of it to say really.

The Red Scourge
09-01-2010, 20:39
There aren't too many fantasy armies, there are too few.

Love to have a DoW/Tilea, Araby etc. option out there.

And since people are already whining about the time between updates, it really wouldn't change anything on that scale :)

Lordsaradain
09-01-2010, 21:06
Do I want dogs of war back (as its own army)? No.

Do I want regiments of renown back? Yes.

Mr. Gobbo
09-01-2010, 22:32
My own opinion about the subject is that Dogs of War should be back as both a stand-alone army and as an army supplement. But using Dogs of War units in other armies could have restrictions. By restrictions I mean that specific units couldn't be in certain armies. For example, restrictions could either be for balancing reasons, like cavalry for dwarfs, or fluff reasons, like dwarfs for an Orcs & Goblins army.

Bloodknight
09-01-2010, 22:40
like cavalry for dwarfs

Well, it should be said that most of these unfluffy choices don't do much good anyway. Cavalry in a Dwarf army just presents the opponent with something more worthwhile to shoot at than large blocks of Dwarfs, and it's a waste of a perfectly good Rare choice.

Actually most armies have better stuff in their Rare section than almost anything the DoW have to offer (with the exception of WoC, their Rares are just lame, and a hired cannon won't break the game anyway....that said, I always wondered how Chaos would conduct sieges without any siege weapons).

Condottiere
09-01-2010, 23:10
Probably would have to add in weaknesses into RoR, which would inherently restrict them in certain circumstances.

For example, Volund's Venators are renowned drunks.

Tymell
09-01-2010, 23:14
Probably would have to add in weaknesses into RoR, which would inherently restrict them in certain circumstances.

For example, Volund's Venators are renowned drunks.

I like this sort of idea. Maybe also something like (and do forgive me if this already was in place, I never actually had the Dogs of War book) dogs of war can't use general leadership, to represent their lack of loyalty to an army.

Lord Malorne
09-01-2010, 23:15
OP: Yes but only as a stand alone army.

Lord Malorne

Mr. Gobbo
09-01-2010, 23:17
Actually most armies have better stuff in their Rare section than almost anything the DoW have to offer (with the exception of WoC, their Rares are just lame, and a hired cannon won't break the game anyway....that said, I always wondered how Chaos would conduct sieges without any siege weapons).

Why, with the help of the Chaos Daemons of course!

Also, if DoW is redone maybe how DoW units are included in an army would be different. Maybe instead of all DoW and RoR counting as rare choices, all core units in the book could count as special in other armies, all special units counting as rare, and all rare units counting as 2 rare choices.

Condottiere
09-01-2010, 23:21
Sounds about right; personally, I'm working on differentiating city militia from the hired guns.

Freman Bloodglaive
09-01-2010, 23:45
I want them back in both capacities.

starlight
09-01-2010, 23:55
Yes I do...it's the only army I can see putting as much effort and money into as I have my Greenskins... :)

Steadman
10-01-2010, 00:05
I think if DoW came back it should be as a single book that contains a standalone army list, but also details on how RoR can be hired and which armies can and cannot hire them i.e no Manhide in HE armies, no Kreuger in VC etc.

Duke Georgal
10-01-2010, 01:01
No. It makes it too easy to fill in the gaps in your army; gaps that may be there for balance reasons.

Yeah, like those gaps haven't been already filled and balance destroyed by the last round of army books. Empire now has stubborn core infantry, Bretonnia and Chaos each have a war machine (good lord), Vampires have heavy cavalry, etc. Just what gaps are left? Balance, please. If anything being able to choose what troop to add in order to strengthen your army will make the game more balanced. Maybe the O&G players could be competitive again.


I think dogs of war should come back, but not as a complete army in themselves.

I believe it should be a complete army complete with its own flavor and fluff. It used to be a lot of fun, it could be again.


Yes, but with restrictions so the balance of armies and the game in general are not upset.

"Balance of armies", what game are you playing. I have been playing Warhammer Fantasy. You know, the game with the three tier army book format. Balance is not even considered anymore.


As additions to armies. Yes and no. I don't mind them if they fit the fluff and theme of the army.

I believe the "fit and fluff" of each army is mandatory. Back when DOW were fairly common for instance, Bretonnia could not hire any (except for Felix & his "Freind"), and that fit Bretonnia quite nicely. The old system was pretty good.


Chaos should be 1 army again, for warriors, Daemons and Beasts as one.

NO NO NO! Splitting the apart again was the best thing about the current rules. The whole "everything in chaos is core" system completely threw off the army construction system. It was just too open for abuse. How do you spot a WAAC power player? He is the one who wants the Chaos trilogy reunited.


Cavalry in a Dwarf army just presents the opponent with something more worthwhile to shoot at than large blocks of Dwarfs, and it's a waste of a perfectly good Rare choice.

I use Ogre Mercenaries more often in my Dwarf army than anywhere else. I hate the Dwarf rare choices. Two unit of leadbelchers really fill the army out nicely.

TMATK
10-01-2010, 01:18
Question: When and where did Dogs of War go? I have a dogs of war pdf that says "official rules", and my O&G book says I can take them as a rare choice. Did GW put out a memo retracting everything? Or is this more in regards to official tourneys?

Condottiere
10-01-2010, 01:26
One bright and sunny Italian Games Day, it was announced that Dogs of War would no longer be supported.

Speculation is that Ye Olde Forge World might remedy that.

Warhammerrox
10-01-2010, 02:21
YES!

Should have been a poll...

Rogue
10-01-2010, 03:03
I feel that DOW was a catch all for any human race that was not covered in the Warhammer World so for any army that you would want to do for the following:

Kislev
Tilea
Araby
Estalia
Kathay
Nippon
Ind
Any other damn idea that you had

the DOW army would support that army for the most part. I think that the paymaster and bodyguard was proabably the most ubiquotus that may cause issues, but with a little creativity that could be remedied. Now any army MUST use Empire, Brettonian, or (to some extent) WOC to represent them. Dont get me wrong each army has its place, but the variety is not there as DOW brought to the fold. For this reason I like it as a stand alone army. I could take it or leave it for units in a different army.

lord marcus
10-01-2010, 03:32
i want kislev back more. kislevite bear cav would be the shiz and probably make a run for bloodcrusher money. because with bear cav, well, you know! ;)

TheZombieSquig
10-01-2010, 04:19
As their own list, yes. They had character and models so I don't see why not.

As filler units available to other lists, no.

Condottiere
10-01-2010, 05:43
The Paymaster should have been an option, not a requirement. It should also have been an upgrade, not a fixed character.

fall3nang3l
10-01-2010, 05:56
No. It makes it too easy to fill in the gaps in your army; gaps that may be there for balance reasons. It also removes some critical thinking and strategy from commanders.

ETA: Hmm, reading the responses following mine, I do see a legitimate reason for this army as a whole. Perhaps if it was just a separate army on its own and not an army for hire by other armies: meaning we wouldn't see dwarves hiring wizards, WoC hiring shooters, etc.

I was about to comment until I read this comment.

I support every word

Condottiere
10-01-2010, 06:19
Regarding the hiring of wizards, the FAQ cleared that up; DoW characters cannot be hired by other armies.

The Red Scourge
10-01-2010, 08:58
How do you spot a WAAC power player? He is the one who wants the Chaos trilogy reunited.

I take offense to that :eyebrows:

Chaos now lacks anything chaotic in the feel of the army. Before the split chaos was everything out of John Blanches nightmares, but now they're just 3 bland evil armies :p

WLBjork
10-01-2010, 10:11
[Churchill-the-dog]Oh, yes[/Churchill-the-dog]

Sice the Ogre Kingdoms, I've laways felt that GW missed an opportunity to apply the DoW label to units in other armies (e.g. Dwarf Warriors and Quarrellers), then added an army book consisting mainly of RoRs and the few units that don't come from an existing army (e.g. Pikemen).

brendel
10-01-2010, 12:20
I cant see any reason why you still can't use the old list if your oponet is ok with it, untill Games workshop say so I belive its still a vaild list they have said that all 6th ed amy lists can be used untill they are updated, same as chaos dwarfs.

And its not like its an over powered list, as for other armys hireing units that fill a gap in there army, Im pretty sure they had some restrictions on who could hire who eg: elves cant hire dwarfs or any green skins or vice versa as fo Chaos warriors with crossbow troups I'd pefer them shooting at my amy than hell cannons.

FBI
10-01-2010, 15:06
I would like to see mercs reappear. A new human army somewhere between empire and brettonia.
I would like big blocks of pikeman, heavy cav, and pavicecrossbowman. And some weirder stuff. ogres, maybe some arabyunits. And lots of special characters and famous units.

Havock
10-01-2010, 15:30
NO NO NO! Splitting the apart again was the best thing about the current rules. The whole "everything in chaos is core" system completely threw off the army construction system. It was just too open for abuse. How do you spot a WAAC power player? He is the one who wants the Chaos trilogy reunited.

Yes, because chaos (talking mortals here) has previously always been the #1 list in those days. The new list is
A- Boring.
B- One dimensional, oh, see A. It's either magic heavy, cav heavy or both.
C- lacking in character.

Same appears to be going for the beastmen. "Mixed herds too complicated for 13 yr olds. Must. Easify. Book."
Also: "Must, change stuff so people who had working BoC army have to pay through their nose again to make it work."

I spent a good sum of money into furies, screamers and -almost- a unit of beastmen with a shaman. Not very nice, still pissed about it. Well, pissed is a big word, but let's just say that GW won't be getting much more from me.

someone2040
11-01-2010, 03:19
Of course I want Dogs of War back.
I personally feel, Tilea and mercenaries themself, have enough character to have their own stand alone list. I mean, Pikes and Duellists alone.

And of course, all the Regiments of Renown have their own bit of character attached to them.

ChaosVC
11-01-2010, 03:38
I want it back as the book of border princes, Tilea and Estelia. 3 simple army rules, each with a unique advantage, in a single book would be fun.

Freman Bloodglaive
11-01-2010, 06:35
They are already a legal armylist.

WoC can already take DoW cannon, if they wanted to, but they don't.

Dwarfs can already take DoW heavy cavalry, if they wanted to, but they don't.

Beastmen can already take DoW pike blocks, if they wanted to, but they don't.

Basically the options are already there but generally people prefer to play their list "pure". That wouldn't change if the DoW got an updated list.

Condottiere
11-01-2010, 06:38
I don't think most people are worried about normal gamers, but those that like to abuse combinations.

outbreak
11-01-2010, 09:31
I'd love to see them back, as a kid (before i played but i used to go into GW stores and paint the odd free miniture and get white dwarfs from the library to look through) D.O.W were one of my favourites. Looking over their stuff they are full of character compared to what i find bland empire and brettonian (i want a human army just not one of those 2). I do think that taking units in other armies isn't the best idea unless HEAVILY restricted but it could be ok for friendly games (i'm guessing most tournies will put a block on that like special characters anyway?). I think D.O.W could even be reintroduced just as a supplement in white dwarf or something that's stated as official, the models are essentially there if you convert from other ranges anyway.

ChaosVC
11-01-2010, 09:48
You know, if GW can do a "Dogs of war" book with 5 different configs ie, Tilea, Estelia, border princes, Kislev and mercenary making about 2 to 3 unqiue models for each of the first 4, I would fly over there to give them all a big kiss.

Edit: If that happens, Bret and Empire will lose their sales to it...hmmmm.

Zilverug
11-01-2010, 10:44
As stand-alone army: yes, unless the Empire made much more flexible so it'll be allowed to be used as a Tilean/Estalian/Border Princes/Araby/Kislev/Ulric/... army list as well.

Which basically means making it a deSigmarized unEmpire army, which is not what we want, do we?

Commodus Leitdorf
11-01-2010, 12:20
I want them back as a stand alone army and with the old Dogs of War rules. God forbid we cannot customise our armies for alittle flavour. 7th Edition is getting far to...standardised, and all that means is we get more and more cookie cutter. THAT is certainly more of a tragedy then a Chaos player bringing a cannon to the table...

Nephilim of Sin
11-01-2010, 12:24
Yes they need to come back, for many reasons, most of all because they added some variety.

However, I am surprised to see everyone saying 'No, they will unbalance the armies'. This is a joke, right? Because the armies are so balanced right now, and we never complain about certain armies being over the top, and some being pitifully weak?

Satan
11-01-2010, 12:24
Goddamn yes I want them back. Not in the wacky form they used to be, but as a sensible army...

The SkaerKrow
11-01-2010, 12:52
Not in their previous incarnation, no. While the idea has merit, the design team never really delivered on its potential.

Condottiere
11-01-2010, 13:14
The ideal would be a liberal take on Italian Renaissance history and characters. How far you take the mickey might be the difference between it being a farce or a fascinating setting.

Odin
11-01-2010, 13:29
It's a tricky question. I love the DoW army, and would almost certainly buy them if they were re-released. I also want to use Duellists in my planned Empire army.

But they were too easy an option for armies to get around their inbuilt weaknesses. Dwarfs with cavalry and Chaos with cannons and crossbowmen does nothing for game balance.

Perhaps they would work best as an individual army. Then they could maybe release a WHFB version of Apocalypse, which not only allows allies, but also mercenaries. Like super-heavy tanks, that sort of game imbalance doesn't really matter when you're playing a big fun game.

The Red Scourge
11-01-2010, 13:33
I don't think most people are worried about normal gamers, but those that like to abuse combinations.

Those guys are already playing DoC, so that really wouldn't make a difference :p

Odin
11-01-2010, 13:45
NO NO NO! Splitting the apart again was the best thing about the current rules. The whole "everything in chaos is core" system completely threw off the army construction system. It was just too open for abuse. How do you spot a WAAC power player? He is the one who wants the Chaos trilogy reunited.


The rules were flawed, but should have been fixed, rather than tearing the army apart.

And I desperately want the Chaos army reunited, but I never abused the system. Never took more than one unit of knights, never took a Sorcerer in a Khorne army. I just want to be able to play with the army I have been collecting for nearly 20 years, not three pale imitations.

N810
11-01-2010, 14:20
Yea but include RotR like restrictions on what armies can hire what merceneries in what slot for what price... to help balance everything out.

Tymell
11-01-2010, 16:29
Yea but include RotR like restrictions on what armies can hire what merceneries in what slot for what price... to help balance everytthing out.

Exactly. I think any potential balance problems could be solved in this manner. Keep things very restricted. Not so much as say, "Only human armies can hire human units" etc, just not most every unit being hireable by most every army.

Besides which, as I mentioned before, one unit doesn't completely alter how an army plays, just allows it to shift itself a little.

Freman Bloodglaive
11-01-2010, 19:57
Orcs and Goblins could use maxed RoR units to give themselves some reliable units that don't stuff them up 1/3 of the time.

Razakel
11-01-2010, 21:53
Yea but include RotR like restrictions on what armies can hire what merceneries in what slot for what price... to help balance everything out.

Indeed, I would quite like to see Dogs of War and Regiments of Renown back again. With the obvious restrictions which have been discussed on the previous pages, just units to give your army more flavor. No Elven cannons, no Dwarf cavalry etc.

Although I feel like all this would take GW a lot of work and a long time for an army that just isn't THAT popular. I think they should work on existing army books and get to DoW later. Sorry DoW players, just my opinion.

BilboBaggins
11-01-2010, 22:58
Do I see the benefit of Dogs of War? Yes
Should they come back? Yes
Should there be slightly modified restrictions on who takes what? Yes.
Are the crazy group working on an Independent Dogs of War book discussing these things? Yes

Arjuna
11-01-2010, 23:18
I do not want the Dogs of War to return because there are other themes such as the mythology of India or the pre-Islamic Arabian myths that I think would be far more interesting and cohesive. Certainly Cathay and Nippon would also be fertile ground for something new.

Games Workshop can only support a finite number of armies and Dogs of War would just "eat up a valuable slot." It is sad enough that the GW made the wretched Ogre Kingdoms instead of Ind, Araby, Cathay or Nippon. I would rather have any of those or something inspired from the many African tribal myths, Pacific Islander culture or an army inspired by the historical three kingdoms era of Korea than the awful ogres or redundant regiments of re-noun.

I do not want the regiments to return either for the same reason. I would rather GW produce armies than bits and pieces of armies.

Bloodknight
11-01-2010, 23:30
Cathay or Nippon

One would think the Ogres were offensive enough to Asians already. I'd dread to see what GW would to to Japan and China ;) (and my head would explode at the possible senseless Katana-Pron we'd have to suffer. The Cathay-Longsword is bad enough...).


mythology of India

Cat People...arrrgh.


African tribal myths

I gather you've never seen GW's pygmys...there's a reason why they don't produce these anymore.

BilboBaggins
12-01-2010, 00:13
OK, If GW would have decided that the 6th Edtion book was perfect they could have used the resourses making 7th and now 8th into balancing the books and coming out with new books for missing areas in the maps in the Warhammer rulebook.

ChaosVC
12-01-2010, 01:16
One would think the Ogres were offensive enough to Asians already. I'd dread to see what GW would to to Japan and China ;) (and my head would explode at the possible senseless Katana-Pron we'd have to suffer. The Cathay-Longsword is bad enough...).



Cat People...arrrgh.



I gather you've never seen GW's pygmys...there's a reason why they don't produce these anymore.

Exaclty! You my friend is very observant.

Arjuna
12-01-2010, 01:49
The mythology of India is older and richer than European and British culture combined by far. I just cringed when you summed it up as "cat people" even though I recognize it as partial in jest (I hope). Nonetheless you received a quick second of your response. Any way the Raksasha would be a really badass monster, hardly the basis for the army. Anyone that does not understand that an army based on the culture of India could be fantastically diverse and bring in completely new aspects to warhammer is just woefully uninformed. Maybe you dont want an army from India for personal aesthetic reasons, which is of course fine. But to just dismiss the idea as "eww cat people." That is so narrow minded it gives baby jesus gas.

Maybe a lot of Brits still have butt hurt about losing India as a colony? That is the ONLY reason I can think of why we dont have "Warhammer Armies Ind":evilgrin:

So what if the pygmies were a mistake. I have been collecting GW miniatures since the early 80s, and I doubt if there are any miniatures that citadel has mass produced since then that I have not seen. You are going to dismiss African mythos/culture because of some stupid and minor figs made decades ago? That is just ridiculous.

Dogs of War and regiments of renoun are just a recycling of themes and ideas already in warhammer. No! A thousand times no.

Bloodknight
12-01-2010, 02:33
Anyone that does not understand that an army based on the culture of India could be fantastically diverse and bring in completely new aspects to warhammer is just woefully uninformed

I am of course aware that there's a lot more to it, but popular culture (and the weird fondness of geeks for kittens) tell me that GW - and probably any other manufacturer - would make this the Cat People Army (yes, I admit it, I hate the idea of cat people, but if other people like it, why not - Kraken Editions has some nice minis of cat people -); if we were lucky, with a couple of monkeymen and elephant giants in it. Trust me, if you really like the Indian history and mythology, you'd probably be the first one to hate what they did to it if there were an Ind book ;)

After all, Beastmen (there's so much you could do with them, and it's even in the fluff, insectoids and stuff) ended up as simple goat people with a spattering of cow, too.






That is the ONLY reason I can think of why we dont have "Warhammer Armies Ind

That and there's not much sense in them fighting against the Old Worlders. Even the Lizards are stretching it a bit already.

Also, I am sure it would end up as a bad caricature. The Western style armies have an excuse for being caricatures - the designers come from that cultural region and should know what to poke fun at that isn't too offensive to the respective people (although I have heard some bitter complaints about the Kislevitian mixture of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Russia both by Polish people and Russians); it's however pretty hard to make a fun version of a culture whose mindset one doesn't really understand. Again, look at the Lizardmen and especially their names. If I were of Aztec/Mayan/whatever heritage, I'd probably be offended, and I am not a particularly big friend of PC.

But I will of course admit that the old DoW army book was basically one bad pun, too.

librisrouge
12-01-2010, 02:57
I always though that it would be nice to have Regiments of Renown changed into special units assigned to a Armybook with options for other armies taking them as well.

Example, Armybook Dwarves:
Special Units:
Malakai Malakiasson and the Gobline Hewer - Taken by Empire as well
Joseph Bugman and Bugman's Ranger - Taken by Empire, Brettonia, and Ogre Kingdoms
Long Drong and his Slayer Pirates - Taken by Empire, Brettonia, Ogre Kingdoms, and High Elves (they already have no honor left, why not.)

Etc.

Every armybook would have a few weird units that could be taken in atleast one or two other armies. At the very least this would encourage players to own armybooks other than their main army's.

Step 1: Make Special Units
Step 2: Let other armies take then
Step 3: PROFIT!!!

Obviously though, you'd have to make the units balanced to the other armies.

Commodus Leitdorf
12-01-2010, 03:05
Step 1: Make Special Units
Step 2: Let other armies take then
Step 3: PROFIT!!!


Yes, I never really understood why the idea of making a single model (or models) for a bunch of different armies to use, instead of the current one army, is a bad thing. GW is trying to get us to buy more of their stuff to begin with, why this concept was abandoned I cannot understand....

BilboBaggins
12-01-2010, 03:15
GW wants each army to only use it's own army book, that is the main reason I heard from ditching Dogs of War. For a company that cares only about profits that answer didn't make sense to me.

Then they didn't want to create all new models, but Dogs of War can use models from the Empire, Bretonnian, Dwarf and Chaos lines so that isn't a good reason either.

My theory is that there is nobody in the design studio assigned to it because they are all working on the different versions of Space Marines.

Condottiere
12-01-2010, 05:25
One would think the Ogres were offensive enough to Asians already. I'd dread to see what GW would to to Japan and China ;) (and my head would explode at the possible senseless Katana-Pron we'd have to suffer. The Cathay-Longsword is bad enough...).

Cat People...arrrgh.

I gather you've never seen GW's pygmys...there's a reason why they don't produce these anymore.Cat Girls, Ninja or otherwise, are from Nippon.

It would have been better if they kept the Mongol/steppe archetype with the Hobgoblins, but perhaps they wanted to move away from the European stereotype.

It's probable that GW wants self-contained armies, to ensure that players would be forced to buy them as sets, rather than be able to utilize units in other lists, thereby cannibalizing sales.

Sygerrik
12-01-2010, 05:26
I really like the Tilean/Estalian theme. The Marksmen of Miragliano, Ricco's Republican Guard, and especially the Birdmen of Catrazzo, and characters like Lorenzo Lupo and Lucrezia Belladonna, all have a very strong unifying theme. If Dogs of War came back, I'd like to see them strongly focused around that theme, with regiments available to hire out to a variety of armies. To solve the balance dilemma, the most powerful units would require a Dogs of War Lord to be present (and disallow non-DoW armies from having a DoW general), as that way armies would have to choose between having a powerful high-Leadership general and having access to cool DoW stuff (except in high-points games, which tend to have more flashy toys anyways).

Satan
12-01-2010, 05:30
It's probable that GW wants self-contained armies, to ensure that players would be forced to buy them as sets, rather than be able to utilize units in other lists, thereby cannibalizing sales.

Nah, I think their rules set does a pretty good job at that already.

BilboBaggins
12-01-2010, 05:35
Dogs of War characters are not allowed in non-Dogs of War Armies. Most of the generic Dogs of War units are not that good to fill a weakness in any other army. The biggest problem I heard from GW employees were Shooters in Chaos armies, that is a simple fix to say that Chaos (except Chaos Dwarfs) are not allowed missile weapons.

It wasn't that long ago that GW (via White Dwarf) was trying to convince players to add pikes to all their armies.

Hrogoff the Destructor
12-01-2010, 05:35
I do not think Dogs of War should be a independant army.
I also do not think that every team should be able to hire units that help negate their armies weaknesses. For example, Warriors of Chaos should not be getting great cannons.

However, I do think they could make it work if it was far more restricting.

For example:
*Mercenaries from Tilia, Kislev, and Estana can only only be hired by the following teams: Brettonia or Empire
*Hobgoblin mercenaries can only be hired by the following armies: O&G, Ogres, and Chaos Dwarves
*Undead liche dude can only be hired by: Tomb Kings and Vampire Counts.
*Dinosaur thingie can only be hired by Lizardmen or Dark Elves.
*Etc.

In other words, make it so there is at least some degree of similarity between hirable units and the armies that can use them. I think there was a restriction chart like this in the Dogs of War book, but it allowed pretty much anyone to have anything. I still remember watching one dwarf player using ogres and I just couldn't stand how silly it looked.

However, I think that if they did this they might as well make a full on expansion (like the General's Compendium).

Condottiere
12-01-2010, 05:48
While it wouldn't be unrealistic to have mercenary great cannons, schlepping them up north probably would be, since the Empire would likely detail a task force to put paid to that.

You have to distinguish "allies" from paid professionals; while unsavoury humans aren't that problematic to work with, ones with tentacles growing out of their groin region might give pause for thought for any mercenary captain, since being by nature chaotic doesn't actually imply good book keeping practices like paying your subcontractors in a timely fashion.

Tymell
12-01-2010, 08:32
I always though that it would be nice to have Regiments of Renown changed into special units assigned to a Armybook with options for other armies taking them as well.

Example, Armybook Dwarves:
Special Units:
Malakai Malakiasson and the Gobline Hewer - Taken by Empire as well
Joseph Bugman and Bugman's Ranger - Taken by Empire, Brettonia, and Ogre Kingdoms
Long Drong and his Slayer Pirates - Taken by Empire, Brettonia, Ogre Kingdoms, and High Elves (they already have no honor left, why not.)

Etc.

Every armybook would have a few weird units that could be taken in atleast one or two other armies. At the very least this would encourage players to own armybooks other than their main army's.

Step 1: Make Special Units
Step 2: Let other armies take then
Step 3: PROFIT!!!

Obviously though, you'd have to make the units balanced to the other armies.

The only issue I could see with this idea is if you have the merc units in other army books, it means players potentially need several books when they just want a couple of units. I.E. if an Empire player wants the Slayer pirates and, say, the Dark Elf Manflayers, he has to buy two new army books for it.

danny-d-b
12-01-2010, 08:41
I do not think Dogs of War should be a independant army.
I also do not think that every team should be able to hire units that help negate their armies weaknesses. For example, Warriors of Chaos should not be getting great cannons.

However, I do think they could make it work if it was far more restricting.

For example:
*Mercenaries from Tilia, Kislev, and Estana can only only be hired by the following teams: Brettonia or Empire
*Hobgoblin mercenaries can only be hired by the following armies: O&G, Ogres, and Chaos Dwarves
*Undead liche dude can only be hired by: Tomb Kings and Vampire Counts.
*Dinosaur thingie can only be hired by Lizardmen or Dark Elves.
*Etc.

In other words, make it so there is at least some degree of similarity between hirable units and the armies that can use them. I think there was a restriction chart like this in the Dogs of War book, but it allowed pretty much anyone to have anything. I still remember watching one dwarf player using ogres and I just couldn't stand how silly it looked.

However, I think that if they did this they might as well make a full on expansion (like the General's Compendium).

yep thats 1 of the problems, the cursed company, if thats what you mean as Undead liche dude would have to change there fluff quite a bit to ally with VC and TK, as its always been said that then leader hates the people that brought him back

ChaosVC
12-01-2010, 09:11
Games with ROTR can be fun only when they are reasonable matched with their pay master. I mean...a bunch of Estilean fighting for von carstein, Lahmia and blood dragon...possible with promise of the blood kiss etc but then those are no longer mercenary are they? How about Necrach and strigoi?! "mind pooping" if you ask me, human mercenary working for daemons or simply chaos! Whoopi DOO! POOPI!

But considering how GW wanted to simplify things in the game as long as it profits.....its not impossible for mercenary to work for these abomination of the old world...rules wise. So do we really want a DOW army or another human army? Oh yeah, fluff is a dirty word, the chaos gods love each other now holding hands and dancing merry go round somewhere in the chaos waste remember?

Zark the Damned
12-01-2010, 10:54
I like the DOW army concept, it would be great for them to have an updated army book.

Adding DOW units to other armies is also fine, but I agree there should be more restrictions on which units can be taken by which armies.

Duke Georgal
12-01-2010, 11:12
I never abused the system. Never took more than one unit of knights, never took a Sorcerer in a Khorne army. I just want to be able to play with the army I have been collecting for nearly 20 years.

Well, then you my friend are a very rare individual. I guess there are exceptions to every rule.

I am happy the WAAC players are stuck with just a daemon army and can't toss in a unit of chosen knights or a hellcannon "just to add chaotic flavor".

Hrogoff the Destructor
12-01-2010, 11:18
yep thats 1 of the problems, the cursed company, if thats what you mean as Undead liche dude would have to change there fluff quite a bit to ally with VC and TK, as its always been said that then leader hates the people that brought him back

I wasn't talking about anyone in particular. I just made a list of the first few things that came to my head and who should get to use them.

Tymell
12-01-2010, 11:47
Well, then you my friend are a very rare individual. I guess there are exceptions to every rule.

I am happy the WAAC players are stuck with just a daemon army and can't toss in a unit of chosen knights or a hellcannon "just to add chaotic flavor".

Most warhammer players I've met/spoken to are likewise not out to abuse the system and win at all costs, and I'd imagine most players as a whole are like that. It's just that you always remember the ones that aren't, and they are perhaps a more vocal group online too, so it might create that perception.

Not to lesson Odin's good intentions :) But I think actual WAAC players are thankfully rare themselves.

Col. Frost
12-01-2010, 11:55
DoW would work as a standalone army relatively easy. How many people would pick up the book, buy a few boxes of Empire State Troops, Dwarf Ironbreakers, Bretonnian Knights etc to chuck in with a few existing units from armies they already own and hey presto, a new army!

Lets be honest here, If GW were ever to produce an army book about Araby, Ind , Cathay or Nippon they would have to tread very carefully. They prospect of producing an Araby book without upsetting some Arabian because of a perceived racial or cultural stereotyping 'slur' is just not worth the risk.

Commodus Leitdorf
12-01-2010, 12:31
I do not think Dogs of War should be a independant army.
I also do not think that every team should be able to hire units that help negate their armies weaknesses. For example, Warriors of Chaos should not be getting great cannons.


I'm so utterly terrified of a Chaos player, whose never fired a cannon before, buying a DOW one to "show me how its done" :rolleyes:. I admit my troops might get annoyed at all those cannon balls flying over their heads....those feather on the sate troops have alot of wind resistance! They'll be bending over to pick up their lost hats all the time...it will totally slow down my soldiers movement...

In all seriousness though...what "weaknesses" are you talking about? Last time I checked WoC has no shooting (except for the Helcannon of course...) So to offser this, every Chaos Horde coming out of the north seems to be lead by Tzeentch sorceror!. If they dont have shooting in one fashion...they got it in another.

Dwarfs are meant to be slow....so to offset this they take the Anvil and Strollz's rune BSB....they aren't so slow after that.....stupid Miners killing my cannons...*grumble*

The "Weaknesses" people keep refering to Don't exist. There are plenty of ways to get around them and players do it all the time and thats okay...but if a dwarfs player uses his Holds vast wealth to hire out some Ogres OMG balance is destroyed!?!!?

Please GW, bring back DOW. If you want to put restrictions on it feel free. But dont let them die!

Bloodknight
12-01-2010, 13:08
For example, Warriors of Chaos should not be getting great cannons.

Good thing that DoW Cannons are not Great Cannons.


Sorcerer in a Khorne army

That a) doesn't work with the current DoW rules and b) wouldn't help the Khorne guys a lot. All you'd get would be a guy who generates another dispel die and wouldn't get off any spell with his couple of dice.

Odin
12-01-2010, 14:00
I'm so utterly terrified of a Chaos player, whose never fired a cannon before, buying a DOW one to "show me how its done" :rolleyes:. I admit my troops might get annoyed at all those cannon balls flying over their heads....those feather on the sate troops have alot of wind resistance! They'll be bending over to pick up their lost hats all the time...it will totally slow down my soldiers movement...

In all seriousness though...what "weaknesses" are you talking about? Last time I checked WoC has no shooting (except for the Helcannon of course...) So to offser this, every Chaos Horde coming out of the north seems to be lead by Tzeentch sorceror!. If they dont have shooting in one fashion...they got it in another.

Dwarfs are meant to be slow....so to offset this they take the Anvil and Strollz's rune BSB....they aren't so slow after that.....stupid Miners killing my cannons...*grumble*

The "Weaknesses" people keep refering to Don't exist. There are plenty of ways to get around them and players do it all the time and thats okay...but if a dwarfs player uses his Holds vast wealth to hire out some Ogres OMG balance is destroyed!?!!?

Please GW, bring back DOW. If you want to put restrictions on it feel free. But dont let them die!

Lovely speech, but you're wrong I'm afraid. Those weaknesses do exist. Take the WoC example... by taking a Tzeentch sorcerer lord you are forgoing the change to take a fighty character. Most other armies, in selecting ranged firepower do not have to make this sacrifice. Not to forget that magic can be dispelled, so your opponent will have the chance to counter the crucial spell that could ruin his plans.

Personally, I'm not all that worried about game balance. I play for fun, against a small group of opponents who mostly have the same approach. If something is horribly unbalanced we either don't use it, or we re-write the rules. But realistically I can't see GW allowing much in the way of mercenaries within the normal game (sadly). I think the best we can realistically hope for is a standalone army, with an Apocalypse style expansion that allows allies and mercenaries in big battles.

Bloodknight
12-01-2010, 14:10
Game balance is down the drain anyway.


Take the WoC example... by taking a Tzeentch sorcerer lord you are forgoing the change to take a fighty character.

Well, since their champions are already as good as other people's heroes and their heroes beat some Lords over the head, I'd say it's not much of a sacrifice.

BilboBaggins
12-01-2010, 14:14
I probably wouldn't be so big into wanting to see the Dogs of War redone if they included Halflings and Pikes in the Empire book. But the Mercenary concept is a good idea and with the slight restictions I mentioned previously the Dogs of War could be an fun army to play.

selone
12-01-2010, 14:17
I'd like to see them back.

JackBurton01
12-01-2010, 15:12
since I play them I'd like to see them back as well. My fear right now is when they update ogres I'll lose my maneaters.

RGB
12-01-2010, 17:36
Cat Girls, Ninja or otherwise, are from Nippon.

He probably means the Tiger-men of Ind, who do turn up in the BRB a little.

Crazy Harborc
12-01-2010, 21:11
For my regular opponents and I, Dogs of War have never gone away to have to come back.

We tell each other in advance what's a coming (we assume all armies have and use scouts)

Heck, one opponent and I are just about due to drag out our Empire/DoW armies and have a go at it. It happens once a year or so.

Little to no....magic phase goodies. The make up of our armies is usually mostly DoW/RoR with a couple or three Empire units.;)

Malorian
12-01-2010, 23:11
Do I want dogs of war back?

YES!!!

Dreng Tromm
13-01-2010, 06:01
Greetings fellow Old World travellers!

Yes, I would like the Dogs of War back if only for the sole purpose of making our warhammer experience that much more real.

I do not know about other players but I personally play warhammer because it provides me with the opportunity to escape reality and immerse myself, even for a few hours, in the grim world of Warhammer. In so doing, I inescapably find and imagine myself as an Empire General going against the forces of Chaos with my loyal and brave troops or a beleaguered Dwarf Thane holding off a greenskin onslaught.

The world of warhammer is just too dark and complex (and exciting) to simply limit it to exisitng armies and exclusive army compositions. There are simply a lot of cut-throats and sell-swrods out there that would readily sell their own wives to enrich their own lives and the fact is, there are also several provinces and city states that could help bolster their resident armies with the services of mercenaries... especially the specialized ones.

Hence, the inclusion of Dogs of War increases the "feel" of realism which I get when playing Warhammer.

Gamewise, the inclusion of Dogs of War units should also be a welcome option in the sense that it seeks to provide some support to an otherwise inherently weak or imbalanced army. For example, dwarves, proud though they may be, could probably welcome the help of a cavalry unit from Voland's Venators (although I doubt it if the dwarves would ever really admit it) especially when fighting against fast-striking armies.

As an army in itself, the Dogs of War should also be seen as a potential source of refreshing challenge in the sense that it gives the warhammer player/general another dificult army to deal with thereby enriching his gaming experience.

Hobbywise, the return and perhaps increase of Dogs of War would mean more beautiful figures to collect and paint and play with.

Let us set aside the technicalities and rule-nitpicking for a while and let us get back once more to the reaon why we all got into this hopbby in the first place --- PAINTING BEAUTIFUL ARMIES and PLAYING WITH THEM WITH FRIENDS and just simply HAVING FUN!

Freman Bloodglaive
13-01-2010, 06:18
In that vein let's remember that the 5th edition Dogs of War were Perry sculpts and the Perrys were fantastic sculptors even then.

Dreng Tromm
13-01-2010, 06:34
Agreed!

Three cheers to the Perry Brothers!

Gromdal
13-01-2010, 09:02
A dogs of war army would be awesome.

Lord choice: Mercenary Captain (dwarf lord, human lord, ogre lord, elf lord).

Would be so cool with some ridden pistoliers some kind of hvy dwarf infantry, heavy cavalry, ogres and so on.

Its all about the cash for these people!!

The Red Scourge
13-01-2010, 13:24
I'd really love a Tilean mercenary army to fight my empire and bret opponents.

It would be really nice to have some low-fantasy battles without unspeakable evils milling about the battlefield :)

loveless
13-01-2010, 16:43
Well, I don't want Dogs of War back - I've no interested in a Mercenary force in this game.

My opponents might, though, so bring it on :p

Bingo the Fun Monkey
13-01-2010, 16:56
In any game system I've played after leaving GW games, I've realized I can only play mercenary factions. Like Mercenaries in Warmachine, Nomads in Infinity and Outcasts and Malifaux. I have 2000 points of DoW sitting in a box under my painting desk waiting for a reason to come out and play (well, FB needs to get better before I come back, too, but Mercs would certainly help).

Skyros
13-01-2010, 18:21
Yes, however, the ability of other armies to 'hire mercenaries' would need to be very strictly curtailed. In fact, it really only makes sense for the empire to be able to hire masses of mercenaries like that, being already a broad confederation of numerous different territories (and they had ogres, halflings, dwarves, etc, in their pay in the past). The orcs could hire the wolf boys or xbow orcs, etc.

The DOW models are great, and I love the idea of a stand alone mercenary force, so I'd love to see them return.

Maybe as an 'allied contingent' to empire using the old kislev rules that also let them stand alone? I just don't want to see dwarves hiring a high elf dragon prince or something.

Slayerthane
13-01-2010, 23:25
Yes, and with maybe Kislev, Cathay, Araby, Estalian/Tilean supplements.

As a standalone force only, not as an add-on for other armies. They get enough attention as it is.:rolleyes:

Condottiere
14-01-2010, 06:48
Mercenaries, by nature, are auxiliaries in a number of armies.

Petey
14-01-2010, 07:11
I d like to see them come back as the Tilea army

ChaosVC
14-01-2010, 07:17
I want my Vebla leading my wing lancers killing chaos champion thats not mine...

The boyz
14-01-2010, 10:38
Yes, I would like to see DoW back as both a stand alone army and available to other armies.

Darthvegeta800
14-01-2010, 13:28
No. GW has enough trouble updating the main armies. Not to mention supporting them. So I'd rather not see them back.

Condottiere
14-01-2010, 13:31
Somehow, I doubt adding DoW onto the production roster will detrimentally effect the quality of GW's routine updates.

Skyros
14-01-2010, 18:42
Mercenaries, by nature, are auxiliaries in a number of armies.

Yes, and those armies would pretty much all be human armies operating more or less in the regions of the empire.

They wouldn't be joining demons of chaos or vampire counts, for example.

We shouldn't confuse armies in the real sense of the word with the warhammer word 'armies' which is closer to 'races'.

BilboBaggins
14-01-2010, 18:49
I can see some mercenaries joining even the most vile armies, humans do anything for cash.

N810
14-01-2010, 18:53
Actualy there are quite a few non-human Dow/RotR units...
(Ogres, Halflings, Undead, Giants, Dragons, Skinks, Dwarves, ect...)

Condottiere
14-01-2010, 19:16
Ogres are fairly indiscriminate for whom they'll fight.

artisturn
14-01-2010, 19:31
Yes, and those armies would pretty much all be human armies operating more or less in the regions of the empire.

They wouldn't be joining demons of chaos or vampire counts, for example.

We shouldn't confuse armies in the real sense of the word with the warhammer word 'armies' which is closer to 'races'.

If I remember correctly in 6th ed there was only two human units that I would be able to hire on to my Vampire army a cannon and handgunners but they would cost me a rare slot.

The Handgunners were great, skirmishers 4/4 and two attacks in combat, I would bring eight of these guys and plant my general in there, I made some zombies with handguns and their fluff was they were the gun club on the local leper colony and the vampires were the only army that didn't mind their horrible appearance.

I would gladly welcome the return of Dogs of War to warhammer.


I can see some mercenaries joining even the most vile armies, humans do anything for cash.

Don't forget Power and dark magics that also attracts as many vile humans as the coin.

dejavu
15-01-2010, 10:45
yes! I have 5k of beautiful models languishing with outdated rules.

Satan
15-01-2010, 13:00
yes! I have 5k of beautiful models languishing with outdated rules.

Played a game against the Ravening Hordes DOW list just last week and I think they performed quite amiably. They even won. But then again my group mainly plays sane armies and no-one fields daemons.

Odin
15-01-2010, 13:44
If I remember correctly in 6th ed there was only two human units that I would be able to hire on to my Vampire army a cannon and handgunners but they would cost me a rare slot.

The Handgunners were great, skirmishers 4/4 and two attacks in combat, I would bring eight of these guys and plant my general in there, I made some zombies with handguns and their fluff was they were the gun club on the local leper colony and the vampires were the only army that didn't mind their horrible appearance.


I suspect you remember wrongly then.

I certainly never heard of these handgunners.

Condottiere
15-01-2010, 13:52
That would be interesting; who were these handgunners?

Havock
15-01-2010, 14:28
Duelists, I think. With a brace of pistols each.

BilboBaggins
15-01-2010, 14:34
Duellists have an option for pistol not a brace of pistols.

They may have one of the following:
bucklers (count as shields)
additional hand weapon
pistol
May also have throwing knives.

Condottiere
15-01-2010, 14:40
That would be Handgun gunners; pistoleers having been copyrighted.

guillaume
15-01-2010, 14:44
As a stand alone army, I think they make a lot of sense and are great fun. I just don't think other armies should be allowed to hire regiments or other units.

Dogs of war play very differently, especially with their pike rules (they are unique: fight in 4 ranks is absolutely brutal).

They just need a great amount of tidying.

There are 14 Hero choices, 14 core choices, 22 special choices and 17 rare choices....

that is just plain ridiculous.

So yes, as a stand alone army, absolutely. As DoW as they are now where someone can theoretically hire units....na...that's just lazy.

Satan
15-01-2010, 14:46
Duelists, I think. With a brace of pistols each.

That would be them. I distinctly remember facing a nearly army-wide screen of them no more than two weeks ago.

Fun though, it felt pretty realistic.

N810
15-01-2010, 14:51
As a stand alone army, I think they make a lot of sense and are great fun. I just don't think other armies should be allowed to hire regiments or other units.

Dogs of war play very differently, especially with their pike rules (they are unique: fight in 4 ranks is absolutely brutal).

They just need a great amount of tidying.

There are 14 Hero choices, 14 core choices, 22 special choices and 17 rare choices....

that is just plain ridiculous.

So yes, as a stand alone army, absolutely. As DoW as they are now where someone can theoretically hire units....na...that's just lazy.

Yea I think you should only be able to hire out RotR units and but not basic DoW troops.

This would narow down the choices another army can hire down to 2 or 3 units (due to selection restrictions).

guillaume
15-01-2010, 16:26
This is a quick list of what (to me) would make sense out of the current DoW

Regiment of Renown Characters:
Asamil the dragonlord
Lorenzo lupo
Dark emissary (minus the fenbeast)
Midas the mean

Dogs of War Heroes:
Hireling wizard, Hireling wizard lord
Merceneray captain, mercenary general
Paymaster (must have- does not count toward hero choice though).

Dogs of War Core:
Crossbowmen
Duellist
Light cavalry
Heavy cavalry
Pikemen

Regiment of renown Core
Leopold leopard
Ricco Republican
Voland’s venators

Dogs of War Special
Paymaster bodyguards
Dwarves
Ogre Maneaters

Regiments of renown Special
Cursed company
Al muktars desert dogs
Braganzas besiegers ( I move Al muktars and Braganzas into special, as they are quite good- could be made better too).

Dogs of war Rare
Giant
Cannon

Regiments of Renown Rare
Birdmen of Catrazza
Mengil Manhide manflayers (i moved them into rare as they absolutely brutal).

This would make sense to me. There is a large choice of units. A grand total of 27 units (similar to the latest lizardmen book).

However, I would limit Regiments of Renown. For example, 1 regiment for less than 999pts, 2 regiments for 1000-1999pts, 3 regiments for 2000-3000 etc...Also, RoR characters would not be allowed to join a RoR unit either.

That, I could live with. The model opportunities would be great!

Jormi_Boced
15-01-2010, 16:30
No. It makes it too easy to fill in the gaps in your army; gaps that may be there for balance reasons. It also removes some critical thinking and strategy from commanders.

ETA: Hmm, reading the responses following mine, I do see a legitimate reason for this army as a whole. Perhaps if it was just a separate army on its own and not an army for hire by other armies: meaning we wouldn't see dwarves hiring wizards, WoC hiring shooters, etc.

I applaude this post. It seems a rare thing on Internet message boards for someone to change their position instead of arguing to the death!

artisturn
15-01-2010, 16:30
Duelists, I think. With a brace of pistols each.

That would be them. I distinctly remember facing a nearly army-wide screen of them no more than two weeks ago.

Fun though, it felt pretty realistic.

yep this was the unit I was referring too, great unit was worth the rare slot to use them in my VC army,sorry about the name confusion it has been a while since I used them.

ZeroTwentythree
15-01-2010, 16:46
I would love to see DoW back as both a stand alone army, and for hire by other armies.

Complaints about "filling in" weaknesses in other armies are usually unfounded since:

1. They were never nearly as powerful as the things available within a given army book.

2. The idea that each army needs a "built-in weakness" caters to poor players who need an expected and easily identified weakness to win games.

Sintram
15-01-2010, 16:49
I think that i could be very good for balance if RoR came back. Think of the low powered armys that might get acces to better mercs then high powered armys.

guillaume
15-01-2010, 18:26
I think that i could be very good for balance if RoR came back. Think of the low powered armys that might get acces to better mercs then high powered armys.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that GW made it very clear they did not want to have units being hired as mercs by other armies. This somewhow meant that less models were sold.

Considering the depth of new armies compared to 4th or 5th edition, I don't see any army that could benefit from DoW or RoR.

Instead, I truly feel that a stand-alone army is something that most of us would love to see on the table. The idea that an army would NOT look cohesive would be quite the revolution in our hobby. Afterall, if DOW armies are hiring thugs from across the old world, they would NOT wear the same color trousers.

ZeroTwentythree
15-01-2010, 18:45
Considering the depth of new armies compared to 4th or 5th edition, I don't see any army that could benefit from DoW or RoR.



Empire. Especially troops like duelists, light cavalry, pikemen.

Aside from that, what it allowed (and what the previous editions' rules for allies and mercenaries) was a player to buy & paint an occasional unit from another army just because they liked the look or thought it was a cool concept, and include it in their games.

An example of that is a unit of the old (pre big-hat) chaos dwarfs I own. I used to use them as part of the chaos allies or mercenaries (forget which) lists back before they had DoW as a full list. I occasionally used them with my skaven just because I liked them. (In truth, not the best choice in game turns since they moved significantly slower... but I liked the figures.)

ZeroTwentythree
15-01-2010, 18:51
The idea that an army would NOT look cohesive would be quite the revolution in our hobby. Afterall, if DOW armies are hiring thugs from across the old world, they would NOT wear the same color trousers.


That's also nonsense. Most of my skaven army is painted hodge-podge as it reprsents their scavenger nature.

I've also got a number of historical armies that are exactly that... Burgundians, Condottieri, Carthaginians and I'm looking into starting a Successor army. All made up of a variety of different types of troops, many of different national origins, with different fighting styles & costume.

Even reading many fantasy novels there are plenty of instances of multi-faceted armies.

At one time WFB was more like this as well. It's only become more common in recent editions to make simplified one-dimensional "caricature" armies, though even then some still retain a little big of variety (WE have elves and spirits.) IMHO WFB is losing a lot of its depth as "fluff" becomes "stereotype."

guillaume
15-01-2010, 18:58
Well, Empire have handgunners, bowmen and hunters...given skirmish pistols are fun, but Empire has plenty of shooting. Similarly the Outriders are pretty awesome as a fast cavalry unit.

As for taking pikemen, I imagine everyone would want them: fight in 4 ranks is pretty awesome, especially when they are immune to psychology.

As for the models things, I completely agree with you ZeroTwentyThree. It makes sense to me that having fun mercs units available would mean that GW would sell more of those.

But then I can also see that by forcing DoW into a full army, then if you want to play with them, you will have to field a whole lot of models. Makes commercial sense.

Condottiere
15-01-2010, 19:02
There's only one Pike RoR that's ItP, though in the right circumstances they are awesome, or rather, they don't let anything overawe them.

ZeroTwentythree
16-01-2010, 15:33
Well, Empire have handgunners, bowmen and hunters...given skirmish pistols are fun, but Empire has plenty of shooting. Similarly the Outriders are pretty awesome as a fast cavalry unit.


Outriders fulfill a completely different roll than DoW light cav, and represent a totally different type of troop (in terms of fluff.)





As for taking pikemen, I imagine everyone would want them: fight in 4 ranks is pretty awesome, especially when they are immune to psychology.



If they're so uber-powerful, why, in the many years they've already been available, does almost no one take them?

Even people playing pure DoW armies rarely seem to take pikemen.

They may seem good on paper, but they seldom work out well on the table top. In exchange for a very large investment of points (10+ points per figure) you get a bucket-load of regular humans & S3 attacks. You can put out as many S3 attacks with Skaven infantry. They are vulnerable to missile fire, magic, and running away. For all their attacks, they will only be effective against lightweight targets (low T without much armour.) They are vulnerable to flank attacks.

I've used pike in my Empire army. They're not even close to being the most effective Rare choice compared to things like the STank, Helblaster & Helstorm. I've taken them for fluff and for a change of pace. Most people avoid them or blast away at them from a distance. A few have pinned them in a disadvantageous combat. They've done OK when they can get into combat with the right target -- but that's a rarity. And even then I had to bolster them with an WP or AL and some heavens magic to give them better odds.

Crazy Harborc
17-01-2010, 02:23
IMHO, it is not too likely that DoW and or RoR are going to be brought back into the listed armies for 8th Edition.

If they had been big sellers or even average volumn sellers the DoW and RoR minies would still be listed with the rest of the armies in the regular WHFB section of GW's online store not to mention in the rules for 7th Edition.

IMHO, they are just the latest "armies" to be dropped....Chaos Dwarves and Squats (40K)....gone. Were there others?

BilboBaggins
17-01-2010, 02:40
Fimir, Zoats, Gnomes, Half-Orcs are other races tossed aside.

SilverWarlock
17-01-2010, 03:07
I think they should come back with some new fluff and expansion under a "Mercenaries of Cathay" army.

The reasons:
- makes some fluff sense (Cathay is rich, hires mercenaries ... keep a few of the RoR, paymaster etc)
- make them standalone only, avoids powergamers exploiting them to fill gaps
- new units and fluff would make them distinct from empire troops (which they resembled a lot)

I think the army could be half resurrected and half redone. In its past state it caused too much abuse and was too similar to the empire (and some of the RoR were silly ...).

jdp
17-01-2010, 03:24
Dow was my first Army back in fifth edition. I liked there looks and liked how they played as well, they were expensive but things like pikes did level things out. Heck I think I was the first player to win a game with them at a GT back in the day.

I still have that force in my basement, and a lot of unpainted pewter ready to go if the mood strikes, but lets be serious, the ravening hordes list from pre 6th ed. just doesn't hold water anymore. I would love to see them brought back as a stand alone army, but you could hire out some of the more inocuous units I suppose just like you can with the ogres currently.
Heck all this list really needs is a buff of its points, a merc magic items list, and a box of plastic pikes and its good to go, it'd even fill the new its an army release with only 4 codes that is going around currently.
However I'd really like to see Araby brought up from the Warmaster leagues to be the new army when it comes time for the next "new" army.

tezdal
17-01-2010, 04:32
I'd like to see them come back as a stand alone Tilean/Estalia army, possibly throw in some Araby units.

ZeroTwentythree
17-01-2010, 05:54
IMHO, they are just the latest "armies" to be dropped....Chaos Dwarves and Squats (40K)....gone. Were there others?


Fimir, Zoats, Gnomes, Half-Orcs are other races tossed aside.


Also Nippon & Norse. And the pygmy allied contingent.

Condottiere
17-01-2010, 08:11
Unlike Squats, there will always be mercenaries, even if disguised as Bretonnian Sheep Herders.

RGB
17-01-2010, 09:06
They may seem good on paper, but they seldom work out well on the table top. In exchange for a very large investment of points (10+ points per figure) you get a bucket-load of regular humans & S3 attacks. You can put out as many S3 attacks with Skaven infantry. They are vulnerable to missile fire, magic, and running away. For all their attacks, they will only be effective against lightweight targets (low T without much armour.) They are vulnerable to flank attacks.

I love pike, but yes, they're not that great. Saurus can put out as many attacks as pike for cheaper, at better S.

Condottiere
17-01-2010, 09:56
Pikemen are currently overcosted.

Haravikk
17-01-2010, 10:36
I would agree that it should be returned, as I do have some units I can no longer use, as well as a few novelty characters that there were never rules for in the first place.

However, I generally play with Dogs of War as an option that both players have to agree upon before the battle, due to the aforementioned balance issues they can produce. Usually as a house rule I restrict Dogs of War to relevant choices that maintain an army's tactical theme, so choices such as a wizard for Dwarfs etc. would be discounted anyway. But a unit of pirates isn't really an unsuitable choice, and can be fun to field in a game.

The exception to this I would say is if you have an entire Dogs of War army because you've built a custom army, or just assembled lots of different cool unit types. I don't remember though, have Dogs of War armies been accepted into tournaments in the past?

Bloodknight
17-01-2010, 16:05
As for taking pikemen, I imagine everyone would want them: fight in 4 ranks is pretty awesome, especially when they are immune to psychology.

Pikemen currently don't get taken by the more successful DoW tournament players (we've got a couple of them in Germany, and most tournaments use a tiered system which means that DoW get up to 2500 points for 2000 points games...) because they're severely overcosted and not that impressive, and especially the Leopard company is overpriced.


don't remember though, have Dogs of War armies been accepted into tournaments in the past?

Yes, pure DoW armies. I think last year's UKGT was the first one to not accept them anymore.

ZeroTwentythree
17-01-2010, 17:00
Yes, pure DoW armies. I think last year's UKGT was the first one to not accept them anymore.



A lot of tournaments around here seem to still allow them. There's little reason not to accept them -- if anything, they're a bit underpowered and light on the special rules compared to the "regular" army books. We've got two DoW players locally, plus me (sometimes use DoW in Empire, but have been planning on putting a full DoW army on the table in the future.)

ghostline
17-01-2010, 17:47
I dont see anything really wrong or Overpowered from dogs of war.. it's not like people can't take Ogre Kingdoms unit's for there dogs of war. My friend has a dogs of war army(and every warhammer army except Tomb Kings and Lizardmen). We play with it occasionally and take units from it sometimes..

Theres really nothing horribly imbalanced about it. Most of the options are overpriced, Pikemen are expensive and you HAVE to take a large unit of them to be effective. That and they take up RARE slots in the army your taking them in. A chaos demon player couldnt take flamers(which are a better choice then cannons IMO). A chaos warrior player could take em, but couldnt take an engineer to make it reliable AND they really need those points for there other units.

Right now, people can take dogs of war if they want already, and it's not completely imbalancing the game. The Naysayers are crying over something that they think might happen, but hasn't.

So yes, GW should release a new dogs of war book.

Condottiere
17-01-2010, 18:23
Usually as a house rule I restrict Dogs of War to relevant choices that maintain an army's tactical theme, so choices such as a wizard for Dwarfs etc. would be discounted anyway. Character selections are prohibited in any case, though a method might be evolved to get Gotrek and Felix back onto the tabletop, without claiming they are a regiment.

BilboBaggins
17-01-2010, 18:30
Gotrek and Felix aren't character choices but are a RoR unit like the Witch Hunters.

Condottiere
17-01-2010, 19:10
They are holdovers, and need an update. At a minimum, one character slot in addition to a Rare one.

BilboBaggins
17-01-2010, 19:38
They are holdovers, and need an update. At a minimum, one character slot in addition to a Rare one.

I do not agree with that one since it's only two guys and one is human. They are missile/magic targets.

raymon
17-01-2010, 21:52
Yes. As a stand alone army and for hire in other armies. I am a collector, and want to collect what i like without restrictions which are a bit nutty if you think about it. Warhammer is expensive already, and i am only allowed to pick from a certain range if i want a viable army. Dogs of War gives that bit of extra freedom to collect what you want. Not to mention that they can reflect any only-fluff-mentioned-armies in the warhammer world (border princes, cathay, araby) with some converting.

I like fitting different races in one army. In this way its in real terms a fantasy army with all the dragons, giants, ogres, humans, dwarfs and elves. I don't get bored with painting easily because of all the different models. Not to mention the converting. From a collectors perspective, dogs of war gives you the oppertunity to get the models you want to play without racial restrictions (its my money and i buy what i want to). Ideal starter army in my opinion. You get what you want, and start playing. And these units can be a starting point for armies from a specific race. GW sells models anyway you go with it. Looks like a good selling strategy to me to support dogs. And it offers veteran players to convert allot. I could realize a custom theme because of DOW, which other armies could not because of there already strongly determined look and feel.

Fluffwise its realistic that there are mercs around in such a war torn world. And generals willing to take them if they need a specialty his army cannot provide to win a war. His opponent would probably do the same.

From a competitive view: If your opponent is allowed to negate his weaknesses with mercs, so can you. It would only broaden the spectrum of what you are likely to face. More tactical options to get or counter in my point of view. So you expect chaos not to fire at you, tough luck, he brought some cannons, now respond in kind to get your victory. A Good General does anything to get a victory. If its hiring mercenaries to get the job done, then do so. Some people are already cherry picking the "best" units in there army, DOW will not change that. What we get instead is the freedom to collect what we like and a broader range of models to choose from. And in my humble opinion DOW & ROR arn't taking away weaknesses from the current armies.

Crazy Harborc
18-01-2010, 00:46
Well, for just about 30 years, the suits at GW have increasingly expected the GW systems players to......well, act like we are in school. GW is the school, staff and teachers. The paying customers are the students. Well......the parents and other relatives pay while "students" play.

The only way GW will bring back DoW and RoR is if the suits decide it's their idea to do it. THAT will only happen IF, that's if, the suits are convinced they will bring in lots of money.;)

Davo
18-01-2010, 11:52
Sorry if this has been discussed but I haven't trawled through the entire thread yet. Did the Dogs of War get any upgrades/new rules after that 5th edition army book? If so anyone know of any legal pdf for them?
Was thinking of trying a merc army but the game has moved on significantly since 5th and I think it probably wouldn't work to well.

Condottiere
18-01-2010, 12:01
There are two PDFs that separately list the generic units and force structure, and the other one that addresses the Regiments of Renown; they are also published in one of the Chronicles.

Davo
18-01-2010, 12:06
Thanks mate, I'll try track them down.

plantagenet
18-01-2010, 12:28
Mercenary armies should definitly get a refresh. I like the idea of them and it adds a little bit extra to the warhammer world.

Logan_uc
18-01-2010, 12:37
I would love to see a DOW army but in a diffrent way.
A book that makes possible the use of the different human nations.

Using a "mark" sistem that makes units gain a flavor of a certain nation and some unique units, all dependent on the army general "mark".

And of course, the option to hire the unmarked unit, with appropriate price hike.

Desert Rain
18-01-2010, 15:56
I think that it would be fun with a dogs of war army. Especially if you focus on the mercenary part so that other armies could hire various units from the list.