PDA

View Full Version : Tamurkhan and Tournaments



Lord Inquisitor
05-01-2012, 22:33
So Tamurkhan has been out for a little while, what do people think of it, specifically with regard to tournaments? Imperial Armour over in 40K-land is largely disregarded for tournaments with a few notable exceptions, but what about Warhammer Forge's products?

I'm curious as to how accepted these things will be. Tamurkhan is particularly interesting as their first book as it includes the Chaos Dwarfs for the first time as a legal list and I'm sure many players are chomping at the bit to bring their evil little stunties to tournaments.

Will Tamurkhan be allowed at tournaments? Just the CD list? Should it be allowed, particularly in tournaments that allow special characters?

MOMUS
05-01-2012, 22:44
I think they are chomping at the bit to bring that kadai destroyer chap rather than its evil stuntie cheerleaders. :p

thesheriff
05-01-2012, 22:54
Well, I do think certain aspects of the book are a bit OP anyway, but I reckon it should be allowed at GW tournaments. They have had a chance to live and learn from IA. And, previous imperial armour releases have been focused on expansions for existing races (eg; elysians for Imp. Guard) with the notable exception if traitor guard. But as chaos dwarves can't really be substituted for anything in the current AB range, i reckon it's a good idea to include the chaos dwarf list in tournaments.

However, although I do not advocate it, Tournaments that do comp need to restrict it in some areas......

thesheriff

Rikkjourd
05-01-2012, 22:58
I have tried to build a couple of CD lists and gone over the rules a couple of times. For comped tournaments I see absolutely no problem of including them.

But I guess you want the uncomped man-hammer version, and for that I am guessing that the skullcracker will be the ultimate cheese. (it even has the word skull in the name so it must be good)

Lord Inquisitor
05-01-2012, 23:02
I'm hearing a lot about the Destroyers. I'm looking at the book now and it's ugly to be sure. But what about it makes it quite so reviled?

Oh wait, I think I see it. -1 to wound means its immune to anything less than S5, right? Ah.

Aluinn
05-01-2012, 23:05
I'm hearing a lot about the Destroyers. I'm looking at the book now and it's ugly to be sure. But what about it makes it quite so reviled?

Oh wait, I think I see it. -1 to wound means its immune to anything less than S5, right? Ah.

If you watch this battle report (http://www.youtube.com/user/tmarichards#p/u/8/uukuMXg9K0k) (I hope tmarichards doesn't mind me plugging it) I think you'll see what is wrong with it.

thesheriff
05-01-2012, 23:06
I think the worst thing is the lore of Hashut personally. Although only available on a lv3, it's absolutely devastating.

Rogzor87
05-01-2012, 23:09
From what I hear the Chaos Dwarves list is devastatingly good. I am more concerned with the "Hordes of Chaos" list in the book. Would you think that is allowed?

Rikkjourd
05-01-2012, 23:19
If you watch this battle report (http://www.youtube.com/user/tmarichards#p/u/8/uukuMXg9K0k) (I hope tmarichards doesn't mind me plugging it) I think you'll see what is wrong with it.

"I hope whoever wrote it is either fired or never get to write rules for anything again because you are a "#%&ing idiot whoever you are"

HAHA sums it up nicely! I didn't realize how OP the -1 to wound actually was.

BorderKing
05-01-2012, 23:44
This is what FAQ's are for.

The Low King
06-01-2012, 00:01
As a dwarf i must catagorically deny the existance of such a group as 'Chaos Dwarfs', they do not exist and therefore cannot be used as a legal army.

Shandowner
06-01-2012, 00:11
I think none of you have actually read the list....

Actually Read it, then compare it to the power builds in GT's today.
Like all lists you can abuse it (it wouldnt be wargaming if you couldnt)
But it certainly not stronger than many of the current books.

Please dont repond with a knee jerk reaction.

This list is filled with holes, any INT based tests (destroyer is on a 100 by 150), will ruin all it's toys. and no one barring the Destroyer can actually fight..
Bull centaurs have 2 attacks... chaos dwarfs are too expensive to grind (vs 8pt dwarves with great weapons)
Their lore is actually pretty "ehh" basically ash storm and maybe number 6 arent situational.
Magic items all suck.
chaff is rare (wolf riders) or too expensive (4 1/2 for hobgoblins )
If you only bring Hellcannons, magma cannons, deathshriekers and destroyers, you'd
smash face. But you'd also be in the comp bracket with the other lists that min/max....

the list is fine..

The Low King
06-01-2012, 00:22
Bull centaurs have 2 attacks... chaos dwarfs are too expensive to grind (vs 8pt dwarves with great weapons)


Dwarf warriors with GW are 10 points.

Plus you underestimate chaos dwarf armour, sure our GW troops might hit harder but with them fireglaive things and a 3+ save chaos dwarfs hit back hard. (plus they have both elite units and chaff)

txamil
06-01-2012, 00:24
I dont quite get the steam carriage rule.

Shandowner
06-01-2012, 00:39
Dwarf warriors with GW are 10 points.

Plus you underestimate chaos dwarf armour, sure our GW troops might hit harder but with them fireglaive things and a 3+ save chaos dwarfs hit back hard. (plus they have both elite units and chaff)

ok, with fireglaves, they have chaos armor (4+) at 18pts a model (which xbows and handguns out range) you will outduel them at range and outnumber close to 2-1 in close combat.

without fireglaves, regular dudes at 12 pts a model is their best bet, but you are looking at very best 1 big block who can grind (provided you want all the other cool stuff in the list) or two blocks of 30ish..

all thier artillery is on chariot bases (except the hell cannon) so to get them to be able to get the engineer roll they have to be pretty close (3 of the engineer,) so they will be bunched together for PITS, or Purple suns, to kill alot of them fairly easily. Also they have nothing to generate powerdice or perhaps more importantly help their magic defense, to prevent those mishaps.

all this said, the same player who tries to cheese them ot will be the same player who does that with any other list.....

balanced among the other lists easily.

Drongol
06-01-2012, 01:15
ok, with fireglaves, they have chaos armor (4+) at 18pts a model (which xbows and handguns out range) you will outduel them at range and outnumber close to 2-1 in close combat.

Actually, they have Chaos Armor and Shields at ranged, for what it's worth. They're still ridiculously expensive, mind you, and the ranged options really aren't that good, but Ironbreakers with a ward save against fire aren't bad for 12 points a pop.


all thier artillery is on chariot bases (except the hell cannon) so to get them to be able to get the engineer roll they have to be pretty close (3 of the engineer,) so they will be bunched together for PITS, or Purple suns, to kill alot of them fairly easily. Also they have nothing to generate powerdice or perhaps more importantly help their magic defense, to prevent those mishaps.

While true, I'd like to point out that they have the Chalice of -D3 power dice that they can use as often as they'd like. Not the best magic defense, but it certainly doesn't hurt.


all this said, the same player who tries to cheese them ot will be the same player who does that with any other list.....

balanced among the other lists easily.

Honestly, I'm not so sure how balanced they are. On the one hand, what they do, they do incredibly well, namely, destroy units with artillery. The rockets and magma cannons are just incredible for the points.

On the other hand, if your opponent can handle the K'daii, you're going to have all kinds of problems up close. Basically, they kind of have to go gunline + K'daii and there's not a whole lot that they can do if you get the drop on them.

cornixt
06-01-2012, 01:31
Some elements of the list are a bit too powerful/cheap and other parts (like everything Core) are too expensive. It probably balances out overall I think. My local GW is very happy about using the list for their own tournaments.

Drongol
06-01-2012, 01:39
Some elements of the list are a bit too powerful/cheap and other parts (like everything Core) are too expensive. It probably balances out overall I think. My local GW is very happy about using the list for their own tournaments.

Oh, I'd never dream of banning the list from tournaments. At all. Ever.

I just wouldn't say it's a particular pinnacle of balance. What's good is very, very good. What's not good... Sucks. Problem is, you have to take quite a lot of suck to get to the good.

Shandowner
06-01-2012, 01:49
RE:fireglaves
Cannot be used with shields in hand to hand... (require two hands in close combat) 4+ save
It doesnt say you can't use the shield option vs shooting attacks; you could get 3+ vs those..

Shandowner
06-01-2012, 01:54
Oh, I'd never dream of banning the list from tournaments. At all. Ever.

I just wouldn't say it's a particular pinnacle of balance. What's good is very, very good. What's not good... Sucks. Problem is, you have to take quite a lot of suck to get to the good.

100% got your back on this one...

Agoz
06-01-2012, 02:47
With most armies having access to and in fact making extensive use of great weapons, I don't see the destroyer really being that big of a problem, I guess it would depend on how many points it is.

Jind_Singh
06-01-2012, 06:33
I see them being allowed - after all with the release of Storm of Magic the aim was to allow FW items into mainstream gaming - sales are sales are sales!!!

There is no NO way FW makes a big book like that which won't be supported at GW events - begging that they are same company.

Also while some of the CD units are really good, they are also very VERY expensive! I tried making a few 2000 point lists, and 2500 point lists and it's VERY easy to run out of points very quickly!

Besides, any poor bugger who is shelling out FW prices, assembling FW models deserves to use their awesome models in any event!

Jack of Blades
06-01-2012, 08:51
I think the most obvious way to balance the destroyer is to make the -1 to wound thing not making you immune to being wounded. I think it's the best way to go about it because it's not really a rule change, it's more like something a FAQ could fix and it makes it not so horribly good for the points. I mean even if it does a load of damage with its attacks, automatic S4 hits and stomps, if you can at least wound it then you have the same chance that you have with any other really big monster.

Memnos
06-01-2012, 09:05
With most armies having access to and in fact making extensive use of great weapons, I don't see the destroyer really being that big of a problem, I guess it would depend on how many points it is.

Well... Let's take a unit of White Lions in horde formation.

18 attacks, hitting on 4s(The Destroyer is WS 5) would be 13.5 hits.

Wounding on 5s, because it's T6 and they wound 4.5 times.

The Destroyer then saves 2.25 from its ward save.

It takes 3 rounds of fighting the front of a horde of white lions in order for it to drop on average.

In return, it will cause:

6 S4 hits from its burning aura.

7-9 WS5, wounding on 2s attacks.

d6 thunderstomps. That's on average between 6-9 wounds every round. Better hope you have enough to maintain horde formation with the White Lions.

And the beast has a M9, so it can pick its fights and will never ever hit a horde of White Lions in the front.

Jack of Blades
06-01-2012, 09:09
Sigh on that white lion graph :( I've always wanted a bloodthirster-like rare monster for my WoC and when it finally comes, it's so good I can't use it with a clear conscience. What do you think needs to be done?

Memnos
06-01-2012, 09:16
Sigh on that white lion graph :( I've always wanted a bloodthirster-like rare monster for my WoC and when it finally comes, it's so good I can't use it with a clear conscience. What do you think needs to be done?

The destroyer is basically a greater daemon, so if you wouldn't feel guilty about using a Bloodthirster then don't feel guilty about using the K'daii Destroyer.

Basically: If you're prepared for the Destroyer and he gets average ward saves, you can smash him. If you aren't, he'll smash you. Frankly, I'd up his points cost to be in keeping with other Greater Daemons. Beyond that, I think he's about as balanced as a Bloodthirster, only he's taken from Rares.

Lord Zarkov
06-01-2012, 09:26
6 S4 hits from its burning aura.


More than that, depending on which way round his base is, if it's the 100mm side forward you'll get 7 hits against WLs, and if it's the 150mm side you'll get 9!
So that's 6 wounds, rather than 6 hits

logan054
06-01-2012, 09:49
I don't see the issue with the destroyer, I always have something with a 2+ wardsave against flaming attacks, just march that that and the destroyer is going to have problems doing anything. The video report made me laugh, its a DE shadow player moaning about something being broken? so a DE shadow mage playing against a low I value army moaning about broken lol.

jack da greenskin
06-01-2012, 09:57
I've played against them and think they're a bit underpowered, or well balanced at best. They take a little bit of finesse to play, their artillery is good, but the troops are a bit meh, either really good (blunderbass) but really expensive, or a bit overcosted for what they do (warriors or was it infernal guard?).

Didnt help I had a unit of mournfangs roll down a flank and decimate a lot of artillery :L So that might have affected my judgement.

Arijharn
06-01-2012, 10:22
The destroyer is basically a greater daemon, so if you wouldn't feel guilty about using a Bloodthirster then don't feel guilty about using the K'daii Destroyer.

Basically: If you're prepared for the Destroyer and he gets average ward saves, you can smash him. If you aren't, he'll smash you. Frankly, I'd up his points cost to be in keeping with other Greater Daemons. Beyond that, I think he's about as balanced as a Bloodthirster, only he's taken from Rares.

I thought so too, but doesn't he have a 4+ ward save? He's considerably more survivable than all Greater Daemons with the possible exception of a Great Unclean One or a successful Slaaneshi LD bomb (but that only affects those in melee). -1 To Wound is a horrid rule.

Do ForgeWorld even release Errata's? Speaking of Errata's though; I'm still waiting for an errata/faq for Storm of Magic.

Drongol
06-01-2012, 12:08
The K'daii Destroyer really is broken, due to the FW ruling that the -1 to wound means that S4 and below attacks cannot bother it. Remove that and it's still a blenderator, but at least its victims can slowly whittle it down.

In combat, the burning body thing is just disgusting--getting 7-ish auto hits means that you're effectively giving the thing 11-14 extra attacks (or the equivalent thereof) at a lower strength. That gives it the hitting power to completely overcome a large unit and just keep crushing things beneath it's hooves.

"But I have a 2+ ward against fire!" I hear you claim. Guess what? You're probably not M9. The Destroyer will just go after another unit and leave your lone character for missile bait, or something.

I'm not overly worried about the Destroyer, mind you. All of my units can hurt it, none of them are particularly horrible matchups against it, and with my Ogres, it'll be eating two cannons a turn until it drops.

The problem is that the Destroyer can just run roughshod over a good portion of the opponent's army while the other part is sucking on two magma cannons and 2 rockets. That's a lot of any-infantry killing power.

Wishing
06-01-2012, 12:26
In relation to the original question, when are the rules for GW-held tournaments at things like Games Day usually published? Not until these are released will we get an idea of how "officially" tournament legal the WF list will end up being, although it is possible that the list will be accepted by indy tournaments the world over even if the GW tournaments don't allow it.

tmarichards
06-01-2012, 14:25
I don't see the issue with the destroyer.

Not the sharpest knife in the draw then?

Max_Killfactor
06-01-2012, 14:28
I don't think the list is that powerful, but I am biased... and my other army is dark elves.

The Destroyer and Magma Cannons are both very, very good. The Death Shrieker is very good. The rest isn't anything to complain about imo.

Overall, I think it's about in the middle of the pack in terms of power. If it wasn't for the Destroyer or the Magma Cannon, I think it'd be a very weak list.

I think it should absolutely be allowed in tournaments.

Gradek
06-01-2012, 14:31
If I was hosting a tourney, I wouldn't allow the Chaos Dwarfs. The Destroyer is absurd and is not only obscenely overpowered at any cost for the -1 to wound rule, but undercosted even if that rule was removed. The destroyer should have the -1 to wound not apply to rolled 6's (ie a 6 always wounds) and even then should cost about the same as a thirster.

How anyone can justify the CD army with that monstrosity in it is almost laughable. Let's see. does it really matter what the rest of the army does/costs, if one extremely fast and overpowered unit can essentially wipe out its choice of the opponents army with no fear of dying unless perhaps the opponent has cannons. And to top it off, the CD have great warmachines too, so they can shoot at any problematic units while the destroyers wrecks everything else.

I agree with the DE player in that battle report video, the guy that designed the rules for this thing should be terminated post haste.

Memnos
06-01-2012, 14:52
With respect, I disagree. Yes, the K'daii destroyer is a game changer. Yes, I agree that it should probably hit about 400-450 points.

But in any tournament, if you aren't prepared for monstrous beasts like the K'daii destroyer, you're going to lose to that same Bloodthirster list. You'll lose to the Beastmen army with that Doombull of mashiness(Who would kill the K'Daii, by the way). The only difference between the K'daii and those other Monster Mash armies is that a S 3-4 army against the Doombull/Bloodthirster has nearly no chance of hurting versus the K'Daii list where it has no chance.

If you're looking for a tactica on how to beat it with all-comer lists, I'm certain there are many who would be willing to help.

Wargamejunkie
06-01-2012, 14:55
I would allow it at any tournaments I ran. If there is a reacquiring issue then I would mod it accordingly.

The book seems decent enough to at least give it a try. I would have to try it at some smaller tournaments first before allowing it at a GT would be my only caveat.

Off Topic- Would Heroic Killing Blow do anything to it? Since it is just a roll of a 6 and "off with its head". Not having the book in-front of me I would think poison would be the order to cancel it as it doesn't require a to wound roll.

BigbyWolf
06-01-2012, 16:43
With respect, I disagree. Yes, the K'daii destroyer is a game changer. Yes, I agree that it should probably hit about 400-450 points.

But in any tournament, if you aren't prepared for monstrous beasts like the K'daii destroyer, you're going to lose to that same Bloodthirster list. You'll lose to the Beastmen army with that Doombull of mashiness(Who would kill the K'Daii, by the way). The only difference between the K'daii and those other Monster Mash armies is that a S 3-4 army against the Doombull/Bloodthirster has nearly no chance of hurting versus the K'Daii list where it has no chance.

If you're looking for a tactica on how to beat it with all-comer lists, I'm certain there are many who would be willing to help.

I'd have to agree with Memnos on this, given the number of big nasties out there these days it's a bit odd to go to a tournament without the means to deal with efficiently (I.E not relying on "Well, I can wound anything on a "6", so lots of attacks should deal with it).

That being said, it does have silly rules, and should be costed accordingly- Like many other things in the WFB universe. It's a bit OP, but is that a reason to ban CD lists? No.

Lord Inquisitor
06-01-2012, 17:04
To be fair, with a bit of math-hammer, it is the toughest "big monster" out there so far. Even the vaulted Steam Tank is actually more likely to be wounded by cannons. In terms of S6 attacks (as strong as you're likely to get with infantry attacks) it is exactly as hard to wound as a Steam Tank.

It's got I5 (why!?) and good stats, so it's pretty much immune to any of the auto-death spells out there.

Running a 2+ ward save character into it is going to slow it down, but the Destroyer will still likely get a wound through each turn by volume of attacks.

Still, it does have the not insignificant downside that if you roll a 6 at the start of any turn it loses D3 wounds, and dropping it's toughness is going to be doubly effective.

Trains_Get_Robbed
06-01-2012, 17:06
^^^ Frankly, I disagree with you Bigby Wolf and Menmos, and actually find that Destroyer thing to be monstrously unbalanced.

As a H.E player, in that W.L example (a unit I regularly take to tournaments) THAT IS MY WAY OF HANDLING GREATER DEMONS. A +5 ward and wounding on 4's is a HUGE DIFFERENCE STATISTICALLY than a +4 Ward and a wounding on 5's. In addition, to argue that a Great Unclean has ten wounds, it also has +5 ward, low W.S and limited attacks or a Slansshi/Tzneetch can both get +4 Wards, but aren't combat oriented.

If that thing gets -1 wound taking away, and a points increase (55-60) then I wouldn't have a problem with it. However, anyone saying otherwise is just ignorant and hasn't played against it yet.

Jack of Blades
06-01-2012, 17:21
If that thing gets -1 wound taking away, and a points increase (55-60) then I wouldn't have a problem with it. However, anyone saying otherwise is just ignorant and hasn't played against it yet.

What about removing the -1 wound thing and making it cause S3 automatic hits but keeping the point cost? I would rather tone it down than increase its points because more points to play with = more fun.

KronusDaSneaky
06-01-2012, 18:36
I collect CD, Daemons and Skaven. I consider my CD the weakest of the 3 from a competitive stand point so I would be happy to face them in a tournament. In a non comp environment there are at least 6 armies better and comp has the means of curbing worst excesses of the list.

Sure buttercup ... I mean the destroyer is nasty but so are hellpits, stanks, pendent lords, chosen stars, teclis, kairos to name a few. It's existence should not be viewed as a reason to invalidate an otherwise largely average list. That said I am always happy to use my CD as WOC if people have issues and break up the double warshrine chosen star madness

MLP
06-01-2012, 18:38
The thing is its highly unlikely that the rules for the destroyer will change. Even an errata for Tamurkhan would likely do a very little maybe only a points hike. But I expect Warhammer forge made the destroyer powerful for its points to increase sales while making the mandatory troop choice over costed to balance the army. That way you buy more of everything they want to sell!

KronusDaSneaky
06-01-2012, 18:51
The thing is its highly unlikely that the rules for the destroyer will change. Even an errata for Tamurkhan would likely do a very little maybe only a points hike. But I expect Warhammer forge made the destroyer powerful for its points to increase sales while making the mandatory troop choice over costed to balance the army. That way you buy more of everything they want to sell!

Accounts of discussions with designers I have seen on the Cd forums suggest that there were indeed last minute point increases on core in an effort to balance the book as reflected by difference between book and experimental rules. I am equally cynical that the reason the put the added points there rather then on say the destroyer is that the core are mandatory and so will sell irrespective of there point cost

Lord Inquisitor
06-01-2012, 19:11
But I expect Warhammer forge made the destroyer powerful for its points to increase sales
Which might make sense if they actually sold the model. It's downright odd considering the K'daai don't have models (past or present). I'm sure WF will get around to making one sooner or later, but a deliberate overpowering seems most unlikely simply because they won't profit from it immediately. The same argument was made for the Hellpit but in the end if anything it probably hurt sales - how many lost purchases from people who scratch-built their own ones or bought the Maelstrom version? It doesn't make sense.

logan054
06-01-2012, 19:22
Not the sharpest knife in the draw then?

The reality is its only good against certain armies, certain armies will crush it, before ranting on some video blog about something I suggest you take a look at your own army. DE are one of the top armies for a reason, its nothing to do with the fact that it attracts all the best players either, I'm sorry but I can't take a DE player using a lvl4 wizard with lore of shadow seriously when they moan about something being broken, especially when any list can include counters to it few relatively few points.

Something else that needs to be considered is it can actually kill itself, with withering you can increase the chance it kills itself as well as allowing the ever so balanced RXB spam to kill it, skinks are still going to destroy it, cannons, rock lobbers, pit of shades can still do it if you reduce the I value, still what does that say about lore of shadow if it can deal with such creatures which are apparently broken as hell? what does that say about the people using it? just some food for thought.


Running a 2+ ward save character into it is going to slow it down, but the Destroyer will still likely get a wound through each turn by volume of attacks.

about average of 8 attacks, so against most characters 4 hits, 3 wounds, shouldn't get past the 2+ save unless your unlucky, if you holding it in place with a cheap enough character then your doing well, if they have a magical weapon then they have a fair chance of killing it it (depending on weapon), I know this isn't a competitive choice but its something I very often use, exalted, jugger, ogre blade, charmed shield, dragon bane gem could be very effective against it

Col. Dash
06-01-2012, 19:39
Its a 300+ point unit, taking up a rare slot, in an army where a core troop choice of 20 guys easily costs 300+ points. The only lord choice is a 200+ point unit base. It isnt bad when you put it in context with the rest of the army. In a vacuum, yeah its mean. I dont know about you guys but I have an entire other army to figure out with mandatory choices. By itself it will not win the game. CD WILL ALWAYS be outnumbered badly, even by WoC. I dont see it as that big a deal. Throw a tarpit or two on it and it will be stuck, you will still outnumber everyone else in the army unless they brought hobgoblins which have their own negatives. I think its a very balanced list in general especially since 2500 point list will have maybe 5 or 6 units total not counting characters.

BigbyWolf
06-01-2012, 19:47
^^^ Frankly, I disagree with you Bigby Wolf and Menmos, and actually find that Destroyer thing to be monstrously unbalanced.

Disagree with what? I didn't say the Destroyer was balanced.


Its a 300+ point unit, taking up a rare slot, in an army where a core troop choice of 20 guys easily costs 300+ points. The only lord choice is a 200+ point unit base. It isnt bad when you put it in context with the rest of the army. In a vacuum, yeah its mean. I dont know about you guys but I have an entire other army to figure out with mandatory choices. By itself it will not win the game. CD WILL ALWAYS be outnumbered badly, even by WoC. I dont see it as that big a deal. Throw a tarpit or two on it and it will be stuck, you will still outnumber everyone else in the army unless they brought hobgoblins which have their own negatives. I think its a very balanced list in general especially since 2500 point list will have maybe 5 or 6 units total not counting characters.

Again, more good points. Viewing the list as a whole and not focusing on one model (which, incidently is the purpose of the thread...). I mean, should we ban HE's because of Teclis, or Dark Elves because of their Pendant? How about we move the discussion back onto the lines of the OPs question:



Will Tamurkhan be allowed at tournaments? Just the CD list? Should it be allowed, particularly in tournaments that allow special characters?

Instead of debating the Destroyer, because frankly, if that is peoples only reason for not wanting to allow this CD list into a tournament, then it's a bit lame. This is Warhammer, every now and then you will come up against something that is particularly difficult to deal with (and I'll say again, the Destroyer is a very nasty example of this). I did note that in the featured battle report, the Dark Elf player did note that he had other units that could have damaged it, but they were on the other side of the board (IIRC). He also mentioned other deployment options that would have helped against it. Admittedly, this is only good in hindsight, but it does give hope that if there was a "Round 2", the Dark Elves might have a better chance against it.

Looking at the rest of the CD army list, is there anything else that would be considered truly "nasty", can anyone shed light on what else in the book is not suitable for using in games of Warhammer?

Gradek
06-01-2012, 19:50
The reality is its only good against certain armies, certain armies will crush it, before ranting on some video blog about something I suggest you take a look at your own army. DE are one of the top armies for a reason, its nothing to do with the fact that it attracts all the best players either, I'm sorry but I can't take a DE player using a lvl4 wizard with lore of shadow seriously when they moan about something being broken, especially when any list can include counters to it few relatively few points.

Something else that needs to be considered is it can actually kill itself, with withering you can increase the chance it kills itself as well as allowing the ever so balanced RXB spam to kill it, skinks are still going to destroy it, cannons, rock lobbers, pit of shades can still do it if you reduce the I value, still what does that say about lore of shadow if it can deal with such creatures which are apparently broken as hell? what does that say about the people using it? just some food for thought.

First of all, there really shouldn't be anything that simply auto wins against even "certain armies", as that is grotesquely unfair and not fun to play against. Second, the movement value of the destroyer means that it gets to pick its battles against most armies, and thus has the ability to avoid the one or two things in an army (without cannon) that can kill it, while still essentially winning the game all by itself. Third, with CD great artillery, they can support the destroyer from a safe distance and attempt (and likely succeed) at removing those direct threats to the destroyer. Fourth, you are acting as though spell combo's are easy to pull off and the fact that it requires a combo to deal (and from a specific lore or two at that) with this thing is just another highlight of it being overpowered. Finally, even beyond this thing being overpowered, I think we can all admit that it is absurdly undercosted.

Lord Inquisitor
06-01-2012, 19:53
about average of 8 attacks, so against most characters 4 hits, 3 wounds, shouldn't get past the 2+ save unless your unlucky, if you holding it in place with a cheap enough character then your doing well, if they have a magical weapon then they have a fair chance of killing it it (depending on weapon), I know this isn't a competitive choice but its something I very often use, exalted, jugger, ogre blade, charmed shield, dragon bane gem could be very effective against it
I suppose. Although it isn't that unlucky. Let's say 8 attacks - probability of wounding (assuming no armour after modifiers and hitting on 4+) is 5/72 per attack, which gives a probability of 1 or more wounds inflicted per round of 0.70. So 70% chance of wounding at least once. The chance of the Destroyer inflicting 2 or more wounds is 31%, and it inflicting 3 or more wounds is a not-entire-unlikely 9%. "Average wounds" is good enough up to a point but it is important to appreciate the outliers. Also note that the above calculations don't take into account the S4 automatic hit plus if the challenger is on foot, he's taking another D6 hits from thunderstomp, at which point even surviving a round or two starts to look dicey.

logan054
06-01-2012, 20:32
First of all, there really shouldn't be anything that simply auto wins against even "certain armies", as that is grotesquely unfair and not fun to play against.

But this is how warhammer is, chaos dwarfs are not a top tier army because of one unit, yes its good but its not going to win you a game, some armies can kill it, others have to tarpit.


I suppose. Although it isn't that unlucky. Let's say 8 attacks - probability of wounding (assuming no armour after modifiers and hitting on 4+) is 5/72 per attack, which gives a probability of 1 or more wounds inflicted per round of 0.70. So 70% chance of wounding at least once. The chance of the Destroyer inflicting 2 or more wounds is 31%, and it inflicting 3 or more wounds is a not-entire-unlikely 9%. "Average wounds" is good enough up to a point but it is important to appreciate the outliers. Also note that the above calculations don't take into account the S4 automatic hit plus if the challenger is on foot, he's taking another D6 hits from thunderstomp, at which point even surviving a round or two starts to look dicey.

Why are you bringing up thunderstomp? why you send a character in foot into it? your not going to as you may as well just not bother! its less than 9%, if your talking about a mounted character with a dragon helm then you are looking at 1+ save followed by a 2+ wardsave so you looking at a 33% reduction in wounds wounds before the wardsave which is again another 70%, so thats about 0.3 of a wound, if you charge the thing and win combat then you have knocked off the frenzy which is going to knock down its chances of doing any wounds. If you charge and take no wounds then you win combat (which is very likely), A S4 flaming attack against 1/2+ save with T4 is what? 0.344 wounds, how often are you going to fail two 2+ saves?

Gradek
06-01-2012, 22:02
Why are you bringing up thunderstomp? why you send a character in foot into it? your not going to as you may as well just not bother! its less than 9%, if your talking about a mounted character with a dragon helm then you are looking at 1+ save followed by a 2+ wardsave so you looking at a 33% reduction in wounds wounds before the wardsave which is again another 70%, so thats about 0.3 of a wound, if you charge the thing and win combat then you have knocked off the frenzy which is going to knock down its chances of doing any wounds. If you charge and take no wounds then you win combat (which is very likely), A S4 flaming attack against 1/2+ save with T4 is what? 0.344 wounds, how often are you going to fail two 2+ saves?

First, how often do you really believe someone is going to get the charge on that MV 9 monstrosity? Second, sure, if I design a character specifically to deal with one monster that i may or may not encounter at a tournament I can beat it, but the problem is that I shouldn't be forced to spend a bunch of points on some non-optimal build for a character just so I can beat this brain fart by some CD crackhead designer at FW.

TsukeFox
06-01-2012, 22:18
A)- the Destorier needs to be FAQed. It is better than any greater Daemon out there

B) anyone play a "Great Chaos Host?"

Lord Inquisitor
06-01-2012, 22:28
Why are you bringing up thunderstomp? why you send a character in foot into it? your not going to as you may as well just not bother! its less than 9%, if your talking about a mounted character with a dragon helm then you are looking at 1+ save followed by a 2+ wardsave so you looking at a 33% reduction in wounds wounds before the wardsave which is again another 70%, so thats about 0.3 of a wound, if you charge the thing and win combat then you have knocked off the frenzy which is going to knock down its chances of doing any wounds. If you charge and take no wounds then you win combat (which is very likely), A S4 flaming attack against 1/2+ save with T4 is what? 0.344 wounds, how often are you going to fail two 2+ saves?
Firstly, this isn't a game of "let's design a unit that can take on the Destroyer" it's "what do I have to be able to take it on?" Most people have a character or two with a 2+ ward save vs fire in their usual lists. So it's a viable choice to say "I'm going to throw my 2+ ward save character at it!" Reasonable. But it's another thing to bring a character kitted out to stall the Destroyer in an all-comers list because even in a tournament that allows CD we can expect it to be rare. Most people do not field mounted characters in any large amount if at all. Even a 1+ armour save is only going to give a 5+ armour against S7. That only reduces the probability of inflicting a wound in any given phase by 8% overall.

Secondly I said I didn't incorporate either thunderstomp or the S4 hit into the calculation!

Thirdly "average wounds" is not a very good representation of probabilities. There's always the chance the Destroyer will kill you outright. The probability of X or more wounds is what is informative. For example, what's the probability that the Destroyer will kill your 2-wound character in 2 combat rounds? Answer 31%. 1.1 "average wounds" doesn't tell you that you've a 1-in-3 chance of not surviving past round 2.

logan054
06-01-2012, 22:59
Firstly, this isn't a game of "let's design a unit that can take on the Destroyer" it's "what do I have to be able to take it on?

Sorry I couldn't be bothered to read past this, I would have bothered but you clearly ignored what I had already said in a previous post, that character was not designed to kill a destroyer.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=287939

So no, I am not not playing lets designing a unit to destroy a destroyer, if you look at the first post of that thread you will see I posted that combo over a year ago, last time I used a jugger hero that is the build I used, it has nothing to do with a destroyer but rather increasing his protection and taking advantage of peoples fear of chaos trolls, aboms, hydras etc.

Lord Inquisitor
06-01-2012, 23:09
If you ignore my posts then you won't get much of a response.

If you use a mounted character regularly with a 1+ save and a 2+ vs fire, bully for you. Most people do not. I do not.

What you actually said was:

about average of 8 attacks, so against most characters 4 hits, 3 wounds, shouldn't get past the 2+ save unless your unlucky, if you holding it in place with a cheap enough character
I'm sorry, at what point did this change from a discussion of holding it in place with a generic "cheap enough" character to hitting it with your specific, "uncompetitive" hero?

logan054
06-01-2012, 23:21
I actually said this:


I know this isn't a competitive choice but its something I very often use, exalted, jugger, ogre blade, charmed shield, dragon bane gem could be very effective against it

Take note of the bolded text, you then say this


Firstly, this isn't a game of "let's design a unit that can take on the Destroyer" it's "what do I have to be able to take it on?

This is basically saying I'm lying, so no, when you start calling me liar I am going to stop paying attention, thing is your all bitching and moaning about it because you don't use balanced list, I see no reason not to include a character with a dragonbane gem or dragon helm, its just so damned cheap, as I said, it takes advantage of peoples fear of regen models rather than being designed to kill destroyers.

txamil
07-01-2012, 00:07
If I dont field the infamous Destroyer, I'm fine though?

Drongol
07-01-2012, 03:12
If I dont field the infamous Destroyer, I'm fine though?

Thing is, in all honesty, Chaos Dwarfs really need a K'daii Destroyer to be competitive. Unfortunately, it's a little bit too strong.

Without one, they turn into a gunline that can't fight their way out of a paper bag. They have amazing statlines but pay about 2 points per model too much for it (both Hobgoblins and Infernal Guard). The special choice CD unit is amazing, but you're competing with Warmachine points for that unit and it's just not going to happen.

Chaos Dwarfs are kind of an interesting list, in a lot of ways. The "nasty" list (2 units of Hobgobs, a horde of Dwarfs, 2 magma cannons, 2 rockets, and a Destroyer) is a seriously strong list, but if you deviate, the list falls apart. Also, you're relying on your opponent to not take the most powerful Lore in the game--Shadows--or else you are seriously screwed.

selone
07-01-2012, 03:53
I can appreciate the problems with the destroyer but that Battle report just sounds like a 'frightful whinge'.

KronusDaSneaky
07-01-2012, 08:56
Thing is, in all honesty, Chaos Dwarfs really need a K'daii Destroyer to be competitive. Unfortunately, it's a little bit too strong.

Without one, they turn into a gunline that can't fight their way out of a paper bag. They have amazing statlines but pay about 2 points per model too much for it (both Hobgoblins and Infernal Guard). The special choice CD unit is amazing, but you're competing with Warmachine points for that unit and it's just not going to happen.

Chaos Dwarfs are kind of an interesting list, in a lot of ways. The "nasty" list (2 units of Hobgobs, a horde of Dwarfs, 2 magma cannons, 2 rockets, and a Destroyer) is a seriously strong list, but if you deviate, the list falls apart. Also, you're relying on your opponent to not take the most powerful Lore in the game--Shadows--or else you are seriously screwed.

Spot on. The sad thing is that its the only thing capable of dealing substantial damage in the entire army that is not overpriced. GW Infernal Guard cost 15pts each and only have 1 attack a piece. There monstrous cavalry equivalent has a mere 2 attacks a piece. Take away the hobgoblins and the destroyer and you basically have costly and much less hitty WOC with a few more warmachines to play with. To be competitive without the destroyer would need some notable tweaks to core point costs and perhaps a basic warrior option with access to cheaper GW's

rabotak
07-01-2012, 18:39
Spot on. The sad thing is that its the only thing capable of dealing substantial damage in the entire army that is not overpriced. GW Infernal Guard cost 15pts each and only have 1 attack a piece. There monstrous cavalry equivalent has a mere 2 attacks a piece. Take away the hobgoblins and the destroyer and you basically have costly and much less hitty WOC with a few more warmachines to play with. To be competitive without the destroyer would need some notable tweaks to core point costs and perhaps a basic warrior option with access to cheaper GW's

sorry people, i must have played 20 games so far with the LoA list and have yet to lose, without fielding destroyer nor multiples of the magma cannon, or fielding gunlines. they are tougher to play without the obvious no brainers, but still have all the tools they need. blocks, not hordes, of line infantry, supported by centaurs and one or two warmachines, and they do fine. if you take the destroyer and multiples of the magma cannon out of consideration, the list, while expensive, is balanced quite well, upper mid tier i'd say.

all that said, the destroyer is ridicilous. i'd only field it in some grand SoM megabattle, if i knew my opponents would bring all of their nasties. or against WAAC suckers!

Drongol
07-01-2012, 20:06
sorry people, i must have played 20 games so far with the LoA list and have yet to lose, without fielding destroyer nor multiples of the magma cannon, or fielding gunlines. they are tougher to play without the obvious no brainers, but still have all the tools they need. blocks, not hordes, of line infantry, supported by centaurs and one or two warmachines, and they do fine. if you take the destroyer and multiples of the magma cannon out of consideration, the list, while expensive, is balanced quite well, upper mid tier i'd say.

all that said, the destroyer is ridicilous. i'd only field it in some grand SoM megabattle, if i knew my opponents would bring all of their nasties. or against WAAC suckers!

Unfortunately, your anecdote is even less useful than normal because of the "WAAC suckers" comment. That leads me to believe that you and your opponents are playing at less-than-all-out, which in and of itself invalidates the competitive nature of the list.

You're having success, and that's great, but it doesn't seem like you're going up against the best lists you could be. Maybe I'm mistaken here.

Shandowner
07-01-2012, 21:13
sorry people, i must have played 20 games so far with the LoA list and have yet to lose, without fielding destroyer nor multiples of the magma cannon, or fielding gunlines. they are tougher to play without the obvious no brainers, but still have all the tools they need. blocks, not hordes, of line infantry, supported by centaurs and one or two warmachines, and they do fine. if you take the destroyer and multiples of the magma cannon out of consideration, the list, while expensive, is balanced quite well, upper mid tier i'd say.

all that said, the destroyer is ridicilous. i'd only field it in some grand SoM megabattle, if i knew my opponents would bring all of their nasties. or against WAAC suckers!

Yea really. Good for you, but no one can say how good you are or your opposition. For example I have won my 2134th game in a row.

Bottom line until there are regular results from the large Gts no one can really tell where they scale in the grand scheme of things. While head to head cd's I think have an advantage I can tell you that the ogres are easily a better list. I bet cd wont win a single gt this year..

TsukeFox
08-01-2012, 02:04
So bad is it to play against the "Great Host?"

Col. Dash
08-01-2012, 02:07
Grrr, my local store just decreed that FW will not ever be allowable in any official tournament. Guess this thread is moot for me. Sucks when I have a full army. GW needs to just grab its balls and announce that FW as a subsidiary of itself is legal in tournaments. This is getting stupid.

Drongol
08-01-2012, 02:16
Grrr, my local store just decreed that FW will not ever be allowable in any official tournament. Guess this thread is moot for me. Sucks when I have a full army. GW needs to just grab its balls and announce that FW as a subsidiary of itself is legal in tournaments. This is getting stupid.

Well, the Chaos Dwarf list is noted as being "official," so there's that. However, any TO can ban pretty much anything. If they cannot see reason, you may want to look into finding a new place to play?


So bad is it to play against the "Great Host?"

There's nothing wrong with the Great Host except that it requires a game of at least 3000 points and isn't really official. As such, I don't see it getting a whole lot of play any time soon.

logan054
08-01-2012, 07:02
Well I think the great host is recommended at 3k, I don't think you have to actually play a 3k game, I have used it in smaller games, just without mixing, its actually a pretty fun set of rules and its a shame you can't use in tournaments (even without the mixing).

I doubt GW will ever allow FW lists in official tournaments, it takes away sales from the main company, its really meant to be a collectors thing.

Satan
08-01-2012, 10:27
If you watch this battle report (http://www.youtube.com/user/tmarichards#p/u/8/uukuMXg9K0k) (I hope tmarichards doesn't mind me plugging it) I think you'll see what is wrong with it.

I don't. And I don't understand why he didn't just spend the entire game baiting it away from everything else considering it's frenzied and has to overrun? :confused:

Also, most tournament armies I've ever seen also bring some sort of flaming ward save or other... The Kdaiis' regular attacks and thunderstomps do not count as flaming though, as far as I can tell.

Von Wibble
08-01-2012, 12:20
I must have missed something here - the basic core warrior costs more than a chaos warrior when given equipment but has worse stats and this is overpowered??

The Kdaai destroyer is relatively easy to hold up with a cheap steadfast unit and if you lower its toughness you not only make it easier to shoot or kill in combat, you also make it more likely to hurt itself thanks to burning bright. To me it looks about right for the ponits cost, (but should be 0-1). Which armies struggle against it? Only wood elves spring to mind (spirit swallower is about the only thing I can think of and thats' not a good choice vs the rest of the army).

Magmas cannon looks no worse than a dwarfflame cannon -but the latter can have protection from misfires and higher strength. Slight range buff, but opponents move towards both armies anyway so this is not an issue.

To me the list looks underwhelming overall but I do pick armies by choosing a bit of everything so perhaps I have missed something?

Satan - they only overrun on a failed ld check so maybe he thought it wasn't worth the sacrifice for something that probably wouldn't work anyway? Cheap enough baiters would be worthwhile though, eg ogre sabretusks.

Satan
08-01-2012, 12:55
Satan - they only overrun on a failed ld check so maybe he thought it wasn't worth the sacrifice for something that probably wouldn't work anyway? Cheap enough baiters would be worthwhile though, eg ogre sabretusks.

Nope. Frenzied units MUST overrun or pursue.

I've long since shelved my woodies and am very unlikely to use them unitl the release of a new army book. The competitive builds are few and far between, and they're just generally un-fun to play. Had a real blast of a Storm of Magic game a couple of months back when one of my friends was fielding them though.

Drongol
08-01-2012, 14:25
Yes, if it's baited it has to pursue.

However, it is a M 9, Ld 8 single model (hence unlimited pivots). Even if you bait it, it will be out only one turn while it turns around and marches 18" to be behind your lines.

And again, it's Ld 8 and M 9, so chances are it passes the test to restrain and then marches 18" to get close to something juicy anyways as opposed to being distracted by chaff.

Thommy H
08-01-2012, 14:37
sorry people, i must have played 20 games so far with the LoA list and have yet to lose, without fielding destroyer nor multiples of the magma cannon, or fielding gunlines. they are tougher to play without the obvious no brainers, but still have all the tools they need. blocks, not hordes, of line infantry, supported by centaurs and one or two warmachines, and they do fine. if you take the destroyer and multiples of the magma cannon out of consideration, the list, while expensive, is balanced quite well, upper mid tier i'd say.

all that said, the destroyer is ridicilous. i'd only field it in some grand SoM megabattle, if i knew my opponents would bring all of their nasties. or against WAAC suckers!

You've won twenty out of twenty games and your conclusion from that is that the list is balanced?

That right there is exactly what's wrong with the way Warhammer players talk about balance in the game on the internet. If you lose once, it's underpowered, if you've been beaten by it once, it's broken, right? Can no one see how these two things are mutually exclusive? You're supposed to lose about 50% of your games, assuming similar age, intelligence and experience in your opponents. That's what balance is.

Sorry, I know this is nothing to do with the Destroyer, I just had to pick up on this.

Satan
08-01-2012, 14:59
Yes, if it's baited it has to pursue.

However, it is a M 9, Ld 8 single model (hence unlimited pivots). Even if you bait it, it will be out only one turn while it turns around and marches 18" to be behind your lines.

And again, it's Ld 8 and M 9, so chances are it passes the test to restrain and then marches 18" to get close to something juicy anyways as opposed to being distracted by chaff.

It also has a baze the size of a brick, so no. I would park one of two units of harpies in front of it, draw it off and have it run off in a random direction where I will once again plant a unit in its front arch 1" away making it impossible for the thing to pivot.

How you people deal with stuff like Nurgle Warrior hordes with dual war-shrines in any other way is beyond me. Which I've also had the pleasure of facing in tournaments. The K'daii destroyer is no worse than many of the units I faced in the last comped tournament I played.

That said, could the CD list, including the destroyer have been designed differentely? Yes, but that argument can be made against both the basic WHFB rules as well as many of the current army books. I say let the CD in to the tournaments. The list has a clear line of text that says it's an official WHFB army list after all. But it's up to each and every TO to decide how they want to play it.

Drongol
08-01-2012, 15:15
It also has a baze the size of a brick, so no. I would park one of two units of harpies in front of it, draw it off and have it run off in a random direction where I will once again plant a unit in its front arch 1" away making it impossible for the thing to pivot.

While you can certainly do that if you have the chaff, you are now relying o having a turn to park your Ld 5(?) harpies in front of a terror-causer directly 1" in front of them (to disallow pivots, of course) but at an angle where they will lead the likely centrally-deployed Destroyer off on a wild goose chase. And while you're doing that, the war machines and magic of the Chaos Dwarf list is not going to be dealing with the only thing that can really derail the typical "Destroyer smash!" strategy, but shooting at your slowly advancing Warriors or whatever it is. ;)


How you people deal with stuff like Nurgle Warrior hordes with dual war-shrines in any other way is beyond me. Which I've also had the pleasure of facing in tournaments. The K'daii destroyer is no worse than many of the units I faced in the last comped tournament I played.

Hold on. Nurgle Warrior Hordes? With Warshrines? That's something you're throwing out there are terrible?

I'm more worried about the Tzeentch Chosen horde with warshrines, personally. :P


That said, could the CD list, including the destroyer have been designed differentely? Yes, but that argument can be made against both the basic WHFB rules as well as many of the current army books. I say let the CD in to the tournaments. The list has a clear line of text that says it's an official WHFB army list after all. But it's up to each and every TO to decide how they want to play it.

Now there, I absolutely agree. The list is stated to be official. No reason to disallow it.

Satan
08-01-2012, 15:36
While you can certainly do that if you have the chaff, you are now relying o having a turn to park your Ld 5(?) harpies in front of a terror-causer directly 1" in front of them (to disallow pivots, of course) but at an angle where they will lead the likely centrally-deployed Destroyer off on a wild goose chase. And while you're doing that, the war machines and magic of the Chaos Dwarf list is not going to be dealing with the only thing that can really derail the typical "Destroyer smash!" strategy, but shooting at your slowly advancing Warriors or whatever it is. ;)

True enough, but there are other valid options other than harpies. My point is that you can deal with the K'daii - what gripes I'd have with it are the same as I'd have with the following:



Hold on. Nurgle Warrior Hordes? With Warshrines? That's something you're throwing out there are terrible?

I'm more worried about the Tzeentch Chosen horde with warshrines, personally. :P

They don't give up any points and are nigh on impossible to take points from. I used the warriors as an example that I've actually faced, seeing as how a Chosen Horde IIRC wouldn't be eligible under the pts restrictions in ETC. The black knight deathstar is a similiar example. My strategy has been somewhat similiar - you deflect them. Problem is they don't give up any points, which makes for a very boring and bad game if you're playing wood elves.

I'm going to guess you'd want the K'daii on a flank since:

A) If in base contact with your units he burns them (though the IG do have a Flaming Ward save and T4...)

B) If going off on a wild chase a clever opponent will make him block your other units and take you in the flank.



Now there, I absolutely agree. The list is stated to be official. No reason to disallow it.

Glad we agree - but I could easily see why someone would have issues with the K'daii since it makes for a game (and an army) that may not be fun and possibly very similiar in every match. My point is just that this can be said for a number of WHFB armies wether you're using ETC restrictions or not. :)

Drongol
08-01-2012, 15:54
True enough, but there are other valid options other than harpies. My point is that you can deal with the K'daii - what gripes I'd have with it are the same as I'd have with the following:

There's actually a very big difference between a M9 monster that can actually defeat ranked infantry and a M4 horde of fairly nasty infantry, both in terms of what they can do and in terms of how you can deal with them. But chaff can work in many cases.


They don't give up any points and are nigh on impossible to take points from. I used the warriors as an example that I've actually faced, seeing as how a Chosen Horde IIRC wouldn't be eligible under the pts restrictions in ETC. The black knight deathstar is a similiar example. My strategy has been somewhat similiar - you deflect them. Problem is they don't give up any points, which makes for a very boring and bad game if you're playing wood elves.

Oh. OH! That explains it. Honestly, I think in ETC, the Kdaai Destroyer is a major issue, but I don't have nearly enough experience playing ETCHammer, nor any desire to build up said experience. If you're limiting the things that can deal with the Destroyer, then yes, the Destroyer's going to be even worse.


I'm going to guess you'd want the K'daii on a flank since:

A) If in base contact with your units he burns them (though the IG do have a Flaming Ward save and T4...)

B) If going off on a wild chase a clever opponent will make him block your other units and take you in the flank.

Actually, you're talking about an M9 model in an M3 army. The Destroyer deploys close to the general/BSB to hopefully not be baited too soon, then the rest of the army pretty much sits back and shoots war machines while the Destroyer takes on half of the opponents. If you're trying to actively move forward with a CD army for too long, you're probably playing them incorrectly.

The Low King
08-01-2012, 16:08
Magmas cannon looks no worse than a dwarfflame cannon -but the latter can have protection from misfires and higher strength. Slight range buff, but opponents move towards both armies anyway so this is not an issue.



Great point...except the flame cannon got nerfed in the FAQ to have no range and could never take runes. The Magma cannons is what us dwarf players wish our flame cannon was.

Also, how many armies can lower toughness? There are spells in the Shadow and Death Lores...so thats Dark elves, High elves, WOC (i think), Tomb Kings would have to pay a lot for it (and get lucky), Lizardmen would have to forgo the far more useful lores (for them) and empire. So half the Armies cant do so and many of those that can would have to waste a lot do do so.

Makaber
08-01-2012, 16:28
How many Wounds does the Destroyer have?

I've played against the Chaos Dwarf list once and lost. It did not have any of the "best" stuff in it, and I did a fairly big blunder at one stage, but it still held its own. As people say, the Core is fairly expensive, but Dwarfs with great weapons are still a mouthful. And say what you will about 2 Attack Bull Centaurs, but they are very robust and come on a narrow base, so it's hard to generate CR against them.

As for the Destroyer, personally speaking and purely theoretical, I think I could manage to deal with it well enough not to let it dominate the game completely, using my standard friendly games Beastmen list.

Anyway, I'd probably rather want to play against a Chaos Dwarf army with a Destroyer in it, than a Dark Elf list with two Hydras. But then again, I am a pretty average Warhammer player, so maybe the game isn't for me. :shifty:

Tymell
08-01-2012, 17:02
The Destroyer -is- undercosted, but I don't think it's a total game-breaker as some claim.

Magic, war machines, powerful characters, big monsters, leading it away with frenzy, bogging it down, there are ways to combat it. It's dangerous, but that "It's immune to 85-90% of Warhammer" bit in the battle report was just silly.

Drongol
08-01-2012, 17:26
The Destroyer -is- undercosted, but I don't think it's a total game-breaker as some claim.

Magic, war machines, powerful characters, big monsters, leading it away with frenzy, bogging it down, there are ways to combat it. It's dangerous, but that "It's immune to 85-90% of Warhammer" bit in the battle report was just silly.

In fairness, it probably is "immune to 85-90% of Warhammer" if we take that to mean models that are S4 or lower. It's certainly not immune to 85-90% of the Warhammer armies out there, and particularly use of Shadow magic should see if off the table in a hurry, but it is not a weak choice.

Of course, if it was just a little bit cheaper, then you could field two of them at 2500 points. And that would be truly frightening. ;)

Von Wibble
08-01-2012, 18:12
Great point...except the flame cannon got nerfed in the FAQ to have no range and could never take runes. The Magma cannons is what us dwarf players wish our flame cannon was.

Also, how many armies can lower toughness? There are spells in the Shadow and Death Lores...so thats Dark elves, High elves, WOC (i think), Tomb Kings would have to pay a lot for it (and get lucky), Lizardmen would have to forgo the far more useful lores (for them) and empire. So half the Armies cant do so and many of those that can would have to waste a lot do do so.

Flame cannon can't take runes? Wow - they actually made something a bit more reasonable. That thing has taken out far too many of my high elf units over the games, and combined with its cousin the S5 reroll scatter stonethrower has on more than one occasion left me with 4 crippled units in the space of 2 turns. Served me right for not deploying them wider to begin with.

Empire, High Elves, VC, TK, LZ, Chaos, Daemons, Ogres, Beastmen. All have access to death and most also have access to shadow. Tomb Kings also have a S and T decrease spell (imo the best spell in the game, albeit expensive) - and their casket is nasty against it thanks to its relatively low ld of 8.

Only 5 armies don't have access afaik. Wood elves and bretonnians - good luck there but we know they both will struggle (brets at least can make some good character killer combos).

Orcs and goblins, skaven and dwarfs are the other 3. All 3 have good war machines and 2 of the 3 armies also have cheap tarpits.

Its certainly good for the points- but all rare choices should be this good - thats why they are rare. Armies should want to take as much special and rare as they can, and be limited in their abilty to do so by the numbers - after all thats why its special!

Edit - also remember on average it effectively has 4 wounds in the game not 6 due to burning body (rounding to the nearest number). An unlucky one could die without the opponent having to do anything!

MLP
08-01-2012, 20:12
A lot of people saying it IS under costed or overpowered. At the end of the day it is what it is and is unlikely to change. It may be extremely hard to kill and have a massive damage output but they have a counter from every army in some form wether it's tar-pitting with masses of dirt cheap infantry, 2+ fire ward characters or leading it on a frenzy fuelled goose chase! I don't think any tournament organiser will disallow a legal list for one rare choice.

GrandmasterWang
09-01-2012, 04:13
Overall I like the Chaos Dwarf list.

Destroyer is not as broken as the Magma cannon which is completely broken. I had to chuckle about the person who compared it to the Dwarf Flame Cannon. Magma cannon can flame template causing D3 wounds from turn 1! Flame Cannon is lucky to get 1 shot off.

Destroyer has its 'burning bright' draw back but is certainly overpowered with the -1 to wound for non magic items. That said, in my one actual game experience vs it I killed it in one round with my dwarf lord (rolled 1 for Thunderstomp) and it only killed a couple of dwarfs. If it's played that 6's hurt it then it's fine for its cost. If not it's overpowered but the Chaos Dwarf list is fine.

Speaking of Chaos Dwarf nastiness (I love the big hatted ones and was one of the first to get Tamurkan). I do like the potential of the Black Hammer with the Lore of Hashut (hammer kills flamable stuff, lore makes stuff flamable). Ash Storm is one of the (if not THE) best spells in the game and can kill battle plans. No charge for you!

Overall the CD list is no worse than DE/Daemon/Skaven cheese etc etc. It's an elite army with expensive, slow stunties. If I want to play with greenies I play O & G. I leave the Hobgobbo's at home.

Magma cannon is hands down broken. That's what people should be whinging about.. and I love chaos dwarfs. Destroyer is overpowered but it has its draw backs as people have mentioned. (Burning Bright/Frenzy) and it's the most expensive normal monster in the game so if you can 1 shot the thing (5 wounds) it's a massive pts hole.

To the elf player who talked about the Horde of White Lions vs Destroyer example how they were his way of dealing with Greater Daemons. Destroyers hate Dragon Princes, a unit of them is all you need and the Destroyer will not have a fun time.

I think Chaos Dwarfs should be allowed and welcomed everywhere like the Big hatted overlords they are!

All hail Hashut!

Memnos
09-01-2012, 08:07
The Destroyer, which seems to be the only thing people are complaining about in the list, is a difficult item. However, if it's a huge difficulty, here's what you'd want to throw at it:

Lizardmen: Skinks. Poisoned shots auto-wound. No penalty pops up. Or Slann. But Skinks are a mainstay and easy to take it on, plus everyone takes them(And Slann)

Warriors of Chaos - 3+ ward save Tzeentch chosen, which nearly everyone takes. The Destroyer fades to nothing.

Dark Elves - Pendant on Pegasus, which is a very common tournament build. Both spend forever fighting each other. Or Shadow Magic.

Empire - Cannons. Or Empire Wizards. Take your pick, both very common on the tournament field.

Beastmen: Herdstone spam, which is a common tournament build, or Doombull of Mashiness, which is a common tournament build.

High Elves - Spearmen+Occam's Razor=Dead Destroyer. Very common Tournament build.

These are just off the top of my head of things I regularly face in tournaments. If we're talking about tournaments, which we are, the Destroyer - while definitely undercosted is not and should not be the be-all and end all of a fight.

rabotak
09-01-2012, 11:48
Unfortunately, your anecdote is even less useful than normal because of the "WAAC suckers" comment. That leads me to believe that you and your opponents are playing at less-than-all-out, which in and of itself invalidates the competitive nature of the list.

You're having success, and that's great, but it doesn't seem like you're going up against the best lists you could be. Maybe I'm mistaken here.


Yea really. Good for you, but no one can say how good you are or your opposition. For example I have won my 2134th game in a row.

Bottom line until there are regular results from the large Gts no one can really tell where they scale in the grand scheme of things. While head to head cd's I think have an advantage I can tell you that the ogres are easily a better list. I bet cd wont win a single gt this year..


You've won twenty out of twenty games and your conclusion from that is that the list is balanced?

That right there is exactly what's wrong with the way Warhammer players talk about balance in the game on the internet. If you lose once, it's underpowered, if you've been beaten by it once, it's broken, right? Can no one see how these two things are mutually exclusive? You're supposed to lose about 50% of your games, assuming similar age, intelligence and experience in your opponents. That's what balance is.

Sorry, I know this is nothing to do with the Destroyer, I just had to pick up on this.

Ok people hold it right there - I know that Im neither a "chapter master" here
nor am I a renowned member of the grand US/UK tournament scene, but, believe it or not, Ive played quite "a couple" of games over the last 10 years,
mostly chaos dwarfs, against every army in every incarnation (save beastmen) against all sorts of players, noob, skilled or "WAAC"-tourney "players" and I believe therefore have earned the right to participate in an open discussion.
The essence of my post was not the anecdotal part of my own experience, but that IMO the LoA-list has all the tools it needs to be competitive without having to play no-brainer choices - responding to posts claiming that without the destroyer, the list would be underpowered (and I claim to have enough experience to be able to state this.) On paper, the list really does look weak without the nasties, but there are a couple of nice synergies that can be exploited without having to ruin your opponents day by using the easy way out, obvious examples revolving around ash storm/flaming or breath of hatred combos. Still a tough nut but neither frustrating nor boring - and that now tickles the WAAC-issue:
I must admit my comment about this type of player was a little teaser, if not a little trolling, but i did not want to offend other members, I used it as a vehicle to put my point across. Sorry for that. again, its up to you to believe, but countless times have i played against what the webz described as OTT, cookie cutter, WAAC and whatnot lists, and in my experience (warning: anecdotal!), maybe some of you would agree, a good general always has a good chance of beating them, more or less regardless of what he fields himself (as always, there are obvious exceptions though). even back in the day of ravening hordes, I had a fun time playing against those lists. and - guess what - no double earthshaker and only 2 boltthowers and i still (anecdotal!) had a +-50/50 win record against those double stanks, deathstars, SAD-nastinesses. call me naive but part of the enjoyment for me is to find ways of handling these lists, to a) improve my playstyle and b) to maybe influence the meta so people start to take more interesting builds. In the end, winning a tournament by taking the easy way out is nothing i would be proud of.

good post thommy btw, although Im quite uncomfortable with the situation of being the trigger for it. I am of the same opinion, and had carelessly thought that my personal experience could add something constructive to this
discussion, since we players are all equal-minded and therefore posts all have the same relevance, right ;). after all, this is a game of strategy and DICE, and since everybody here can only talk about subjective experiences or mathhammer, naive me thought he could do the same - but who am I to judge *looks at post count* :angel:

selone
09-01-2012, 12:33
Making your text easier to read would help :)

I don't think Skaven would have anything to worry about with their plethora of magical shooting destroyer wise.

rabotak
09-01-2012, 12:47
Making your text easier to read would help :)


sorry, Im a n00b, remember ;)

selone
09-01-2012, 13:47
You are an internetism?

Max_Killfactor
09-01-2012, 16:13
I think it's a terrible precendent to ban a list because of one unit/monster/magic item.

Obviously it's up to the tournament organizer though.

I play Dark Elves and Skaven (and have since 6th, I'm not just a powergamer) and both lists are more powerful than Chaos Dwarfs. You will not see Chaos Dwarfs dominating the tournament scene.

Dooks Dizzo
09-01-2012, 17:56
Hordes of steadfast infantry get eaten by magma cannons before they ever get a chance to get to the destroyer.

Cannons are fine and all but it has a 4+ ward save and very fast movement, you don't get a second chance to shoot at it.

S4 hit for everyone in base, all it's attacks at S7 + thunderstomp mean it kills a lot more infantry than most monsters.

Lowering it's toughness with shadow doesn't work as well as you'd think. It's T6 so lowing it by 1 has no real effect. Lowering by 3 only gives it a 50/50 of taking any wounds.

But really, it's the 145 point, S5 flame templates at 24" range that destroy people. The K'daii just finishes the survivors.

Balanced or not, the army is absolutly no fun to play against.

Gradek
09-01-2012, 18:29
Hordes of steadfast infantry get eaten by magma cannons before they ever get a chance to get to the destroyer.

Cannons are fine and all but it has a 4+ ward save and very fast movement, you don't get a second chance to shoot at it.

S4 hit for everyone in base, all it's attacks at S7 + thunderstomp mean it kills a lot more infantry than most monsters.

Lowering it's toughness with shadow doesn't work as well as you'd think. It's T6 so lowing it by 1 has no real effect. Lowering by 3 only gives it a 50/50 of taking any wounds.

But really, it's the 145 point, S5 flame templates at 24" range that destroy people. The K'daii just finishes the survivors.

Balanced or not, the army is absolutly no fun to play against.

This. Playing against an army that sends an obscenely overpowered/underpriced super fast 4+ wardsave unit forward while sitting back and shooting you with everything else isn't fun to play against and essentially turns the game into a contest of can I kill his super powerful monster before his artillery shoots me to death (ie taking virtually all other strategy and tactics out of the game).

logan054
09-01-2012, 19:30
I play Dark Elves and Skaven (and have since 6th, I'm not just a powergamer) and both lists are more powerful than Chaos Dwarfs. You will not see Chaos Dwarfs dominating the tournament scene.

This is kind of why I found that DE players rant so amusing, I guess people would moan less if the flame cannon had S3-4 and the destroyer was -1 strength rather than -1 to wound. Problem is generally monsters are to easy to kill on 8th ed and I think this is just a attempt to make a monster viable, I think if it was just -1 strength then it wouldn't be viable, it would never make it across the board. The destroyer can still kill itself before it gets across the table which I think is part of the reason its cheap.

Lord Inquisitor
09-01-2012, 19:33
To be fair, the issue is not with the Destroyer being -1 to Wound (although just giving the damn thing T7 is much easier) but the FAQ that says there is no "1s always fail, 6s always wound" rule.

If 6's always wounded, the Destroyer would be much more palatable. And it'd get rid of auto-wounding flaming sword cannons too.

Gradek
09-01-2012, 19:36
This is kind of why I found that DE players rant so amusing, I guess people would moan less if the flame cannon had S3-4 and the destroyer was -1 strength rather than -1 to wound. Problem is generally monsters are to easy to kill on 8th ed and I think this is just a attempt to make a monster viable, I think if it was just -1 strength then it wouldn't be viable, it would never make it across the board. The destroyer can still kill itself before it gets across the table which I think is part of the reason its cheap.

Seriously? First, it has been demonstrated in this thread how unlikely the destroyer is to actually kill itself before it makes it into combat. Second, it has a 4+ ward save right? They didn't make this viable, they made it the god of warhammer monsters. Name me one army that wouldn't auto include this as a rare choice if it was available?

The Low King
09-01-2012, 19:52
Name me one army that wouldn't auto include this as a rare choice if it was available?

Dwarfs. But thats just because we dont like monsters.

logan054
09-01-2012, 19:56
To be fair, the issue is not with the Destroyer being -1 to Wound (although just giving the damn thing T7 is much easier) but the FAQ that says there is no "1s always fail, 6s always wound" rule.

If 6's always wounded, the Destroyer would be much more palatable. And it'd get rid of auto-wounding flaming sword cannons too.

I have to agree that the FAQ should include a 1 is always a fail and a 6 is always a pass, I think that was the obvious intent when they changed the to wound chart. Still if the rule had been -1 strength then it would have avoided this issue but then would it actually be viable? Sadly Monsters in general are just underpowered in warhammer because of the power of cannons and magic and its still effected by these like every other creature. No doubt its a very good monster but what about in context to the rest of the list? The list only really has two effective choices, the rest are ok but nothing special, perhaps that is how the designers balance warhammer, some armies have more points effective troops than others. Regardless of this being the best way to balance units it certainly seems this is how it has been done for alot of armies.


Seriously? First, it has been demonstrated in this thread how unlikely the destroyer is to actually kill itself before it makes it into combat. Second, it has a 4+ ward save right? They didn't make this viable, they made it the god of warhammer monsters. Name me one army that wouldn't auto include this as a rare choice if it was available?

Its been demonstrated in a vacum how likley it is to kill itself, with the amount of dice rolled its hard to predict when those 6's are going to come up, with shadow being a common lore a lucky withering can make it a 50% chance of failing as well as making it much easier to hurt with ranged weapons, still part of the problem is with cannons, they make it very hard to create viable monsters because frankly, they are just too good.

Lord Inquisitor
09-01-2012, 20:06
Dwarfs. But thats just because we dont like monsters.

Slightly undermined by the fact that it does, in actuality, come from a Dwarf list. :p Some Dwarfs don't like monsters. Others, apparently, like them a lot.

Dooks Dizzo
09-01-2012, 20:11
First you have to get withering off without it being dispelled. Then you have a 33% chance of giving them a 50% chance of losing up to 3 wounds. On average you'd need to get the spell off at least twice to make it lose 2 of it's 5 wounds.

If you're saying that the best way to defeat the Destroyer is to be luckier...I think that doesn't work for everyone.

Gradek
09-01-2012, 20:16
Its been demonstrated in a vacum how likley it is to kill itself, with the amount of dice rolled its hard to predict when those 6's are going to come up, with shadow being a common lore a lucky withering can make it a 50% chance of failing as well as making it much easier to hurt with ranged weapons, still part of the problem is with cannons, they make it very hard to create viable monsters because frankly, they are just too good.

Again, let's stick to math, not luck and anecdotes. And math says you are wrong on how likely it is to kill itself. Second, last time I checked the game is called WARHAMMER, not monsterhammer and even then, it is unlikely that a single cannon will take this down before it reaches combat (actually very unlikely if we use math). Third, are CD not allowed access to dispel dice or the dispel scroll? Because otherwise not only does one then ahve to rely on having shadow and withering, but also getting it off and even then it only somewhat increases the chances of winning. Just admit, this thing is grotesquely overpowered for its cost and should have no place in warhammer.

logan054
09-01-2012, 20:21
First you have to get withering off without it being dispelled. Then you have a 33% chance of giving them a 50% chance of losing up to 3 wounds. On average you'd need to get the spell off at least twice to make it lose 2 of it's 5 wounds.

If you're saying that the best way to defeat the Destroyer is to be luckier...I think that doesn't work for everyone.

Main reason your castng it is so your ranged weapons can hurt it, its just a bonus you can also increase the chance of it hurting itself, on average roll your still looking at a 33% chance of it hurting itself.

You still have mind razor, everyone loves that spell! you could always miasma it and then pit of shades it, its going to be hard to miss it.


Again, let's stick to math, not luck and anecdotes. And math says you are wrong on how likely it is to kill itself. Second, last time I checked the game is called WARHAMMER, not monsterhammer and even then, it is unlikely that a single cannon will take this down before it reaches combat (actually very unlikely if we use math). Third, are CD not allowed access to dispel dice or the dispel scroll? Because otherwise not only does one then ahve to rely on having shadow and withering, but also getting it off and even then it only somewhat increases the chances of winning. Just admit, this thing is grotesquely overpowered for its cost and should have no place in warhammer.

But we are not on about luck, we are on about law averages, they don't balanced out for a single isolated dice roll unless thats all you rolled for, they will balance out over a game, I appreciate maths hammer but sometimes how it applied can be abit silly. So I assume dwarf players wont be saving dispel dice and scrolls for pit of shades on the main blocks of infantry containing the characters? its not a dwarf army, one does not have to rely on magic, it entirely depends on the army facing it, some will use magic, some will use cannons, others will have decent combat characters with magical weapons, some may have a combination, others will just have to tarpit it, dragon princes with a 2+ warsave against its attacks come to mind.

Dooks Dizzo
09-01-2012, 20:23
Mind Razor doesn't work because the infantry that you need to use it are dead from the magma cannons.

Miasma + pit is fine but you shouldn't HAVE to use a spell combination to have a chance of killing something.

logan054
09-01-2012, 20:45
Al your infantry is dead?? seriously, we know they are good but no need to exaggerate like that, I'm sure you have fast moving units in your list can deal with them, still template weapons are generally a issue with 8th ed anyways, they got buffed far to much.

Miasma and pit is exactly how I would deal with chosen with MoT, hell even chaos warriors, the chaos warriors being closer in points.

Drongol
09-01-2012, 20:48
Mind Razor doesn't work because the infantry that you need to use it are dead from the magma cannons.

Miasma + pit is fine but you shouldn't HAVE to use a spell combination to have a chance of killing something.

Frankly, if we're talking about a combination of 3 Magma Cannons and a Destroyer and you have nothing that can answer to these, I have to question what you're doing.

As mentioned previously, it is possible to bait the Destroyer away will well-positioned chaff, and warmachine hunters can get to the Magma Cannons (which, really, are somewhat on the short-ranged and unreliable variety). And, of course, outside of those two and perhaps the rockets, pretty much everything in the Chaos Dwarf list is rather overpriced.

Basically, they play an awful lot like "normal" Dwarfs: they're not an opponent so much as they are an obstacle course. It's just that the course is tougher, but once you get to the end, you don't need nearly as much force to finish the whole darned thing.

Lord Inquisitor
09-01-2012, 20:50
Miasma and pit is exactly how I would deal with chosen with MoT, hell even chaos warriors, the chaos warriors being closer in points.
Does it work well often? (I mean that as an honest question). I would have thought that the Chaos player could stop either miasma or pit and put paid to that scheme.

I know a guy who won an Ard Boyz semi (just pipping me to the post) using a double-slaan build that used Enfeebling coupled with Dwellers to wreck the enemy. It's a good combo but I've not been clear on how he got both spells off every time. Clearly it can work but it looks risky to me. Why the Destroyer has such a high initiative is beyond me.

The Withering seems to be a perfect foil for the Destroyer - I agree with you, you just need to get the toughness down to kill it, if it takes wounds from its own rule that's a bonus - but the CD player doubtless knows this too.

Dooks Dizzo
09-01-2012, 21:04
Frankly, if we're talking about a combination of 3 Magma Cannons and a Destroyer and you have nothing that can answer to these, I have to question what you're doing.

As mentioned previously, it is possible to bait the Destroyer away will well-positioned chaff, and warmachine hunters can get to the Magma Cannons (which, really, are somewhat on the short-ranged and unreliable variety). And, of course, outside of those two and perhaps the rockets, pretty much everything in the Chaos Dwarf list is rather overpriced.

Basically, they play an awful lot like "normal" Dwarfs: they're not an opponent so much as they are an obstacle course. It's just that the course is tougher, but once you get to the end, you don't need nearly as much force to finish the whole darned thing.Short ranged?The start by placing the template within 24" and then move it forward.

Tell me of your amazing army that has enough chaff and war machine hunters to deal with the Destroyer and the Magma cannons.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Drongol
09-01-2012, 21:24
Short ranged?The start by placing the template within 24" and then move it forward.

Tell me of your amazing army that has enough chaff and war machine hunters to deal with the Destroyer and the Magma cannons.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Actually, I completely have an idea. And, in terms of my "amazing army," I would point you towards Daemons, Skaven, Dark Elves, Dwarfs, and Empire as all being armies that have very little problems whatsoever dealing with Chaos Dwarfs, then at Lizardmen and Tomb Kings as likewise armies that are more than capable of dealing with them.

24" plus bounce is short for a cannon, and while it can certainly do a number to infantry, it's also easily taken out by the typical warmachine hunters without much real difficulty. Things like Chamelon Skinks and Gutter Runners are just plain nice here.

Also, remember with the Destroyer, each single chaff unit you throw out buys you two rounds of not having to deal with him. So really, sacrificing 150 points (if not less) gets him out of your face for the entire game.

The Low King
09-01-2012, 21:56
why do we (dwarfs) have little problems? We cant bring down the Kdaii easily and whilst we are struggling we are being outshot by their warmachines. Our infantry are probably more cost effective but by combat we are basically fighting almost identical troops.

Dooks Dizzo
09-01-2012, 22:19
Actually, I completely have an idea. And, in terms of my "amazing army," I would point you towards Daemons, Skaven, Dark Elves, Dwarfs, and Empire as all being armies that have very little problems whatsoever dealing with Chaos Dwarfs, then at Lizardmen and Tomb Kings as likewise armies that are more than capable of dealing with them.

24" plus bounce is short for a cannon, and while it can certainly do a number to infantry, it's also easily taken out by the typical warmachine hunters without much real difficulty. Things like Chamelon Skinks and Gutter Runners are just plain nice here.

Also, remember with the Destroyer, each single chaff unit you throw out buys you two rounds of not having to deal with him. So really, sacrificing 150 points (if not less) gets him out of your face for the entire game.
I've actually played against the army, and let me say that you're over simplifying. I asked you to show me the army list you would use, not just list off the armybook that have poison attacks.

You're claiming that MSU is the key to victory basically. How many chaff units do you have? How many war machine hunters?

You need roughly 9 poison hits to kill the destroyer. 1 in 6 shots poison so you're talking 54 shots. How many chamelion skinks would that be? And you'll get 1 chance to shoot at it assuming your opponent is foolish enough to let you scout in on it.

At M9 it simply moves away from you 18" and you're done shooting at it.

What war machine hunters are going to get past the infantry blocks guarding the magma cannons? It isn't like they hepless without the destroyer to save them or anything. And their war machine crews are WS4 T4 with Chaos armor, not exactly going to just fold to the first unit of light cav to come their way.

Have a good player proxy the army against you and tell me if you still think that getting shot with S5 flame templates before you've even moved is short range.

Also consider that this thread is about tournament play. So designing a list that can best out the Chaios Dwarfs but gets cained by everything else isn't exactly going to work.

Memnos
09-01-2012, 22:25
Short ranged?The start by placing the template within 24" and then move it forward.

Tell me of your amazing army that has enough chaff and war machine hunters to deal with the Destroyer and the Magma cannons.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Beastmen herdstone list: +4 magic dice/turn, 4 shots at miasma. Harpies/Centigor for the magma cannons. Chalice to stop the war machines firing. Doombull with ASF, 1+rerollable armour that gives bonus attacks for every save/force rerolls of successful ward saves for Destroyer, who will have 4 miasmas a turn cast at him he has to stop.

And that's just with my Beastmen.

The Low King
09-01-2012, 22:29
so your investing in 4 level 2s, a doombull and a herdstone to kill one thing?

logan054
09-01-2012, 23:24
Does it work well often? (I mean that as an honest question). I would have thought that the Chaos player could stop either miasma or pit and put paid to that scheme.

Sure it happens, its all down to the rolls at the end of the day, every turn, certainly not, all you really need is for it to happen once and your laughing really. After posting it the reality is your going to be using pit of shades on the other units in a CD army.


The Withering seems to be a perfect foil for the Destroyer - I agree with you, you just need to get the toughness down to kill it, if it takes wounds from its own rule that's a bonus - but the CD player doubtless knows this too.

Well sure he does but he can only stop so much, I think most CD players are going to want to stop the shades on his main blocks, generally these are going to be worth all the VP's. If you lose a single model like a Destroyer its not going to be game over, you lose your general (who will be a lvl4 sorcerer) and a 40 man block of warriors your pretty screwed.

Drongol
10-01-2012, 01:05
why do we (dwarfs) have little problems? We cant bring down the Kdaii easily and whilst we are struggling we are being outshot by their warmachines. Our infantry are probably more cost effective but by combat we are basically fighting almost identical troops.

Counter-battery fire and more efficient infantry. The Destroyer isn't going to be breaking your blocks any time soon (and, with combat reform, will likely spend an entire game trying to chew up one of them), while your cannons and grudge throwers are more than a match for the magma cannons.


I've actually played against the army, and let me say that you're over simplifying. I asked you to show me the army list you would use, not just list off the armybook that have poison attacks.

The army list I would use would, and has, been slaughtered horribly, because hordestar ogres really hate seeing 2-3 magma cannons. That said, I have seen Chaos Dwarfs get taken apart by intelligent players who target the magma cannons with warmachine hunters and bait the Destroyer away.


You need roughly 9 poison hits to kill the destroyer. 1 in 6 shots poison so you're talking 54 shots. How many chamelion skinks would that be? And you'll get 1 chance to shoot at it assuming your opponent is foolish enough to let you scout in on it.

Oh, I'm sorry, you completely misunderstood me. That's unfortunate. See, I wasn't talking about shooting poisoned blowguns/slings/etc. at the Destroyer--you're unlikely to kill it without lowering its toughness anyways, so no point in trying--but rather taking out the magma cannons with them. Since I've yet to see (or take) a steam carriage or hellbound weapon, that becomes a much simpler prospect.


What war machine hunters are going to get past the infantry blocks guarding the magma cannons? It isn't like they hepless without the destroyer to save them or anything. And their war machine crews are WS4 T4 with Chaos armor, not exactly going to just fold to the first unit of light cav to come their way

What guards? The typical Chaos Dwarf list will have a decent-sized block of IG and perhaps two moderately-large Hobgoblin blocks, both easy to get around, particularly if you have any sort of deployment shenanigans. And if you don't kill the CD crew, but don't break from combat, your war machine hunters have done their job.

Frankly, the core units of the CD army are so overcosted as to be laughable. They get slightly cheaper Ironbreakers (but not cheap enough) and way-too-expensive worse-than-Skavenslaves. Take out the magma cannons and have the Destroyer chase things around the board and you can deal with the rest of the army without any problems.

selone
10-01-2012, 01:38
If Chaos dwarfs are so good why aren't they winning all the tournaments they are allowed to be in?

lurker1
10-01-2012, 01:47
If you watch this battle report (http://www.youtube.com/user/tmarichards#p/u/8/uukuMXg9K0k) (I hope tmarichards doesn't mind me plugging it) I think you'll see what is wrong with it.

"so this thing is basically immune to 85% of warhammer" XD funny batrep.

Lord Inquisitor
10-01-2012, 03:12
If Chaos dwarfs are so good why aren't they winning all the tournaments they are allowed to be in?

Which tournaments have allowed them?

GrandmasterWang
10-01-2012, 04:34
The Destroyer, which seems to be the only thing people are complaining about in the list, is a difficult item. However, if it's a huge difficulty, here's what you'd want to throw at it:

Lizardmen: Skinks. Poisoned shots auto-wound. No penalty pops up. Or Slann. But Skinks are a mainstay and easy to take it on, plus everyone takes them(And Slann)

Warriors of Chaos - 3+ ward save Tzeentch chosen, which nearly everyone takes. The Destroyer fades to nothing.

Dark Elves - Pendant on Pegasus, which is a very common tournament build. Both spend forever fighting each other. Or Shadow Magic.

Empire - Cannons. Or Empire Wizards. Take your pick, both very common on the tournament field.

Beastmen: Herdstone spam, which is a common tournament build, or Doombull of Mashiness, which is a common tournament build.

High Elves - Spearmen+Occam's Razor=Dead Destroyer. Very common Tournament build.

These are just off the top of my head of things I regularly face in tournaments. If we're talking about tournaments, which we are, the Destroyer - while definitely undercosted is not and should not be the be-all and end all of a fight.


Problem with this is that with it's 4+ ward and 3+ needed to wound it's more resistant to cannons than most and will prob get into combat. Regarding the other things (chosen/occams elf cheese etc) the fact that you need to rely on these overpowered things to have a good chance is telling.

Most importantly however the thing is Movement 9, so a skilled player isn't going to fight your spear elves/chosen/doombull etc etc. It has free pivots unlimited so unless you can chaff trap it etc it's fighting what IT wants to fight, not what YOU want it to fight.


24 inch base is short for a cannon, but HUGE for a fricking flame thrower!. Add to that the artillery distance plus the actual length of the flame template itself and you have one devastating machine. The problem is the WAAC types taking 3 of the things. One is bad enough (the cause panic tests on 1 casualty also don't they?) but 3 is a game fun ruiner.. and doable at 2000 pts. Warmachine hunters will have their work cut out for them.

Regarding the Destroyer, even if you needed a 4+ after getting a 6 to wound it (like shooting) it would be ok. I'm just fundamentally against something so devastating being immune to so much (nothing ethereal is either as fast/tough or has the hitting power). Also, say you're playing a 'fluff' game, like my purely melee dwarf army with no rangers and you have to face something like that you're screwed pure and simple. You should always have a 'chance'.

"The Destroyer isn't going to be breaking your blocks any time soon (and, with combat reform, will likely spend an entire game trying to chew up one of them)"

It really possibly is. The auto Strength 4 hits, 7-9 attacks and Thunderstomp add up really quickly. There's nothing really MORE effective at breaking big blocks from a damage perspective.

"If Chaos dwarfs are so good why aren't they winning all the tournaments they are allowed to be in?"

They aren't that good overall, just these 2 things. Expensive core and character limits them. Even with the bugbears i'm raving about there are more 'op' armies but that doesn't make these 2 units any more acceptable. Other than that I really like the list and enjoy using blunders and GW Guard even though they are 'underpowered'.

I plan on using 'overcosted' fireglaives also as soon as I get the (brilliant) models.

Memnos
10-01-2012, 07:12
so your investing in 4 level 2s, a doombull and a herdstone to kill one thing?

To kill many things. If it takes me six turns using that to take apart a single monster, then I will agree that I was counting on it to kill one thing.

I was bringing it anyway. May as well use it against the Destroyer, then toss it at the weaker infantry.

Wishing
10-01-2012, 10:45
Which tournaments have allowed them?

That's the question I'm interested too. This whole debate whether the destroyer is overpowered or not is tedious and will clearly never end...

Drongol
10-01-2012, 11:47
Problem with this is that with it's 4+ ward and 3+ needed to wound it's more resistant to cannons than most and will prob get into combat. Regarding the other things (chosen/occams elf cheese etc) the fact that you need to rely on these overpowered things to have a good chance is telling.

I don't think anyone is going to say that it sucks. I do, however, believe there is a significant Internet Kneejerk regarding the Destroyer which makes it out to be nastier than it is.


Most importantly however the thing is Movement 9, so a skilled player isn't going to fight your spear elves/chosen/doombull etc etc. It has free pivots unlimited so unless you can chaff trap it etc it's fighting what IT wants to fight, not what YOU want it to fight.

So trap it. That's what you brought chaff for anyways, right?


"The Destroyer isn't going to be breaking your blocks any time soon (and, with combat reform, will likely spend an entire game trying to chew up one of them)"

It really possibly is. The auto Strength 4 hits, 7-9 attacks and Thunderstomp add up really quickly. There's nothing really MORE effective at breaking big blocks from a damage perspective.

They add up, but if you're running the typical 40-man Dwarf unit, you can make the Destroyer a lot less nasty by reforming deep and just tying the damned thing up. It'll win eventually, but not particularly quickly, and stubborn with Ld 9 is very unlikely to run.

Like I said, the CD army is an obstacle course. The difficult part is getting through with enough numbers to be able to do anything, but once you get there, your perseverance will be rewarded.

Additionally, Chaos Dwarfs seem to thrive on killing big blocks of infantry, but struggle against anything else. There's some sticker shock, effectively, upon seeing how much damage they can do to a unit, but throw double Hydras or HPAs or something similar out there and things get a little interesting. And remember, there can only be one Destroyer, and while it's fast, it can't be everywhere at once.

The Low King
10-01-2012, 13:09
Hell yeah, my 425pt GW warriors block can tie up a single monster for most of the game....

AngelofSorrow
10-01-2012, 13:14
Adepticon allows all the tamurkhan stuff. Minus the great hosts. Guess we will see some results in April.


Ready for eternal war!

MLP
10-01-2012, 13:23
IAnd remember, there can only be one Destroyer, and while it's fast, it can't be everywhere at once.

You can actually have as many as the rare duplicate restrictions allow for the points value. But maybe you were thinking on the lines of a 2400pt army where you could only have one. 2600 and above you could face two!

Wishing
10-01-2012, 13:26
Adepticon allows all the tamurkhan stuff. Minus the great hosts. Guess we will see some results in April.

That's interesting. It makes a lot of sense to not allow the great host - it is, after all, an alternative way of playing a normal chaos army, and tournaments don't tend to look favourably on alternative army lists that use the same models already found in a normal army list. The CD list is clearly different in this respect and unique in that it contains the rules for an army that used to be produced by Citadel, but no longer is, in a new incarnation. If Adepticon allows the CD list, to me that is a good sign that the concept of armies that have been dropped by GW being picked up by FW is being well received, so maybe we will see more of this in the future.

selone
10-01-2012, 13:49
Well off the top of my head last year there was Winter Incursion.

Over the next 3 months courtesy of 'the other site' they are-

January Slayer
Warlords One day Waagh
Stocksfield Smash Up
Open War XVII - unsure

In fact all of the ones I have looked at, allow them. As I say the other warhammer forum has a fairly complete list of tournaments if you wanted to do the research.

Max_Killfactor
10-01-2012, 14:43
January Slayer
Warlords One day Waagh
Stocksfield Smash Up
Open War XVII - unsure

In fact all of the ones I have looked at, allow them.

That's good news, thanks for posting that here.

Hopefully there's a decent Chaos Dwarf showing in those tournaments so we can get a good feel for their power level.

While the Destroyer and Magma Cannon are certainly powerful enough to complain about, I don't think they are so powerful that Chaos Dwarfs should be banned.

logan054
10-01-2012, 15:16
Hell yeah, my 425pt GW warriors block can tie up a single monster for most of the game....

So your 425pts can tie up his 325pts, not a terrible trade off, they can also kill it unlike many other units.

Drongol
10-01-2012, 15:53
So your 425pts can tie up his 325pts, not a terrible trade off, they can also kill it unlike many other units.

Exactly. I'm not really seeing the issue here. Sometimes things don't work out so that the points are particularly even, but if it costs yuo 425 points to tie up 325 points and incidentally win the game, what's the issue?

Chaos Dwarfs have the Destroyer and magma cannons. Beyond that, the rockets are nice and everything else in their list is subpar. So take out the first two and suddenly the game is yours.

And MLP: I was specifically talking about what I would view as the "standard" for tourneys, which would be 2500 and below. Yes, at 2600+ there can be two, which is scarier.

The Low King
10-01-2012, 16:01
They also have cheaper ironbreakers, chaff units (wich dwarfs dont have) and somne monsterous infantry. My cannons would be shooting at his magma cannons, my grudge throwers at his Hobgoblins and CD blocks. His magma cannons would be doing the same to mine whilst his monsterous infantry charge up. there are too many targets.

Also, 425points (1/3 of the standard dwarf list CC force) being tied up. 100 points could easily be another hobgoblin unit charging them to get the ranks.

On average the dwarf GW horde will be getting hit by (assuming steadfast formation) 7-9 attacks + 5 S4 autohits +D6 thunderstomp. Nearly 10 dead each turn. In exchange im getting 10 attacks; 5 hits, maybe 0.4 wounds a turn? for 100 point more than it costs...

MLP
10-01-2012, 16:14
They also have cheaper ironbreakers, chaff units (wich dwarfs dont have) and somne monsterous infantry. My cannons would be shooting at his magma cannons, my grudge throwers at his Hobgoblins and CD blocks. His magma cannons would be doing the same to mine whilst his monsterous infantry charge up. there are too many targets....

I don't think you'd have an issue with there being too many targets because of the relatively high points cost of most units. Dwarves will outnumber chaos dwarves most of the time and even if they dont it would be only hobgoblin blocks to make numbers. And even the cheap chaff wolf raiders are rare so you wont see many if the points are spent on a destroyer and/or dread quake/ hell cannon.

logan054
10-01-2012, 16:19
Also, 425points (1/3 of the standard dwarf list CC force) being tied up. 100 points could easily be another hobgoblin unit charging them to get the ranks.

So wont the Hobgoblins take hits from the destroyer? if they are just to provide ranks then its going to be alot of hits, then you just aim you attacks on the hobgoblins for easy CR, I imagine they are going to have a tough time retaining more ranks than the dwarfs considering the destroyers base is 100m long! that also assumes that you don't kill or panic it before it reaches combat with you grudge throwers.

The Low King
10-01-2012, 16:23
dwarfs would have 8 ranks, losing approx 2 per turn. Destroyer charges front, in B2B with 5 dwarfs. Hobgoblins charge flank, lets say with 8 ranks themselves (160points?)

Drongol
10-01-2012, 16:41
They also have cheaper ironbreakers, chaff units (wich dwarfs dont have) and somne monsterous infantry. My cannons would be shooting at his magma cannons, my grudge throwers at his Hobgoblins and CD blocks. His magma cannons would be doing the same to mine whilst his monsterous infantry charge up. there are too many targets.

Cheaper Ironbreakers: does anyone take IBs anyways? 12 points is still too expensive.
Monstrous Infantry: Too expensive and has an annoying tendency to burn itself out.
Chaff: Either M4 or Rare, so 2 units at most under 3k.


Also, 425points (1/3 of the standard dwarf list CC force) being tied up. 100 points could easily be another hobgoblin unit charging them to get the ranks.

Try to make a Chaos Dwarf list. Honestly. Tell me how many combat units you can get (hint: it's no more than 2) while still taking a Destroyer and 3 magma cannons.

Infernal Guard are decent in a horde formation. They're also ridiculously expensive in such. In smaller formations, they wind up being an overly-expensive tarpit.

Also, let me know when you manage to bring an M4 unit with low leadership and its own brand of animosity across the table to tie up a unit that's been tying up your Destroyer.


On average the dwarf GW horde will be getting hit by (assuming steadfast formation) 7-9 attacks + 5 S4 autohits +D6 thunderstomp. Nearly 10 dead each turn. In exchange im getting 10 attacks; 5 hits, maybe 0.4 wounds a turn? for 100 point more than it costs...

Yep, it's an uneven exchange that will eventually result in you winning the game. Go figure.

Lord Inquisitor
10-01-2012, 19:11
Adepticon allows all the tamurkhan stuff. Minus the great hosts. Guess we will see some results in April.
That's awesome.

Personally, I don't play Chaos Dwarfs. I love some of the other stuff in the book and the idea of running Elspeth or Lietpold appeals very much to me. Probably not the least bit competitive but both offer a nice model and an interesting variation on an Empire army. I'm dithering about getting Elspeth when there's no "generic" option in the book for a Dragon and if I get her just for friendly games I know I'll never paint her.


I don't think anyone is going to say that it sucks. I do, however, believe there is a significant Internet Kneejerk regarding the Destroyer which makes it out to be nastier than it is.
Maybe... I thought so at first but it's pretty solid all round. It's literally immune to low strength attacks and the toughest vs cannonballs out there. It has damage output that actually almost puts the hellpit to shame. Its inexplicably high WS and I are a final kick in the proverbials.

I think I put it in the same category as the Hellpit Abomination (which really WAS as disgusting as the initial Internet Kneejerk predicted). I've seen an Abomination literally destroy 1500 points of troops with no other skaven on the board. The Destroyer looks like it has similar capabilities.

Whether or not it's overpowered is another matter because that really depends on the list it is in. At least you can't have two unless you're playing more than 2500 points.

One weakness that hasn't been discussed is that it is Unstable, so if you can prevent it from doing too much damage (fire wards, flesh to stone, debuffs, etc.) and hit it with a lot of static combat res, then it should crumble nicely. The trick is stopping something with ~8 WS5, S7 attacks racking up combat res.


They add up, but if you're running the typical 40-man Dwarf unit, you can make the Destroyer a lot less nasty by reforming deep and just tying the damned thing up. It'll win eventually, but not particularly quickly, and stubborn with Ld 9 is very unlikely to run.
It'll take on average 2 turns to chew through that many dwarfs. 4 combat rounds, maybe 5 if you raise shields. In the meantime you're sacrificing a unit that costs more than the Destroyer to hold it in place? Even assuming your M3 infantry unit can engage the M9 monster on their terms? I guess it could work but it doesn't seem like a great deal to me.

Drongol
10-01-2012, 20:26
It'll take on average 2 turns to chew through that many dwarfs. 4 combat rounds, maybe 5 if you raise shields. In the meantime you're sacrificing a unit that costs more than the Destroyer to hold it in place? Even assuming your M3 infantry unit can engage the M9 monster on their terms? I guess it could work but it doesn't seem like a great deal to me.

Oh, definitely, you're relying on a little bit of luck, but two turns holding up the Destroyer is two more turns for the rest of your army to deal with, well, the rest of his, and that's not a bad deal at all.

Perhaps part of the problem may be that people are thinking of an Internet Nasty Chaos Dwarf list up against "their" army, not an Internet Nasty (insert army here).

Ragweek
10-01-2012, 23:50
Omg just played against them in a 2.5k game with a very competitive orc and goblin list. I tried running a mangeler squig into it only causing 1 wound. This thing just single handedly owned my 40man black orc unit then over ran into my bunker. My squig horde got eaten by his chaos cannon. That left my 40 savage orcs to deal with the 50+ chaos dwarfs with 3+ saves and 6+ wards. His other two rocket things protected by the chaos cannon seemed a very hard combo to beat! Not many war machine hunters can beat chaos cannon in CC.

Dooks Dizzo
11-01-2012, 01:38
To be clear I have played against the Destroyer and seen it played in my local store over a dozen times. Nothing I have said is kneejerk.

I am excited to drive Hexwraiths through it though.

GrandmasterWang
11-01-2012, 05:24
Yeah, needs a change, just to make it 'vulnerable' to the 50+% of units which it's currently immune to.

That said, as I stated before I actually killed 1 in 1 round of combat. That was with my Dwarf Lord who happenned to be immune to fire (Astragoth model as it happens, the Destroyer must have feared the High Priest of Hashut) and a tiny hammerer crew. 4 wounds on the thing then crumble did the rest.

Still, you shouldn't need to have a 'nasty' list just to have chance against the thing.

Really glad these tournaments are allowing the Big Hatted Overlords to participate.

Ragweek i'm assuming you mean the hellcannon, and not the Dreadquake Mortar (the one potentially with the ogre loader)?

Eitherway, badluck with the game. Revenge for the Black Orc uprising of course.

aka_mythos
11-01-2012, 13:12
Almost every unit in the Chaos Dwarf list is overpriced or fair but on the high side, the exception is the Magma Cannon and Kdaii Destroyer. Unit to unit comparisons between those two and units in other lists might net the advantage to Chaos Dwarfs, but when taken into consideration with the whole army all the pricier units that Chaos Dwarfs simply must take balance out the fact that these two units are good. For example the Infernal Guard test rules, that were out before the book's release, had Infernal Guard a point cheaper per model and all the weapons upgrades were also a point cheaper... Those rules, when test played were balanced, but the book raised the prices. With this book most average sized IG unit is ~60pts more expensive than what players tested and found to be balanced. If you take two blocks of Infernal Guard, right off the bat you're playing at a nebulous sort of 120point handicap... and whatever incorrect valuation Magma Cannons and Destroyers may have maxing out on both only mostly correct for the excessive pricing of other units.

I haven't really seen it mentioned but remember the Destroyer also has to take a toughness check each turn, with the potential of inflicting a wound upon itself.

The Low King
11-01-2012, 13:37
That said, as I stated before I actually killed 1 in 1 round of combat. That was with my Dwarf Lord who happenned to be immune to fire (Astragoth model as it happens, the Destroyer must have feared the High Priest of Hashut) and a tiny hammerer crew. 4 wounds on the thing then crumble did the rest.
.

i hope you mean a 2+ ward save vs fire? because dwarfs cant get immune to flaming attacks any more....



I haven't really seen it mentioned but remember the Destroyer also has to take a toughness check each turn, with the potential of inflicting a wound upon itself.

thats been the most suggested way of defeating it, lower its toughness. It has been mentioned a lot.



@Drongol: i take ironbreakers, they are a solid unit and can really take the pain from low strength units or missile fire. If they were a point cheaper (and have a ward vs fire?) i would be taking them in most lists as they would be the same point cost as longbeards with shields.

Gradek
11-01-2012, 14:26
What exactly from Tamurkhan is "official"? If I show up with Chaos Knight Rot Beasts for instance would that be official or is it just the Chaos Dwarfs (I know the Great hosts are not, but am thinking more about the individual chaos units)? I don't want to buy the book if only the Dwarfs are "official".

Lord Zarkov
11-01-2012, 14:40
What exactly from Tamurkhan is "official"? If I show up with Chaos Knight Rot Beasts for instance would that be official or is it just the Chaos Dwarfs (I know the Great hosts are not, but am thinking more about the individual chaos units)? I don't want to buy the book if only the Dwarfs are "official".
It's all "official", but Tournament rules may vary as always.
So you could use any of the rest in a GW store say.

Wishing
11-01-2012, 15:15
What exactly from Tamurkhan is "official"? If I show up with Chaos Knight Rot Beasts for instance would that be official or is it just the Chaos Dwarfs (I know the Great hosts are not, but am thinking more about the individual chaos units)? I don't want to buy the book if only the Dwarfs are "official".

The concept of "official" doesn't exist. The concepts it covers are "tournament legal" and "requires opponent's permission to use", both of which will vary from tournament to tournament and store/club to store/club.

However, the general trend so far, from what we can tell from this thread, appears to be that the CD are accepted by many tournaments and the rest of the book (or at least the chaos great host) is not.

Max_Killfactor
11-01-2012, 16:11
The quote from the book regarding what is official is in my sig. I don't have the book with me, but I don't recall any other sections or characters being labeled "official"


i take ironbreakers, they are a solid unit and can really take the pain from low strength units or missile fire. If they were a point cheaper (and have a ward vs fire?) i would be taking them in most lists as they would be the same point cost as longbeards with shields.

Ironbreakers are WS 5, right? I don't think Ironbreakers or Infernal Guard are bad units, they just aren't really that good either. The difference is that the Dwarfs have lots of other infantry, whereas the Chaos Dwarfs have the Hobgoblins... which are also probably overpriced by a hair.

The Low King
11-01-2012, 16:14
No, they just arnt as good as hammerers (who are our best unit) or hordes of GW warriors (GWs are probably underpriced and horde makes the most of them)

Drongol
11-01-2012, 16:17
@Drongol: i take ironbreakers, they are a solid unit and can really take the pain from low strength units or missile fire. If they were a point cheaper (and have a ward vs fire?) i would be taking them in most lists as they would be the same point cost as longbeards with shields.

Wow. You are certainly not taking the typical Internet Nasty Dwarf list. Didn't you also say you were only taking 1 cannon and 1 grudge thrower as well, or was that someone else?

The "typical" Dwarf list I expect to see would be a Runelord (often on an anvil), 2 large blocks of Warriors with GWs, 1 medium-large block of Hammerers, a BSB, 2-3 each of cannons, grudge throwers, and organ guns.

The Low King
11-01-2012, 16:32
No, the typical dwarf list (and i have taken it) is 2 hordes of 40ish GW warriors, 40 Hammerers, 2 cannons with Forging, engineers and fire. 2 organ guns. One Grudgethrower with 2xPenetrating and accuracy. Runelord With balance, 2xspellbreaking and some defenceive runes. 1 BSB with 1+ rerollable As, immune to killing blow and flaming attacks.

Its also a rather dull list to play imho as although the blocks are powerful you have to sit back and castle to win. It also requires a supprisingly large degree of skill vs good players.


As i said, ironbreakers arnt bad troops they just arnt as good as some of the other options. And i play interesting lists because, after having done it for a while, i realised that castleing (what dwarfs are designed to do) is just a little dull.

My current list includes Ironbreakers, Shield warriors, bolt throwers and a Gyrocopter.