PDA

View Full Version : Need advice on unit sizes



2_heads_talking
15-02-2012, 10:47
Hey all.

I'm thinking of getting back into Warhammer Fantasy, but on reading posts I've noticed that the size of regiments seems to have increased recently.

Now if I'm wrong please someone correct me, but I have fifteen dwarf hammerers as part of a dwarf army. This unit also fields my general. With 8th edition, is this unit severly undersized? How many models do you need within units to make them competitive? I'd hate the idea of my general's unit being only large enough to be classed as a speed bump, but I'm also not sure if Dwarf armies should have 50-warrior regiments.

Hope this makes sense, if anyone can help me understand the current layout a little better it would be appreciated.

Arnizipal
15-02-2012, 11:17
Twenty is the absolute minimum I think.
You won't get much combat value out of a unit so small, even if it holds your general. In 8th edition you get a lot of incoming attacks each round due to the Step Up rule so your units need to be able to take some casualties.

tmarichards
15-02-2012, 12:30
For Dwarfs, 25-30 is a good size for most of your units. There is a school of thought that says in 8th edition everything has to be in massive unit to be worthwhile, but to be honest this is largely (not entirely) an incredibly simple way to play the game. It might be effective, but pushing massive blocks at your opponent doesn't really do much in the way of contributing to good play.

Tayrod
15-02-2012, 13:02
Just about the only combat units I've seen 15-20 strong in 8th are chosen, chaos warriors, and skaven clanrats (for the weapon teams).

I guess it all depends on how you use them. If you horde them up, you'll need 30++ for full combat effectiveness, but if you run 20 in 5x4, you can afford to lose 10 guys before your attacks start to dwindle. However losing 10 a turn is quiet normal in 8th (and remember: prolonged combats are more usual now), and rank - bonus + steadfast still counts for something.

calnen
15-02-2012, 13:34
As you thought, a unit of 15 Hammerers isn't much use. With 2 ranks (at least) of enemies attacking, you'll lose a large fraction of those before they even get to strike. It's a pity as it's so unfluffy, but Dwarf units in 8th do have to be large.. probably 25 minimum for a shield block, or 35 minimum for a horde.

russellmoo
15-02-2012, 15:45
A horde of hammerers is a good thing- if you want to get the most out of them bump them up to 35-40 models and use horde formation-

There are 2 ways to play dwarfs- 1) 5+ warmachines and MSU- under this build you field blocks of 20-30 models 2 or 3 grudge throwers, and some organ guns, maybe a cannon, or Thorek- you then sit back shoot your enemy to death then finish him off with your small blocks of troops- 2) Dwarf horde- this army features 3-4 warmachines, usually just 1 or 2 Grudge throwers, and a few other warmachines, but relies on huge units of great weapon wielding warriors, rangers, hammerers, etc. all at around 40 models each.

The real consideration is this: as a dwarf player you don't have access to buffs/hexes, and more importantly you don't have access to the uber death spells (dwellers, pit of shades, purple sun, etc.) this means that you are going to need a way to either kill off the enemy's large units before they get to close combat, or have the sheer numbers to survive a prolonged battle of attrition (as a dwarf player, don't expect to win very many combats, players will force through the important buffs/hexes with IF and you best hope of killing off a unit is to stick around with a combination of steadfast + high leadership to eventually wipe them out)

Oogie boogie boss
17-02-2012, 18:46
For an elite unit like Hammerers, depending on what size of game you're playing, you probably want around 25-30. For your core Warriors 40 is more reasonable. 8th has shifted the focus more to big infantry units, and the new rules mean you get hit with a lot more attacks generally, so you need the numbers to dish it out and to take it.

Vampiric16
17-02-2012, 19:14
I've had reasonable success with 4 blocks of 25 (One hammerer, one GW longbeard, one GW warriors and one HW/S warriors). By deploying in a 'sheild wall', large units like hordes will end up fighting two units, which means they are dividing attacks while I hit back with two full units. Against similar sized units, I'm in a position to flank charge with my adjacent units. Thus far it's been rather successful. Warmachines help a lot, grudgethrowers are awesome for thinning units out before they get within poking distance.

Olannon
17-02-2012, 19:25
While I disagree with the common perception that bigger is better, I do not believe that 15 Hammerers are worth taking, unless you intend to congaline them for stubborn purposes. Now I'm not that familiar with Dwarfs but I would say 24 sounds good (if you intend to play them 5x5) or maybe 39 (4x10). Give it a try and see what suits you!

Malorian
17-02-2012, 19:29
While I disagree with the common perception that bigger is better, I do not believe that 15 Hammerers are worth taking, unless you intend to congaline them for stubborn purposes. Now I'm not that familiar with Dwarfs but I would say 24 sounds good (if you intend to play them 5x5) or maybe 39 (4x10). Give it a try and see what suits you!

I believe bigger is better, especially with offensive units such as dwarfs with great weapons. I like 40 or 50 depending on the size of the game.

Only unit that should be smaller is maybe a unit of 20 to take the watchtower.

Olannon
17-02-2012, 20:51
This makes no sense to me Malorian. I just stated that I disagree with the common perception with regards to the originial post's mention of 8th and unit sizes and even recommended a potential 40 strong unit depending on what he wants it to perform. In a competitive setting, bigger isn't always better - as the multitude of combined arms armies have shown us. Granted, it is of course better to have generally bigger units than in 7th, but I haven't seen really big blocks completely dominate games yet. Also, I fail to see how you can call Hammerers an offensive unit - they're one of the best defensive units in the game with T4, S6 and stubborn! As far as offense and Dwarfs go, I'd say the anvil is a must, in which case practically any units can be a hammer.

Gilbert Gosseyn III
17-02-2012, 22:55
This makes no sense to me Malorian. I just stated that I disagree with the common perception with regards to the originial post's mention of 8th and unit sizes and even recommended a potential 40 strong unit depending on what he wants it to perform. In a competitive setting, bigger isn't always better - as the multitude of combined arms armies have shown us. Granted, it is of course better to have generally bigger units than in 7th, but I haven't seen really big blocks completely dominate games yet. Also, I fail to see how you can call Hammerers an offensive unit - they're one of the best defensive units in the game with T4, S6 and stubborn! As far as offense and Dwarfs go, I'd say the anvil is a must, in which case practically any units can be a hammer.

I guess St 6 doesn't make a unit of 30-40 horde-formation Hammerers a hammer unit. In that case you're right.

Malorian
18-02-2012, 05:22
This makes no sense to me Malorian. I just stated that I disagree with the common perception with regards to the originial post's mention of 8th and unit sizes and even recommended a potential 40 strong unit depending on what he wants it to perform. In a competitive setting, bigger isn't always better - as the multitude of combined arms armies have shown us. Granted, it is of course better to have generally bigger units than in 7th, but I haven't seen really big blocks completely dominate games yet. Also, I fail to see how you can call Hammerers an offensive unit - they're one of the best defensive units in the game with T4, S6 and stubborn! As far as offense and Dwarfs go, I'd say the anvil is a must, in which case practically any units can be a hammer.

WS5 and str6 makes for one hell of an offensive unit. The stubborn is just the icing on the cake (and pretty useless icing at that since the unit almost never loses).

And from what I've seen the combined arms still can't compete with maxed out units. Dwarfs actually do it better than most as they have the anti-magic to stop the spells that are the only real counter to this tactic.