Dwarf Army Book - Suggestions for 8th edition

[m1acca1551]

Shield wall/square: the player can elect not to move the unit/march in there movement turn. the unit gains +1 as against missile fire except artilery or template fire. in addition to the +1 as they do not count as having flanks for the first round of cc. the unit cannot pursue if the enemy breaks from combat.

to me this fixes many of the issues that dwarf plyers have when deploying and being out manouvered. i can now deploy further away from the board edge and have my warriors protect my flanks with out giving away there own. the square formation is fluffy and for 1 turn only represents the square failing after casulties occur.

[Petey]

The stagnation of some 6th edition rules/points is so built in with the ideas presented specific to great weapons.

Simply put, great weapons on grave guard (from 7th and now 8th edition) cost one point - not two.

So, why would Great Weapons on Dwarves miraculously cost double that of other units from other armies ??? I would expect a point drop for the Great Weapons.
For the 'handicap' of losing a shield (-1 AS and no parry) but gaining the +2 S for striking last - all offsets itself. It would be interesting to see if Dwarves somehow will have any option(s) to gain ASF with Great Weapons. I would expect this to come from the Anvil (reinvented of course).

Lies, and or misinformation. I've corrected you before, and it seems I need to again, just to prevent your words from influencing others unduly. Great Weapons cost 2 points. Grave Guard loses its shields (which are one point items) and gains great weapons for an additional point. 1+1=2. This has been the case since the original big red book. Which I happen to have sitting at my left as I write this. Do you know why it costs 2 points? Because they are worth 2points. Your either deceitful or erroneous claims do not change their cost. NO ONE PAYS 1 POINT FOR GREAT WEAPONS. Everyone pays 2 or more. Including Grave Guard. L2read.

Thanks for your reply Petey, my responses below.

Hmm, I might have exaggerated a bit, but not by much. The best way to get bulk VPs is to catch a fleeing enemy in combat. That -1 to flee/pursue means that there is a greater chance of losing one of your units, and of letting the enemy escape with their VPs intact. Resolute would not be missed, trust me....

Whether it would be missed or not is irrelevant. It is a married concept to dwarves, like animosity is to orcs. Orcs got animosity because they are slightly better than their points imply, this same thing was in the design for Dwarves. It may not be true anymore that they need resolute to justify their cost, but it is a hallmark attached power to the dwarf army. Other simple additions might be better than removing the rule though. How about parting attacks from the dwarves if their enemies break from combat. How about swiftstride banners which would allow them to chase more effectively. How about the anvil of doom forcing the enemy to stay and fight another round of combat. There are many solutions to this issue. Perhaps you should look to mitigating losses, and making the dwarves stubborn somehow. Whatever the answer Resolute is here to stay, in the same way as animosity is for orcs, trust me...

I also don't see the justification for it. Dwarves are meant to be slow, but slower than zombies and skeletons?

Not slow in reaction time, slow as in lazy to chase people. And yes, grumpy surly angry sneezy drunken dwarves are more likely to let you run off than chase you, cause seriously they have better things to do... like drinking.

It's entirely possible to fail Ld 9 tests, even with a reroll. My aim here is to try and boost the Dwarf movement phase, which is extremely weak, without simply putting Dwarves at M4 or giving us hosts of cav/skirmishers/flyers etc.

I see the reasoning here. To some extent I agree with it, but I think just allowing the dwarves to march after a swift reform (or normal move after a regular reform) would be enough

I think you're right in that it's relatively complex, but the way I stated doesn't penalise the poor S3 units out there, who are already on a hiding to nothing. Still, I wouldn't complain about an extra point for Armour Save.....

If the chaos dwarves are anything to go by, this seems to be the direction they will take the stunties. As one of my favorite opponents plays dwarves, I think this would be a welcomed change. I also like the idea of a rune or banner than negates Armor Piercing, that goes a long way in saving dwarven lives.

Shieldwall might be the wrong name for it, but I'm glad you like the concept. It might seem too complex, but it'll give shields on Warriors a place and help make Dwarves more durable against killy foes (at the cost of reducing their lethality.)

I think dwarves with shields have a place already, as the most cost effective and reliable anvil living troops can get. Great armor save, free ward save, and relatively inexpensive makes dwarves with hand weapon and shield a great choice IMO. Another rule that might work is that your Shield Wall might be a power that you get from some source (for example, Thane riding a shield) the unit makes a leadership roll and gains +1 strength. This makes great weapons better (marginally) and makes hand weapons excellent.

Heck, I might say that there should be 3 types of thanes (and lords).
Those that get an oathstone (Unbreakable, Immobile, Taunt)
Those that get shield bearers (Shield Wall above)
Those that get neither (stubborn, Hatred)

This way you could get a style of play based on the personality of the thane in question. Is he the thane that is a stubborn set in his ways curmudgeon, or is he a vengeful stump of hate out for revenge. Both occur in the fluff, and separately from one another. Just some thoughts and musings.

[Snake1311]

I doubt dwarf infantry will change in function and stats in any significant way. Everything except hammerers will get cheaper to varying degrees, until they are in line with hammerers for point efficiency.

Afterwards, it will be the new units which will be filling in the gaps that we need. We will probably get another unit with swiftstrider (for chasing things down), and something that slaps templates/autohits in combat, ala sphinx or reusable breath weapon (to compensate for lack of multiattacks). If they re-release an Anvil kit, it will probably be a dual with some alternative shrine-y thing, so we get some ways to dish out minor buffs ala cauldron.

We got a decent army core at the moment, all that needs to happen is:
1) the underperforming units need a realignment
2) the inevitable 4-5 new units need to fill some gaps

Sorted.

[Montegue]

With regards to the Organ Gun - it's fine. Seriously. It cannot have any runes, which means it's the least reliable of all the Dwarf Artillery. It's got a 2 in six chance of blowing up when a misfire is rolled. It has a 24" Range, which means it doesn't come into play until the enemy has crossed the center line of the field. It's got no engineer upgrade, which means it's only got three wounds before it's popped. Yes, it can do great harm to a unit, and yes, it doesn't roll to hit. However, it's also 140 points given over to the enemy should it blow up, and unlike every other piece of artillery in the Dwarf arsenal, there's no way to avoid that.

Dwarf Infantry -

The problem with dwarf infantry is twofold. One, they are very expensive, which means you can't put out a wide variety of troops and still do well in battle. Shield warriors, slayers, Ironbreakers - all of them generally collect dust on the shelf. The longbeard upgrade can make shield warriors somewhat useful, but they are almost half again as expensive as a simple Great Weapon warrior, and the benefits just aren't that great. A 4+ armor save and a 6+ ward sound great in theory, but when you think about the raw number of S5 or greater enemies Dwarfs commonly face, that armor doesn't really help. Better to pay less for more great weapons and smash faces with active combat res.

The second problem is that Dwarfs don't have a single unit that's anywhere near as killy as the offensive units other armies can field. Bloodletters cause fear, have a base WS of 5, a ward save of 5+, S5, and I4. Ogre Ironguts come with Great Weapons, heavy armor, have three attacks, and three wounds a piece. They also get a huge amount of supporting attacks (and a stupid amount of them if in horde formation). Swordmasters of Hoeth ASF, reroll to hit on basically everyone, and strike at a S5. Even the Empire Greatswords outpace dwarfs with their 4+ armor save and the hatred they get when coupled with a warrior priest. (and someone needs to explain to me how the armor the dwarfs forge for the Empire is better than the stuff they gear up their own warriors with...).

Our most effective unit in combat is the Hammerer, but they're only so effective because they have a modestly strong stat line in addition to Stubborn. Stubborn means they hang on longer, and coupled with our leadership means they can stay in Horde formation and keep the number of outgoing attacks relatively high for at least a little while.

Slayers collect dust because they are terribly vulnerable to shooting and melee combat. Shield warriors collect dust because they can't hold up to S5 or better enemies and they hit like wet noodles at S3. So, Dwarfs are left with GW warriors and Hammerers to hold their lines.

If you nerf Dwarf artillery in any way, dwarfs would no longer be a viable army. The only reason we can survive the onslaught is because we can weaken units that simply out perform us, pound for pound. So, anyway, here's my suggestion -

Army wide rules

- Keep the rule about subtracting one from Flee distance, but *not* from pursuit. It makes sense that dwarfs don't want to run, but it doesn't make sense that they don't want to kill the bastages they just got done defeating. Let the leadership roll determine if they are to restrain.

- Army wide rule - any dwarf unit in Horde formation is considered to be Stubborn. This would allow all units to have some offensive and defensive utility while keeping in line with the whole concept of the Dwarfs being some of the hardest nuts to crack.

- Magic Resistance: Allow Dwarfs to use their Toughness for any attribute test they are forced to make. This would fit with the whole notion that Dwarfs have built up a stong immunity to magic, and would help mitigate one of the most vulnerable points of the dawi host - pit of shades and other such spells.

- Gromril Armor - 3+ base AS.

Infantry Changes:

Warriors: 7 points per model, comes with a shield and HW and heavy armor as standard equipment. 2 pts for GW upgrade. Upgrade to Longbeards for 2pts per model.

Ironbreakers: 2 Attacks on profile. Otherwise kept the same.

Hammerers: Unbreakable when accompanied by a Dwarf Lord (change to bodyguard). Gromril armor.

Quarrelers: Reduce points by 1. Add heavy armor for 1pt per model.

Thunderers: Reduce Points by 2 per model. Heavy armor for 1pt, shield for 1pt.

Slayers: Runic Tattos - 6+ ward save. 5+ if accompanied by a Slayer Hero or Lord. Otherwise keep them the same. Giant Slayer limited to 1 per unit.


Lords and Heroes:

Dwarf Lord: Stubborn. New Upgrades: Book of Grudges (Lord and unit he's with get Hatred), Incredible Leadership (army may roll 3d6 for leadership tests and take the best results).

Runelord: Pretty much keep them the same. Perhaps an upgrade to +4 on dispell. Anvil of Doom: Is fine, but could probably use some means of rerolling a misfire. Possibly an upgrade to make using Ancient Power a little less likely to blow up in your face.

Runesmith: Pretty much the same.

Thane: BSB should be able to take a shield or great weapon. Increase leadership to 10.

War Machines:

Gyrocopter: Eliminate partial hits. Possibly lower cost, or turn it into a unit that can field more than one model. My gyrocopter model has a couple of ancestor bombs on the bottom I would love to be able to use in combat.

Flame Canon: Make it useful again.


New Stuff:

One thing I want to see made available to dwarfs are some appropriate and unique choices for units, especially if they make a good centerpiece for the army. Suggestions that aren't new -

Runic Golems/constructs. Monstrous infantry with a decent M attribute.

Big runic machine of some kind.

Big air ship or blimp.

[knightime98]

Lies, and or misinformation. I've corrected you before, and it seems I need to again, just to prevent your words from influencing others unduly. Great Weapons cost 2 points. Grave Guard loses its shields (which are one point items) and gains great weapons for an additional point. 1+1=2. This has been the case since the original big red book. Which I happen to have sitting at my left as I write this. Do you know why it costs 2 points? Because they are worth 2points. Your either deceitful or erroneous claims do not change their cost. NO ONE PAYS 1 POINT FOR GREAT WEAPONS. Everyone pays 2 or more. Including Grave Guard. L2read.

Yikes Petey ! Calm Down. Some people do get excited from time to time. Let's be civil in all cases. Do you see me printing in upper case ? I'll highlight perhaps one word or such but have limited my highlighting,bold, and font color to a minimum.

I'll make concessions when necessary and apologize when I am wrong.

This is not mis-information in any regards. The 8th edition VC book on Pg. 92 shows that
normal equipment for Grave Guard includes shields (Base points are 11 per model). It also states in the profile under options that the shields may be replaced with Great Weapons for 1 point.

I'm not sure what resource you are using to calculate 2 points (not be sarcastic or anything but rather trying to figure out how you arrived with your answer).

So, my original point is that grave guard do get great weapons for 1 point as part of the 8th edition rules. Dwarves should also get great weapons for 1 point as per the VC book outline. That's my statement or conclusion to that thought.

In any event, I hope that we can still see eye to eye and be mutually respectful of one another.

[DaemonReign]

I doubt dwarf infantry will change in function and stats in any significant way. Everything except hammerers will get cheaper to varying degrees, until they are in line with hammerers for point efficiency.

Afterwards, it will be the new units which will be filling in the gaps that we need. We will probably get another unit with swiftstrider (for chasing things down), and something that slaps templates/autohits in combat, ala sphinx or reusable breath weapon (to compensate for lack of multiattacks). If they re-release an Anvil kit, it will probably be a dual with some alternative shrine-y thing, so we get some ways to dish out minor buffs ala cauldron.

We got a decent army core at the moment, all that needs to happen is:
1) the underperforming units need a realignment
2) the inevitable 4-5 new units need to fill some gaps

Sorted.

This.
Just look at the previous couple of Army Book released for 8th.. Before we run off with a bunch of wild ideas of radical changes to Dwarves.
Oh.. And when it comes to Slayers discussed earlier the most fundamental starting point on fixing them would be to remove th 0-1 cap on them.
And damn it Snake you should abandon comp then we could agree all the time.. *lol*

[Balerion]

Yikes Petey ! Calm Down. Some people do get excited from time to time. Let's be civil in all cases. Do you see me printing in upper case ? I'll highlight perhaps one word or such but have limited my highlighting,bold, and font color to a minimum.

I'll make concessions when necessary and apologize when I am wrong.

This is not mis-information in any regards. The 8th edition VC book on Pg. 92 shows that
normal equipment for Grave Guard includes shields (Base points are 11 per model). It also states in the profile under options that the shields may be replaced with Great Weapons for 1 point.

I'm not sure what resource you are using to calculate 2 points (not be sarcastic or anything but rather trying to figure out how you arrived with your answer).

So, my original point is that grave guard do get great weapons for 1 point as part of the 8th edition rules. Dwarves should also get great weapons for 1 point as per the VC book outline. That's my statement or conclusion to that thought.

In any event, I hope that we can still see eye to eye and be mutually respectful of one another.

Wow, how the heck did you manage to gloss over his point so completely. You should consider a career in politics.

Grave Guard start with a shield. A shield is a 1 point piece of equipment. A great weapon is a 2 point piece of equipment. When the Grave Guard take great weapons they lose the shield. They lose a 1 point piece of equipment. And then they pay 1 additional point for a 2 point piece of equipment.

Dwarf Warriors don't lose anything when they buy a great weapon. They can buy a great weapon (a 2 point piece of equipment) for 2 points. They can buy a shield (a 1 point piece of equipment) for 1 point.

And you want them to be able to buy a 2 point piece of equipment for 1 point.

[swiftshadow14]

I want dwarves to be the best army in the game....This is the vibe im getting here. Dwarves need an update yes, but they are still good and their cannons still kick @$$. I would like to see more of an infantry focus than simple gun line in this edit. I think giving MR1 to units is alot more balenced then giving them crazy dispell. Also no one can stop IF thats the point great risk/ reward dont ask for stupid things. Sorry for the tone of this post but I dont want to hear people whine about their army when other armies need updates alot more.

[Snake1311]

This.
Just look at the previous couple of Army Book released for 8th.. Before we run off with a bunch of wild ideas of radical changes to Dwarves.
Oh.. And when it comes to Slayers discussed earlier the most fundamental starting point on fixing them would be to remove th 0-1 cap on them.
And damn it Snake you should abandon comp then we could agree all the time.. *lol*

I'll love to abandon comp, but GW have to get their act together before that. Do you think I like explaining to my freinds who are just starting WHF why they shouldn't buy two lightning cannons because they will never be able to field them both? Comp is a necessity like the glasses on my face - don't like it being there, but better than stumbling around half-blind.


You know what I'd really like to see in a dwarf book when it comes to warmachines?

Special entry:
Traditional warmachine....0pts
Upgrade to one of:
BT.....x pts (can take a pair as a single choice)
GT.....y pts
Cannon ....z pts

Rare Entry:
Experimental warmachine...0pts
Upgrade to one of:
Organ Gun...x pts
Flame Thrower....y pts

Bam! An inbuilt cap of 5 warmachines per army. No more cries of cheese, no more need for any restrictions on dwarfs (this is the only significant thing that gets capped for us), everyone who plays this game for what its supposed to be is happy.

If they approached all similar comp-based problems with solutions like the above, WHF would be amazing. Looking at the new books, even though they are a big improvement, they still got a long way to go.

[The Low King]

Woodelves
Beastmen
Bretts

^^^ the only armies that might need an update more


Gunlines dont work in this edition. Dwarf armies work by softening up enemies with warmachines before beating them in combat.

Also, cannons arnt that good for their cost, ive had that argument many a time.

Our dispelling is fine, leave it as it is. Runelords/smiths just need to be able to do something aswell as dispell.

[MikeyB]

Just throwing a curve ball out there but I'd quite like to see rune powered constructs like in Skyrim/Dragonage ^_^ It'll never happen but i reckon they'd be cool

[Snake1311]

I want dwarves to be the best army in the game....This is the vibe im getting here. Dwarves need an update yes, but they are still good and their cannons still kick @$$. I would like to see more of an infantry focus than simple gun line in this edit. I think giving MR1 to units is alot more balenced then giving them crazy dispell. Also no one can stop IF thats the point great risk/ reward dont ask for stupid things. Sorry for the tone of this post but I dont want to hear people whine about their army when other armies need updates alot more.

I'd rather not get anything than have MR1. If some idiot wants to waste his power dice throwing magic missles at my big blocks, I'd rather the rules not deter that decision. I also like how MR1 can help me not get hexed - o wait, no it cant.

Yep, people get very carried away, but offering us piss poor options like MR in place of our dispell capacities is just stupid. What will you do to compensate for this? It will make us worse than WoC at antimagic and we will still have no magic offence, so I suppose that 'infantry focus' will mean that we will be more point effective than them in combat, yes? 5 points for a GW warrior core sound OK to you? Since you will be taking away our gunline aspect too, I suppose it should really be more like 4 points.

Think before you post things, otherwise you are no better than the rampant wishlisters, just extremist in the other direction.


Montenegue - 3+ on hammmerers, with potential for unbreakable, are you kidding me? What is this setup going to cost, 16-17 points a model? no thanks.

[Petey]

Yikes Petey ! Calm Down. Some people do get excited from time to time. Let's be civil in all cases. Do you see me printing in upper case ? I'll highlight perhaps one word or such but have limited my highlighting,bold, and font color to a minimum.

Sure thing, it just seems as if you've ignored me posting a retort ten times.

I'll make concessions when necessary and apologize when I am wrong.

I look forward to it.

This is not mis-information in any regards. The 8th edition VC book on Pg. 92 shows that
normal equipment for Grave Guard includes shields (Base points are 11 per model). It also states in the profile under options that the shields may be replaced with Great Weapons for 1 point.

I'm not sure what resource you are using to calculate 2 points (not be sarcastic or anything but rather trying to figure out how you arrived with your answer).

Big red book 3rd edition, in the section on weapons, 2 points. In every edition since that one where points values for weapons are used, they have costed 2 points for standard troops. Double for cavalry or Heroes, triple for lords. The way that points are figured per model has not changed in many many editions, the base cost of models has changed (ie humans used to cost 5 point naked, now they cost 3) but the way they charge for equipment has been the same for a very long time. Additionally, the price can be inferred based on units that have GW standard.

So, my original point is that grave guard do get great weapons for 1 point as part of the 8th edition rules. Dwarves should also get great weapons for 1 point as per the VC book outline. That's my statement or conclusion to that thought.

In any event, I hope that we can still see eye to eye and be mutually respectful of one another.

They don't. The shield costs 1 point, and they're getting a rebate for giving it up. see Balerion below, he also sees what I'm say.

Wow, how the heck did you manage to gloss over his point so completely. You should consider a career in politics.

Grave Guard start with a shield. A shield is a 1 point piece of equipment. A great weapon is a 2 point piece of equipment. When the Grave Guard take great weapons they lose the shield. They lose a 1 point piece of equipment. And then they pay 1 additional point for a 2 point piece of equipment.

Dwarf Warriors don't lose anything when they buy a great weapon. They can buy a great weapon (a 2 point piece of equipment) for 2 points. They can buy a shield (a 1 point piece of equipment) for 1 point.

And you want them to be able to buy a 2 point piece of equipment for 1 point.

Man, thank you Balerion, that was driving me nuts.

I'd rather not get anything than have MR1. If some idiot wants to waste his power dice throwing magic missles at my big blocks, I'd rather the rules not deter that decision. I also like how MR1 can help me not get hexed - o wait, no it cant.

Yep, people get very carried away, but offering us piss poor options like MR in place of our dispell capacities is just stupid. What will you do to compensate for this? It will make us worse than WoC at antimagic and we will still have no magic offence, so I suppose that 'infantry focus' will mean that we will be more point effective than them in combat, yes? 5 points for a GW warrior core sound OK to you? Since you will be taking away our gunline aspect too, I suppose it should really be more like 4 points.

Think before you post things, otherwise you are no better than the rampant wishlisters, just extremist in the other direction.

Montenegue - 3+ on hammmerers, with potential for unbreakable, are you kidding me? What is this setup going to cost, 16-17 points a model? no thanks.

Certainly MR has it's flaws, and honestly should be tweeked and revamped a bit, but I think it's a rule more in character with the army. I feel that it is more in keeping with the spirit of how dwarven armies function in the fluff.

As to it being a piss poor options, I can only disagree. It is an excellent ability to mitigate damage, which is what dwarves are supposed to be good at. I don't feel they are a dispelling army. Your opinions may vary. As to compensation, I don't feel you need it, High MR availability is worth the dispel bonus over the aggregate average of games. What the army needs is a magic phase. Perhaps one composed of many bound spells, through rune priests and lords. Also, I never demanded they lose their gunlines, what are you talking about here?
What the army also needs is better options to make them more of a melee force, like the fluff constantly states. That isn't accomplished by extra cheap GW core units. A few things here and there would do it. You could give slayers swiftstrider. You could give the army a taunt character/banner/power/magic item which could force units to charge into your anvils. You could make more infiltrating options. You could give more vanguard options. There are a lot of potential answers here, all of which can be very fluffy and useful.

Also, I challenge you to think on the name of this discussion. It is going to be prone to wishlisting. But there may be some good ideas among the bad, like gold in the dirt. Certainly, many of the ideas people have proposed have sounded entertaining to me

[knightime98]

@Baleron - I did not gloss over Petey's point. He did not explain that the shield was a part of the built in price of a Grave Guard model. He was making a statement that there was a cost of 1pt you had to pay for shields and then if you bought a shield that you could trade the shield in for a Great Weapon. That was my interpretation of the conversation.

You pointed out the idea that the shield was part of the built in cost of the model. To me, the built in cost is mutually exclusive as the book simply states that you drop the "free" shield for a great weapon at 1 pt per model. What I fail to understand is why the grave guard are only 11 points a model. They get unbreakable, cause fear, killing blow, T4, AS 4+/ WS 6+, and can be raised back all for the 11 points. That to me is dirt cheap ! Sure some will say that they crumble and all that. But getting through the T4 and saves is no easy task. Essentially what you are saying is that the Grave Guard should have been a base of 10 points and then have the option for a shield for 1 point/ Great Weapon for 2 points. If it were explained in that context, I would of had a different statement.

By all means, I am not a politician nor do I ever plan to be one. They are the scoundrels of the earth and a necessary evil. They always exclude themselves from their own rules that they impress upon others. For instance, all their 'mail' is free, well sort of - We the taxpayers pay for it. Isn't that a wonderful thing.

@ Petey - Next time, break your argument down to the basic level first. Don't assume that everyone knows exactly what you are talking about. This was just a simple misunderstanding of the concept of built in cost. When you said the shield is 1 point, I looked in the book and saw that it shows it as normal equipment that is included. By inference, this was misconstrued as the shield being in the VC book as costing one point per model just like the option for the Great Weapon shows for 1 point a model.

Well now that we have all that cleared up. The Dwarves will get updates and hopefully ones that make sense. This is the reason that I started this thread is to see what ideas others may have in store for the Dwarves. So, far a lot of others have voiced their opinions. All of the 8th edition books seem to be in equilibrium with one another which is a good indication that this may be the case when the Dwarven book is released. Rumors are flying that the Empire book will be the next book. For some odd reason, GW thinks the Empire needs adjustments first? ? I'm not so sure at this point. We'll just have to wait and see.

[m1acca1551]

Empire will get done 1st due to theres not alot to really fix rules wise and they only need a few new mini's whilst dwarfs require new regiments of core/special/rare and even hero minis. backed up by a tricky rune system that will have to be balanced with the magic system they will be a while yet.

[Petey]

@Baleron - I did not gloss over Petey's point. He did not explain that the shield was a part of the built in price of a Grave Guard model. He was making a statement that there was a cost of 1pt you had to pay for shields and then if you bought a shield that you could trade the shield in for a Great Weapon. That was my interpretation of the conversation.

You pointed out the idea that the shield was part of the built in cost of the model. To me, the built in cost is mutually exclusive as the book simply states that you drop the "free" shield for a great weapon at 1 pt per model. What I fail to understand is why the grave guard are only 11 points a model. They get unbreakable, cause fear, killing blow, T4, AS 4+/ WS 6+, and can be raised back all for the 11 points. That to me is dirt cheap ! Sure some will say that they crumble and all that. But getting through the T4 and saves is no easy task. Essentially what you are saying is that the Grave Guard should have been a base of 10 points and then have the option for a shield for 1 point/ Great Weapon for 2 points. If it were explained in that context, I would of had a different statement.

By all means, I am not a politician nor do I ever plan to be one. They are the scoundrels of the earth and a necessary evil. They always exclude themselves from their own rules that they impress upon others. For instance, all their 'mail' is free, well sort of - We the taxpayers pay for it. Isn't that a wonderful thing.

@ Petey - Next time, break your argument down to the basic level first. Don't assume that everyone knows exactly what you are talking about. This was just a simple misunderstanding of the concept of built in cost. When you said the shield is 1 point, I looked in the book and saw that it shows it as normal equipment that is included. By inference, this was misconstrued as the shield being in the VC book as costing one point per model just like the option for the Great Weapon shows for 1 point a model.

Well now that we have all that cleared up. The Dwarves will get updates and hopefully ones that make sense. This is the reason that I started this thread is to see what ideas others may have in store for the Dwarves. So, far a lot of others have voiced their opinions. All of the 8th edition books seem to be in equilibrium with one another which is a good indication that this may be the case when the Dwarven book is released. Rumors are flying that the Empire book will be the next book. For some odd reason, GW thinks the Empire needs adjustments first? ? I'm not so sure at this point. We'll just have to wait and see.

On that we agree, I think Dwarves need a redo before empire.
I would like to see 4 books a year, this year's books being VC, Dwarves, Bretonnia, and Wood Elves
I would be ok with seeing Empire in next year's batch, but really other armies need to be altered first.

As to why GG are 10 points (plus 1 for shield or 2 for GW), if we take skeletons as the base troop type (3 points naked), add 1 for +1WS & I (these are sold as a pair for 1point), add 1 for +1S, and 2 for +1T bonus, 1 more for +1ld (sometimes they value ld at 1pt for 2ld) then add 2 for heavy armor. The formula can be applied very generally to any core to elites extrapolation. There are sometimes specific points discounts on units here and there if they prove to not be worth taking, but generally you can predict a unit's cost very easily.
Basically, the breakdown works like this.
+1 (WS and I) or (WS and BS) = 1pt
+1 S = 1pt
+1 T = 2pt
+2 I = 1pt
+1 A = 2pt
+1 or 2 ld = 1pt
Armor is 1 pt per save ie heavy armor and shield is worth 3pts
Weapons are generally 1pt for melee weapons, though great weapons and a few others are worth 2.
Missles are more complicated, and their cost is going down in this edition, the old formula is changed for them
The cost of anything is doubled for mounted units or heroes (though mounted units often don't double the cost of missle weapons they can buy), or trippled in the case of lords. It is generally 4x more for Monsterous Infantry to buy gear (though there are exceptions)

[knightime98]

That is very insightful Petey. Through the 10 years of playing Warhammer, I've never seen a break down of points like that.

Also, I have never seen the Big Red 3rd edition book either as I started at the very beginning of 6th edition.

Lastly, Your break down shows the stat line and equipment, however, it does not factor in the special rules at all. The killing blow, unbreakable (which is huge), and cause fear.... Why do they get these assets as free ??? That's what gets me.. To me the VC are the no brainer army. All I mean by that is the VC army is the 'autopilot' army.. The point and click style. You never test, you never run, and you have the benefits of causing fear/terror and making other (weaker) armies quake in their boots. It's what I call the fail proof or fail safe army. It's the sure bet if you will. This is precisely why VC is not one of the 7 armies that I own. I don't find it challenging to play. Now, don't get me wrong - I'm not digging on the VC players for playing VC. It is my preconceived notion that they are the most boring army ever. Some players say that about Dwarf players which I find to be ironic. It is true that most Dwarf players have some sort of gunline, however, that is 1/2 of their game with the other half being combat. These points, I have illustrated and pointed out numerous times.

So, it seems to me.

[Snake1311]

As to it being a piss poor options, I can only disagree. It is an excellent ability to mitigate damage, which is what dwarves are supposed to be good at. I don't feel they are a dispelling army. Your opinions may vary. As to compensation, I don't feel you need it, High MR availability is worth the dispel bonus over the aggregate average of games. What the army needs is a magic phase. Perhaps one composed of many bound spells, through rune priests and lords. Also, I never demanded they lose their gunlines, what are you talking about here?
What the army also needs is better options to make them more of a melee force, like the fluff constantly states. That isn't accomplished by extra cheap GW core units. A few things here and there would do it. You could give slayers swiftstrider. You could give the army a taunt character/banner/power/magic item which could force units to charge into your anvils. You could make more infiltrating options. You could give more vanguard options. There are a lot of potential answers here, all of which can be very fluffy and useful.

Just because you think its not useless doesn't make it so - it provides no help against hexes and augments, and most of the really deadly spells ignore ward saves. So it will only really help against a select few spells, which would be targetting subotimal targets? How is that even vaguely comparable to dispelling the spells in the first place? And I'm talking MR3 here.

I agree with the concept that dwarfs are a resisting rather than dispelling army. MR in its current state does not represent that at all however. Fine, I admit that dispelling enemy augments makes little sense; however if we can't actively dispell we need an abilty to shrug off Hexes and Pits/Suns. I'm talking a Banner-of-the World-Dragon-type effect, triggered on a 4+ for every model under a template/affected by damage, and 4+ for a unit affected by a hex. And it would STILL be a nerf to what we have now.

Onto your other points.

Swiftstrider slayers - fair enough, although its more likely that any new units will fill that role.

Taunt - already present, its called Rune of Challenge. I hope we don't lose it.

Vanguard / Infiltrating - Firstly, an abundance of them will make dwarfs a mobile army, which is weird and unfluffy. Secondly, neither of those help you not get battered once you get into combat.

Also, I challenge you to think on the name of this discussion. It is going to be prone to wishlisting. But there may be some good ideas among the bad, like gold in the dirt. Certainly, many of the ideas people have proposed have sounded entertaining to me

Its true, you are 100% correct. It would be nice for people to filter out the most obvious of dirt themselves by not suggesting blatantly OP / UP mechanics though, woudn't it? I mean, I'm looking at this from a dwarf players perspective,yet I'm (at least trying to) not suggesting unreasonable buffs.

[korintex]

Hey,

First of all, I’m not a fluent English writer... sorry if I made a mistake..

I love Dwarfs, and I love the Warhammer game, but i need to say the Dwarf army book is very one-dimensional.

If the constructor, the Game-workshop realy loves this game, and the profit from the selling, I think they should to change the whole dwarf army concept.

This is a great opportunity what bring the 8th. Edition rules, to change and re-concept the Whole Dwarf army.

Everyone is understood the Dwarf army has:

• Troop with hand weapon
• Troop with gun
• And war machine.

No spell caster, no cavalry, no chariot or something like the Empire Steam tank. The enemy is count that and they have a great advantage to make an army against the dwarf. (and against when I make an army I can chose 2 options I want to charge, or shoot..wow)

The Dwarf are the master of making engine and a war machines... and where we see it? They made a gun, and a catapult,(what everyone made same or better..) and they can’t made a weapon team or a small engine like the skeaven... yeahh the small aggressive ratman more intelligent and creative than dwarf engineers... wow...

This is why I try to suggestion to create a new unit types to dwarf. I don’t write rules, or statistic, because I think the GW writer will do it, and will make a perfect job . I only Ask from them to think about it.

My unit type suggestions(nest to the re- thinked already unit types):

- Weapon teams (small groups)

o Grenadiers (dwarf with dynamites )
o Flamers (like the Skaven)
o Small Drilling machine - the dwarf operator hand a small/medium drilling machine
o Circular saw...ohh need me... (maybe it will cause fear against elf  )

- Calvry:
o Bear, mole cavalry – jeah I know the dwarf can’t ride on some world, but I can’t read in the Warhammer fantasy they can’t do it... think about it...

- Chariots:

o Steam bulldozers – like the blood bowl unit(deathroller) – the concept of art is already...
o Beer cart – (in the past it released in one White dwarf - Bugman cart) – i think it’s a perfect time to bring back and it maybe work same like the Warshrine (of cours another buff)

- Monsters:

o Mole chargers – Huge blind mole, ride by a dwarfs in a structure (like warsphinx) – It can carry a small steam engine – like a, small gun, or circular saw.

- War machines

o Katusha – A chariot (pulled by mole, bull or cow) with lot of racket
o The Drilling machine – It’s a huge drilling machine, what use to make a tunnel- this machine can came from below – like the Tomb king rules.. or something like that..

- Units

o Bears – A horde of bears (or something aggressive animal what live on a Mountains) in a unit what specialized to release on the battlefield against the enemy... (in the past the armies use bulls to hit the enemy formations... they hooked up a flaming torch – and the bulls frightened and run into the enemy line.. the hit was devastating ) Maybe the bears trained to charge the enemy... or just same like that..
o The walking terrors – The dwarf made a steam powered walker engine like a robot suit ‘Exoskeletal’, the dwarf operator sit in the machine, and this machine give for him a strength to use huge weapon and protections. – Design: The machine like the MATRIX movie Mecha, or in the Avatar Army machines... - concept – I think it can same like a ogres, Ushabty units, base, characteristic etc. + some unique speciality....

- Characters
o Dwarf saboteur skill – for master engineer – It has an ability to force to re roll a misfire dice one war machine (or something like that.) – maybe before the battle, he went to the enemy camp and sabotaged the enemy war machine.... 

- Unit Buff

o Lamps – A unit can buy a Flash powders lamp... Before the enemy Charge they flashed that lamp whish can blind the enemy and distract – maybe the enemy force to roll against the charge dice, or something like that
o Grenades – like the Miners bomb.
o A lot of Beer...... – Buff a unit for the first round of combat...
o Smoke bomb – In the move phase the dwarf throws it before the unit – this create a smoke screen before the unit – hard cover? against the shoot.- and that turn can’t move..etc,
o Hatred – I hope the great book of grudges will came back, because, this is the only stubborn species to hate everyone(because in the past)... and see the rules they can’t hate just only one... lol

I have a lot of ideas more but I think it’s enough for now.

Thank you for read this.
Chears,

Korintex

[Balerion]

That is very insightful Petey. Through the 10 years of playing Warhammer, I've never seen a break down of points like that.

Also, I have never seen the Big Red 3rd edition book either as I started at the very beginning of 6th edition.

Lastly, Your break down shows the stat line and equipment, however, it does not factor in the special rules at all. The killing blow, unbreakable (which is huge), and cause fear.... Why do they get these assets as free ??? That's what gets me.. To me the VC are the no brainer army. All I mean by that is the VC army is the 'autopilot' army.. The point and click style. You never test, you never run, and you have the benefits of causing fear/terror and making other (weaker) armies quake in their boots. It's what I call the fail proof or fail safe army. It's the sure bet if you will. This is precisely why VC is not one of the 7 armies that I own. I don't find it challenging to play. Now, don't get me wrong - I'm not digging on the VC players for playing VC. It is my preconceived notion that they are the most boring army ever. Some players say that about Dwarf players which I find to be ironic. It is true that most Dwarf players have some sort of gunline, however, that is 1/2 of their game with the other half being combat. These points, I have illustrated and pointed out numerous times.

So, it seems to me.

VC are far from the autopilot/point-and-click sort of army, and I don't know if I've ever seen someone level those accusations against them before. It's especially odd coimng from a Dwarf player in a Dwarfs thread, because Dwarfs are easily one of the most point-and-click armies in the game right now (based on the meta that 8th edition has fostered).

Vamps don't have many choices in their list that can stand alone. The entire army depends on a web of support, for raising, marching, buff-based spellcasting, and other assorted are effect bonuses. Every component of the army has to be in the right place to benefit from these effects, because each would get trounced in a 1 on 1, unit-to-unit engagement. Unbreakable, while an asset, comes with the inherent (and serious) drawback of instability. Fear rarely works in 8th edition, so it almost sounds like you're assessing the army based on the last edition of the game.

Meanwhile, Dwarf armies just plonk down a couple of hordes of great weapon Warriors and a handful of war-machines, and go to it. Your combat blocks don't have the maneuverability to pick their battles, so you just creep forward and take on whoever comes at you (but it doesn't really matter because you're simultaneously resilient enough and killy enough to make a decent job against most core or elites, and your universally high Ld will bail you out consistently in the combats you aren't winning). Your war-machines are all fine-tuned to take on specific types of targets, so you aren't required to make any demanding target priority decisions ("my cannon shoots your monster, my stonethrower shoots your horde, and my organ gun shoots your elite infantry") and can benefit from very forgiving/powerful runic combinations. BS shooters stand still and BS shoot. All your stuff is expensive, so you don't really get a whole bunch of units that need to interact and move in tight coordination. How does any of that excite you?

Granted, viable Dwarf builds are pigeonholed by the demands on 8th edition (as VC builds were while they still used the 7th edition book), so your boring army isn't completely your fault. And that's why a thread like this gets so much action.