Dwarf Army Book - Suggestions for 8th edition

[The bearded one]

2nd Edit: Quick question on a very weak tangent, What colors do you use to paint blonde beards on dwarves ? Need the base color, primary color, then the highlight, (lastly a wash for those who use them). Any quick help would be appreciated.

I used this tutorial to get a recipe for blonde hair; http://www.librarium-online.com/foru...onde-hair.html

I made it more golden though (more golden yellow, or khaki or somesuch) to get results such as this:



I believe it was something like this
calthan brown
snakebite leather
snakebite leather + golden yellow
snakebite leather + golden yellow + kommando khaki
snakebite leather + golden yellow + kommando khaki + skull white

something like that

[knightime98]

Found this on bugmans
http://www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/...rds-need-help/

Going to give it a try as I already started a single crewman model with it. Experimenting a little.
Posted from LordRavenhelm

Blond beards:
Calthan brown, highlight with snakebite leather, highlight with either bubonic brown or desert yellow, then highlight with bleached bone.

@ BeardedOne, I'll look at the link and colors from that site as well. I'll see which one I like better. Thanks for the link

On topic, as for the Miners, do you think that GW will still have them pop on any table edge? I know that GW is doing away with all magical movement which means that the Anvil movement is going to go away (unless, they incorporate it to add to the actual movement phase itself). When using an 8 foot table, the miners become useless really quick. It'd be interesting to see how GW works these guys in... I don't see them just popping onto the board and charging the same turn. I never did like that at all. From the inception of the Scorpion of the TK's it was a horrible idea. That thing had a bubble of 28 inches to charge when it popped on. 7 base move, 14 for charge but it is 14 inches for a charge in any direction so 14x2 = 28 inches. That's just really idiotic as no player can really prepare for it. Oh, btw, I have a unit of 30 miners rear charging that unit NOW out of nowhere. That's just wrong. Skaven have the Gutter runner's that can do that with a 24 inch bubble. Kills warmachines just about instantly when they pop on. Just wrong.

Anyhow, what do you think about it? I really want to see if they can have another idea to be useful really.

[Liber]

4. Monstrous...: We all know that golems/steam battle-bots are coming; the modelling opportunity is too much for GW to ignore. Please make them M5 at least, to give us something with a medium-range charge move.

Your overall point about Dwarf immobility being due to much much more than the infamous M3 is spot on and well presented.

That said I personally don't care that much whether or not the mobility problem is fixed as I agree with what you stated that its more or less a problem Dwarfs are supposed to have.

The part I quoted is one area I agree completely: if (or when) we get that steam powered machine I really do hope that its not slow as hell. A faster machine (or one that could tunnel underground etc.) would make for more fun and interesting Dwarf strategy than something that just trundles along at the slow pace of the rest of the army.

Another point you made that I like was the entrenching war machines bit. I suppose it wouldn't be too much to ask to have the Master Engineers ability to entrench 1 machine expanded upon, or something similar to that effect.

[Balerion]

On topic, as for the Miners, do you think that GW will still have them pop on any table edge? I know that GW is doing away with all magical movement which means that the Anvil movement is going to go away (unless, they incorporate it to add to the actual movement phase itself).

That's not entirely accurate; they're eliminating out-of-sequence charging, but the brand new VC book still has a Vanhel's Danse Macabre that grants units an 8" move.

I think the Anvil and some spell from the Lore of Athel Loren are the only remaining holdovers that can still grant an actual charge outside of the movement phase.

Would you Dwarf purists be strictly opposed to, say, Rangers with M4? Or do you think stumpy-legged M3 is a physiological absolute? I think it could work, and there are comparables in books like the Skaven one (where Night Runners and Gutter Runners come from the exact same stock as other Skaven, but get extra movement due to training and equipment).

[Liber]

Would you Dwarf purists be strictly opposed to, say, Rangers with M4?

I would be opposed to it.


If anything were to become 'faster' about basic Dwarf troops I would have it be the Initiative value.

Its honestly embarrassing when your most elite units (read: every unit in our army) are attacking slower than your oponents damn horses...

Dwarfs are short, but they're not slack-jawed drooling ******


:/


edit: just felt i should clarify i am not advocating any initiative or movement changes really. just saying essentially if one had to change i'd rather have I3 elites than m4 rangers or something.

[Petey]

Umm, you do realize that all tha customization comes with a pricetag, right? There is a reason why Dwarf characters have access to 50% more points for gear than their comparables in other armies. And that's because to get the same affect a Dwarf usually has to pay 50% more to get it. Heck, some cobinations aren't even possible right now due the Rule of Jealousy.

Yeah, NO, totally incorrect. Dwarves get 50% more points to buy magic items with to make up for the fact that they don't get any mount options, it's been talked about by the designers at length actually. Both in White Dwarf, and at Games Day, when the book first came out.

Some runes may be overpriced but that s a seperate issue.

[Athlan na Dyr]

Something else I'd like to see: Runic Shooting Upgrades.

So for your Quarellers and Thunderers you can upgrade their shooting with one (and only one) of the following
>Rune of Propulsion [not a fan of the 'Rune of Penetrating''s name]: Increases the strength of the model's shooting attack by 1 for +2 points per model
>Incendiary Rune: Makes the model's shooting attack count as flaming for +1 points per model

Either rune makes the attack magical.

Furthermore, Flash Felix's post got me thinking about some cheap Dwarf-y redirectors/ war machine hunters. So I present the Gyro-Ranger


M WS BS S T W I A Ld
1 4. 4. 3 4 1 3 1 9

Points: 20~25 Unit Size: 2+
Equipment: Heavy Armour, Dwarf Handgun
Special rules: Flyer, Bomber, Impact hits (1), Dive, Fast Cavalry

Bomber: If a Gyro-Ranger unit moves over one or more enemy units in the movement phase, the unit may elect to drop bombs on one of these units. The unit suffers a number of automatic Strength 4, Flaming hits equal to the number of Gyro-Rangers left in the unit.
Dive: When a Gyro-Ranger charges, it first climbs before diving down to ram into the enemy. As such, if the Gyro-Ranger charges then both the crew's attack and the Impact hit's strength are increased by one (to 4) for the first round of combat

In effect, a nice little redirector and hunter unit. Fast Cav is just to reflect their mobility. For base size, I'd put them on a cavalry base.

[The bearded one]

Yeah, NO, totally incorrect. Dwarves get 50% more points to buy magic items with to make up for the fact that they don't get any mount options, it's been talked about by the designers at length actually. Both in White Dwarf, and at Games Day, when the book first came out.

Truly? I did not know that, and I suppose it is quite fair. Mounts are often the path to a good armoursave (heavy armour + shield + barded mount = 2+ after all) and tactical flexibility. Also a higher point allowance allows for a greater degree of variety and customisability than the standard allowance would.

[The Low King]

Yeah, NO, totally incorrect. Dwarves get 50% more points to buy magic items with to make up for the fact that they don't get any mount options, it's been talked about by the designers at length actually. Both in White Dwarf, and at Games Day, when the book first came out.

Some runes may be overpriced but that s a seperate issue.

Its not quite 50%. Its 25 more points on Lords, thanes, Dragon Slayers and runesmiths and then 50 more points for runelords. Daemon slayers and Master engineers both have the normal amount.

Also, i believe the main point he was making is that we pay for customisation. We do. Most of the runes cost more to do the same as BRB items. For example, a +2 attack runic weapon costs 50 points whilst in the BRB it costs 40. So are actually just overpriced (such as the fear rune) but we still pay more on general runes for their customisation ability.

[The bearded one]

Its not quite 50%. Its 25 more points on Lords, thanes, Dragon Slayers and runesmiths and then 50 more points for runelords. Daemon slayers and Master engineers both have the normal amount.

For thanes, dragonslayers, runesmiths and lords that's 25% more than a hero/lord generally gets. Usually it's 50 for heroes, 100 for lords. Dwarf lords are midway.

Also, i believe the main point he was making is that we pay for customisation. We do. Most of the runes cost more to do the same as BRB items. For example, a +2 attack runic weapon costs 50 points whilst in the BRB it costs 40. So are actually just overpriced (such as the fear rune) but we still pay more on general runes for their customisation ability.

That can be attributed to basically being from 2 editions ago.

[Da_White_Orc]

Look I don't know when you played Dwarves...

i play dwarfs semi-weekly. played them today actually.

Dwarf cannons shouldn't missfire.

i disagree with your logic too, it seems.

obviously we'll never agree on this if you genuinely believe your warmachines should be the only ones in the game that don't misfire.

if dwarf war machines shouldn't misfire, why does the brb require that you roll an artillery dice when you shoot them?

[Da_White_Orc]

ever tried going anywhere with movement 3?

everyone has when they've had itchy nuisance cast on them, knocked some elves down to movement and initiative 1 today

how about a 'Natural Sprinters' rule.

keep dwarfs at movement three, but make it so they can march up to 8" and charge 2D6+4" but every model in a unit of 3 ranks of more has to take a dangerous terrain test if they use the extra 2 inch movement when marching or charging (and of course you have to declare the sprint before you roll your charge range). the dangerous terrain test represents them tripping over and getting trampled.

now dwarfs can get to combat quicker, but they run the risk of losing some dudes in the stampede. smaller units of elites or missile troops can avoid the dangerous terrain test by deploying 2 deep.

Something else I'd like to see: Runic Shooting Upgrades.

So for your Quarellers and Thunderers you can upgrade their shooting with one (and only one) of the following
>Rune of Propulsion [not a fan of the 'Rune of Penetrating''s name]: Increases the strength of the model's shooting attack by 1 for +2 points per model
>Incendiary Rune: Makes the model's shooting attack count as flaming for +1 points per model

Either rune makes the attack magical.

lol I hope you were a good boy all year if you expect warhammer santa to bring you those

i literally gafawed at the 'and only one'. yeah, wouldn't want to make magic strength 5 crossbows and magic flaming bullets over-powered now...

no matter that you've just nerfed trolls, hydras, pit abominations, anything with toughness 3, and the entire vampire counts book in one fell swoop

[The bearded one]

if dwarf war machines shouldn't misfire, why does the brb require that you roll an artillery dice when you shoot them?

Because the BRB rules are meant to govern how regular cannons work, which includes an artillery dice to determine the distances. What is suggested is an army-specific rule, similar to how the irnblaster rolls 2 artillery dixe for the bounce, for example, that prevents dwarf cannons from misfiring.

That'd be a bit too much for me, though minor tweaks to represent the more skilled nature of dwarven artillery engineers and the more solid craftsmanship of the machines would be nice, like for example having dwarf blackpowder artillery (like cannons) only explode on a result of 1 on the misfire chart, instead of 1 and 2.

[Athlan na Dyr]

If the points they paid for it reflected the cost then its hardly OP. Hence why I costed the upgrade per model rather than per unit (as a certain lucky shrunken head is)

If you feel its too cheap or too commonly available then just say so rather than being all snarky about it. The intent of the above was to make the low volume of shots per point a bit more effective for the core shooters, as well as keep complaints down if I suggested a similar thing (of only one runic upgrade) for warmachines (so no flaming and S5 grudgethrowers, no flaming and rerolling misfire cannons, etc. which was what you seem to be so against).

What sort of points range would you deem more appropriate for those upgrades? And would you see them as more reasonable if only 1 unit of thunderers/ quarrelers could be upgraded with each of the runes (though that would open up a whole set of problems with huge units of missile troops... hmm).

Thoughts?

[Da_White_Orc]

neither of you liked the natural sprinters rule?

i thought it was pretty cool

If the points they paid for it reflected the cost then its hardly OP. Hence why I costed the upgrade per model rather than per unit (as a certain lucky shrunken head ishttp://www.warseer.com/forums/warsee...shiftyeyes.gif)

If you feel its too cheap or too commonly available then just say so rather than being all snarky about it. The intent of the above was to make the low volume of shots per point a bit more effective for the core shooters, as well as keep complaints down if I suggested a similar thing (of only one runic upgrade) for warmachines (so no flaming and S5 grudgethrowers, no flaming and rerolling misfire cannons, etc. which was what you seem to be so against).

What sort of points range would you deem more appropriate for those upgrades? And would you see them as more reasonable if only 1 unit of thunderers/ quarrelers could be upgraded with each of the runes (though that would open up a whole set of problems with huge units of missile troops... hmm).

Thoughts?

i wasn't trying to be snarky, that's just the way i talk sorry if you took offence

i've never heard a dwarf player complain that his handgunners were under-powered to be honest. and there isn't even a comman magic sword that gives flaming attacks. there's a banner that costs ten points readily available. you just have to chuck your bsb in a shooting unit like everyone else since missile troops typically can't take a magic banner.

i like the way 8th edition makes the player make hard decisions. sure i can take the spider banner on a big unit of archers and give them poison attacks, then buff it with magic to 5+ poison attacks. but now i have to take a goblin bsb naked which means he's very easy to kill. so it's a trade off. black orc with a ward save and no magic banner for a resilient combat bsb or try to go with the goblin shooting death star and just hope i don't fail my animosity tests

the randomness and the constant chess match, having to make hard decisions is what makes the game fun. just having every unit be able to do everything ruins it.

and your fast cavalry flying rangers? there's a reason dwarfs don't have fast cavalry. it's because you have strengths in combat, shooting and magic defence as it is, you don't need to be able to wipe your opponents war machines on turn 2 like elves can

strength 5 crossbows makes your own bolt thrower redundant as well

edit: see a response to my sprinters rule. oh ok, nvm. i guess this is the thread where you guys just wishlist and pile on anyone who doesn't agree

i'll see my way out

but to quickly counter point, the sprinters rule would be used in combat heavy dwarf armies with multiple combat blocks. you would have to SACRIFICE something else to make good use of the rule because you'd need MORE combat guys. so perhaps you don't get 5 war machines this game?

see, it's a give and take. your dwarfs will be able to use that sprint a couple of times a game (especially in the later turns, once there numbers are reduced by casualties) but it will cost you because you will need to take MORE dwarfs to make up for the casualties you will take from them tripping over their stubby little legs

this is how other armies special rules work. they CAN help you a lot but once in a while, they bite you in the ass. unlike the rules you guys are throwing around that have absolutely no weaknesses in them at all

peace

[The bearded one]

how about a 'Natural Sprinters' rule.

keep dwarfs at movement three, but make it so they can march up to 8" and charge 2D6+4" but every model in a unit of 3 ranks of more has to take a dangerous terrain test if they use the extra 2 inch movement when marching or charging (and of course you have to declare the sprint before you roll your charge range). the dangerous terrain test represents them tripping over and getting trampled.

now dwarfs can get to combat quicker, but they run the risk of losing some dudes in the stampede. smaller units of elites or missile troops can avoid the dangerous terrain test by deploying 2 deep.

That's.. well, I'll just come out and say it; that sounds like a terrible idea. Sacrificing 1/6th of a unit in an army of models costing 10-12'ish points in order to gain movement parity with the slowest third (excl. dwarfs) of the armies does not sound like a sound rule. Particularly considering the fact that dwarfs in the current environment work best with great weapons, as their damage output without is quite abysmal with handweapons, and that dwarfs thus need large units to keep up the attrition rate before they get to strike back. Therefore any unitwith any serious intent of seeing combat will be larger than 2 ranks.

no matter that you've just nerfed trolls, hydras, pit abominations, anything with toughness 3, and the entire vampire counts book in one fell swoop

It's not like hydra's and HPAs don't need a big-ass nerfing. Traditional ballistic skill shooting (archers, handgunners, crossbowmen etc.) is pretty poor these days, especially compared to warmachines, and for a 16 point thunderer you better expect some good stuff.

[Da_White_Orc]

That's.. well, I'll just come out and say it; that sounds like a terrible idea. Sacrificing 1/6th of a unit in an army of models costing 10-12'ish points in order to gain movement parity with the slowest third (excl. dwarfs) of the armies does not sound like a sound rule. Particularly considering the fact that dwarfs in the current environment work best with great weapons, as their damage output without is quite abysmal with handweapons, and that dwarfs thus need large units to keep up the attrition rate before they get to strike back. Therefore any unitwith any serious intent of seeing combat will be larger than 2 ranks.



It's not like hydra's and HPAs don't need a big-ass nerfing. Traditional ballistic skill shooting (archers, handgunners, crossbowmen etc.) is pretty poor these days, especially compared to warmachines, and for a 16 point thunderer you better expect some good stuff.

before i log off, there's a pretty effective counter to both those monsters and i think you guys have runes that accomplish both these effects:

flaming banner, plus unit with great weapons, plus hero with potion of speed = devastated hydars and hpas. you don't need to shoot them, you just need to spend the 15 points on those two items combined and commit to a combat with a monster that will do some wounds on you and possibly thundestomp you if you can't kill it first

my black orcs relish the oppurtunity and have eaten both monsters in one turn

you don't even need the banner, just take a dragon slayer with flaming and strikes first or an initiative boost and support him with a unit with great weapons. or you know, slayers

[The bearded one]

edit: see a response to my sprinters rule. oh ok, nvm. i guess this is the thread where you guys just wishlist and pile on anyone who doesn't agree

i'll see my way out

but to quickly counter point, the sprinters rule would be used in combat heavy dwarf armies with multiple combat blocks. you would have to SACRIFICE something else to make good use of the rule because you'd need MORE combat guys. so perhaps you don't get 5 war machines this game?

see, it's a give and take. your dwarfs will be able to use that sprint a couple of times a game (especially in the later turns, once there numbers are reduced by casualties) but it will cost you because you will need to take MORE dwarfs to make up for the casualties you will take from them tripping over their stubby little legs

this is how other armies special rules work. they CAN help you a lot but once in a while, they bite you in the ass. unlike the rules you guys are throwing around that have absolutely no weaknesses in them at all

peace

I hardly ever see 5 warmachines. One of the most popular builds has 4 of them and I myself used 3 for ages (one of which was a bolt thrower). But when an army's choices are limited to infantry and warmachines, how odd is it to see several warmachines? The 5 different types of warmachines all work well against specific things (GT vs blocks, bolt throwers and cannons vs large critters, organ gun vs skirmishers and knights, the flame cannon... doesn't, though I guess it can be decent against monstrous units, if it manages to hit anything of course) and with no alternatives available in different unittypes or magic, the warmachines are the only remaining option.

Judging from your username and your examples mentioning orcs & goblins, I assume you play them. Know that the animosity rule might be the greatest screw-you-over armywide rule in all 14 armies. Dark elves aren't bitten in the ass by their hatred rule, high elves don't have to facepalm because their ASF went wrong, ogres don't sigh heavily that they wounded themselves again with their bullcharge, vampire counts are definately not miffed another caster can take over to prevent crumbling when the general is killed. Basically.. animosity is a bit of a fluke. There are few armywide special rules that are negative to the army, apart from the likes of animosity and the dwarven -1 to flee and pursue.

There is fairly little left to take. The dwarf army has consistently been losing stuff and options over several incarnations. Gyrocopters used to be able to drop bombs and would crash when killed. It'd be nice to see stuff like that return. The army is just too bland right now, that a 'give and take' approach is barely possible for many units. For ironbreakers for example many have called for tunnelfighting rules, boosting their defensive properties, adding pavise shields or pikes, etc. etc. What in return should be taken? Really all an ironbreaker is, is the dwarf elite statprofile + gromril armour. A hammerer is the dwarf elite statprofile + great weapon + stubborn. Similarly with 4 out of 5 warmachines, they all follow exactly the BRB rules without extras, and with the 5th warmachine (the organ gun) we're damn sure those auto-hits will be gone. In short, there isn't much left to take or trade from a pretty bland army. I don't think things in the dwarf army should be so much improved, as much as they should be given new options and be made more distinct from eachother. As an example of the pressing need for differentiation between all the infantry units, it is possible to capture all 8 types in 2 armybookprofiles with some options.

back to the sprinters; In order to seriously consider it as a rule, it would need considerable work. The reward is too small, the price too high. Your average dwarf warrior horde will have to pay 70 points for +1 inch charge! By contrast several other armies have banners granting +D6" on the charge. The increase in movement would either have to be a lot higher (like +D6", or just flat out +3), or the price has to be lower. Another option is that instead of allowing them to sprint always, to make it a one-use-only ability for each unit, granting them +D3" on their move, march or charge.

Having talked about the slayerarmy on bugmans brewery today and discussing movement, I think slayers could use some attention here (* cough, bring back doomseekers and malakaisson's goblinhewer * ).The slayerarmy had a 'look snorri, trolls!' special rule, letting all slayers surge forward 2D6" before the first turn (and letting them roll 2D6, picking the highest, to determine if they got first turn). The slayers in the dwarf army could use something like that, granting them a 6" vanguard movement for example, or extra chargemovement if they were to charge monstrous infantry/cavalry/beasts or monsters. This make them more useful to use against what they're supposed to be fighting fluffwise, instead of being used as a tarpit. The slayerarmy also had a reverse VP mechanic where the dwarf player got 10 vp's for every slayer killed by an enemy with Str5 or T5 (before any modifiers). This one might too be a fun rule to bring back from the SoC slayerarmy, making dwarf players actually want to throw their slayers at enemy monsters and letting them die as is their goal fluffwise.

my black orcs relish the oppurtunity and have eaten both monsters in one turn

Howmany black orcs got killed by that HPA before they did?

When I threw my own HPA into a saurus unit, he killed 15 or so in one turn.

However I was not saying that we needed any tools to kill hydra's and HPAs, just that it's not really a crime against balance to have something that adversily affects them. Do note dwarfs don't have any acces to the common items, but we do currently still have runes that can easily beat down either. Rune of might ftw.

[Athlan na Dyr]

i've never heard a dwarf player complain that his handgunners were under-powered to be honest. and there isn't even a comman magic sword that gives flaming attacks. there's a banner that costs ten points readily available. you just have to chuck your bsb in a shooting unit like everyone else since missile troops typically can't take a magic banner.

i like the way 8th edition makes the player make hard decisions. sure i can take the spider banner on a big unit of archers and give them poison attacks, then buff it with magic to 5+ poison attacks. but now i have to take a goblin bsb naked which means he's very easy to kill. so it's a trade off. black orc with a ward save and no magic banner for a resilient combat bsb or try to go with the goblin shooting death star and just hope i don't fail my animosity tests

the randomness and the constant chess match, having to make hard decisions is what makes the game fun. just having every unit be able to do everything ruins it.

True... (though many hold that BS shooting is rather poor... guess who you talk to I suppose)
The point of the flaming upgrade was to have a method of dealing with regen monsters/ monstrous infantry that wasn't a flaming cannon or a dwarf lord weilding "Snorri Snorrison's axe of monstrous pwnage". Meaning that there is other options to dealing with these nastys for those who don't like cannons or easily avoidable M3 characters. Puts in a bit of variety rather than "5 warmachines, a couple of hordes of GW infantry and so on".

As for the comparison with the Banner of Eternal Flame, as soon as the unit goes above 10, the runic upgrade starts to cost more, as a sort of compensation for not having to take a banner (though dwarves couldn't at the moment anyway).

and your fast cavalry flying rangers? there's a reason dwarfs don't have fast cavalry. it's because you have strengths in combat, shooting and magic defence as it is, you don't need to be able to wipe your opponents war machines on turn 2 like elves can

strength 5 crossbows makes your own bolt thrower redundant as well

I should probably have made it clear that they were mounted on a gyro-esque contraption and came from the rare slot. Considering the expected expansion of flying dwarfish craft (airship), I considered a downsize of the current Gyro to partially fill a large, gaping hole in the dwarf list as well as offer some more cannon alternatives to regenerating foes.
Yet again, it offers alternatives to the current 'lots of shooting + GW hordes' by allowing some manner of control in the movement phase, facilitating a more combat heavy dwarf list, as your own natural sprinters rule does (though I think it's a little harsh).
Bear in mind that I'd put the Anvil, the Airship and a steam powered Tunnel Fighting device also in Rare so they would have a fair bit of competition and I did try to price them somewhat conservatively.

Yeah.. I'll concede on the S5 crossbows. Probably not so good an idea or 3ppm at least...

edit: see a response to my sprinters rule. oh ok, nvm. i guess this is the thread where you guys just wishlist and pile on anyone who doesn't agree

i'll see my way out

but to quickly counter point, the sprinters rule would be used in combat heavy dwarf armies with multiple combat blocks. you would have to SACRIFICE something else to make good use of the rule because you'd need MORE combat guys. so perhaps you don't get 5 war machines this game?

see, it's a give and take. your dwarfs will be able to use that sprint a couple of times a game (especially in the later turns, once there numbers are reduced by casualties) but it will cost you because you will need to take MORE dwarfs to make up for the casualties you will take from them tripping over their stubby little legs

this is how other armies special rules work. they CAN help you a lot but once in a while, they bite you in the ass. unlike the rules you guys are throwing around that have absolutely no weaknesses in them at all

peace

Yet again, it seems a bit harsh... The benefit is marginal and the loss is 1/6th of a unit every time you charge... unless you're deployed ridiculously thin.
As for other armies special rules, lets see...
O&G's :Animosity = bad, Choppa = good
WoC : Must challenge = bad, Eye of the Gods = meh, Reroll panic = good
Brets :Lance formation + conditional 6++ = good
Lizardmen: Cold blooded = good
Dark Elves: Eternal Hatred = good
High Elves: SoA = Good
Wood Elves: move and shoot with no penalties = Good
Empire: Detachment System = not in tune with current ruleset. I'll wait till next month
Beastmen: Conditional hatred/ frenzy = Good
Ogres: Impact hits that increase in S = good
Skaven: conditional boost to ld = good
Demons: Ward save and Unbreakable + special instability = good
VC: Unbreakable + instability = eh... depends on unit and comparison to steadfast
TK: Unbreakable + instability = see above. Arrows of Asaph = good

See the general trend? Army wide special rules are generally a benefit and add something characterful to the army. Making them die by running is neither particularly characterful or something people would use. Call it wishlisting if you will (and to an extent, you are probably right) but come on, there is no way thats balanced.

[Warhammer Madman]

I would simply like the points to be re-shuffled...

take a hammerer to a longbeard.

Hammerer has a great weapon and stubborn over a basic longbeard (3pts of equipment).

so by that logic a longbeard should be 9pts without any equipment.

warriors would be 7pts.

and an Ironbreaker as it is now would be 11pts