Which army book is most in need of an update?

[Casablanca Cat]

I'm going to say Dwarfs just because they have such a boring army selection... I still love 'em though.

[White_13oy]

I want Dwarfs, I really want to play them, But as Casablanca cat said, they're just really boring to play as and against. No one seems too fight them because of Dispell and same-y play style no matter what. I really hope they allow Slayer armies again in the new book that way I can use my 60+ Slayers and 6 Doomseekers again.

But... I voted WE as there style, while unique, got crapped on with the nerf to skirmishers. The few times i've seen them played, even though they have a harder time do seem enjoyable and fresh.

So overall

Dwarfs: Boring as hell and not fun for my opponents, but still strong.
WE: Enjoyable from both side (IMO), but hurt by new edition.

[Memnos]

I should have said "excepted chaos". Chaos is always better at everything anyway. If they ever get regular shooting, you can be sure they're going to be murderous. Now the fact is, almost everybody has more powerful cavalry than brets these days, that's a point I don't think you will argue?

Definitely more powerful. I can't disagree with that: Blood Knights, for instance, or Mournfang cavalry. I'd be uneasy dropping something more powerful than those two things on to the Bretonnians, though - What I'd like to see is just more options for Heroic Killing Blow. That would more than even the odds in most cases, I suspect. Grail Knights are still near to the top for cavalry, but it's no longer Warriors of Chaos Knights, Grail Knights.

Bretonnian knights usually had special rules rather than stat upgrades to make them powerful: The Lance formation allows deep ranks with huge numbers of attacks, making Bretonnians still far more useful than sheer numbers suggest as they're one of the few Knights that can overcome steadfast in a frontal charge. Reduced frontage also lets more units in.

Were I to tweak them, I wouldn't change much. If they had huge increases in stats combined with the Lance Formation, there would be very little that could stand against them and we'd just be back to the rather stupid 7th ed 'Move forward. Charge. Win.' days.

So I'd probably keep them just as they are but give Grail Knights Heroic Killing Blow. Potentially 20 attacks that can killing blow anything would make them anti-Monster, anti Monstrous Infantry and a terrifying field. That way, you'd still be able to field large armies of Knights with relatively cheap knights and elite armies of Grail Knights with their retainers.

Also, I'd take the Standard that removes Steadfast from them.

[Lance Tankmen]

i voted WE because shooting to me is a decent phase at best, they only have that going for them...

as to the guys idea above me on brets i dislike grail knights to begin with, i dont think there should be 12-15 on the field they are fluff wise suppose to be a 1 man army so only my characters are grail knights. honestly add either hippogrph knights, or single grail knights which are demi hero status for example they get 25 pts to spend.. but that was off topic

[Oberst]

Clearly wood elves, they are too expensives. All of those armies need to be updated. Bretonnian can't strike first all the time during charge, they can't charge from farer than most of the armies (just the Hight elves could charge in 16'' or 18'' before), another problem is the hudge number of infantry troops, so great number of ranks (but I often take a hudge number of knight) but every cavalery have the same problem ( that's why I take 15 cold one), the peasans have a goblin profile but cost the double...

[Urgat]

Definitely more powerful. I can't disagree with that: Blood Knights, for instance, or Mournfang cavalry. I'd be uneasy dropping something more powerful than those two things on to the Bretonnians, though - What I'd like to see is just more options for Heroic Killing Blow. That would more than even the odds in most cases, I suspect. Grail Knights are still near to the top for cavalry, but it's no longer Warriors of Chaos Knights, Grail Knights.

Bretonnian knights usually had special rules rather than stat upgrades to make them powerful: The Lance formation allows deep ranks with huge numbers of attacks, making Bretonnians still far more useful than sheer numbers suggest as they're one of the few Knights that can overcome steadfast in a frontal charge. Reduced frontage also lets more units in.

Were I to tweak them, I wouldn't change much. If they had huge increases in stats combined with the Lance Formation, there would be very little that could stand against them and we'd just be back to the rather stupid 7th ed 'Move forward. Charge. Win.' days.

So I'd probably keep them just as they are but give Grail Knights Heroic Killing Blow. Potentially 20 attacks that can killing blow anything would make them anti-Monster, anti Monstrous Infantry and a terrifying field. That way, you'd still be able to field large armies of Knights with relatively cheap knights and elite armies of Grail Knights with their retainers.

Also, I'd take the Standard that removes Steadfast from them.

I'd love to discuss that and got myself an enormous wishlist for Brets, but that's OT so I'll just say that I mostly agree with you after all

Also, after thinking a lot, I'm going to toss my vote for dwarves. The meta around here doesn't hurt wood elves much, but the dwarf list is the dwarf list. I love that army, I want it to be as cool gameplay-wise as it is fluff-wise.

If you want proof that hit and run tactics can work on an open plain, look at Ghenghis Khan.

I missed that one. There is nothing comparable between Gengis Khan armies and the Wood elves, and I think you should be the one looking at his history. Wood elves don't have thousands of horse archers. They have one core unit. More than half the mongol army was that, horse archers. Sure thing, horse archers work fine in the open.

[ewar]

The difference being, of course, that you don't have to spend points on exclusively anti-artillery items, you just put those points into other units/characters, wheras dwarf anti magic is entirely one way. if you spend your points on anti magic and the enemy brings no wizards, you are majorly down. If you spend none, you are very vulnerable to magic. Dwarf anti-magic costs almost as much as other races offensive magic but has no offensive capability.

In terms of plastic models,I really think that dwarfs suffer. There are some monopose models with variable plug-and-play weapon options. You can use the same kit to represent three or four different units, but why would you want to? None look distinctive from each other. The miners are the saving grace. All of the character from the old range of citadel metals has gone completely, which is a shame and why I have voted Dwarves. They need a complete overhaul, to add character, options and a sensible and coherent theme. It's fine to sacrifice a phase, but Dwarves strike out in so many it just gets boring.

Not meaning to derail the thread too much, but you're forgetting that dwarfs get decent magic defence for free. I find dwarf players feel hard done by if a single spell gets through in a phase. Plenty of armies run without a single dispel scroll, so as far as I'm concerned there is no justification for dwarfs to bring two or more, without even counting annoying items like RoBalance.

Anyway, all that stuff aside, that army needs a serious gameplay overhaul. Dwarfs were my first army and I still have a few thousand points worth, but nothing has made me want to put them on the table in 8th. Shame as they're a very characterful army.

[Urgat]

Anyway, all that stuff aside, that army needs a serious gameplay overhaul. Dwarfs were my first army and I still have a few thousand points worth, but nothing has made me want to put them on the table in 8th. Shame as they're a very characterful army.

I'd have thought 8th would be an exciting time for dwarfs, now that they can actually bring the fight to the enemy, realistically expecting to pull charges and stuff?

[Rosstifer]

You'd think so, but every Dwarf Player I've played in 8th has just stuck it all in a corner still. Made worse, because now to get to the brutal Warmachines you have to get through GW wielding Hordes.

[Morkash]

You'd think so, but every Dwarf Player I've played in 8th has just stuck it all in a corner still. Made worse, because now to get to the brutal Warmachines you have to get through GW wielding Hordes.

There is the possibility of the "super-fast" (for Dwarfs) meele army with the one BSB rune and the anvil, but in the end it is a one trick pony unfortunately... and then it's back to Great Weapons and Warmachines.

[Skopey]

Really? i love getting stuck in asap with strollzas rune, Rangers, Anvil, Gyrocopter etc. I'l even move my lord on oath stone as far forward as possible on turn 1 with a unit of Longbeards with Great weapons and taunt my opponents biggest/best unit so i can start getting my flank charges in with the support units turn 2 onwards. My main opponent being a WoC player with a unit of 36 Dual wielding warriors or 15 khorne knights. it tends to get very messy but damn its always a fun exciting fight. I usually only filed an organ gun and/or a stone thrower. Yeah the results are pretty mixed but he hates my longbeards with a passion that he will go out of his way now to wipe em out as soon as he can get charges off on them XD

[Snake1311]

Not meaning to derail the thread too much, but you're forgetting that dwarfs get decent magic defence for free. I find dwarf players feel hard done by if a single spell gets through in a phase. Plenty of armies run without a single dispel scroll, so as far as I'm concerned there is no justification for dwarfs to bring two or more, without even counting annoying items like RoBalance.

+2 to dispell isn't "decent magic defence", its mere peanuts considering everyone will be at least on +2 to cast, with 90% being on +4.
Outside of the rune of balance, the famed "omg dwarf DD spam" is priced at 70 points per extra die.

Scroll spam is the main anti-magic saving grace, but they come at the same cost as they do for other armies, and are carried by 70-point-for-a-DD-and-not-much-else runesmiths/runelords.

And no one plays competitively without a scroll, unless:
a) its restricted to be combined with something better in the army (e.g. OK comp now often has scroll OR hellheart)
b) they've found some epic wombo combo that leaves no free arcane slots (...can't even think of an example, but its theoretically plausible).

I'd have thought 8th would be an exciting time for dwarfs, now that they can actually bring the fight to the enemy, realistically expecting to pull charges and stuff?

It will be, when a new books comes out. At the moment, that capability is only used for counter-charges (or preemptive charges), since about half the armies will beat the snot out of you in CC point for point (thats before magic kicks in), others are still waaaay more manouverable than you and won't let you charge them even with 15" max charge potential, and when you happen to win combat for whatever reason you can't actually chase things down.

In the new book, some, if not all, of the following things will happen:
- Anvil won't be a trash choice (although I doubt it will allow charges - most likely extra movement ala VC/TK)
- Gyrocopters won't be trash (worth taking - more movement - more swiftstrider - can actually wipe units after winning combat)
- Any new units will likely be either more mobile, or combat buffers.

So yeah, new book will likely put more emphasis on engaging.

[Lorcryst]

After twenty-four games against Dwarves, loosing everytime, and facing varied builds and deployments, I totally disagree that Dwarves are boring and one-dimentional ...

Of course, my Dwarf-playing friend DOESN'T go on forums to find the IntarTubes Wizdomz about his armies, he does fluffy lists with the models he has, and he is a better tactician than me ... still, 24-0 against a mostly Khornate WoC army is impressive, don't you think ?

[Snake1311]

Well, either he is really good, or you are really bad :P I doubt luck discrepancies can be that consistent over 24 games, so its gotta be that.

Fluffy WoC against Fluffy Dwarves is roughly a 50-50 matchup in my experience (regular opponents/guys I learned the game with are WoC and Brets)

[Mr. Ultra]

honestly as long as they are the next three books I don't really mind.

They are not, that's the problem. The next books will be Warriors of Chaos and probably High Elves. Yes, High Elves. This will be the 5th incarnation of their book...

[tmarichards]

I don't consider it a problem that Warriors are next- the multiple 3++ wards encourages a really abusive style of play that is bad for the game, and I don't think anyone will be sad to see that blasted Knight Bus or Disco Stu et al. go the way of the dodo. I am firmly of the mind that it is better for the game that after Warriors GW fixes Daemons, Dark Elves, Skaven and Lizardmen (and, ideally, an admission that they dropped the ball with Ogres and some sort of extensive FAQ) before worrying about books that are just old.

[Wesser]

Definitely more powerful. I can't disagree with that: Blood Knights, for instance, or Mournfang cavalry. I'd be uneasy dropping something more powerful than those two things on to the Bretonnians, though - What I'd like to see is just more options for Heroic Killing Blow. That would more than even the odds in most cases, I suspect. Grail Knights are still near to the top for cavalry, but it's no longer Warriors of Chaos Knights, Grail Knights.

Bretonnian knights usually had special rules rather than stat upgrades to make them powerful: The Lance formation allows deep ranks with huge numbers of attacks, making Bretonnians still far more useful than sheer numbers suggest as they're one of the few Knights that can overcome steadfast in a frontal charge. Reduced frontage also lets more units in.

Were I to tweak them, I wouldn't change much. If they had huge increases in stats combined with the Lance Formation, there would be very little that could stand against them and we'd just be back to the rather stupid 7th ed 'Move forward. Charge. Win.' days.

So I'd probably keep them just as they are but give Grail Knights Heroic Killing Blow. Potentially 20 attacks that can killing blow anything would make them anti-Monster, anti Monstrous Infantry and a terrifying field. That way, you'd still be able to field large armies of Knights with relatively cheap knights and elite armies of Grail Knights with their retainers.

Also, I'd take the Standard that removes Steadfast from them.

Myeah it's because I find this to be a misconception that I voted Brets. I don't think anyone wants Brets to have the most powerful chaps, but their cavalry still have to the best in warhammer or what's the point?

In terms of points and abilities Core bret knights stand fairly even with Empire knights, but the sheer problem with the Bret book is that all the versatility lies with the Empire knight while it should be with the Knights Errant/KotR.

The Empire knights have boosting options from hatred, ItP/Hold ground and their hurricanum in addition to blessings and a wider array of spell lores.

Bret knights are hampered by restrictions on unit sizes which also means that Lance Formation's ability to negate steadfast for all practical purposes is a myth. A 15 man lance is horrifically vulnerable and it is rare indeed that it actually negate steadfast since the actual number of extra attacks Brets can dish out is actually fewer than people believe.


Bretonnia is building that needs to be torn down and rebuild from scratch. Wood elves and dwarves as they are now can be salvaged with rule/price tweaks and a couple new units (like Stag Knights for woodies). Brets cant rly be patched in my opinion



PS. The Banner of the Lady dont negate steadfast (although it should), so its actually quite overpriced ...well except against Skaven (no SiN for you hah)

[Why]

I missed that one. There is nothing comparable between Gengis Khan armies and the Wood elves, and I think you should be the one looking at his history. Wood elves don't have thousands of horse archers. They have one core unit. More than half the mongol army was that, horse archers. Sure thing, horse archers work fine in the open.

So you are admitting that a different type of warfare can work against ranked armies out in the open.

Hit and run tactics are hit and run tactics I fail to see how nothing is comparable between the two armies. Malorian has proved that one of the meanest wood elf list consist of a huge amount of glade and warhawk riders, more than half an army of them.

[tmarichards]

A couple of non-tournament games against very, very questionable opponents is a long way from proven.

[Lorcryst]

Well, either he is really good, or you are really bad :P I doubt luck discrepancies can be that consistent over 24 games, so its gotta be that.

A bit of both actually

He really is better than me, on all levels, and I still make horrendous blunders in deployment, forget my rules, and the like ...