Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I played 3 quick turns of WH with my son yesterday. The game was 800pts, goblins vs dwarfs. There were way way more goblins than dwarfs on the field for those points.

The first close combat was when a unit of 6 cave squigs and 4 squig herders charged a unit of 10 dwarf warriors.

Basically the squigs really demolished them. Their weapon skills were tied, the squigs have initiative, they are really strong and they got 9 attacks (they were in ranks of 3). The dwarfs had heaver armor and shields but the squigs' strength 5 reduced their saves. And the squibs had hatred for the first round. The squigs took casualties, but they won two combat rounds and looked set to finish off the dwarf unit.

What I wondered though was why did the squigs cost many fewer points than the dwarf warriors? Does anyone have any insight into that? It was bad enough that one of the key dwarf units was getting torn up early. but there were still spider riders, and two units of goblin infantry left to take on the remaining miners and dwarf lord.

I know the armies weren't 100% legal as far as unit composition and core vs. special units, but that mostly seemed to be in the dwarfs favor. What gives? Are the dwarfs just unreasonably expensive?

Run some math hammer on how it would have gone if you were using great weapons. I find S3 very lacking and I2 might as well be always strike last.

I would guess the points reduction is courtesy of the complete lack of armor. So the dwarfs might be well advised to direct crossbow/handgun fire and such at those squigs early and often. One good salvo could gut a small unit like the one you describe.

Probably wouldn't make too much of a difference, but did you remember to give the dwarfs their Parry save?

Squig Hoppers also get Random Movement, don't they? So they can run into bad fortune moving across the board. But you're right, Dwarf core is costly compared to some others (see Sauruses, Ghouls, etc), but is very solid when paired with a good combined arms strategy or upgraded to longbeards. Plus, 10 dwarfs is a very lonely group, you're not able to take advantage of their high Leadership to keep them around through a few rounds of combat.

Dwarves generally struggle against high Attack, high Strength foes since they rely a lot on armor and don't have much in the way of ward/regen saves or big counter-monsters/monstrous infantry. But their heroes are solid and their artillery and missile support is some of the best in the game.

He's not talking about squig hoppers, he's talking about squig herds. Two different units!

A lot of warhammer is getting your right matchups. Shield warriors will do better holding their own outnumbered by lots of goblins, where they can take maximum advantage of their high toughness and good armor save. Squigs can bite through that a little easier.

That being said, squigs versus shield warriors isn't necessarily an auto-win for the squigs (though they do hold the advantage if they haven't taken any casualties).

well as I have both armies, I can see why you would think O&G are undercosted and Dwarfs are over. however, as many have pointed out Dwarfs are high Toughness, Good Armor and High LD. the reason the goblins seem so cheap is, they are squishy to ranged fire and suffer from not always working when the O&G player wants them to(Animosity Checks, make sure they are taken every turn) as some units are liable to do as much damage to your own army as the enemy's(IE, Fanatics, Mangler Squigs). O&G are much cheaper for their stats, but without Black Orcs mixed in(not the best idea either as BO's are costly, and liable to smash your Orcs and Goblins faces in) your not guaranteed anything. with some bad animosity checks and the O&G army can literally sit still and chew itself up before ever reach the enemy lines.

Dwarfs never suffer these problems and have some of the best cannons in the game, and those thunderers are awesome(basically have BS4 due to their well made handguns). if you combine arms them you should do just fine. smear the O&C with cannon and thunderer(maybe even Bolt Thrower and Crossbows) fire as the cross to you and then after that engage them in HtH combat. or use a gyro to zip up on the flanks of the big blocks and slow them down, while using that template to put the hurt on said block.

Thanks for all of the great responses. The Dwarfs are my son's, I just hated winning too easily. I think it's a really good point that the dwarfs would have done better with more ranks, and especially if they had the chance to shoot at the squig herd first.

Also if the squigs hadn't passed their animosity check on the way into battle it would have been a different scene.

Neither of us knew about the parry save, so that's something as well.

In small fights, slightly lucky/unlucky dice can really swing the results. In the formation you described:

9 squig attacks with re-rolls to hit (4+), and Strength 5 (3+ to wound) vs 4+ armor (saves on 6) and then parry (saves on 6), nets just over 3 wounds on average.

7 dwarves swinging back with re-rolls (hits on 4+), and S3 (wounds on 4+), kill the naked squigs with no save. Doing just over two and a half wounds.

So on average, the squigs win the first round by about half a wound, and have no option for command, and are naked T3 to weather the storm on the way in.

Also, being so narrow, the 5 wide dwarves would have steadfast (1 rank of 5 wide vs zero ranks of 5 wide).

All things considered, it's not that big of an edge in combat, and it's really tough for the squigs to make it across the table and arrive in a useful strength.
Don't forget that if he loses those goblins, the whole unit vaps, hitting anything nearby. I've lost small units on turn 1 so often that I stopped taking them. A luck burst of fire kills 3 goblins, and the whole unit pops, tearing a chunk out of my army. I switched to the 30+ or nothing plan. If I can't fit in a really big unit, they stay at home.

-Matt

Dwarfs are in need of an update. But don't dwarfs have hatred of the greenskins too? And grudge throwers squish goblins

Points don't show how good a unit is and where, even if we assume everything is pointed perfectly and there is no unfair costing.

Cave Squigs are fairly cheap because they are easy to kill outside of combat. 10 handgunners or Quarrelers will demolish 6 squigs at range and if any survive into combat should be able to mop them up.


Units pay for effectiveness in their strengths which is then compensated by their weaknesses. Dwarf warriors are weaker in combat then Cave Squigs.

While it is true that the dwarf book is old and there are some issues because of that, the biggest issue here is the proper application of your unit's strengths.


I don't care about the point cost equivilance, 500 points of Cannons are not going to beat 500 points of Gnoblars or skaven slaves. The cannons will kill a few at range and then get swarmed in combat.

Once a unit is on the table, it is almost never going to be the equal of the same cost in other units.


It comes down to what your points are spent in and how you apply the force. A shooty unit isn't going to beat a CC unit in combat, even if the shooty unit is worth more points, unless the dice go wacko or they outnumber them by an enormous margin. However, that shooty unit can potentially decimate a CC unit when it is played to its strengths.