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 have got a second batallion box, and was planning to use the warriors as Longbeards (add face plate, grey beards, viola!!!). Another Dwarf player suggested that Longbeards really arn't worth it and just to use them as warriors instead and use the saved points for somethng else (he suggested another WM.)

Do you more experienced people agreee? Are Longbeards just not really worth it??

The only time I use longbeards, are if I need a really good anvil units (i.e HW&S, since their str 4, they can actually hurt something and still survive and tarpit units.)

My idea was to have s large(ish) unit of LB Rangers with GW's in an Anvil list; possible 1st turn charge!!

Their decent but remember say 30 of them are going to be the only thing near your opponent for at least 2 turns letting your opponent do what he wills with them, never really been fan of expensive scouts tbh but it can be done, your talking about 400 points though

The longbeard ranger list can really ruin some armies, but can't threaten others (Warriors immediately spring to mind). I haven't tried it, but it seems to me it'd work as a pretty good gimmick- highly effective at times, really not worth it at others.

As for longbeards, I think there's some value to a defensive bunker, but they *are* pretty steep for their price. Perhaps not optimal, but not terrible either.

The longbeard ranger list will work if you back them up with miners and a gyrocopter. Otherwise they will be surrounded and eliminated before the rest of the army can arrive to help. Of course a few sucessful cannon shots can help to support them for awhile.

I like the long beards. Immune to panic = immune to terror. Passing around free re-roll panic is nice too.

Most of all, I like the long beard rangers with throwing axes.
If you play with building rules at all, this guys MURDER things. Drop down one of those nice 3 story GW buildings.

Stand and fire is 15 shots at S5. Followed by 10 S6 great weapon attacks in combat. Then stubborn 9 to break them out of the building. When they hold, they thow 15 more axes at S5 at the unit that just assaulted them.

Basically you get 30 S5 shots and 10 S6 attacks each game turn.
Once in the bar, they simply don't budge.


In a more gimicky build, give them the rune of slowness with the anvil. Opponent charges half as fast with a -D6". It allows for a lot of stand and firing.

-Matt

The Ambush list pretty much requires Bugman and his Rangers to back up the first unit of Rangers, with a unit or two of Miners coming in later and an Anvil to help everyone move around more efficiently.

Ranger Quarrelers can be used as a flanking threat and shooting block, just remember to move up your main line to support them.

Even if you aren't planning on Scouting outside of your deployment area, a unit of Rangers gives you a major boost in the deployment phase. It gives you one unit you get to place after seeing where the vast majority of your opposing units are going to be. They also give you a potential counter to enemy scouts; if you scout in your own deployment area, you are still allowed to charge first-turn...

I use them as a bodyguard unit for heroes, they are perfect for it.

Having recently started Dwarfs, i've been messing around with the different options with Longbeards and Warriors. I personally find that the extra point of strength and the point of weapon skill are Well worth the 3 points per model, and the immunity to panic is just an excellent bonus. At lower point games, they can act as a poor-dwarf's bsb in helping you get to combat if you face much shooting.

Hammerers do what LB do but more efficiently. They are not Immune to Panic, but are Stubborn and cheaper than GW Longbeards with the same stats.

Hammerers are not core.... Thus it is pointless to compare them to LBs

Pointless isn't a good word to use there. If you have met minimum core and have points left in your special cap, you may find yourself doing exactly what Nagashek is- comparing Longbeards to Hammerers.

I just made the connection as the OP was walking about using warrriors as LB

Red_Zeke wrote:Pointless isn't a good word to use there. If you have met minimum core and have points left in your special cap, you may find yourself doing exactly what Nagashek is- comparing Longbeards to Hammerers.

Hammers can't do the heavy armor shield in combat, nor do they have the option to scout, or pack throwing axes.
If you are just running long beards with great weapons though, and you already have enough core, you are correct, hammerers will most likely work better.

Personally, I always liked running a dwarf lord with long beards, and long beard rangers as my only two core choices. It didn't give my opponent anything soft to go for.

-Matt

HawaiiMatt wrote:

Red_Zeke wrote:Pointless isn't a good word to use there. If you have met minimum core and have points left in your special cap, you may find yourself doing exactly what Nagashek is- comparing Longbeards to Hammerers.

Hammers can't do the heavy armor shield in combat, nor do they have the option to scout, or pack throwing axes.
If you are just running long beards with great weapons though, and you already have enough core, you are correct, hammerers will most likely work better.

Personally, I always liked running a dwarf lord with long beards, and long beard rangers as my only two core choices. It didn't give my opponent anything soft to go for.

-Matt

From an Elf point of view, Dwarfs never have anything soft to go for

I just played against the WOC last night. 1300 pts....

I used 2 blocks of 21 Warriors....

One block ran right off the table! So upgrading one block to LB is on my to do list... I think it will be a great CORE unit to add a killy Lord too wtc.... They hit hard and dont flee so easy....

I play a gun line though so My guys just stand there and await the charge =]

HawaiiMatt wrote:

Red_Zeke wrote:Pointless isn't a good word to use there. If you have met minimum core and have points left in your special cap, you may find yourself doing exactly what Nagashek is- comparing Longbeards to Hammerers.

Hammers can't do the heavy armor shield in combat, nor do they have the option to scout, or pack throwing axes.
If you are just running long beards with great weapons though, and you already have enough core, you are correct, hammerers will most likely work better.

Personally, I always liked running a dwarf lord with long beards, and long beard rangers as my only two core choices. It didn't give my opponent anything soft to go for.

-Matt

You can't have more Longbeards than warriors.

green_oni wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:

Red_Zeke wrote:Pointless isn't a good word to use there. If you have met minimum core and have points left in your special cap, you may find yourself doing exactly what Nagashek is- comparing Longbeards to Hammerers.

Hammers can't do the heavy armor shield in combat, nor do they have the option to scout, or pack throwing axes.
If you are just running long beards with great weapons though, and you already have enough core, you are correct, hammerers will most likely work better.

Personally, I always liked running a dwarf lord with long beards, and long beard rangers as my only two core choices. It didn't give my opponent anything soft to go for.

-Matt

You can't have more Longbeards than warriors.

Check the FAQ.

Rangers dont count.
Dwarf Lord allows 1 more long beard unit than normal.