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.

So as a dwarf player (brand new BTW/ still working on my build) I'm curious from a tactical point of view? I was lead to believe dwarves were a attrition based army so wouldnt survivability be our primary concern in games? Or should i just go with Great Weapons because I'm i2? Any and all advice and input on this is well appreciated! Thanks!

You will be striking last against most armies anyway plus dwarfs are relatively resolute to damage given their good armor save, making taking 2HW less of a risk compared to other units in the game...and the reward is still awesome.

The main reason is that the trade off of increased survivability isn't worth you hitting back at a pathetic Str3.

You will be hitting last anyway so you might as well hit hard enough to do some damage.

Caus ya cant krump wif a twig now can yuh?!

Bah - real dwarfs fight with an axe in one hand, a stein in the other!

I always take a huge hoard of Dwarfs with 1hand and then throw a couple of Elite units (such as Miners, Longbeards and Slayers) into the mix and you've got yourself a killing army (combined with shooting of course). It only works on certain armies though:
WoC, OnG, Empire heavy CC, VC and Skaven
This is just IMHO, but it is tested (by me) and as long as you make those damned Wizards a corpse, your good!

with i2 you are going to attack last anyway.... so lets attack with str5. And it's always funny to see their faces when the rival charges on a crossbowers unit only to realize they have 2hw.

 baxter123 wrote:
I always take a huge hoard of Dwarfs with 1hand and then throw a couple of Elite units (such as Miners, Longbeards and Slayers) into the mix and you've got yourself a killing army (combined with shooting of course). It only works on certain armies though:
WoC, OnG, Empire heavy CC, VC and Skaven
This is just IMHO, but it is tested (by me) and as long as you make those damned Wizards a corpse, your good!

Ye, that's the other thing. Shadow 6th with IF = gg most of the time. Say goodbye to about a good part of your army. Oh, 8th and its beloved Deluxe Yahtzee.

deSardinett wrote:
with i2 you are going to attack last anyway.... so lets attack with str5. And it's always funny to see their faces when the rival charges on a crossbowers unit only to realize they have 2hw.

Couldn't be anymore true. Soften them up with arrows, finish em off with great weapons.

Love guns/bows with great weapons. Amazing how everyones ranged units die instantly in melee, yet dwarves when armed properly just get better.

My Dark Elf Repeater Crossbowmen feel much the same way. It's fun to be underestimated by people who don't realize my crossbowmen have the exact same statline as my spearmen and corsairs... and even better saves...

Tookyflakes wrote:
Love guns/bows with great weapons. Amazing how everyones ranged units die instantly in melee, yet dwarves when armed properly just get better.

I agree. I have seen Dwarf quarrelers with great weapons used to great effect.

It is a sad time for the Dwarfen concept. The shield wall is nonexistant in 8th edition; great weapons mean you die more, but you kill so much more that it makes up for your loss of casualties.

In cases where you're facing low S, low T models with poor armour, shields can fair better.
I've also found shields to work well in small flanking units, about 15 or so; just big enough to Disrupt the enemy and give up as few casualties as possible.
Then again, you could have just thrown in 13.5 more Dwarfs with great weapons for the same cost. Again, they'd die faster, but they'd kill faster too.

Someday, shields will be the go-to equipment set-up. Someday, a sword or spear and a shield will be the most practical choice for almost every warrior ever. Someday, perhaps.

Shields are fine if you end up with a decent armor save and have some way of increasing your strength through other means/have a high base str.

Like Warriors of Chaos. A chaos warrior with a shield is T4 with a 3+ armor save. He's also Str4, meaning unless the opponent has equally high armor they have enough damage output to break past most armor.

Remember that you don't need to completely negate armor, just reduce its effectivness. Str4 basically makes 4+ armor and worse fairly inconsequential.

Gw (accidentally I guess) put a facebook post up saying "next in line is dwarfs, what would you like to see?". This was taken down after about 10 minutes, presumably when the new guys supervisor saw what he'd put up

My point here is I tended for warpsolution, theoretically not long to new toys and rules if this is true.

@Grey Templar: shields are not fine. I'd like to see a Warrior of Chaos who takes a shield over a halberd. The only one's I've seen so far have the Mark of Tzeentch, to make that Parry worthwhile.
It's not like shields need some huge boost. 7th used to favor them over great weapons in the same degree as the reverse is now true. But, in that instance, 7th was closer to the truth of it than 8th. Large units with shields, small specialist units with great weapons.

With MoT you will ALWAYS take a shield over a Halberd. That 5+ ward in melee is soooo tasty.

Usually, you will have a block of Tzeentch warriors as an Anvil unit. They are meant to sit there and take a beating, but they are also decent against most core units too. Str4 is nothing to sneeze at.

Then you will have a block of Khorne warriors with Halberds as a Hammer unit. This is what hits the Tzeentch warriors have engaged in the flank.

That's what I mean, though. Tzeentch Warriors take shields and not halberds, because the 5+ makes it worthwhile.

But without that 5+, shields aren't worth it. Not on Khornate Warriors or unmarked ones. Shields are not good on their own.

Well my Ogres take them all the time. 5+ armor/6+ parry on T4 with 3 wounds is tasty.

With Khorne, its not that the shields are bad, its that Halberds are so much better and have more synergy with MoK.

What are the Ogres other options, though? And how much do they cost?
If I'm remembering it correctly, it's that they can take shields or ironfists (maybe extra hand weapons, too?), and shields are cheapest.
However it actually is, you raise a good point: some units benefit more with shields. I still think that the number of these units is sadly small compared to how many it really should be.
Especially Dwarfs. If any army should want lots of shields, it's them.

And I don't get your point about halberds being comparatively better versus shields being bad; isn't the entirety of anything's worth determined by comparing it to other things?

In the right circumstances, shields in other armies can be pretty sweet- but usually on infantry that are getting them free.

I've tried hard to make shield warriors work. They're not atrocious, but they'd need to be cheaper- like 8 points with a shield to be a little more worthwhile. They kill absolutely nothing.

I do agree that dwarfs should be able to rock shields a little more solidly. Back in 7th when mostly you just tried not break too quickly once combat started, it was shields all 'round. I was glad to see great weapons become useful again, but it's a bit too much the other way.

S 3 sucks. While S4 is OK, S5 is the sweetspot for anything warhammer fantasy.

Eh, yeah, basically.

I liked how great weapons worked back in 7th; charging let you attacked first, and units of 10-15 S5 Warriors in the flank could really make a difference. And is much closer to how it actually worked, historically.

8pts for shield-warriors would be fair. Really, I think that every non-Slayer Dwarf should come with a shield automatically.

The charging unit hitting first was a poor design, especially when combined with casualities coming from the front. it was dumb and the game came down to whoever got the charge. Which given the movement rules was never going to be dwarves.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I am much happier with 8th.

What I'm saying is, the way that great weapons functioned in 7th fits as to how such weapons would actually be used- by small groups of warriors, rather than wave after wave of blocks of them.

A block of 14- 15 in still quite tasty in the flank, and accomplishes what you're talking about. Not taking many swings in return that way and can really punch up the damage for the round.

That's true, but what I'm really talking about is the synergy between large shield-walls and small supporting units with great weapons.
In 8th, you'd most likely be facing 30 great weapon-Warriors to the front, and then get charged by s'more in the flank.

If you could choose between using your great weapon and your shield in melee you might see them taken in conjunction more often.

They really should have classified Shield and Hand Weapon as a special weapon combo. So you could choose to use the Shield instead of your Greatweapon/Halberd/whatever if you wanted too.

 Grey Templar wrote:
If you could choose between using your great weapon and your shield in melee you might see them taken in conjunction more often.

They really should have classified Shield and Hand Weapon as a special weapon combo. So you could choose to use the Shield instead of your Greatweapon/Halberd/whatever if you wanted too.

I disagree with the latter. Chaos Warriors e.g. have two viable weapon choices, either s&b or halberds which is superior to all other choices. Being able to choose what you'd want to as long as it was equipped would likely make the combo too strong.

Not sure what you're driving at, Sigvatr. Chaos Warriors are best off with halberds or hand weapons/shields, so you don't think they should be able to switch between them, because then no one would ever take great weapons or extra hand weapons even more?

Also, I've seen plenty of great weapon-Warriors for monster-hunting. If you let them use their shields sometimes, I'd be fine with that.

Though Warriors are a bad example for this in most cases. I haven't seen a player yet who decided that 1pt for +1 armour on an 18pt model is not worth it.