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 I've been rooting around through my dwarven models lately, and have found that I have three cannon and three organ guns (and two ballistae!) I also have a model that can be built as either/or of the Cannon/Organ Gun options. So... I'm tempted to build the Organ gun because the model looks a little nicer. Is there any pressing reason to go with the cannon instead? I haven't actually played as the Dwarves yet, as I'm still very much in the building and painting phase.

Organ guns are usually easier to use than canons, but being short ranged they serve a different role, usually as an aera denial weapon, while the canon can target priority target almost anywhere provided that you have a line of sight.

But most dwarf players prefer to use the bombard than a canon to play a similar role, sure it has a lower piercing value, but with lob it it can fire indirectly and ignore cover (plus it gets a longer 60" range), so it's easier to find a target for it, and even against def 5+ or 6+ a hit should still hurt.

If your meta has a lots of high def units, or even things like the usual dragon lord with the magic armor, then the canon might be slightlyt better. If however you just want some long range shooting on average the bombard should be slightly better (not on absolute, just that it will be harder to be left with no optimal target so you won't get as frustrated as someone using a canon to fire at an unit in cover for lack of a better target)

Organ guns are much more reliable than cannons but have a much shorter range.

If you already have three of each then I'd go with which ever is going to be more fun to build and paint as I'm guessing that chances to field 4 of the same artillery piece in the same army are relatively few.

Maybe try to convert it into a Flame canon or a Bombard ?

Yeah, converting it if you want to do that might the better option. You already have enough of the other war machines to cover any one game.

Thanks guys. I'll go with the Organ gun since it's a sweet model (it's the current GW one, and I only have the one of that kit). I do have plans to scratch build a flame cannon though from various parts.

One smallish issue is that GW cannon look like actual historical bombards, what with their enormous muzzles, so I might have to go with the "bell" mortar style of bombard to help distinguish them. That or the "fixed wooden frame" type.

Any recommendations on how many Flame Cannon or Bombards to build as options? Seems I've got 2 or 3 cannon barrels in a bits box I got awhile back, plus the one I won't be using - so I'll be doing a bit of modding it seems.

The tournament tweaks already limite to 3 the duplicates of any one monster/war engine or hero, so more than that is probably not recommanded.

Flame canons fulfill a very different role, and many dwarf players already use organ guns for a similar close range support, but the flame canons have the big advantage of being able to move and fire, so they are perfect to counter fliers or similar fast and nimble units that might try to flank you.

In other words It depend on tastes, points available and what else you want in your army, but anything from 0 to 3 flame canons is perfectly viable if you take them.

i would say that the vanilla canon is probablye the only dwarf war engine that I wouldn't want to have 3 of them, because if you take so many then it starts to be hard to find a line of fire to a decent target for all of them, and by then it's then usually better to take a mix of normal canons and bombard instead

Note that the organ guns can sometimes get a similar problem, and if you take some you can find that they also compete with the canons during deployment for those nice lines of sight (depending of course on the terrain pieces on the table), that's probably another reason for the relative lack of popularity of the vanilla canon.

I think than an army that didn't use too many organ guns, or that used flame canons instead for short ranged support, would probably find it easier to slot one or two canons