Dwarf Army book review and tactics

POST 3


Characters

I’m going to do this section a little differently and instead of spitting the section by Lords and then Heroes, I’ll instead group them by the Lord and Hero counterpart.


Dwarf Lord

The lord is a solid melee choice. Fairly standard lord stats but with boosted WS (7), T (5) and LD (10). He gets all the dwarf army special rules. And can take a massive 125pts of runic items.

I like the lord. You are more likely to see him than an equivalent lord in a different army but this is because you don’t need to take a high level spell caster unlike most others. That isn’t to say you often see him, as there are arguably more competitive choices. If you are going to take him, I cannot see why you wouldn’t take him on shieldbearers (except if you didn’t have the points) as 40pts for the +2 W, +2 armour save and +2 WS5, S4, I2 attacks is a bargain. That alone gives you a 2+ save and 5W off the bat. If I had to take a lord with limited points, I would probably take that over runic items.

One of the most fun things about the lord is just the wealth of options available on how to arm or armour him. You can build your lord for offense of defence but he works especially well as an immovable object. I have and will mention the unkillable lord several times. The classic build for this is: Shieldbearers, 2*Ro Iron, 1*Ro Fortitude, 3*Ro Warding and a Great Weapon. This gives you in defence: 2+ save, 4++ ward, T7, 6W with 4 WS7, S6 attacks (and 2*WS5, S4 attacks). Not too shabby I’m sure you will agree (probably an understatement if ever there was one. That much toughness and that many wounds on an infantry model is obscene).

A cheaper version (by 50pts) would be to drop the 3*Ro Warding and the Ro Fortitude and replace that with 1*Ro Preservation. This drops 1 point of toughness and the standard 4++ ward and replaces it with a 2++ ward vs killing blow and heroic killing blow.

Probably the main reason for the lord heading down the defensive runic route is his base strength of 4. Taking just armour and talismanic runes leaves the option for you to just arm him with a cheap great weapon. The defensive runes almost always ensure you have the option to hit back and his strength and GW will still ensure you get a -3 save modifier.

If I’m taking runic weapons, I’m partial to this combo: MRo Smiting, Ro Might, Ro Parrying. This gives him double strength vs T5 or higher foes, multiple wounds (D6) and he gains the mark of Nurgle (sorry -1 to hit). The last helps offset the lack of defensive runes. I still mount his on the almost compulsory shieldbearers and and give his a shield for a 1+ armour save. You would have 15 points left to spend (if you wanted), so could add a Ro Luck (it’s a luck stone from the BRB – basically re-roll one dice for this model in the game) or a Ro Fire (for a 2++ ward vs flaming attacks). I think the key rune when taking a weapon is Might as it allows you to offset the lack of base strength. That isn’t to say you always have to take it but I feel it has the most utility.

I do have to say that this lord cost can be expensive. To put it into perspective, a minimal build (shieldbearers and great weapon) is just under 200 pts but fully runed up, in the classic unkillable build is over 300pts. For that cost you can get 2 runed up warmachines or another block of troops.

If you do take him you won’t be disappointed but you have to think carefully on where to place him. Yes you could put your tooled up lord in your hammerers but that unit is already a magnet for spells, missile fire and artillery and most opponents will avoid combat with it as much as they would witch elves. You would be much better off placing him in your weakest combat block. Perhaps dwarf warriors, as suddenly that weakest block is looking a lot nastier. It’s worth pointing out that if you are playing closed lists, most opponents will automatically assume that your lord on shieldbearers is the unkillable variety, so you could still ‘buff’ your weak unit whilst fielding the cheaper bare bones option to free up points for other options.




Thane

Like the lord, the thane has all the dwarf special rules. The main difference between them is the stat line with 4 of the characteristics (WS, W, A and I) being a single pip lower. Retaining an LD of 10 and costing less than half the value of the lord, makes a thane a very attractive alternative, especially with his 75 point runic item allowance.

Even with a naturally high leadership, it is rare that a dwarf player won’t take at least one thane to use as a BSB. There are very few armies that can perform without them, the risk of failed leadership tests is just too great. With their low movement and reliance on a solid battleline, the BSB is rarely out of range of key units if deployed well so he is more often than not a staple of your army and I think that is as it should be. I’m very much of the school that all armies should have a general and bsb if only for fluff reasons.

In terms of arming your BSB, again the runes give you multiple choices and you also have to factor in the banner runes. A solid choice is to give him a shield and the MRo Grungni. This gives his a 3+ save and a 4++ ward as well as throwing out a 6” bubble that gives a 5++ ward vs shooting. Not only does this make him very durable but it is very handy when defending warmachines against counter battery fire. (Not to mention helping your slayers last a little longer).

I most often flit between that build and taking a shield and the MRo Valaya, which gives an additional +2 bonus when dispelling. I find this combined with the spellbreaker runes really helps neutralise (or reduce) enemy magic phases (at the expense of some defence for your thane). You can add other runes to the banners as a BSB has a 100pt allowance but it quickly boosts the cost and as with the main banner rune, which ones you take should depend on the army build you are taking and if it fits in with it.

The third of the builds I favour can be used for a bsb or for a normal thane. Give him a MRo Gromril, Ro Iron (for a 1+ save and an additional wound) and a Great Weapon to boost his strength. This still leaves a few points to play with. Depending on what you are fielding and where you are planning to deploy him, you can then add an oath stone (though I wouldn’t advise this if you are using the thane as a BSB).

Again, there are lots of fun combo’s to take with runes and this barely scratches the surface.




Master Engineer

The ME allows a warmachine within 3" to use his BS instead of their own and also re-roll an artillery dice (in the same way as a Rune of Forging). As a tertiary affect he can also entrench one warmachine at the start of the battle to give it hard cover.

His primary and secondary abilities equate to 50pts of runes, so you are effectively getting a hero and body guard for your warmachines for an additional 20pts. If you then take into account the entrenchment ability he gives, then you are making a saving 5pts (at least if he is taken naked).

Now having said that, I would only normally take an engineer if I were to take an Organ Gun, as his abilities sync with this machine the most (as you can use all three of his abilities with it) and I’d go as far to say I consider a taking one Master Engineer per Organ Gun, a mandatory choice. It is worth pointing out that you could take an organ gun with no runes and just a ME without compromising its effectiveness and suddenly that banner of the world dragon bearing unit of elves, isn’t looking too safe!

I’d never take an engineer on a cannon or a grudgethrower as taking runes is normally more cost effective. I would take one on a flame cannon IF I had taken the Rune of Penetrating on it (as I would want the re-roll to misfires the ME would provide).

In terms of armaments, it is worth adding a Ro Stone to an engineer to boost his armour to a 3+. A brace of pistols never goes amiss to boost his combat potential when guarding his warmachine. You could consider a GW instead, as it is cheaper, but the pistols allow a stand and shoot reaction and that can make the difference in combat. The main thing is to keep him pretty cheap.




Runelord

A Runelord is the master of the runic arts. He is often the oldest dwarf in the hold, imbued with years of wisdom. He gets access to all the standard dwarf army special rules and also gets access to some unique Runesmith rules:

Forgefire: This gives the Runelord and any unit he is embedded in, Armour Piercing. This is a superb rule and one of main reasons to take a Runelord/smith (just after the ability to take dispel ‘runes’).

Runelore: This allows him to channel dispel dice. This is the same as wizards and isn’t game changing but can crop up to assist during the game.

Magic Resistance (2): a 5++ ward against direct damage spells is helpful but not normally that useful.

He is also the only dwarf that can access the Anvil of Doom (which I’ve already covered under the armoury section but to recap, it’s pretty rubbish, don’t take it in any kind of competitive game).

You want to really like the Runelord. He does have a massive 150pt runic item allowance which is great but he falls into a null zone. His stats aren’t good enough to make him a combat character compared to your other options (he has the same attacks as the hero version. Why would that seem like a good idea? I suppose they were modelling them on wizards but with an additional attack). He also costs double the price of a Runesmith so if you take into consideration, forgefire and the ability to take spell breakers, there is no conceivable situation where you wouldn’t take 2 Runesmiths over a Runelord. That is a real shame and because of this, it makes the Runelord the only generic lord option I would never take in a competitive game.

Now having said all that, if you were to take a Runelord (120pts) on an Anvil (170pts) and want to max him out for laughs, consider all or part of the following build: Runic Weapon - 3*Ro Speed (15pts) to give him +3 Initiative. This boosts him to initiative 6 in total and gives maximum protection vs those test or die spells. Give him a shield (3pts) and on his armour give him a Ro Stone (5pts) and Fortitude (35pts) to boost his armour to 2+ and Toughness to 6. Then give him 2*Ro Spellbreaking (45pts) and a Ro Balance (50pts) to give you maximum protection in the magic phase. Sure it comes in at 443pts all told but could be quite amusing.




Runesmith

This is the hero version of the Runelord and a better option in every way. He gets all the same rules, excepting a smaller 75pt runic item limit and Magic Resistance (1) but only costs half what the Lord does.

I would state that EVERY dwarf list should contain at least one Runesmith. If you don’t have one, you should go back and look at your list and rewrite it to put one in, that is how useful they are.

As all Runesmiths will take at least the first level spellbreaker for 25pts, realistically they only have 50pts of Runes. I personally like to kit them as cheap as possible for defence, with a Ro Stone and shield so they get a 2+ save and 6++ parry. Occasionally I might also give a Ro Preservation for protection vs Killing blow if he is my General. I have taken the GW, MRo Gromril and Ro Fortitude combo for a S6, 3W, 1+ save. Though with only 2 attacks as standard, this isn’t as effective as giving this combo to a Thane though. This is one character that can benefit from giving a cheap runic weapon. A Ro Fire is probably your best choice to give both magical and flaming attacks, perhaps combined with a rune of speed (if he isn’t in a great weapon unit), in order to strip regen. I do occasionally give him the +1 WS rune if he’s my general, although I’ll admit this is as much for fluff as anything (as my general should be a more skilled fighter than the troops he’s leading)!
It’s also always worth giving the Ro the furnace for the 2++ ward vs flaming attacks for 5pts and the Ro Passage for 10pts is a good way of getting round the duplicate spellbeaker restriction, whilst giving a useful ability (although not one that will come up often unless you face an opponent with beasts magic).




Daemonslayer

I have a real soft spot for all things slayer. Most armies have their iconic units but there are some that just stand out. For me that is slayers. If you read the time of legends books there are some interesting comments on slayers, as it is only around this time that they started to appear and at the time, many dwarves thought negatively about it and that becoming a slayer was taking the easy (and less honourable) way out of facing the responsibility of their shame (pretty sure that was the gist and I’m not making it up – will have to re-read them to be sure).

Either way, Daemonslayers are the toughest most badass dwarves. Shunning armour and seeking out the biggest monsters and challenges to find a worthy death, they have survived everything thrown at them. Gotrek is the most well-known thanks to the Bill King books but there are many others.

They have very limited options available to them. They can take a runic weapon and can only join a unit of slayers. That is it. So at 5pts cheaper than your basic lord, what else do you get for your 140pts?

Firstly a slightly differing statline. You drop a point of BS and gain a point of initiative. That’s a great trade off and boosts it to 5 giving you a greater chance of striking first.

He keeps the standard dwarf special rules, only dropping shield wall (quite rightly) and retains the standard slayer rules of:

Unbreakable – never has to take break tests and is immune to psych. How I love this rule. It is possibly the greatest strength of a slayer.

Slayer - always wounds on a 4+. Again a good rule and helps against monsters or other high toughness units but it doesn’t help against armour.

Slayer Axes – Can choose to use an additional hand weapon or a great weapon at the start of each combat. On a slayer unit this is a great option but on a slayer character I tend to advocate taking a runic axe which replaces these options.

Deathblow – If a model with this rule is killed, they immediately can make a single additional attack. A fluffy rule and gives you a chance to take out something in a last hurrah.

He also gets the unique Dragon Slayer rule – Gives you the multiple wound (D3) rule vs monsters.

His own special rule is Daemon slayer – Any ward saves made against your attacks must be re-rolled. You basically get the other tricksters shard.

So you get a whole host of special rules, most are excellent and none are bad.

In terms of weapons, you can really tailor this to offset the unit’s weaknesses or take character/monster killers etc. A classic options is:

MRo Swiftness, Ro Might and Ro Parrying (gains always strikes first, double strength against T5+ opponents and enemy suffer -1 to hit him in combat).

He is also one I might actually consider giving 3 runes of cleaving. I also like the idea of giving him the MRo Smiting so he gets multiple wounds (D6) against all foes. If he gets in a challenge and is slain he then gets a final chance to cause D6 wounds back at the attacker. It just seems apt somehow.

You can run a slayer character solo but any opponent worth his salt will use them as a pin cushion as soon as look at them. I might still consider it with a Dragonslayer but due to the cost I’d never run the Daemon slayer outside of a unit.




Dragonslayer

He gets all the same rules as the Daemonslayer (bar the ability to force re-rolls to wards). Comparing him to the Thane he again loses a point of BS and gains one of Initiative and costs 5 points more.

Everything stated about the Daemonslayer, applies to the Dragonslayer.

All in all, I’m not as big of a fan, maybe this is because he loses an attack and a wound on his profile and with no defence, it makes him a bit too squishy with not enough damage output.





Special Characters

There are two main reasons for taking named characters. You are either fitting them in for fluff or for a special ability they are able to confer that no one else can. They are, in the main, considerably more expensive than their generic counterparts.

Full disclosure, I’ve only ever used 3 of the 8 named characters in this review.


Thorgrim Grudgebearer

He is the current High King, known to have struck off an impressive entries from the Dammaz Kron (Book of Grudges). He gets the following dwarvern army rules: Ancestral Grudge, Relentless and Resolute (so no shield wall).

He is carried into battle by 4 dwarves on the Throne of Power and has 4 unique magic items. In addition he MUST be the general if in the army and if he is slain, all dwarves get frenzy! So what are his unique items?

Throne of Power – This is treated as shieldbearers (so he counts as infantry still) and he gets +2 to his save. The difference is he gains +4 wounds and 4 additional WS5 S4 attacks (to represent the 4 dwarves carrying it) but loses the look-out sir rule if he joins a unit. He also gets a 4++ ward and his commanding presence range is increased from 12” to 18”.

The throne is great, +4 wounds puts him up to monster levels and means he can’t be one shotted by cannons. The ward helps further prevent this and the increased range is a bonus but not as important as for other armies, due to the high leadership of the dwarves.

Axe of Grimnir – This is one of Grimnir’s two legendary axes (Gotrek was long thought be wielding the second). This grants him ASF, it wounds on a 2+ (3+ if they opponent is wearing magic armour) and multiple wounds (D6) vs giants.

ASF is always great but with a high chance of getting re-rolls to hit anyway it isn’t as useful for the High King. The 2+/3+ wounding isn’t bad but doesn’t help him overcome high armour with his base S4. The Multiple wounds is very conditional. I can’t remember the last time I faced anyone with a giant. So all in all, this axe is good against monsters with low saves but not great against anything else.

Armour of Skaldor – Gromril armour that combines with the Throne of Power to give him a 2+ save. In addition it gives him a 2++ ward vs Killing Blow, HKB and attacks with the multiple wound rule (this is basically a boosted Ro Preservation).

The wording is interesting. It is a ward save against attacks with those rules, not just against any where a successful killing blow/HKB etc. is made. I like having KB and HKB protection, it doesn’t come up a lot but is always good to have on a tanky, expensive, lord. The unique preservation against multiple wounds is conditional but again helps against things like cannons (especially with no look-out sir protection).

Dragon Crown – Grants Immune to Psychology and Stubborn

Stubborn is all kinds of good and there is never a reason to lament having it. ItP is conditional on dwarves.

Great Book of Grudges – Add +3 to the ancestral grudge roll. On a 7+ all dwarves gain the equivalent of Eternal Hatred (can re-roll to hit in every round of combat)

There is often one thing that sets a named character above its generic counterpart and this rule is the one for Thorgrim. On a 2+ you guarantee your army gets hatred and you also get a 50% chance of rolling eternal hatred. I love this as rerolls to hit are just so useful.


So as you expect, the big boss of the dwarves is loaded with magic items and rules, so what are the drawbacks. Well let’s start with the big one. 650 points! This means you could not fit him in a standard 2500pt army unless you are using the 1.9 errata rules for 50% character allowances.

Trying to see what that cost is made up of, I’ve added together basic cost of the components. Lord (145), 2 * Shieldbearers (80), 3*Ro Warding (45), MRo Swiftness (25), MRo Skalf Blackhammer (75), Ro Preservation (25), Ro Stolicism (35), Ro Courage (20) – Total 450pts

The remaining 200pts is made up of the following abilities: Increased commanding presence range by 6”, additional +2 BS (completely pointless as he has no ranged attacks), MRo of Giant Slaying (from the axe), 2++ ward vs multiple wound attacks (from the armour) and the book of grudges effects. Is this worth it? It’s debatable. I suppose in a much larger game (where you are more likely to field him), then the additional hatred could really come into its own as you would likely have far more combat blocks.

My other main gripe with him is he only has a -1 modifier to an opponent’s armour save (from his S4). The best you can boost this too is -2 if you add a Runelord/smith to his unit. It’s just poor and so you would only want him realistically attacking monsters or rank and file.




Ungrim Ironfist

I love the Slayer King almost as much as normal slayers (fluff and rules). Sure he is reasonably expensive at 350pts but a tooled up tanky ‘unkillable’ Dwarf Lord comes in at over 310pts so he isn’t too much more. So what do you get for the points?

I’ll start with defence (and compare it to the tanky lord even though they aren’t necessarily built for the same role) and his WS of 9. He has to be one of a handful of characters with a WS that high and it means that most enemies will hit him on a 4+ but anyone with a WS4 or lower will only hit him on a 5+. This is almost as good as having a -1 to hit. The Dragon Crown adds +1 to his toughness, boosting it to 6 so most elite troops with GWs will only wound him on a 4+, as well as adding +1 to his save, which combined with his Gromril armour, gives him a 3+ save. Again these help reduce the odds of him losing one of his 3 wounds. On top of this, his Dragon Cloak of Fyrskar, grants a 4++ ward (which increases to 2++ vs fire based attacks).

If I compare is to the dwarf lord. The lord ‘only’ has a WS7 and tends to have a 2+ armour and 4++ ward, so pretty comparable so far. Where the lord outstrips Ungrim is with his T7 (not too much difference) but a whopping 6 wounds. Still, as you can see Ungrim is still pretty tough and not a push over with his defence. It is mainly the wounds that are the difference between them.

So what about attack? Again his WS comes into play. He will rarely, not be hitting foes on a 3+. Ancestral Grudge also gives him a chance at re-rolling failed hits in the first round of combat. His Axe of Dargo, grants him +2S which boosts him to S6, so he will wound most foes on a 2+ and will have a -3 to armour saves. He also has the resolute rule so gets +1 Str on the charge. On top of that, his 4 attacks, strike at initiative 5 and the Axe also gives them killing blow (so a chance to ignore armour and regen saves altogether and kill multi-wound enemy that aren’t monstrous). He also gets all the slayer rules, so any successful ward saves made against his attacks have to be re-rolled, against monsters any wounds caused become D3 wounds and the worst he can roll to wound on is a 4+. This is a lot of special rules and why I consider him a bit of a combat monster.

Again comparing him to the dwarf lord, the lord has 4 attacks at Str 6 (or 7 on the charge) due to the GW (so the same as Ungrim) but this also gives him the ASL rule. He does gain 2 WS5, Str 4, I3 from the shieldbearers but as expected, he is at a disadvantage to Ungrim if only down to the sheer number of additional rules the Slayer King has on the attack.

We’ve established that he has a solid defence and attack so does he bring anything else to the table? Well like other slayers he is unbreakable and as mentioned earlier if taken as a general one slayer unit gets a magic banner of up to 100pts. Unlike other Slayer characters, he can be the army general.

So is he worth taking? Yes definitely. Especially if you are a player who normally takes a Lord character and are planning on taking slayers and so a more themed list. I’ve taken him on numerous occasions and never regretted doing so. The main drawback is like all dwarf lords, he is still only M3, can only join a unit of slayers and costs the same amount as a block of dwarves or 2 runed up war machines.




Thorek Ironbrow

I’m not going to delve into Thorek too much but to say that he automatically comes on an Anvil of Doom and has no spellbreaker rune and costs double a naked generic Runelord on Anvil.

Suffice to say, ignoring the massive over costing, you shouldn’t take him for the same reasons you wouldn’t take the generic character on an anvil.

If you are curious above the difference. He comes with MR (3), so one higher. He also gets to re-roll one of the casting dice on a failed attempt to cast a bound spell and he gets +1 to his casting attempts. He gets a 1+ armour save and his weapon allows no armour saves and if he causes an unsaved wound any magic items equipped by the opponent wounded are destroyed.


Belegar Ironhammer

The true king of Karak Eight Peaks, at first glance, appears to be set up as a combat lord but how does that stand up to scrutiny?

He has a standard Dwarf Lord stat line but with WS8, so higher than most opponents he’ll face. His Hammer of Angrund gives him ASF and +1 to his wound rolls, the latter really helps to overcome his low strength. On top of this, once per game he can double his attacks to an impressive 8.

He comes mounted on an oath stone, so has to accept challenges, so you hope that he is well protected in those fights. I would rate his defence as above average as although he only has a basic save of 3+ save, his Shield of Defiance grants him a 4++ ward with immunity to KB and HKB and on top of that any wounding hits that would automatically slay him only cause a single wound.

As a final rule he also grants stubborn to any unit he joins.

At 305pts he isn’t excessively costed but he suffers from the same issue as many of the special characters, he will struggle against high armour. Now from the fluff side, if you think about his primary foes (Skaven and Orcs) then neither have many high armour units so it wouldn’t normally be an issue but in the real world, it is one of the reasons you will rarely see him fielded.


Grimm Burloksson

In dwarf society, we don’t have family names as manlings know them but the second name often shows who your father is, especially if the father is someone of note. In this case Grimm, son of Burlok and the father was definitely of note, the renowned Burlok Damminsson. The father was always worth a look in older books, so what is the son like?

Well he is a master engineer with the normal dwarf army rules of: ancestral grudge, resolute and relentless. He also comes with an improved +1 BS (so 5) which is utterly fantastic, especially if you combine this with an Organ gun. It also helps out with his unique weapon, Grudge-raker, an 18”, S4, AP, Dwarf Crafted, Multiple Shot (2D3) modified handgun. He also adds +2 to his strength as he built a steam powered gauntlet to emulate his father and combined with his Cog Axe, with its AP, opponents take armour saves with an impressive -4 modification. On top of that, if he scores a hit in combat, on a 5+ their magic weapon is destroyed. Now he only fights with 2 attacks, an initiative of 2 and only has a 4+ armour, with 2 wounds, so I wouldn’t expect him to really survive in combat to make use of this ability.

It is very much worth noting, that he also comes with a brace of pistols and as neither of the above are magic items, he can choose to use these in combat (and I would over the Axe, every time). This gives him 3 S6 (S7 on the charge) AP attacks (on top of his 2D3 S 4 AP shots from standing and shooting). Suddenly charging him is a much less appealing decision, especially from any chaff wanting to get past him to the warmachine.

So now we’ve covered him armaments, how do his special rules compare to the normal Master Engineer?

Well he can entrench machines in the same way. In addition, he has his own special rule called: Master of Accuracy. He rolls a D6 and on a 1 he can’t use it. On a 2+ he can choose one of the following 3 options on a unit within 3”, though he can never benefit from the effects himself (in either situation, he CAN still fire his gun – unlike a normal engineer):

1. Artillery Adjustment – This is the normal ME rule. A warmachine can use his BS and re-roll an artillery dice. NOTE: unlike a normal engineer, this CAN be the distance the cannon ball bounces or flame template moves.

2. Increased Range – A unit of Quarrellers or Thunderers can add 2D6” to their range.

3. Superior Volley – A unit can re-roll any missed shooting hits.

The first of these is useful, especially as you can re-roll the bounce/flame template movement (unlike the normal engineer). However you will normally just take a generic ME if you want to baby sit a machine using these abilities. You will normally be taking Grimm for the second and third abilities. These are just fantastic. Applying the increased range to Thunderers means that, on average, they now have the same range as crossbows. If you give it to quarreller, then they are suddenly hitting the troops that were carefully positioned out of range. Both of these could be a nasty shock to an opponent who isn’t expecting it and these kind of things can help to throw their game plan.

You could apply Superior Volley to Thunderers or Quarrellers to maximise their hits but I would prioritise giving it to your Irondrakes as their volleys would benefit far more from it, in terms of maximising the sheer devastation they can cause. His Grudge-raker also, conveniently, shoots at the same range as their guns (it’s like it was meant to be).

In terms of price, he is around double that of a generic engineer and at 165pts that isn’t breaking the bank. Taking him does mean you are more likely to go down the gunline build but he is well worth considering if that is your plan, as he just makes that build stronger in every way, though I would clarify that by saying, I would only take him if I were planning on taking larger units of missile troops as I think his abilities are wasted if you are using him just for warmachines and you’d be better off just taking a standard Engineer. A very good choice (and the model is great too).




Josef Bugman

Josef is almost as an iconic character as Gotrek or Thorgrim. Almost all dwarves know and rate his beer as having reached almost the pinnacle of the brewer’s art. Most also know of the demise of his brewery at the hands of goblins.

He comes with a standard Thane stats (except an improved BS and Initiative) and the normal access to army special rules of Ancestral Grudge, Resolute and Relentless. Although he does have a shield (combining with Gromril armour for a 3+ save) he doesn’t get the Shieldwall rule, which is quite right as the magic weapon would prevent him getting a parry save anyway.

He also gets the Scout rule, allowing him to deploy either on his own or within a unit of rangers, which fits his fluff nicely.

He and any unit he joins also get the rule: Stout Courage. This grants immunity to fear and terror. Note this is different to the Immune to Psychology rule and as such they can still panic (and can choose to flee).

His magic weapon, Ol’ Trustworthy, gives him +1A, +1S and Armour Piercing (basically 2*Ro Cleaving and a Ro Fury) and that gives him a very respectable 4, S5 AP attacks at initiative 4.

Bugman’s Tankard is his enchanted item and at the start of any friendly turn, Bugman, or any model in the same unit, can drink form this and can gain +D3 wounds they had already lost during the game. This can be useful and as every reviewer points out combines well with the ‘unkillable’ dwarf lord.

He also gets his own unique rule called: Liquid Fortification. At the start of each friendly turn roll 2D6 and the result rolled lasts until the next roll.

2 = Bad Brew – The unit becomes Flammable.

3-9 = Belligerent - The unit becomes Stubborn.

10-12 = Leathered – The unit gains +1T.

There is only one bad roll and the chance of that occurring isn’t high. The other two are excellent.

As a final special rule, he gets Bugman’s Rangers. This allows one unit of Rangers to get +1WS, +1BS and +1S. This boosts the rangers up to Elite dwarf stats and elf shooting levels, all for a ‘miniscule’ +3pts per model. It is worth considering if you were planning on bringing a sizable unit of rangers (otherwise I wouldn’t bother).

Although you could put him in a unit of rangers (whether upgraded to Bugman’s Rangers, or the standard variety), I much prefer putting him in a mainline unit with the BSB to both protect and buff them both. I do consider him more of a buffing unit, despite his decent melee ability.

Cost wise he comes in at 165 points. Taking into account the price of a Thane (65) and his weapon Runes (60), this means his other special rules and enchanted item cost 37pts. If you look at it that way, he is very well costed.

Would I take him though? Possibly. It would all depend on the build and what I wa hoping to get from him. If I were running an Ambusher/Vanguard Hybrid list with a large unit of rangers/Miners and Longbeards, then he would be a serious contender for the list.



Option character rules


Grombrindal

These rules for the White Dwarf were published in WD. It does specifically state that he shouldn’t be used in tournament games. He comes with the straight up stats of a normal dwarf lord but costs a whopping 500pts! Why does he cost so much you ask?

He gets the dwarf army rules of ancestral grudge, resolute and relentless. On top of that he is unbreakable.

He has the option of starting the game hidden in a unit (in a similar way as an assassin) but if the unit he is hidden in flees or is wiped out, he stands his ground and is placed on the table.

He has 4 magic items:

Rune Helm of Zhufbar – any fleeing dwarf units within 12”, will automatically rally. A handy ability but nothing to write home about.

Armour of Grimril Scales – This gives him a 1+ save and a 4++ ward. This is a solid save and ward and is a great if simple piece of armour.

Rune cloak of Valaya - This gives a MR (3). It almost guarantees direct damage spells can’t harm him as it combines with his ward but is quite conditional.

Rune Axe of Grimnir – With +2S, re-rolls to hit and wound and opponents having to re-roll successful armour saves, this is the Axe the High King wishes he inherited.

Overall he is a good combat character that can be sprung as a nasty surprise. You have to be thinking that a large part of his cost is likely tied up in this Axe but he is very expensive and wouldn’t be something I’d include except in a much larger game (in a similar way to Thorgrim)


Grombrindal on Shieldbearers (30th Anniversary)

It should be stated that the designers of these rules intended for this to be ridiculous and it should only be used in agreement with your opponent and they should be bringing Greater Daemons, Dragons and Special Characters to pit against it. This is because Grombrindal is held aloft by none other than Gotrek and Bugman.

The rules for Grombindal are the same as those listed above with one additional item:

Ancestral Shield – Any ranged attack that targets Grombrindal has its strength halved (this includes magic missiles, cannonballs etc.). In additional, the Shield and any other magic items carried by the White Dwarf, cannot be nullified in any way.

This item and mounting him on the other 2 renowned heroes increases the cost from 500 to 1000pts.

So how do their rules combine? Well both heroes add attacks to the White Dwarf.

Bugman adds 4 S5 I4 attacks.

Gotrek adds 4 attacks at I4 that automatically wound, allow no armour save and each cause D3 wounds. Against Daemons or Dragons it becomes D6 wounds.

The final rule is a fun quirk where the 3 strong personalities can have conflicting ideas of what they should do. You roll a D6 in the movement phase and:

1-2 – Bugman decides to have a drink. You can’t move but all wounds are healed.

3-4 – The wiser head of Grombrindal rules and they can move normally

5-6 – Gotrek in a rage that he still lives moves towards the greatest foe. The model must move 12” towards the enemy unit with the greatest points value. If he moves into touch with anything, he counts as charging.

He is basically stupidly priced but if you could arrange a game where your opponent just bought dragons, greater daemons and other such monsters and then faced them off against Grombrindal, you could definitely have a great evening of laughs.

POST 5


Special

Hammerers

Hammerers are elite stat dwarves with WS5, S4 but two attacks. This puts them on par with a Chaos Warrior, though I would argue they are possibly better. A bold claim I hear you say. They come as standard with a GW which is no drawback as they have the garbage standard dwarf initiative and just helps them munch through armour, especially if they charge (as they get the normal +1S) and if they have a Runesmith for AP (that combo could give them a -5 modifier to armour saves!).

They come with stubborn as standard and LD9 so are likely to fight to the last dwarf, especially given how easy it is to make that LD10 with a thane/lord.

They aren’t bad on defence either with T4, heavy armour and the ability to give them shields to help against shooting.

They also have a fluffy ability (in a similar way to Grail knights), where any Hammerer can accept a challenge if the general is in the unit.

On top of that, the unit can take a runic standard up to 75pts. This is huge and allows you to take one of the master runes on the unit (normally be Groth or Valaya) and this can be the starting block for several army builds.

You could take a horde of 40+ of these but you probably shouldn’t, as any opponent who knows anything about dwarves, will not want to come within a mile of them and will avoid them like the plague and with a movement of 3, you won’t be catching anything quickly (though it could act as a large points denial). You are better off taking a unit of 30 or so, ranked 6 wide and 5 deep. This won’t look as intimidating and if it anchors your lines, an opponent will likely have to come within range of it, allowing you to at least get it in combat.




Ironbreakers

Ironbreakers are often mooted as the best anvil in the game. They share the normal elite dwarf stats of WS5 and S4 and a decent 3+ save. Where they go a step further is in getting the Shieldwall of Gromril rule. Most dwarves get an additional +1 to a parry save on the turn they are charged but this rule means that they always get the 5++ parry save. This is a fantastic rule as a 1/3rd chance to always make saves in combat can really make a difference.

On top of that they have a boosted LD of 10 and can take 50pts of runes on a standard, so can easily get stubborn and these combined, really will turn the unit into a tarpit but a tarpit with bite. With S4, the unit will be able to dish out damage too.

I very much consider a Runesmith compulsory with this unit in order to give AP. It gives better synergy with this unit than with Hammerers, who already have a good armour modifier.

This is also the ideal unit to put in the tried and tested Thane on an Oathstone, with GW and Armour of Gromril, as this will ensure the unit gains the parry if also charged in the flank or rear and immunity to disruption. This is great for guarding a flank.

As stated earlier, it is worth considering putting duel drake pistols on the champion for the additional attack and to remove regen from opponents.




Slayers

If we are judging units purely on fluff, these guys are hands down my favourite dwarf unit but they are also pretty effective too as I found out when using them. So what do they bring to the table?

They are unbreakable, so are immune to psychology and basically never have to take a leadership test and will never run away. Even in an army with an average leadership as high as dwarves and with many units having access to stubborn, this is huge. It means you have a block of dwarves that will have to be completely wiped out and can effectively tarpit anything and operate completely outside of the bsb/generals bubble (it is also one reason you find excommunicated beardless dwarves using small darts of them, the shame!).

As with black Orcs, they can also choose each round to use either additional hand weapons (AHW) or great weapons (GW). Note once you are in combat, with a unit you have to keep using the weapon you've chosen. It's not every turn that you change weapons.

With ‘only’ basic dwarf stats (with the S3 being the important one) I would normally use the great weapons against anything that has a 4+ or better armour. It's worth using the AHW vs anything that has either a toughness of 5 and little to no armour (thanks thorpyuk for this), as you are always wounding on a 4+ due to the slayer rule, so you would get an extra attack over using the GW, or if the foe has a toughness of 3 and you charged (as with all dwarves they get +1 to Str when they charge and this would take them to Str 4). Against everyone else I'd use the GW to get a Str 5 attack. 

Always wounding on a 4+ is not a bad rule and helps against high toughness foes but it doesn’t help vs armour so I’ve consider this more of a situational fluffy rule.

When a model dies in combat, it gets to make a final attack back. Contrary to what I've seen written in some places, it is a single attack, no matter your base attacks and using AHW's doesn't boost the number, though you do get the Str bonus for a GW (or runic item effects). This rule helps to overcome the glaring lack of armour and with the step up rule can mean that you are potentially outputting far more attacks than the number normally available from your ranks.

They are also able to take a 50pt standard. This is more in line with Elite Dwarf units than those with a standard dwarf warrior stat line (such as slayers have). You will never have cause to take stolicism on it so stollazs is definitely something to strongly consider (the ability to get them up the board and into combat quickly for just 35pts, is great to avoid taking copious amounts of fire. It's also worth using it on a smaller unit of say 20 slayers and using them on one flank as a distraction carnefex).

So if this unit is pretty damn good, why is it not seen more? Well firstly, it is highly susceptible to poison and missile fire. There isn’t much you can do about the former but for the latter, it is why I consider the Grungni banner with the 5++ ward vs missiles, an almost mandatory selection when taking the unit. You won’t be able to put it in the unit as only a BSB can take it so you will need to place it within 6” of them. They also have the same limited movement as all dwarf units so it is hard to get favourable matchups. The final reason is probably down to choices. They come out of the same section as Cannons, Grudge Throwers, Gyrocoptors, Hammerers, Ironbreakers etc. That is a lot of quality competition vying for slots and is probably the main reason for their exclusion.

So slayers are pretty good by themselves but if you are taking Ungrim as your general and a slayer centric army, then they get even better. This is for one reason and that is because he allows one unit to take a 100pt banner. This is the largest banner allowance outside of the BSB and means you can place one of the Master Runes on the standard (I tend to use Valaya on the unit as Groth would go on the Hammerers).

As a final note, some unscrupulous players take units of 5 or so slayers and deploy them in darts, 1 wide and 5 deep and then use them as a tarpit to hold up enemy units, utilising their unbreakable rule (there is a bit more to this tactic but I won’t soil this post with the rest). DON’T BE THAT GUY. Seriously, just don’t. It is WAAC tactics and no one likes playing that guy. I only mention this here so you can be aware that it is a thing and so if you see them fielded like that, shoot the shit out of them.




Miners

Miners cost the exact same points as GW dwarves, which is not unsurprising as the stats are exactly the same. Where they differ is they drop the shieldwall rule (which is pointless for them anyway) and gain underground advance. This rule gives them the option of using the ambush ability, which is a great way of getting your dwarves into charge range quickly. Their rule specifically says that they ‘can’ be placed into ambush (whereas the ambush rule normally means you ‘must’ place them into ambush) and that gives you some great tactical flexibility.

It is worth noting that their rules mean that in the turn they enter the table, any shooting against them gets a -1 to hit (as the miners peer out of the hole they used to reach that part of the battlefield).

They do have two upgrades. The first is the steamdrill that I covered in an earlier section. This allows you to re-roll the dice to see if you enter the table on that turn. I strongly recommend this as a must take if using a large unit as you don’t want that many points off the table. The second is blasting charges. Chucking some dynamite is fun and fluffy but not worth the points to upgrade.

Taking one or two units of 10 miners can really give an opponent pause, especially if they have a number of warmachines, as they have to factor in these units appearing in their back field. At just 100pts for 10 it is well worth considering taking a single unit to open up options.

Taking a horde of them works well in the ambush/vanguard list as having that sort of threat appear just cannot be ignored. It becomes truly frightening when paired with a similar size number of Rangers.





Cannon

I consider a cannon an almost mandatory choice in every dwarf list. In eighth they are just too useful to not take one in order to threaten monsters and monstrous units. Dwarf cannons become better than every other one in the game, as you can give them a rune to allow the artillery dice to be re-rolled and another one to cancel out regen (about the only defence against a S10 shot). The latter does run the risk of allowing a 5pt dragonbane gem giving that Daemon Prince a 2++ ward vs your shot but that is why you either take another cannon or a Grudge Thrower!

Seriously if you are taking a competitive dwarf list without a cannon and you aren’t running a strollaz/ambusher list, you need to rethink your list. It’s clichéd but true never-the-less.




Grudge Thrower

If for some reason you decided you weren’t taking a cannon (maybe you don’t hold truck with those upstart inventions), then you should consider taking a Grudge Thrower instead (or even one of each). If you take the GT, then you should take a Ro Penetrating as the additional +1S makes a massive difference as not only does it increase the blast area to S4 but it also makes the centre hole hit at S10 to put it on a par with a cannon. If you then give it the Ro Accuracy (which again you should), in order to allow re-rolls the scatter dice, then it becomes the same cost as as the Cannon with Ro Forging. It is also worth giving it the Ro Forging to reroll those pesky misfires.

The GT is great for culling large amounts of rank and file troops, especially if they are T3 but the runes also make it good for monster hunting (if not as good as the aforementioned cannons). It is the more versatile of the two which is why some players prefer to take them.

If taking warmachines, it is worth considering the Rule of Two (a new rule I’ve just made up and in no way connected to the Runic Rule of Three). Many armies have the ability to field their own artillery and both your and their primary mission (even above taking out that Dragon) will normally be counter battery fire. If you fail to get the first turn, then there is a strong chance your warmachine may not get to fire at all. By taking a combination of two of a Cannon/Grudge Thrower, you stand a much greater chance of being able to destroy their warmachine. To a lesser extent, you should also consider this when taking the following: Organ Gun/Flame Cannon, Gyrocoptor/Bomber but due to the range, the Cannon/GT combo is far more important.




Bolt Thrower

I’ll say right now that I think the bolt thrower is the weakest, non-character choice in the army book. It is comparable to other races bolt throwers but can take a huge 100pts of runes. This means that you can really tailor it, giving boosted str, +1 to hit flyers or flaming attacks (to name a few). However there are two main drawbacks:

Rolling to hit. The dwarf crew only have a BS3. This only gives you an evens chance of hitting at short range. Over that and it drops to a 5+. This is just too unreliable. Sure you could spam a few of them or add runes or a master engineer to help out but then this feeds into the second drawback:

Cost. A basic bolt thrower is 55pts (before adding runes). This is 20pts more than an OnG equivalent. Yes your crew is tougher and gains stubborn but those attributes aren’t why you take a warmachine. You take it for the warmachines abilities. To get the most of it you either want to add an engineer to give improved BS or add runes but then the cost starts to spiral and you would be better off taking a cannon as that is stronger and doesn’t need to roll to hit. You could therefore take 2 basic BT’s but again they are not too far off the cost of a naked cannon and I would recommend taking that every time, even over 2 similar costed BT’s.




Gyrocoptor

And now we come to the money shot. The dwarf Gyrocoptor is arguably the best ‘warmachine’ in the book. If I said earlier that I consider a cannon almost mandatory, then I will say that you categorically NEED to take at least one Gyrocoptor in EVERY dwarf list. They are that good. In fact, if you aren’t taking two (remember the Rule of Two mentioned earlier), you will likely regret it.

Why are they so good? Well first of all they bring something that the rest of your list sadly lacks, speed. In an army that can barely make it past a waddle, having a unit that flies at M10 (or a 20” march, remembering that no test is required due to relentless) is just so crucial. If that was all it bought to the table I’d probably say it was a must take. As it is, they happily bring much more than that.

If you compare it against a similar sized chaff unit, the Great Eagle, for 30pts more, you get the same 3 wounds but with a toughness of 5 and a 4+ save on top, which makes it far more survivable. In combat, you still have 2 attacks but at 1 less WS and a significantly lower Initiative (and no stomp) but to be honest you don’t really want your Gyro in combat. What you do get to make up for the lack of combat prowess are some other abilities, which far out strip the eagle.

Bombs – Once per game, if you move over an enemy unit/model (and this includes marching), the Gyrocoptor can drop its bombs. You roll an artillery dice and that is the number of S3 AP hits caused (misfires cause 1 auto wound on the Gyro with no saves). This is never going to be devastating (unless the targeted unit is on the small side, such as other chaff units) but instead think of it as an added bonus.

Steam vs brimstone guns – The Gyro comes as standard with the Steam Gun. It uses the flame template and causes automatic S3 AP hits for everything under it. This is a total unit killer and is one of the main reasons you will take the Gyro. When combined with the speed and manoeuvrability of the model it can decimate units. It’s worth noting that if you get to a stage where the template no longer covers the maximum models in a unit (say if the unit has dropped to a low number of models), then move on to a different unit and rinse and repeat. The template is at its most effective when covers a large number of models (20mm infantry are best).

The Brimstone gun is a free upgrade that gives the Gyro: D3, S5, Flaming, AP, Quick to fire, dwarf crafted shots with an 18” range. This sounds promising at first but with a BS3, the unit will always hit at best on a 5+ due to the multiple shot modifier. On top of that, if you are over 9” away, you also get the long range modifier, so will only hit on a 6+. If you want S5 AP shots that badly, take an Organ gun (or stack up on Irondrakes). I cannot think of any situation where this upgrade is preferable to the standard Steamgun (except if there were some form of comp restrictions in play limiting it – which I have come across – and you still wanting to take the Gyro)

Vanguard – Half the Gyro’s (rounding up) in the army, may be given vanguard for 20pts per model. This is a really handy rule, especially if they are in a strollaz list. It isn’t something I’ve utilised as much as I probably should as I always struggle to find the points.

Restrictions – You can take double the number of Gyro’s in a 3k list that you are normally allowed for Special units (so 6 rather than the 3). It isn’t something I’ve often seen but does allow some different builds.

Gyrocoptors fall into a kind of middle ground of roles. They can be used as chaff, blocking units, attacking warmachines etc. but that isn’t really what you want to use them for. I’ve found they work better as a harassment unit. I tend to move them up aggressively and then march them over the top of a unit, dropping their bombs on the way, to get into the back field. They then will sit behind your selected enemy unit, using its steam gun repeatedly to whittle down their numbers and making them take leadership tests to march at every turn. (My favourite memory of this use was a single Gyro taking out 400pts of Chaos warriors in just 3 turns, neutering the unit for the entire game).

As for the cost, you get all this for a meagre 80pts (or 100pts with Vanguard). I would say this unit is probably under-costed but then a unit of 5 DE Dark Riders with shields and Repeater x-bows comes in around the same value and they are some of the best chaff in the game.

POST 6


Rare

Irondrakes

There are very few units, from the dwarf army book that I would insist you had to take, Gyrocoptors are definitely on the list and more often than not Cannons and Organ guns but here we are looking at Irondrakes and they are also strong contenders.

The Irondrakes have the same elite stats as their deep dwelling brethren, Ironbreakers but with a slightly reduced 4+/ 6++ (non-restricted ward), which increases to a 2++ vs fire. As an anvil, this makes them more effective than a unit of shieldbeards, our go to core anvil unit, with the added advantage of an extra point of Leadership (10) and the same 50pt Magic standard allowance.

Ok so they are still not as good as Ironbreakers but there’s more. On top of that they get an 18″, flaming, str 5, Armour Piercing, ranged attack and they are quick to fire meaning they can move and shoot and stand and shoot without penalty (except for long range) and always stand and shoot, no matter how close the charger is.

The unit champion can be upgraded to dual drake pistols (two, 12″, str 5, flaming, AP, ranged attacks and these also gives the unit the chance of removing regen in combat with his 2 flaming attacks) or to the trollhammer torpedo (a 24″, str 8, flaming, d3 wound, slow to fire attack).

NOTE: the pistols DO NOT allow the unit to stand and shoot at short range, as the drakegun has a range of 18” and half of that is 9” (and the pistols have a range of 12”).

Being both a solid anvil and having a high str ranged attack gives them a versatility that our other infantry units lack. They work equally well as a flank or centrally placed unit and adding a stubborn runic banner means they will normally hold to the last dwarf. The rune of slowness, whilst an obvious and well known choice, is very effective even against cavalry or other high distance chargers.

Add in a basic Runesmith to the unit (who can be tooled up to add further depth with items such as the silver horn, breath weapon or even a basic runic weapon to counter ethereals) and their ward becomes 5+ vs direct dmg spells and their close combat attacks gain AP which effectively doubles their combat effectiveness vs armoured troops and if you choose to charge with them (a possibly option if you have the rune of slowness) then they get the standard dwarf +1 to str that turn and an effective -3 armour modifier.

The Trollhammer Torpedo

I have been asked on several occasions why I never take the trollhammer. There are a couple of reasons:

Slow to fire. It is rare that my unit of drakes is stationary and even with the increased bs of 4 for the champion, it makes a big difference to the hit roll and you cannot stand and shoot with it.

Price. 20pts for it (or 30 if you include the champion cost) may not seem an expensive upgrade but with my preferred army load out, I cannot normally squeeze it in.

Charge reactions. Dual pistols allows a stand and shoot reaction, with an additional attack. Once in combat, they again provide an additional attack for the champion and as they are flaming, can strip regen off anything he attacks. If he does charge himself, he gets the standard dwarf +1 str, so they are back to str 5, flaming AP attacks in the first round of combat.

Single dice rolls. It works like a cannon, in so far as, no matter the actual odds I seem to find that with a single dice roll, 9 times out of 10, it is guaranteed to roll a 1 (either to wound or hit). Conversely 2 dice rolls will more often than not come up as an 11 or 12, especially for break tests. Don’t ask me why, I don’t make the rules, it’s just the way it is!

In terms of recommended unit size, the normal 10 man squad is reasonably cheap and works well but a unit of 20 is solid and a great alternative to Ironbreakers, both as an anchor for your lines and as an offensive unit with the S5 drakeguns. Runes of slowness or stoicism are definitely recommended with a larger unit. A Stollaz rune, to grant Vanguard, can be a surprise to your opponent, especially when they find this fearsome unit is range from the first turn! If going this route, I wouldn’t normally move the full 12”, just far enough to get a number of your foes units in range from the get go (so probably 4-5”). The average unit can only move back 2-3” and your Irondrakes can match that movement. By only vanguarding a few inches, you help prevent them closing in on you a quickly.

So Irondrakes are not an automatic choice but definitely bear consideration, either working in tandem or as an alternative to an Organ gun.


Rangers

This is another unit that offers the dwarves something different. They are identical to GW Quarrellers in core, including cost and come as standard with heavy armour, x-bows and GW’s. On top of that, they effectively get for free, throwing axes (that always allows them to stand and shoot at S4) and Scout. Scout is phenomenal for Dwarves as it allows them to get round their poor movement.

Having the 30” crossbows means that when they are set up, they can already be within short range to maximise their ranged damage as well as being in a great position to then charge in if required.

You can take these guys in minimum units of 5, which means you can take 2 small units just to screen your lines in a vanguarding list, which is essential to not waste all the points spent on those banners runes.

You could also go the other way and drop a horde of 40 to really screw with someone’s day.

You could take 1 or 2 units of 15-20 but I don’t advocate that, purely because I’ve had a couple of very bad experiences with using them at that size. Bear in mind that they are very likely going to be out of range of a general or bsb early on and so susceptible to panic from shooting.

Rangers are a great option to take and the only reason you probably don’t see them more is because they have some extremely strong competition for the points in the special and rare sections.

As a final note, you can upgrade these to Bugmans Rangers to get an additional point of WS, BS and Str at a cost of 3pts per model (as well as the 165pt cost of taking Joseph himself). In a 2500pt game, this limits you to taking 35 rangers (with a standard and musician). The question is, is it worth doing? Possibly. I personally wouldn’t as I think it makes their cost too high but I wouldn’t gainsay you if you decided to go that route as BS4 on crossbows is a combo that makes me warm and fuzzy inside (though that might be the Bugmans XXXXXXXX).


Gyrobomber

What do you get if you take a Gyrocoptor and turn it up to 11? Well I can tell you right now, it isn’t the Gyrobomber. Oh bomber how I wanted to love thee!

The main attack works in a similar way to the gyrocoptors dive-bomb. You can bomb any unit/model you move over during your turn. This includes if you march and remember you can’t be march blocked due to the relentless rule (so have a 20” range and can weave as much as you like). To find out how many hits you get, instead of rolling an artillery dice, you use the large blast marker. On top of that, after resolving the damage, roll a D6 and on a 4+ you have a chance of placing the small blast template and causing further damage (I think of it like the dambuster’s bouncing bomb – not really an accurate analogy I appreciate, as their bombs didn’t work like that but I see the secondary explosion from a ‘bounce’ in my head).

So far so good. This is one of the few attacks in the game to use the large template and the potential number of hits from that is huge. So why don’t I like it? Well to start with, both the large template and the small template (if you are lucky enough to get it) have a chance to scatter. The big template between 2 and 10”, in the same way as a stone thrower. The small template by D6”. With no way of re-rolling the scatter, it makes this very unpredictable in an army that excels in pin-point artillery accuracy.

In terms of damage, anything under the template is struck by a S3, AP hit (or S6 in the centre with D3 wounds). Already this gives you only a 50% chance to wound most standard rank and file in the game and this chance reduces against quite a few armies that have T4. This combined with the scatter makes the damage output too unpredictable for me.

It isn’t too expensive so can be used as a distraction carnifex, as a large blast template is always a worry for opponents but expect a large amount of fire to come its way (It does feel that it needs an additional wound). Having a moving stone thrower also helps to protect it to some extent from warmachine hunters.

My final thoughts are, the large blast template isn’t that much bigger than the flame template and it has a large chance of scattering. So what would you rather take, a guaranteed number of hits or the potential for a greater number?

The Bomber also comes out of the rare section that is already packed with fantastic choices and for that reason alone you will often find it hard to field this.

If you were to field bombers, I'd probably go down the air force route with two bombers and 2-3 Gyrocoptors. That would give your opponent too many targets to prioritise (in a similar way to a monster mash) so they could cause some real issues.




Organ Gun

If the cannon is the number one choice to take to kill off single multi-wound models, then the Organ gun was the preferred choice to kill off everything else. With the introduction of Irondrakes in 8th, it may no longer be the first choice for your S5, Armour Piercing, ranged attacks but there is still a strong case for taking it.

In use, it is very similar to the upstart Hell Blaster Volley Gun but it uses 2 artillery dice rather than the 3 than the HBV rocks, to determine the number of shots fired. Hmmm that doesn’t seem right the humans outclassing the Dawi. Both have to roll to hit using their crew’s BS3. The main base difference is the Organ Gun comes with a 30” range. I cannot state how good that is, sure you roll up to 10 shots fewer than the human version but the main weakness of the HBV is normal archers with a 30” range can target it before it becomes a threat to the rest of your army. The Organ Gun does not have this weakness. Ahhh mankind tears have never tasted so sweet!

The other glaring difference is if you roll a misfire on one of the artillery dice, you don’t halve the number of shots. Instead you just get a -1 to hit modifier.

By itself, the Organ Gun is a good edition to the list but nothing to shout out about. This mainly comes down to it needing to roll to hit using the crew’s BS3. This only gives it a 4+ chance to hit at short range and 5+ at long.

Where it shines is when you add an engineer to it. I would say, if you take an Organ Gun, at a minimum, an Engineer is COMPULSORY. This immediately gives it BS4 (so to hit becomes 3+ at short range and 4+ at long). He also give you a re-roll to one artillery dice. My recommendation is to only use this if you roll a misfire OR if you roll a ‘2’ on one of the dice (you want to maximise your shots and taking the chance of a misfire over increasing the number of shots is always worth it, especially if has the engineer and Ro Accuracy).

It is worth noting that if you take just an engineer on the OG, then it doesn’t have magical shots. Suddenly that horde of White Lions with the Banner of the World Dragon isn’t looking so safe with just a 6+ save!

To take it to the next level, I also highly recommend taking a Ro Accuracy as that adds +1 to the hot roles (short range is now 2+ and long 3+). It is this combined with the basic OG stats of S5 AP, with a potential of up to 20 shots that make this warmachine so feared!

As normal I recommend following the Rule of 2, as then you have a redundancy.

In fact, in a 2500pt list, with 625pts to play with in Rare, you can take:

1 organ gun with Ro accuracy (+1 to hit), with accompanying engineer.

1 organ gun - no runes but with attached engineer.

19 Irondrakes with standard (1* Ro slowness), champion with dual drake pistols and musician (accompanied by a Runesmith).

This comes to 615pts (excluding the heroes) and creates an extremely formidable selection of str 5 AP ranged attacks for the throng.

As a bit of trivia. On the plastic kit organ gun, the runes on the top side, of the firing end of barrel, spell ‘bang’ in dwarvish.




Flame Cannon

This fires in the same way as the one in the BRB. You place a flame template at the machine and roll an artillery dice to see how far it goes. Anything under it suffers a S5 flaming hit and if any wounds are unsaved, they have to take a panic test.

In addition, the dwarf version (being superior in every way because it was made by dwarves), inflicts multiple wounds (D3).

And because Dwarves are the master engineering race they didn’t just let it go at that. You can super charge the shot so that you can place the flame template up to 12” away and then roll the artillery dice. This gives it a more respectable 14-24” range and remember that the template is then an additional 8” in length. Now you are talking.

The supercharged shot does come with a slight drawback, if you roll a misfire, you -1 to your roll on the black powder chart. This means that you HAVE to take a Ro Forging to give you the best chance of not getting a misfire (a normal Engineer cannot affect this role, though it should be noted that Grimm Burlocksson can but you wouldn’t want him to as he is far more useful doing other stuff).

It was like this was invented to ruin Trolls and happily can also do the same to any other monstrous infantry. Get your angles right and it will happily butcher tarpit units too.

The main problem with the Flame Cannon is it falls into competition with the Organ Gun and in my eyes the OG’s 30” fixed range trumps the flame cannon’s variable range. Still it is a decent choice and as long as you can neutralise any threats to it, you’ll have fun using it.


Final Thoughts

The book contains some extremely strong elements that allow you to actively participate in most phases of the game. You are restricted by your low movement and for this reason it favours a heavier shooting element (further backed up as you have no magic phase to speak of).

Of everything in the book, there are only 4 debatable entries: the Anvil of Doom, Thorek Ironbrow, the Bolt Thrower and Gyrobomber, with Thorek being by far the worst by a large margin. The bolt thrower and Bomber could be taken but there are just far better comparable options.

POST 8

In the following post, the 'Monty Mash' list is further expanded and a breakdown given of what makes it so effective. It then ends with a good number of example lists, all of which have placed well in Grand Tournaments. - knoffles


The Monty Mash by Stymie Jackson

www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/44585-2014-dawi-tactica-the-monty-mash/


Tactical Variant: Hybrid Gunline

Points Value: 2500

Summary

Alright, the book has been out for a few months now. The easiest path to a tactical article right now is basically developing the old mainline dwarf armies (gunline hybrid and 'Furgil Lists') to account for changes in the new book. Ambush and strollaz lists look very different than in the past and are, in my opinion, harder to judge effectiveness. There's also new gimmicks like Dwarven Air Forces (yes, a primarily underground-dwelling race would totally master flight) that have appeared, as well as interesting changes for hardcore gunline lists.

So we'll have a better idea about how a traditional dwarf army is doing right now. What the book seems to be geared at is a template of a solid battery of war machines, a couple gyrocopters for support, backed by some interchange able infantry units. There's not a lot of difference (but some tactic differences of course) between running quarreller blocks in core, or taking two medium-sized Shieldbeard blocks. Yes, they'll play differently, but the special and rare choices complement both these options easily with just a change in play style. In other words, the Mash list is not dictated by the 625 points you spend on core. Take whatever you want, we'll cover that later.

Let's be honest here, there really ain't that much to do when all you have is Infantry and Warmachines.

The idea of this list is the 'Monty' Mash www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/44457-war-games-con/. Montegue's battle report here shows the basic outline. As with the last edition, the first person to get an excellent result at a GT is the first person I name a list after. It's a draft tactica anyway, so we can always change our minds later. But we're seeing reports of this list crop up all over and I've used it a couple times (outside of tournaments) to really be excited about it.


Design

The Mash list uses a bank of powerful war machines (4 or 5) backed by a solid Elite unit to base the army around.

The Mash:

Our mash is our war machines and Elite block. The war machine battery is going to be basically cannon and organ guns. Both are excellent, and both can become primary targets of the enemy VERY quickly. You can certainly build variants that have only 3 war machines, but the risk is with a single organ gun, and you're fighting an avoidance army or cavalry-bus based army, that organ gun is going to be public enemy number one and even entrenchment doesn't do enough to stop poison or even massed S3 fire. Three wounds is three wounds. Grungni becomes even more valuable here as your machines are more precious, but with fewer it's easier to get them in the 5++ bubble.

For 4 war machines, take two cannon and two organ guns. Alternately, and I think this works well in the current meta and should REALLY be considered, is taking one GT instead of a cannon. For elgi-heavy metas, 2xGT and 2xOG can certainly work as well.

For 5 war machine builds, the 5th should be either a flame cannon or a GT and not a third cannon

GTs, with accuracy and forging/ME re-roll, hit 40mm bases 55% of the time. This is roughly identical to cannon odds (with the benefit the GT can shoot through or over your troops as it doesn't need to see the ground but the actual target). Cannons are of course better at larger bases and the GT better at smaller, so I feel a GT makes a solid cannon-replacement. With avoidance armies being popular taking both cannon and GT allows better flexibility.

Cannon

Forging

Options: Fire

I don't think you can skip forging at all. The MEs will be too busy for the first few turns on the Organ Guns typically.

Grudge Thrower

Accuracy, Penetration

Options: Forging

The black powder Misfire table is a little harsher than what the GT rolls on, so it might be able to skip forging and hope an ME can provide that later in the game. Without it, it costs the same as a forged Cannon. Penetration is for murdering avoidance units (every hit has to count) rather than for larger targets. It also makes it useful if you have to shoot it at ranked up units of tougher infantry blocks...a cannon is probably better at that task otherwise.

Organ Gun

Accuracy

Options: Forging, Fire

This is the key unit. This is what causes fear in the enemy, obliterates MSU armies, and even makes flying Nurgle Princes think twice. Taking one is great. Taking two is way better if you can fit it. The accuracy rune becomes optional if you have an ME supporting the Organ Gun. BS5 is awesome, but if you're trimming points to squeeze in support like rangers or Irondrakes that's probably one of the first things to go. A cheap version is running one ME to man a naked Organ Gun (say Hi BotWD) and one OG with Accuracy+Forging. The expensive version is Accuracy on both (one with fire) AND a Master Engineer to aim. I wouldn't recommend going less than the cheap version as any Master Engineers are helpful to the list, and running without Forging on an Organ gun (through any source) is risky. Not from blowing up but from effectively wasting a turn of shooting.

Flame Cannon

Options: Forging

For 5 war machine lists consider giving the ol' girl a try.


The Elites

Option 1: ~30 Hammerers, Musician, Standard with Groth

Option 2: ~30 Ironbreakers, Musician, Standard with Stoicism

I feel option 1 is by far the stronger option because Groth goes so well with a defensive list. But you can't go wrong with Ironbreakers. A shout-out has to be given for slayers (possibly with Strollaz) for comp'd tournaments. Heck, if the enemy is shooting slayers he's not shooting something more valuable like war machines or gyros.


Characters:

This is the easiest part. The 'Holy Trinity' of the dwarves is the double runesmith and bsb build. It's pretty self evident why and we're not going to waste time in this thread. Within the limited choices of viable characters there some variety of gearing up. What's new to this article are engineers. The Mash lists works well with at least one, and preferably two master engineers. Again, they work in either a full-on gunline version or a Furgil-style war machine-only shooting list with all combat infantry, or anything in between.

Runesmiths

Spellbreaking, Stone, Shield

Options: 2nd spellbreaking, Fiery Ring, Furnace, Passage, Iron

Simple. Their point is to slightly buff a unit and provide a dispel scroll. If you have points you can make your general a little harder to kill or, even better, make the dispel scroll a spelleater. Everyone should try and take one or two of those gems. You can cripple a magic-reliant enemy in the first turn for a measly 15-20 extra points.

'Banner' Thane BSB

Grungni, Shield

Options: Strollaz, Stoicism, Slowness



'Tanked Thane BSB

Gromril, 3xWarding or 2xIron, GW

I'm personally a fan of a combat character. We have a hard time justifying one in our lists unless you want to run a Lord. Lords are great, but my opinion is they need to be in a strollaz list. Which this artical ain't. Either build listed above is fantastic. A decently tough hero with a 5++ shooting bubble, or a very tough hero with S6. I don't think the 'Banner BSB is mandatory to the build, but many gunline and hybrid lists I've seen are strongly favoring the 'Banner' BSB over the 'Tanked' version.

Master Engineer

Options: Stone, Pistols or Handgun/GW, Impact, Shielding


They are fine naked. When you are adding options the first two have the highest relative value. Pistols make him have 3 S5 attacks on the charge, possibly with hatred. That will wreck chaff units trying to tie up your war machines. The rest of the options are for flavor...it's doubtful you'll have the points with all the other options to choose from. Stuff like upgrading Spellbreaking to Spelleating or Vanguard on a Gyro. But they certainly work effectively. Single pistols are IMO a waste...unless he's camping in a thunderer unit or some other specific purpose.


The Rest:

625 points should be spent on core. If you go over it will be at the expense of Gyrocopters, your Elite block and possibly war machines, and we start to move away from a Mash list. If you do take a smaller Elite block (like 20) you can make the core blocks bigger for a more 'Furgil' like list which can certainly work. This would mean two large GW warrior units, or a decent block of Shieldbeards (25) with those GW Warriors.

We've got three basic styles of core to fit into 625 points.

All shooting:

4 units of 12, or 3 units of 15. Quarrellers with either shields or GW, Thunders with shield, whatever. 15 Shield Quarrellers/Thunderers with musician are 205 points. Take two of those, and one of GW Qarrellers and you have exactly 625 spent.

All infantry:

2 units of 20-25 Shieldbeards. Self explanatory. Goes well with hammerers in special. Better, IMO, than 2x30 GW Warriors, which also fits if you're so inclined. Avoid Shield Warriors.

The Mix:

1) 25 Shieldbeards and 2x10 Quarrellers. You can work the points to get close to 625 pretty easily...may need to drop a Longbeard or 3. Take whatever you want on the Quarrellers.

2) 39 GW Warriors. 15 Shield Quarrellers with Standard and Musician. 625 on the nose.

Gyrocopters

You want two. Three in a variant list. Vanguard if points permit. Take them. Take them. Did I say to take them?


Putting it all together (Tournament Tested Lists W-L-D)


Montegue's List (4-1-0 Games Con, 4th Place Overall)

www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/44457-war-games-con/


Thane, BSB, Grungni, Shield

Runesmith, General, Shield, Stone, Spell Breaker, Furnace

Runesmith, Great Weapons, Spell Breaker

Master Engineer, pistol

Master engineer


24 Longbeards, Music and Std.

10 quarrelers, Shields

10 Quarrelers, Shields

27 Hammerers, Groth One Eye, Fire on the champ


Cannon, Forging

Cannon, Fire

Organ Gun, Accuracy

Organ Gun, Accuracy, Fire

Flame Cannon

Gyro

Gyro


Montegue's 2nd List (3-0-2 2014 Bayou Battles)

www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/44793-bayou-battles/

Thane, BSB, Grungni, Shield

Runesmith, General, Shield, Stone, Spell Breaker, Furnace

Runesmith, Great Weapon, Spell Breaker

Master Engineer

Master Engineer


25 Longbeards, Music and Std.

10 Quarrelers, Shields

10 Quarrelers, Shields

27 Hammerers, Groth One Eye, Fire on the champ


Cannon, Forge

Cannon, Fire

Organ Gun, Accuracy

Organ Gun, Accuracy, Fire

Grudge Thrower

Gyro

Gyro


Stuntymike's List (3-0-2 at Toddhammers Con, 4th Overall)

www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/44490-2600pts-for-first-tournie-with-new-book/

Runesmith Shield, 2 x Rune of Spellbreaking and Rune of Stone

Runesmith Shield, 1 x Rune of Spellbreaking and Rune of Stone, Fiery Ring of Thori

Master Engineer Great Weapon, Rune of Stone

Thane BSB, Shield, Master Rune of Grungni, Rune of Slowness


24 x Longbeards Full command, Great Weapons, Rune of Stoicism

24 x Longbeards Full command, Great Weapons, Rune of Stoicism, Rune of Sanctuary


Cannon Rune of Forging

Gyrocopter Steam Gun

Gyrocopter Steam Gun

Gyrocopter Steam Gun

21 x Slayers Standard and Musician


16 x Irondrakes Full Command, Trollhammer Torpedo, Rune of Slowness

Organ Gun Rune of Accuracy, Rune of Forging

Organ Gun



Rayn Oathforge's List (Crossroad Spring GT, 4th place out 80+)

Lord: GW, Shieldbearers, Stone, 2x Iron, 3x Warding

Runesmith: Sh, Stone, Furnace, Spellbreaking

Runesmith: Sh, Stone, 2x Spellbreaking

Thane: BSB Sh, Groth


41 Warriors: FC, GW

20 Quarrelers: FC


30 Hammerers: FC

Cannon: Forging

Grudge Thrower: Accuracy, 2x Penetrating

Grudge Thrower: Accuracy, Penetrating, Burning

Gyro


8 Rangers: FC


Note: This is not really a Mash list without the Organ Guns and with a Lord. The overall success however earns it a place as it has a good bit in common with the other lists.


Rayn Oathforge's List (Unplugged GT, 11th place out 80+)

Runesmith: Sh, Stone, Furnace, 2x Spellbreaking General

Runesmith: Sh, Stone, 2x Spellbreaking, Fire

Thane: BSB Sh, Grungi

Master Engineer

Master Engineer


35 Longbeards: Standard, Stoicism, Musician, GW

15 Quarrellers: Musician, Standard


33 Hammerers: FC

Cannon: Forging, Burning

Grudge Thrower: Accuracy, Penetrating, Forging

Gyro


Organ Gun: Accuracy

Organ Gun: Accuracy, Burning



Rayn Oathforge's Fall Crossroad GT Best General (4-1-0)

www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/44955-dwarfs-at-crossroads-fall-gt-2014-best-general/

Runesmith: General, stone, shield, spellbreaking x2, furnace.

Runesmith: stone, shield, spellbreaking x2, rune of fire.

Master Engineer: pistol

Master Engineer

Thane: BSB, shield, Master Rune of Grungi

35 Longbeards: Great Weapons, Stoicism, musician and standard.

15 Quarrellers: Great Weapons, musician and standard.

30 Hammerers: 2x Rune of Slowness, musician and standard.

Gyrocopter

Cannon: Forging, Fire

Grudgethrower: Accuracy, Forging, Penetrating

Organ Gun: Accuracy, fire

Organ Gun: Accuracy



Thorgim Thunderbarrel's List (2014 Bayou Battles, 4-0-1)

www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/44801-2500-points-successful-first-gt/


Thane General MRo1+armor, RoWardingx3, great weapon

Thane BSB shield, MRoGrungi

Runesmith shield, RoStone, RoSpellbreaking, Ring of Thori

Runesmith RoStone, RoSpellEATing

Master Engineer


30 GW warriors, veteran, standard

24 shieldbeards, standard


24ironbreakers, full command

2x gyros

canon, forging

grudge thrower, accuracy, forging, flaming


10 rangers, standard

organ gun, accuracy

organ gun, accuracy, flaming



Putting it all together (Other takes on Hybrid Dwarves):


Andy Spier's 2400 Point ETC List

Gunline Variants


www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/42544-andy-spiers-battleblog-new-book-new-thread/page-6


Runesmith General, 2xSpellbreaking, Stone, Furnace, Shield

Runesmith, 2xSpellbreaking, Stone, Shield

BSB, Grungi, Great Weapon, Dwarf Pistol


20 xbow, GW, Veteran, Muso

20 xbow, GW, Veteran, Muso


27 Hammerers, Std (2xSanctuary), Muso

Cannon, Forging

Grudgethrower, Forging, Accuracy

Grudgethrower, Forging, Accuracy, Burning

Gyrocopter

Gyrocopter


16 Drakes, Muso, Ironwarden, Cinderblast Bombs

Organ Gun


This is Andy's 2400 point ETC List. It's actually pretty close to something I'm thinking about running in an ETC tournament. A variant of this list) for a 2000 Point 40 player tournament came in 4th as seen in following list. These are more gunline with an emphasis on the more reliable missile shooting units over Organ Guns. Cinderblast because it can be used to stand and shoot in most Euro comp packs.


Runesmith, Spelleater, stone, furnace, shield

Runesmith, Spelleater, stone, shield

BSB, Grungi, Shield


17xbow, gw, std, muso

17xbow, gw, std, muso


cannon, forging

Grudgethrower, accuracy, forging,

Grudgethrower, accuracy, forging, burning

Gyrocopter

Gyrocopter


28 Irondrakes, std, stoicism, muso, Champion, cinderblast bombs.


Test Variant Build #1:

Variant: Bringing in the Irondrakes

Here's what I'm thinking for a 'softer' ETC list. Swapping out the Irondrakes for another OG/Engineer combo and a 3rd Gyro would make it 'hard'.

Runesmith, 2xSpellbreaking, Stone, Furnace, Fire, Shield

Runesmith, Spellbreaking, Stone, Shield

Thane, BSB, MR Gromril, 3xWarding, GW

Master Engineer, Stone, Pistol

29 Longbeards, Shield, Mus, SB

15 Xbows, Shield, Mus, SB


25 Hammerers, Mus, SB, MR Groth

Cannon, Forging, Fire

Grudge Thrower, Accuracy, Penetration

Gyrocopter

Gyrocopter

Organ Gun, Accuracy

15 Irondrakes, Full Command, Trollhammer


As you can see it's similar to Andy's list, adding a Longbeard Anvil and a Master Engineer. 3 War Machines is definitely on the light side for a Hybrid list, but the Irondrakes and Trollhammer help mitigate that somewhat.

POST 10

This is a good little article on deploying blocks of troops and warmachines to get maximum coverage between them. - knoffles


Alex Hall's Three Block Deployment

www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/44665-3-block-deployment-ideas/

I'm considering some deployment techniques and thought some of the longbeards around here might be able to shed some light on these ideas. I'm no expert and I'm not claiming this is the best nor only way to deploy. I have played Dwarfs for about 7 years, gone to a few GTs, and regularly play in no comp local tourneys.

I like to take the 3 block approach much akin to the Furgil style of yesteryear. In the new book it seems that smaller units are the thing to do now because we can make them stubborn. That way, they can hold long enough for support to swing around!

Anyway I ran into a situation in a recent game where I deployed too tightly. My center unit was unable to swing around to support my flanks! I wanted to come up with a trusty and easy way to deploy in a typical game to maximize fields of fire, ensure supporting flank charges, and minimize my spacing for Grungni.


The set up

I made the below image by just screen capping a set up in Universal Battle (hope I'm not violating any copyright). It's a pretty useful tool and you should check it out! Plus, its free!




Diagram key

The little 2x2 units represent Organ Guns or whatever warmachine you might want there to protect which could be further forward or back, as desired. Things like more war machines, Gyros, rangers, MEs, and other auxiliary or supporting units are not represented here because their deployment is highly variable whereas the main line pretty much sets up the same way every game. The 24" ruler is there to show the amount of room you'll need to make this formation. You will also need about 6" of depth. You can even measure ahead of time for where to deploy, making sure that there's ample space.


The units

The center unit is typically either Hammerers, Ironbreakers, or maybe Slayers. I prefer Hammerers simply for access to Groth One-Eye. The flank units could be anything, typically core; GW warriors (my fav), Longbeards, Quarrellers, or maybe Thunderers. See this useful thread for list building that plays well in this deployment: http://www.bugmansbr...the-monty-mash/


Observations and Grungni

As you can see, the center can support the flanks and the flanks can support the center. If you can anchor one flank to some impassible terrain or building and the other to a table edge by angling the formation this is one tough nut to crack! This deployment also makes full use of the Master Rune of Grungni, covering every unit and war machine if you so desire. If a horde forms the center, the Grungni bubble will fall short of protecting the flank units unless you squeeze the warmachines to the back.


Enemy depth

One variable is the depth of enemy units. In this scenario, LOS is possible to units with 3 or more ranks. Sometimes the enemy unit will be only 2 ranks deep so you'll have to angle the flanks more inward and place them a little more forward. If the enemy is more than 5 ranks deep (Brets, Skaven) you can angle the flanks more outward (forming closer to a straight line).


Size of your units

The size of the flank units is not important other than to ensure they they will hold a charge. The longer they hold, the better. They don't need to do tons of damage, they just need to hold. This is why Groth One-Eye is vital to this deployment (and every Dwarf list?) The size of the unit in the center is more important. Based on how wheeling works, a deeper unit (more ranks) requries more space between it and intervening terrain/models. It is therefore, less wieldy. I have made a table to show the approximate spacing required to wheel a unit of varying sizes to ensure open charge lanes assuming they are somewhat flush.


5x8 3.7" 6x8 3.3"

5x7 3.0" 6x7 2.7" 7x7 2.5"

5x6 2.4" 6x6 2.1" 7x6 1.9"

5x5 1.9" 6x5 1.6" 7x5 1.5" 10x5 1.1"

5x4 1.2" 6x4 1.1" 7x4 1.0" 10x4 1.0"

5x3 1.0" 6x3 1.0" 7x3 1.0" 10x3 1.0"


I hope that makes sense. As you can see, a unit which only requires 1" is preferable to minimize the gaps, providing for a tighter formation. This really only applies to the center unit since the flanks will have open space to wheel. I think the magic number of ranks is no more than 5 if you care about maneuverability.

If a flank unit is in horde formation, you will need to angle it in further since enemies can take advantage of your frontage to position themselves out of LOS from your center.


Theoretically

The other thing is, the numbers above are not mathmatically derived (though could be). They are based on table top measurement. You can't tell your opponent, "well I spaced them thus so I can wheel". No. You have to physically do it and if you clip, its your fault for not providing extra room to account for human error. We humans tend to not pivot exactly, not see precisely, and not measure to the mm. Keep this in mind and provide for some slack.


Side note: Charge denial

This table is also useful if you'd like deny charges by restricting the enemy's wheeling by parking a Gyro next to the unit such that it cannot wheel to charge. This is an even better form of chaffing since the chaff is not destroyed and the unit simply fails the charge, moves forward or is forced to pick a different target. It only works if a wheel is required of course!



The Hard Castle

This is a quick example of what a hard castle looks like. It's obviously not a full army, but this gives you an idea of how to deploy war machines between blocks. Note the infantry will hang back slightly at the start to allow greater fields of fire. When the enemy gets closer they will advance to block of charges to the war machines when possible or flank anything that gets stuck on a stubborn war machine. Below we see the infantry has assumed blocking positions, but are faced in all directions to protect against ambushes.




The initial deployment above gives coverage against all angles. Now when the enemy advances and if the flanks are secure, you can shift into the re-inforced line formation. Again the war machines are protected against the cavalry force, but the Giant may be able to squeeze in anyway!



You'll notice the GT is behind the infantry. This is because unlike cannon they do not need to see the ground to shoot at it they need to see a target. When aiming from the crossbeam you can clearly see larger targets. Here we clearly clearly can target the bone giant:



This allows the Catapult to get a hard cover save against incoming fire while being unaffected itself. Organ Guns and Cannon may have sight blocked by the same deployment.

POST 12

This is a more general post on list building and all the elements that should be considered. - knoffles


Swordthain's List Building Advice

www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/44191-swordthains-list-building-tutorial/

This thread is more of a breakdown of the logic process behind picking an army, and how it all fits together. It will be useful if you wish to 'deviate' from the script and do you own take on the Mash list.


BUILDING A WFB ARMY LIST

Getting started, it has been brought to my attention that this tutorial revolves around the definitions I give to a lot of the "technical" terminology I use. So, here are some definitions to aid you in understanding and engaging this tutorial.


List Building

Tactical Elements: The assets available to the army (i.e. the choices that you have for your list).

Tactical Capabilities: The roles or functions that each Tactical Element has available.

**Strategic Concept: A simple statement about how your army is going to win.

Supporting Capabilities: The Tactical Capabilities in your army that support your Strategic Concept

Utility

Tactical Utility: A measure of the quality and quantity of capabilities available to a Tactical Element.

Value: A measure of the quality of the Tactical Element relative to its cost.

Core Tactical Element: The primary Tactical Elements that allow the army to achieve the Strategic Concept.

Supporting Tactical Element: The Tactical Elements that provide secondary and other capabilities to the army in support of the Strategic Concept or aid the main elements in executing the strategic concept.

Utility Lifespan: The point in the battle at which a Tactical Element/Capability ceases to be a critical asset.

Force Maneuver

Deploy

**Deployment Scheme: A simple, general statement on how your forces should be deployed in order to achieve your Strategic Concept.

Deployment Option: A choice that is made for each Tactical Element with the goal of maximizing its impact on the battle while potentially minimizing the impact of an opponent's Tactical Element.

Maneuver

**Maneuver Scheme: A simple, general statement on how your forces should conduct themselves during the battle in order to achieve your Strategic Concept.

Situation: An assessment of the battlefield, including possible deployment zones for your own forces and your opponent's forces, as well as the impacts of terrain (choke points, visibility, barriers to movement).

Area of Interest: The areas of the battlefield that have the potential to be utilized by friendly and enemy Tactical Elements, determined as deployment progresses.

Area of Operations: The area of the battlefield that you expect will come into play based on the finished deployment.

Mission: The goals for your Tactical Elements to accomplish in the battle in order to achieve victory by means of your Strategic Concept.

Execution: The choices and actions you take in order to accomplish the Mission with regards to your Strategic Concept, Deployment Scheme, and Maneuver Scheme.

Fragmentation Order: A change to a Tactical Element's mission as a result of an opponent's decision or other events during the course of the battle.

Mobility Scheme: Where will your Tactical Elements move, and why?

Obscuring Scheme: Which of your Tactical Elements need to be screened from the enemy?

Intelligence Scheme (for closed-list play): What information about your army is critical for the enemy to know, and how can they determine it?

Command and Control: deploy and maneuver constraints for maximizing the effectiveness of the army general, battle standard, and characters.



1. The first thing any general wants to do in developing a force for any fight is to consider what sorts of troops he or she has and what their roles are on the field of battle. This is really simple in theory, but it can be more difficult than one might imagine in practice. In other words, assess your assets. Imagine yourself as an ancient Israelite king or warlord for a moment. You have the Egyptians from the south and the Assyrians and Hittites from the north, not to mention the Babylonians to the east and Philistines to the west... Each other civilization has its own military foci. Each one has its strengths and weaknesses, but you may not be able to address all of those potential strengths in your force since there's such a wide diversity in the potential threats you may encounter on the battlefield. So, start by evaluating what sort of force you can build that will work well on its own terms!

As this ancient Israelite leader, imagine yourself assessing your assets: you have access mostly to peasant militias with clubs, slings, and other non-metal weaponry. You have access to a small class of wealthier countrymen who can afford metal weapons, spears, bows, and even some armor. Finally, you have the miniscule standing force that serves as the king's body guard and core of any army. You have almost no cavalry or chariots, so you really have to give up trying to face any of your enemies in the open plains. (Historically, the Hebrew people inhabited the hill country almost exclusively, since chariots and horses were extraordinarily expensive and could only function at significant disadvantage in rough terrain.) So, assuming you'll fight your battles defensively in rough or difficult terrain, which of your assets provide the most effective means of eliminating your enemies--whomever they may be?

This is basically what you're doing when you build your army list in WFB! For Dwarf players, the above example may be a good one, since the movement phase of the game tends to be a sore spot for a lot of Dwarf generals. (How I miss the days of the Rune of Oath and Honour!) Each asset is called a tactical element, or element for short. Assessing your assets is probably the most important thing you will do in building your army list next to developing a strategic concept, which we will address in the next section. What exactly does it mean to assess your assets?

First, think of the nature of the tactical element. It might be helpful to use an example here. Let's take regular Dwarf Warriors for starters, since they're pretty straight forward. Warriors have no ranged capabilities, meaning that they have only melee capabilities. Movement is a consideration, as well, which we'll talk about in a moment. So, understanding Warriors as a purely melee tactical element will have significant implications as you select them for inclusion in your list. Now, consider what functions melee tactical elements might have on the battlefield. Basically, there are two. (Let me know if you think of others.) First, they can kill stuff (the conventional jargon for such a melee tactical element is hammer). Second, they can die as slowly as possible (the conventional jargon for such a melee tactical element is anvil or points-denial). The equipment you choose for your Dwarf Warriors, then, will be highly influenced by the role or function you intend the unit to play in your army.

Movement can be its own tactical capability! (The conventional jargon for purely movement tactical capabilities is chaff or redirectors.) Dwarfs have preciously little access to these capabilities. Examples include Gyrocopters and single-column, 5-model Slayer units called "Slayer bolts". Other armies have excellent options for these units, such as Furies from Daemons of Chaos or Dire Wolves from Vampire Counts. The point of such units is merely to have something in a particular location at a particular point in time in order to gain or maintain spacial control of the battlefield. (In our historically-inspired vignette above, chariots excelled at controlling space on a battlefield as well as providing great offensive tactical capabilities in their own right, making them truly the terror weapon of ancient warfare.) A good WFB example of this might be using a unit of High Elf Shadow Warriors to block the Vanguard moves of a unit of Bretonnian Pegasus Knights.

The role or function a unit plays in your force is called its tactical capability. Sometimes a unit may provide more than one tactical capability, though it is usually problematic to build a multi-functional unit into a force as a critical strategic asset. We'll talk more about that later, too.


Go through the entire spectrum of tactical elements available to you. (In WFB terms, this means going through all the units and Runes and such in the entire Dwarf army book, for example.) Based on the options each unit has available to it, determine its potential tactical capabilities and what equipment you need to provide the unit with in order to best perform each of those potential tactical capabilities.


>>> I suggest Greyhnir's handbook as a useful tool for helping you assess your assets: www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/43675-greyhnirs-8th-edition-dwarf-handbook/ (edit: or even my own thoughts on the book at the start of this thread - knoffles)

Now you've assessed your assets and are ready to move on to the next step: developing a strategic concept!


2. The second thing any general wants to do in developing a force for any fight is to consider how he or she wants his or her army to engage the enemy force. Again, this is an internal decision, integral to the function of your force and should not be dictated by the nature of your possible opponent(s). This task takes a good amount of ability to synthesize the assessment of your assets you just did in the prior task! Given the tactical capabilities of your force, then, imagine the possible ways a force with access to those particular assets might engage an enemy force. This should take the lion's share of your time and thought! This is also the most important task in building an army list for a game of Warhammer! We call this developing your strategic concept. Your strategic concept should be simple, not complicated, and it should also have nothing to do whatsoever with a specific deployment or movement on the battlefield. Those sorts of things should be considered, but they should be considered as particular applications of your force organization theory. In other words, you build your army list and THEN consider specific tactical applications. Your list of available strategic concepts for any given faction will not be large. For example, you just don't ever see Beastmen "gunlines" or Chaos Dwarf "Light Councils". This is a good comparison, by the way, since both "gunlines" and "Light Councils" operate using the same strategic concept: shoot the enemy and hope there's nothing left to mop up/mop up whatever is left. To get you started, here are a few example strategic concepts for your consideration.

A.) Shoot the enemy until there's nothing left.

B.) Shoot the enemy's critical targets and mop up what's left.

C.) Take the enemy by surprise and bring overwhelming force to bear against a portion of the enemy force.

D.) Engage the enemy force in close combat to the enemy's disadvantage.

E.) Shoot the enemy while avoiding retaliation.

F.) Disorient the enemy with target saturation and exploit critical errors.

You might start to get the idea quickly, or it may take some time for this idea to sink in. Whatever the case, give it plenty of time processing. Sleep on it. You might want to take a break from reading this tutorial right now so you can contemplate and come back in a couple days when the pot's been stirred, so to speak.

Choosing your strategic concept is the most fundamental, most critical event in the force organization process!


3. The third thing any general wants to do in developing a force for any fight is to consider what tactical capabilities support his or her chosen strategic concept. If your strategic concept is to trample your enemy under the hooves of your Knights' horses (see D above), you probably want to have a unit of Knights with whose horses you may trample your enemies underfoot! It really isn't any more complicated than that! Now, just because it's not complicated doesn't mean it won't be difficult. (Ha! Just like that last sentence.) But seriously, you'll want to ascertain which tactical capabilities support your strategic concept. Let's go back to our historical vignette. As a Hebrew military leader, I decide I want to disorient the enemy with target saturation and exploit critical errors. (This is the typical strategic concept for most guerrilla warfare.) I decide I need mostly ranged capabilities in order to draw the enemy's attention. But then, I know I also want some melee capabilities in order to prevent those ranged units from being isolated and destroyed piecemeal. I only have so much grain-beer to pay my troops (points to build my list), though, so I have to be careful how I distribute these tactical capabilities. In the end, I decide that I will have to also provide myself a command-and-control tactical capability to maintain the coordinated efforts of my other capabilities on the battlefield.

Notice I haven't even chosen any actual units (tactical elements) yet, much less their equipment! Choosing supporting tactical capabilities is the third step. Once you've chosen your supporting capabilities, you can move on to the next step. First, however, you'll really want to put some time and thought into this step, because it's quite a lot more important than the next step. In fact, from this point on, each successive step diminishes in its importance to your force organization process!

It's worth taking the time to discern in what ways a tactical capability that may initially seem to obviously not support your strategic concept might actually prove an extremely supportive capability after all! For example, if you're going with the example of the Knights above, you might imagine what sorts of weaknesses your army will have if all you bring to the table is a tray full of Knights! What might you bring that will help those Knights do their job? A unit of Peasant Bowmen, for example, might be able to clear out chaff seeking to block a critical charge, or a Field Trebuchet might cut a swathe into a unit of infantry with which your Knights might otherwise become bogged-down after the initial charge, unable to continue their intended function.


4. The fourth thing any general wants to do in developing a force for any fight is to consider what tactical elements will provide the desired tactical capabilities that support your overarching strategic concept. This is the step where you choose the units you actually want to include in your army!

There are a couple of criteria for choosing one unit over another, and this piece of the puzzle will again engage your best efforts in channeling your inner Mentat.

A.) Choose each unit (tactical element) with only ONE (1) (UNO) (EINS) tactical capability in mind! As I alluded to earlier, if you start choosing units with multiple functions or battlefield roles in mind, you're not going to know what to do with the unit once your army makes first contact with the enemy force! (Once you become proficient in this process, you might be able to adlib a little. In fact, I do hope you are able to eventually get to that point! But that takes the ability to synthesize a lot of moving concepts and is not something beginners are typically ready to do.) Dwarf Quarrellers are often the subject of this sort of abuse. People often think that, since they can equip Quarrellers with Great Weapons, Quarrellers can function as both offensive/melee and defensive/ranged capabilities. The result is that, especially new players will spend a good portion of the battle moving or reforming their Quarrellers and never use them in the expected function of ranged support, while others will fail to move them at all only to have them charged by something that outclasses them in combat before they have the chance to function as a hammer unit.

B.) Choose each unit with consideration for its cost-efficiency and point-per-model cost. Dwarf Rangers upgraded to Bugman's Rangers are a good example of a difficult case. At 17 points per model, Bugman's Rangers are quite expensive. They do have great statistics and the ability to scout, so taking them as a tactical element is extremely dependent on one's chosen strategic concept. They can't be taken as a "Swiss army knife" type of unit, because they're too expensive, take too great of an investment, and are too big of a target for the enemy. Alternatives, such as regular Dwarf Rangers or Dwarf Quarrellers with Great Weapons might be preferable, since they're cheaper per model and tend to be slightly more cost-efficient.

C.) Choose each unit with its priority in mind. By this, I mean that you will have some units that are obviously primary and others that are obviously secondary or even tertiary in importance based on their tactical capabilities. Give first pick to your primary elements that most directly support your strategic concept, and for newer players, I advise that you try to stick with all primary elements at first. Secondary and tertiary tactical elements should be support elements that are meant to enhance the ability of primary elements to execute the strategic concept of the force.


5. Pick your equipment and options for your tactical elements with the intention of giving your tactical elements the tools they need to best and most efficiently execute their intended tactical capability. For example, Dwarf Warriors intended as a hammer unit will obviously need Great Weapons; shields might help their survivability against enemy shooting, but that's of peripheral importance to their intended tactical capability.

Well, there you have it, folks! Those are my five steps to building a WFB army list based on my force organization theory. I hope y'all will get something out of it! Good luck in all your battles!


A NOTE ON TACTICAL UTILITY:

The utility of tactical elements is difficult to address, because very little formal theory is available on the subject. I find it odd to some extent, but then, I am also not surprised. Military doctrine has only been a formal scientific discipline for a very brief amount of time in the grand scheme of military history, and even then, military strategists are not typically also good scientists. Therefore, the following is largely original theory I have worked on just in the last couple days since posting the above tutorial, so I respectfully request your deference.

First, let us define the term utility. Utility simply refers to the usefulness of something. More broadly, and more specifically in this context, utility refers to the quality of practical use—and the amount of such use—in a tactical environment. It may also be helpful to reflect on the difference between strategy and tactics, two terms used colloquially without formal distinction, and therefore, interchangeably. Strategy, in a formal military sense, refers to the overarching goal and plan to obtain that goal. Strategy therefore includes all capabilities—military or otherwise—available for obtaining that goal. The “goal” is referred to as an end state. Tactics, then, refers to the use of individual elements in their capability roles in support of the strategic concept. To put it another way, strategy is what we do with our brains to develop plans and implement operations, while tactics is what we actually do on the ground, so to speak, when physically engaging the enemy.

So, tactical utility thus refers to the quality and quantity of the usable practical application of tactical elements in-game for the purpose of our discussion here regarding WFB. Tactical utility deals largely with the capability management of tactical elements on the field of battle, so another way to think about this in simpler terms is to imagine that once we have developed a general idea of what our army will look like, it is time to analyze how the units we’ve chosen—and the particular designs we’ve given them (including number, equipment, command groups, characters, magic items, etc.)—might function individually as elements and together as a whole force.

Utility varies in either quality, quantity, or both from tactical element to tactical element. For the purposes of this discussion, a “high-utility” tactical element has a broad base of applicable utility (i.e. the tactical element has multiple capabilities that support the strategic concept of the force), while a “low-utility” tactical element has a narrow or specific base of applicable utility (i.e. the tactical element has only a single capability that supports the strategic concept of the force). (This means that a high-utility tactical element may actually be less useful than a low-utility tactical element, so try to make that distinction clear when analyzing any particular unit.) The quality of the utility of a tactical element—a unit’s actual usefulness in terms of its ability to function in its tactical capability or capabilities—can be referred to as its value. Value follows suit. So, if we were to have a unit we wanted to describe as being good at only one thing but excellent at that one thing, we would call it a “low-utility, high-value tactical element”. (Again, fight the temptation to confuse the use of value with the tactical element’s cost in points or essential nature to your force; the former is irrelevant for this discussion, while the latter is addressed below.)

Next, we’ll look at the utility roles of our tactical elements.

Core tactical elements are those that are most fundamental to your force because they enable the force to function at all. (These are not necessarily Core choices from your army book, just to avoid confusion.) These are often the first options you decide on when actually choosing your tactical elements, since without them, your force would be completely unable to function in line with your chosen strategic concept. Core tactical elements, then, are the fundamental building blocks, the foundation if you will, to your force. For example, if my strategic concept is to engage the enemy with overwhelming force in close combat, my core tactical elements will be those that provide overwhelming melee combat capabilities. Core tactical elements are typically low-utility, high-value units.

Support tactical elements are those that contribute secondary or other tactical capabilities in support of the strategic concept of the force. These come in two types: specialty (or specialized) tactical elements and utility tactical elements. Specialized tactical elements are almost invariably low-utility with medium to high value. Think for a moment about the sorts of units that might fit this description in your army book in the context of any particular strategic concept. You might use a unit in one army as a support tactical element that would be used as a core tactical element in another army you might build from the same army book! Utility tactical elements are almost invariably high-utility but may encompass the spectrum from high to low value! Dwarf Rangers are a good example of a utility tactical element, especially in small numbers. They are almost worthless in terms of their ability to function in most of their tactical capabilities, but they often have such a broad application that they appear in a very large number of Dwarf players’ armies since the new 8th edition Dwarf book was released! Utility tactical elements typically provide a range of capabilities and are therefore some of the most tactically flexible units in any army. The key to using these successfully is knowing when and where to apply each of their available tactical capabilities in various contexts.



TACTICAL ELEMENTS AND UTILITY

Now that we’ve defined our terms, let us consider some practical implications of the theory we’ve covered. This next section will be a guide for evaluating the utility of various tactical elements. Again, for ease of use, I've provided sequential steps to enable the evaluation and selection process. Before I begin, I think it's important to state that a lot of what I'm about to spell out here is mostly stuff we typically do naturally, without even thinking about it. The brain, being the marvelously sophisticated computer it is, constantly works through millions of pieces of data, synthesizing and evaluating to come to resolution on millions of decisions every day. So, what I want to do here is to take what we often leave to our unconscious or unintentional cognitive processes and make those decisions conscious and intentional ones. Obviously, it's easier said than done.


1. The first thing you'll always want to do in evaluating the utility of various tactical elements is to determine to which tactical elements you have access. For example, if I'm a Dwarf player, I decide my strategic concept is something along the lines of "shoot the enemy and mop up what's left". For this strategic concept, I then decide I need to have a unit to do the mopping up, as it were. Now, I look at my choices for filling the tactical capability of "mopping up". (Tactical capabilities are usually referred to in more formal terms, so let's just say we're looking for a low-utility, high-value offensive melee capability.) Dwarfs happen to have a lot of very good options in these regards: anything that will have a good chance of destroying an enemy element in close combat will do. Sounds like a job for Great Weapons to me. So, Warriors, Longbeards, Hammerers, Quarrellers, Slayers, Miners, and Rangers all have access to Great Weapons, so this will fill your initial list of options for this example. Any of these units can theoretically do the job, so don't immediately limit your options. At this point, it's important to keep your options broad, because an element you initially dismiss might actually be the best option after all.


2. Next, consider whether any of these options would tempt you to use them as a different tactical capability. If it does tempt you too much, the end result leaves you forcing yourself into difficult decisions. That's bad. Some armies are simply built on this strategic concept: force the enemy to make difficult tactical decisions and exploit critical errors! If you're adding difficult tactical decisions to yourself, you're either 1) a paragon of tactical genius, or 2) an idiot. I'm most often the latter for the simple reason I fancy myself the former! I might exaggerate, but it's for a point. Be aware of this tendency in yourself and fight the urge to give in to your own hubris. It will take time and effort to become proficient in the use of some units (usually medium to high-utility tactical elements), and until such a time as you do, decide how you want to use the unit beforehand and stick to it save for the most dire situations. In doing so, you're likely to make some errors in judgment, which your opponents will sometimes be quick to exploit, but that's alright. You'll be better off in the end, because if you're consistent in your tactical application of a unit in its intended tactical capability, you'll be better able to see when, how, and why you might utilize a unit in a different capacity in the future.

A good example might be Quarrellers with Great Weapons. The most common tactical decisions with these doughty fellows are when/if to reform prior to combat and when/if to charge an enemy unit. Those decisions sound simple enough, but in-game, they take on a life of their own! What may seem a good decision to reform before an impending enemy charge might be exploited by your opponent when the enemy decides not to charge and instead move up, in which case your unit loses precious opportunity to shoot and precious attacks in close combat if you decide to charge your opponent’s unit. Don't reform, and now you're risking losing Steadfast against an enemy unit charging in. Andy Spears is known for his Dwarf armies that utilize GW Quarrellers, but most Dwarf players can't just pick up that army and have good success with it until they gain good experience using GW Quarrellers and are able to discern the various critical tactical decisions they need to make and how to best execute those decisions.

As you advance in skill and your overall ability to synthesize the tactical capabilities of any given army, you'll eventually be able to intentionally select tactical elements in respect to utility, prioritizing the tactical capabilities a unit may offer. This is one of the things good generals do extremely well, and it ultimately enables a player to be flexible in his or her tactical application of elements in-game.


3. Assess the risk! Do a risk assessment based on your temptation to use a tactical element in more than a single capacity (tactical capability). Weigh the various tactical decisions with which you may be presented in light of the probable outcome of each decision. (This is advanced stuff, so if you're not ready for this, stick with the basics and come back after a few games.)

Assessing the risk is often a gut-check. It's often very subjective. This is where some math can really help, because sometimes your gut is undecided. You see this all the time on forums. People ask, "Should I take White Lions or Phoenix Guard?" or "Should I take Hammerers or Ironbreakers?" These are perfect examples of people struggling with this gut-check. Running the numbers, so to speak, can really help bring clarity to our cognition, even while we still have to wrestle with issues revolving around probabilities and potentialities. A Mentat needs data, right? That said, if you feel the risk of you making a critical error in judgment regarding the flexible tactical use of any particular tactical element is low, by all means I encourage you to try out those multi-functional units!


4. Once you have assessed the risk and determined whether or not each tactical element is a viable option, filter out all the dropped selections from your mind. They'll just cloud your judgment. You need a hard-and-fast decision for now. You can always come back to those other tactical elements when you build another army list in the future. Remember here, your first instinct is usually your best in these cases if you're being intentional about thinking clearly and logically in your risk assessment, so listen to that first instinct. (You'll come back to this step again later. Remember, this is a process.) I often take days to filter out the old ideas that I've decided I need to drop in order to concentrate on moving forward in building my army list. Sometimes it merely takes a few seconds to find clarity. Whatever you do, remember this is a process that you have to work through, so give your brain time to do its work. Some of the best things you can do to help your brain is to get some good physical exercise, eat healthily, and stick to a regular sleep schedule. Do those things, and your ability to do everything in life increases dramatically, not to mention your ability to put together a good army list for a game of WFB! When I'm stuck on a decision, either sleeping on it or doing some pushups helps me. When I wake up, I often find my brain has made the decision during the night while I slept, or when I come back to my desk, I find the pushups have rushed blood to my brain so that it suddenly feels fresh, quick, and discerning!


5. Now, go back to Steps 1-4! Assume you no longer have access to the tactical elements you previously dropped. Once you've gone through these steps--sometimes once, sometimes several times--you should have made your decision to include a particular tactical element in your army list. If so, move on to Step 6. Sometimes, however, you may be left with a multiplicity of viable options. In that case, you'll move on to Step 6 and the rest of the process, but you'll have to come back after deciding on a single tactical element.


6. Consider the utility of the unit in relation to the other choices you have made or will likely make for inclusion of tactical elements in your force. Ask yourself questions about the unit(s) you're trying to decide on that seek to evaluate them. Does this unit add critical, redundant, or superfluous support to each of its tactical capabilities? Does this unit compete with other options? If its tactical capability is redundant, would another unit provide more effective redundancy? Try to determine the overall niche the unit fills amongst the other tactical elements in your army. Can you imagine it working in tandem with other units? If it's a tactically flexible unit (i.e. it possesses multiple tactical capabilities—high-utility), do any of its secondary or tertiary capabilities risk interfering with those of other units? Sometimes it's good to write these down. You can get a better picture of what the unit's interaction will look like with the rest of the army. To continue with the example above, Great Weapon Quarrellers might provide good redundancy with their capacity to engage in supportive small-arms fire. What your Organ Gun can't kill, your Quarrellers might be able to finish off. On the other hand, will your Quarrellers compete with your Hammerers for a late-game charge? Do you risk getting them overextended if they make a charge that your Hammerers can't complete? Do they pose a liability if they give up their points too easily? Is the impact they might make in close combat worth the additional 2 points per model to equip them with Great Weapons? Continue to ask yourself questions like these until you feel like you can make a good evaluative judgment and come to a resolution as to your tactical use of the unit in-game.


7. Next, evaluate the tactical element in terms of its overall utility. In other words, make sure you can give an emphatic answer to this question: Is this tactical element a critical asset (i.e. core tactical element) or a support asset (i.e. specialized or utility tactical element)? It might feel counterintuitive to ask this question towards the end of the process. But really, all your work up to this point has been for the purpose of being able to answer this simple question! This will tell you whether or not the unit is expendable. Notice this evaluation has nothing to do with the unit's cost! It has everything to do with your mentality towards the unit's tactical use in-game. If it's a critical asset, meaning that your army cannot function without it, treat it as such. If it's a support element, meaning that your army can function without it, treat it as such.


8. Finally, determine the unit's utility lifespan. Even your core tactical elements have a utility lifespan, a point at which they cease to be critical assets. At what point will this particular tactical element cease to be combat-effective? This may mean different things for different elements. Cannons may become liabilities once units get into close combat, or they may become combat-ineffective once they have eliminated priority targets, for example. Multi-functional units (high-utility tactical elements) will have longer utility lifespans overall, since they only cease to be combat-effective once they do so in all their tactical capabilities. However, it's good to know when such a unit will become combat-ineffective in each of its tactical capabilities.


9. If you still have multiple viable options, go back to Step 6--or even Step 1! Follow this process in selecting each of your units. You'll have many variables to consider, so take your time and think over each carefully before moving on.



Deployment and Maneuver

I was hesitant to include a section on maneuver and maneuver command and control with the forgoing force organization tutorial. The two are just so vastly different in nature! However, I decided to include the following sections on the basis of the connection that does exist, despite whatever fundamental differences may also exist. On the other hand, it is very important to recognize the hard break that exists between force organization and force maneuver! Force organization tends to have finite parameters, because your force is developed by you, the organizer, and is not subject to the immediate responses of your opponent. (Now, I've tried this before, where my opponent and I built our lists together, reacting to each other's decisions in real time. Not only did it take about five hours to finish our lists (because we constantly changed our lists in reaction to the other's changes, etc.), but we also ended up with armies completely tailored to one another (6th edition Dwarfs v. High Elves), resulting in a rather abusive game that neither of us ended up enjoying.) On the other hand, maneuver (colloquially referred to as "tactics") is fundamentally influenced by your opponent's decisions and therefore nearly infinite in terms of possibilities!

Another important point to remember is that deployment is a particular task within maneuver. I will treat deployment and maneuver separately here for the sake of contextualization to WFB. That said, consider the implications as we discuss each concept in turn, because we will come back to the connection between the two thereafter.



Deployment

1. Develop an overall deployment scheme. Remember to be flexible here. Your deployment scheme should be based on your overall strategic concept of the force. For example, if your strategic concept is to shoot the enemy and hope nothing's left after the smoke clears, you probably want to deploy deep and exploit terrain. Your deployment scheme should be short and extremely general in nature, much like your strategic concept. It should also be simple. If you're drawing up maps and using sand tables to try to project the development of an enemy contact, you're doing it wrong. You cannot predict beforehand where and how your opponent will deploy and move his or her tactical elements on the battlefield--unless you happen have the powers of prescience of the god emperor; therefore, projecting your decisions on the basis of an imaginary opponent's imaginary decisions is essentially meaningless conjecture, neither informed nor informative. This is one of the reasons that new players tend to lose a lot of their early games. They need the real experience that enables real knowledge and real data for synthesis. It's like a blacksmith trying to imagine himself making an ingot and deciding beforehand how he will strike the metal with his hammer and how many times he will have to douse it in the water and reheat it before it's finished. He won't have any real knowledge of such things until he looks at the ore and starts to work with it!


2. Once you've developed a scheme for the deployment of your force, start to evaluate the deployment options of each of your tactical elements. You should have considered this to some extent in building your army. This will give you some idea as to where that particular element may best fit into your overall deployment scheme. Make a list of deployment options for each, but don't decide yet how or where you will deploy your elements. First consider deployment of groups of tactical elements. Not only may there be groups of elements in your force that you can identify as having similar deployment options, but there may also be multiple tactical elements that should be deployed together or in some sort of relationship to one another. Write down these patterns and analyze them until you start to discern relationships between those patterns. Once you do, you can then go back and start to finalize specific plans for deployment of individual tactical elements.

Remember that once you've developed a finalized plan for deployment, no plan ever survives first contact. If you try to make your plan prescriptive, it will completely derail your deployment by robbing it of adaptability! You have to stay flexible and adaptable with your deployment plan and be able to apply your deployment analysis to your specific context and dynamic situation in each battle against each enemy you face.

Deployment dictates a tactical element's maximum possible impact on a battle. Use this knowledge to your advantage. Once your opponent deploys an enemy element, take a moment to define that element's maximum potential impact on the battle, especially if you have elements of your own not yet deployed.



Maneuver

By maneuver, I mean overall tactical operation in combat. I use this term for two main reasons: 1) it provides a familiar military term for our purpose, and 2) it's a general enough term to cover the whole spectrum of battlefield operations. There may very well be a better term available, and I want to make it clear that I am not using this term in its formal and technical military sense. Rather, I'm adapting it for use in our discussion regarding the application of tactical elements on the battlefield.

Maneuver is probably the most difficult concept for which to develop guiding principles! So many variables are involved, exponentially more than even those involved in deployment, because of the mercurial nature of your opponent's interactions and reactions in fluidity with your own through the course of a battle. Good practice in maneuver demands constant--almost perennial--analysis, synthesis, resolution, and execution. Get ready to think extremely broadly and critically, because any principles developed for maneuver must necessarily take into consideration the myriad variables involved therein!

The following is a PROCESS! You'll have to continue all of the following steps, restarting and going through them all during each turn probably multiple times, if not many times! It takes a lot of practice to develop this process as a natural way of thinking through your tactical decisions, so don't think you'll be able to master these concepts after a single game--or ten--or even one hundred games!


1. Develop a scheme of maneuver. Much like your scheme of deployment, your scheme of maneuver needs to be brief, concise, broad, and simple. Again, this should be based on your strategic concept. For example, if your strategic concept is to shoot your enemy and hope there's nothing left, then I would suspect your scheme of maneuver would be something along the lines of "static line of fire, forming ranks prior to impact" or similar. Once you've developed your scheme of maneuver, you're ready to take your force to battle.


2. At the start of your game, consider the following things. You'll have to reassess your scheme of maneuver and adapt it to the unfolding situation throughout a battle. A good rule of thumb is to reassess at the beginning of each movement phase. (Remember that you'll start this process even prior to deployment and includes deployment! I mentioned above that deployment sets the parameters of enemy elements' maximum possible impact on the battle, but it bears mention here that it works both ways: deployment of your own elements establishes the parameters of their maximum possible impact on the battle.)


A.) Situation: First, consider the area of interest. This includes the entirety of the battlefield. Note the possible deployment areas (especially in consideration of the possible scenarios for the game). Note the terrain, its relationships with the possible deployment zones and with its potential impact on both deployment of friendly and enemy elements and on their maneuver thereafter. Impressions are important at this point, not specifics, so look for choke points, barriers to movement, areas of limited visibility, etc. Once you've begun deployment, refocus your scope of interest. Note the areas of the battlefield that are likely to be affected by friendly or enemy elements and that are likely to influence friendly and enemy elements. By the time deployment has been completed, you should be able to tentatively define the outside limits of the area of operations. This is usually easiest to determine in smaller games, just by looking at the deployment of friendly and enemy forces, what areas of the battlefield make up your area of operations. Your area of operations is going to be a subset of your area of interest. Try to block off the sections of the board that are not likely to affect the battle. Don't forget about these areas, but sectioning out various areas of the battlefield--and especially your area of operations, the area with which you're concerned in reference to your tactical elements and their interaction and engagement with enemy elements--will give you a better grasp of the area with which you should allow your attention to be absorbed so that you limit the peripheral influences on your attention and keep the important things as the primary influences on your command and control. Be aware that in larger games especially, your area of operations may actually be synonymous with your area of interest. It may also be helpful to take a moment to consider the area of interest and area of operations of each of your individual elements.

Also consider your mission. Each of the standard scenarios has its own set of criteria for completion--victory conditions. Give thought to these and consider how your deployment and maneuver should work towards obtaining those objectives. Many times, other objectives may also be involved, especially in tournaments and in narrative games and campaigns.

In turn, decide early what tasks or missions you want each of your tactical elements to complete over the course of the battle. These individual tasks should be practical applications of your strategic concept and scheme of maneuver, taking your scheme of deployment into consideration. Consider at the same time which missions are related and the individual elements tasked with those missions. Patterns should readily manifest themselves. Once they do, use those patterns to develop relationships in order to better enable your tactical elements to accomplish their missions. For example, you decide you want to tie up an enemy element with a bus of Swordsmen, while you want to demolish an adjacent enemy element with your Greatswords. It may be wise in that situation to attempt to deploy each across from its respective target and then move those elements in such a way as to increase the probability of those elements making contact with their respective enemy targets. You don't want to have your Greatswords slogging across the entire battlefield only to show up, too little too late. Of course, that's an extreme and limited example, but it should provide some imagination for seeing relationships between the mission or objective patterns of maneuver between elements within your force. Some of these relationships and patterns may have been completely intentional and planned prior to the game. If so, take these into consideration as well, but don't be too afraid to divorce from those relationships and patterns in order to serve the greater overarching strategic concept.


B.) Mission: Next, consider the mission. You've already done this to a certain extent. The point here is to make explicit the correlations between your strategic concept, scheme of deployment, and scheme of maneuver and the victory conditions of the battle. These correlations should present themselves naturally and obviously. If you find yourself thinking for too long about this, you've probably been inconsistent in developing your maneuver and deployment schemes, or your force may not ultimately support your strategic concept. If you find this occurring more than once or twice hereafter, you probably need to revisit the way you're allowing your strategic concept to meaningfully inform your force organization and force maneuver.

A good idea might be to write down your overall mission(s) and attach this with a paperclip or something to the front of your order of battle/army list. This will keep you thinking in terms of the main goal being the main goal! Keep this in front of you so that you actively allow it to inform your decisions. I can't tell you how often I've become so involved in destroying the enemy army, only to discover I've taken too long to get around to the main goal of taking and holding the Watchtower before the game ends, leaving my opponent with the victory despite me being up more than a thousand victory points!


C.) Execution: This piece of the puzzle basically formalizes your intent to accomplish the mission and obtain the victory. Execution spells out HOW you intend to carry out your plan--the entirety of your strategic concept, scheme of deployment, and scheme of maneuver from start to finish. Remember, at this point you're still subject to your opponent's decisions, so stay flexible and be ready to adapt to the unfolding situation. In the United States Army, we use something called a FRAGO--a fragmentation order--that can modify or entirely change the unit's mission in the middle of our attempt to complete the mission we were previously given. Suddenly, we find ourselves directed towards an entirely different objective, and sometimes that means completely abandoning our current position, no matter how hard we just worked to dig in and fortify it! Don't be afraid to scrap your original intent as a battle develops in the event something happens unexpectedly and unfortunately. Nothing--or very little, at least--should really take you by surprise, if you've followed the process I've laid out, because you should have anticipated most, if not all, of your potential risks; and if you've anticipated risks and continued with your plan unchanged, you've decided that those risks are acceptable risks.

Plan your scheme of mobility--where will your units move, and why will they move there? Consider counter mobility, too. Where are enemy elements located, what are their relationships to your own elements, and what are the possible lanes or patterns of mobility available to those enemy elements? Are any of those potentialities seriously threatening to your own elements and scheme of mobility? What contingencies are available to you to counter those enemy elements or block the possible lanes of mobility that pose significant threats?

Consider your scheme for obscuring the battlefield. Which of your elements need to be screened from the enemy force, and how can you screen them? Are there other elements you can use to screen them, or can you use terrain as a screen? Think about your opponent's scheme for obscuring the battlefield. How is he or she doing so? More practically speaking, obscuring involves such things as the notorious "dog screen" in front of a unit of Skull Crushers, reforming units to pull them out of an enemy element's charge arc, or hiding a Heirotitan behind a building. Even things like Alith Anar's passive ability to give enemies -1 to hit or the Skaven Storm Banner should be incorporated into your scheme of obscuration.

If you play closed-list games, a scheme of intelligence may be applicable. Since most players at least have access to information regarding the strategic and tactical options available to their opponents, we won't go into this too deeply; but consider how much familiarity you have with the enemy force and how much experience you have fighting that particular faction. Even if you have little or no knowledge of an enemy's force and playing a closed-list game, you can sometimes extrapolate a lot of information from experiences you've had against armies with similar strategic concepts.


D.) Command and Control: Now, consider your command and control. The most important elements in your force for this piece of your scheme of maneuver will likely be your general and your BSB. Other characters, banners, and such may also be significant considerations. Often, your Battle Standard Bearer is actually more important than your general! Where does each need to be deployed? Where does each need to be in order to provide its unique capability to various portions of your force? As part of your scheme of maneuver, plan out when and where to move those command and control elements in order to best support your force by enabling it to perform its strategic concept to the best of its ability or to the greatest degree of efficiency, predictability, or reliability.


3. Now, I hope you can begin to see how your scheme of deployment is related so closely to your scheme of maneuver. Your scheme of deployment sets the maximum potential impact on the battle of each element, but it also sets the maximum potential impact on the battle of your entire force, since it delimits the impact of each element by setting its starting position! Your scheme of deployment can either enhance your scheme of maneuver or derail it altogether! Consider how your scheme of deployment delimits the maximum potential impact of your entire army on the enemy force.