|
|
Post by Luigino on Mar 3, 2023 15:32:56 GMT
Inspired by this comment I started to wonder. I'll start with dwarfs. ALL dwarfs units (except Irondrakes) can take shields. For many, many years the general consensus seemed to be "shooting units are meant to shoot, not fight in close combat. they're going to lose anyways so better not waste points in shields. Until someone pointed to me that rather than thinking of them as thunderers with shields, I should think of them as warriors with rifles. For some reason now I really like the idea of shooting units with shields but I dislike having shields on the actual models (hence my newest movement tray as seen here). How many other shooting units out there have access to shields? Are they worth it? Would you take it in your army? Does it make sense strategically or is mainly a fluff/modelling choice. |
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Mar 3, 2023 16:12:39 GMT
I don't think it's particularly common outside of Dwarfs.
Empire Crossbowmen and Handgunners can't have Shields, and neither can Tomb King Skeleton Archers or Bretonnian Peasant Bowmen. Elven missile troops can't take them either.
I think the only missile units that either come with them as standard or have the option of taking them are Skinks, Skaven Jezzails and most Orc and Goblin Core Units.
To be honest, it all really depends upon whether the unit is a 'quality' unit or a 'quantity' unit - if the unit is the former, like Dwarf missile troops that can already take heavy armour, then it's worth taking shields as well to make them as survivable as possible, as each one is comparatively expensive and its loss is more keenly felt. On the other hand, arrow-fodder troops like Skinks and Greenskins and decent units lacking in armour like Jezzail teams would only have a 6+ or 5+ save with shields that would quickly be nullified by any attacks of half-decent Strength, so if Shields are optional they wouldn't be worth taking, while if they automatically come with them then they don't achieve much.
|
|
|
|
Post by Grimfang Gogulk on Mar 3, 2023 17:31:24 GMT
I used to have it on my Thunderers and Crossbo stunties, back in 6th Ed.. I think i liked the look and it helped with missile fire so.. I found the points. Hence, i like it.
Would consider it but if you are short on points, i guess they might go? I like that idea you have in your thread though, the shield wall. Looks cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by johngg on Mar 3, 2023 19:00:20 GMT
Any Durchii worth his slaves er, I mean salt wouldn't leave the Watchtowers with his Darkshards if they werent sporting shields.
Who's going to look after those precious Bolt Throwers?!
|
|
|
|
Post by Luigino on Mar 3, 2023 19:27:36 GMT
model wise. elven shields actually kind of make the most sense for missile troops.
they're tall and pointy; so they can be stuck in the ground while the soldiers shoot from behind them.
I understand that they wanted to go with a Viking look for dwarfs, but I seriously think dwarfs would have benefitted from rectangular Roman/tower style shields, t least visually
|
|
|
|
Post by Naitsabes on Mar 3, 2023 20:42:12 GMT
From a gameplay perspective, I would put shields on dwarf shooty units...unless you opt for great weapons on the quarrellers  Shieldwall is a very tasty rule. Along similar lines, I've recently experimented with having command models in shooty dwarfs as well. They become suprisingly capable of holding their own in close combat. This is especially true in smaller games where proper combat units are not giant blobs of ultimate death. |
|
|
|
Post by Grimfang Gogulk on Mar 3, 2023 21:26:50 GMT
model wise. elven shields actually kind of make the most sense for missile troops. they're tall and pointy; so they can be stuck in the ground while the soldiers shoot from behind them. I understand that they wanted to go with a Viking look for dwarfs, but I seriously think dwarfs would have benefitted from rectangular Roman/tower style shields, t least visually Yeah, some kind of pavise or something? I do like those round shields though! But it does make it look like they are for close combat really. Not for hiding behind when my Arrer Boyz send some arrows their way. But hey, they would probably hit my Gobbos anyways so.. |
|
|
|
Post by tucker on Mar 4, 2023 2:29:28 GMT
I love putting shields on my Dwarf Thunderers (or, if you will, my Clan Bronzebeard Fusiliers) -- it makes them a credible melee unit, capable of fending off light troops or stalling something heavier for a few turns. A unit of ten is perfect for holding a flank and harrassing the enemy, while a unit of twenty can fight in the battleline or deploy in the Watchtower.
Back in 6th edition I used to take shields on my Dark Elf crossbowmen, as they could deploy in a shallow formation to shoot, then rank up to fight when the enemy got close. I also like a beefier ranged unit to shelter my mages, something that won't run away in the face of a few casualties. Nowadays I use Corsairs with handbows because they better fit my theme, but I imagine the crossbowmen (or whatever the inane, bespoke sobriquet GW has inflicted upon them is) retain their utility.
|
|
|
|
Post by KevinC on Mar 4, 2023 7:43:17 GMT
Inspired by this comment I started to wonder. I'll start with dwarfs. ALL dwarfs units (except Irondrakes) can take shields. For many, many years the general consensus seemed to be "shooting units are meant to shoot, not fight in close combat. they're going to lose anyways so better not waste points in shields. Until someone pointed to me that rather than thinking of them as thunderers with shields, I should think of them as warriors with rifles. For some reason now I really like the idea of shooting units with shields but I dislike having shields on the actual models (hence my newest movement tray as seen here). How many other shooting units out there have access to shields? Are they worth it? Would you take it in your army? Does it make sense strategically or is mainly a fluff/modelling choice. ------------Missile fire unit with shields are totally worth it. They are the best of both worlds. They can kill stuff at long range and they are decent warriors in combat. In WFB, I've always considered troops that can perform multiple tasks to be the best. In my Goblin army, I take units of Goblins equipped with hand weapons, short bows, light armour and shields. They are extremely effective - as are any shooting units that can have shields. Dark Elf crossbowmen with shields, Lothern Seaguard, and Thunderers with shield are all of great value. Go for it! |
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Mar 4, 2023 9:19:40 GMT
The gents above have covered it well. Of course dwarves are the superior race (just in general) and their rules really reflect it when giving them shields but other ‘lesser races’ also benefit from having them too (😉).
|
|
|
|
Post by vulcan on Mar 5, 2023 3:47:56 GMT
The Dark Elf darkshards have exactly the same statline as the other core combat troops. The only difference is that they have a ranged option as well as being able to fight in close combat. So going from a 6+ save to a 5+/6++ save in close combat is a huge benefit. It's funny to watch an inexperienced player who's used to scattering Bret, Empire, or goblin archers with his light units try it on darkshards... and get slaughtered.
And never underestimate the benefit of going from a 6+ save to a 5+ save against ranged attacks on your own shooting troops.
|
|
|
|
Post by johngg on Mar 5, 2023 12:44:26 GMT
I love putting shields on my Dwarf Thunderers (or, if you will, my Clan Bronzebeard Fusiliers) -- it makes them a credible melee unit, capable of fending off light troops or stalling something heavier for a few turns. A unit of ten is perfect for holding a flank and harrassing the enemy, while a unit of twenty can fight in the battleline or deploy in the Watchtower. Back in 6th edition I used to take shields on my Dark Elf crossbowmen, as they could deploy in a shallow formation to shoot, then rank up to fight when the enemy got close. I also like a beefier ranged unit to shelter my mages, something that won't run away in the face of a few casualties. Nowadays I use Corsairs with handbows because they better fit my theme, but I imagine the crossbowmen (or whatever the inane, bespoke sobriquet GW has inflicted upon them is) retain their utility. Binkering Wizards is such a 'man' thing to do. RELEASE THE MANTICORES!!! |
|
|
|
Post by johngg on Mar 5, 2023 12:46:03 GMT
...Of course dwarves are the superior race (just in general)... Laughs in Druchii though many, many beard skalps |
|
|
|
Post by johngg on Mar 5, 2023 12:46:53 GMT
The Dark Elf darkshards have exactly the same statline as the other core combat troops. The only difference is that they have a ranged option as well as being able to fight in close combat. So going from a 6+ save to a 5+/6++ save in close combat is a huge benefit. It's funny to watch an inexperienced player who's used to scattering Bret, Empire, or goblin archers with his light units try it on darkshards... and get slaughtered. And never underestimate the benefit of going from a 6+ save to a 5+ save against ranged attacks on your own shooting troops. Many true words spake here! |
|
|
|
Post by thorpyuk on Mar 5, 2023 13:01:45 GMT
For certain races it certainly makes more sense- Dwarves included, due to their shieldwall rule, they're getting more 'bang for your buck', especially when combining with heavy armour for a 4+save vs other missile troops
I'd only leave it off if desperate for the points
|
|
