67 replies to this topic

[A.Wagg]

THE 15 COMMANDMENTS OF DWARVES IN 8th EDITION

Thou shalt not take non-ranger Longbeards with Great Weapons.
Thou shalt not take lots of bolt throwers.
Thou shalt not take the Flame Cannon of your minuature shelf.
Thou shalt not fail to put protection on your characters, especially your BSB.
Thou shalt not take runic banners on your BSB unless you are working a Strollaz list.
Thou shalt not take Thanes of Pain as a general.
Thou shalt not take Thunderers without shields, unless you are taking 40+, which isn't the smartest idea, unless you have a specific strategy.
Thou shalt not take Daemon Slayers unless it's for the giggles.
Thou shalt not go to war without lots of Great Weapon dwarves.
Thou shalt not put full commmand on units of 10 dwarves.
Thou shalt not overspend on characters.
Thou shalt not take 20 strong combat units in 2k+ games. Thou should take 25+, preferably 30+ unless gun-lining missile units.
Thou shalt not play Warhammer sober, unless you are under the drinking age.
Thou shalt take at least one Runesmith. In competetive environments, thou shalt take Runelord equivalent anti-magic.
Thou shalt never take a cannon without forging, or a grudge thrower without accuracy.

Golden Rules:
When taking a dwarf lord, take shieldbearers
Reserve the master rune of gromril for your BSB
The master rune of grungni and master rune of balance are highly advised to take, for they are some of our best runes
When running dwarflords run them defensively, because they are not worth it offensively (their cost tends to equal 20-25 hammerers)





Thanks Javidson, Bonecrusher, Crompton, Durin the Young, Slaine McRoth, the bearded one, H33D, and Khazadson! Also thanks to Stymie Jackson for typing all these rules up!

Edited by A.Wagg, 08 January 2011 - 05:41 PM.

[Khazadson]

Absolutely any time mate, but er... what did I do?

EDIT: Ah, just read the other thread. Excellent

Edited by Khazadson, 07 January 2011 - 07:29 AM.

[Akar]

Without deliberately offending those credited, this should be changed to '15 TIPS for Dwarf Players'

Thou shalt not take non-ranger Longbeards with Great Weapons.
** Cause a modified version of Hammerers as a Core choice is bad how?

Thou shalt not take lots of bolt throwers.
** Bolt throwers aren't bad which is why they're in quite a few armies

Thou shalt not take the Flame Cannon of your minuature shelf.
** Agree that it is pretty bad, but with the ability to hit something between the 12"-18" (4,6,8,10)to hit your intended target, it's actually quite reliable as weapons go. The flaming could be used to strip regen if you you're intending to shoot a regen target. Im not gonna deny that there are better options, but it doesn't make this any less viable.

Thou shalt not fail to put protection on your characters, especially your BSB.
** Some players only take characters cause they have to, so wouldn't this be more of a preference?

Thou shalt not take runic banners on your BSB unless you are working a Strollaz list.
** Valaya/Grungi are still viable options for a BSB. Valaya is expensive, but it would give us a +4 to Dispel. Though Grungi is avail to the BSB if Im not mistaken, so if you put him in a support block in the back, this seems to be a decent, cost effective option.

Thou shalt not take Thanes of Pain as a general.
** No idea what a 'Thane of Pain' is, but Thanes don't seem that impressive, so I'll go along with this.

Thou shalt not take Thunderers without shields, unless you are taking 40+, which isn't the smartest idea, unless you have a specific strategy.
** What a load of "I Swear too much". Regardless of the number you take, if you know what you want to do with ANY unit, then it's a smart idea. With all the other stuff in a Dwarf army, if the enemy is shooting the guns, then you've really given em nothing better to shoot at. If they're in combat, then game is probably at a point where shields won't save the unit.

Thou shalt not take Daemon Slayers unless it's for the giggles.
** If by giggles you mean watching your opponent groan if/when he gets hit by this guy, then yeah. I've read the Javidsons Handbook, again, I agree that he's the least loved, but strip down he's a great addition to a single slayer unit or even as a loner. True he is killed easily, and your experience is greater here than mine. Does that mean that no one should take them in a comepetive environement? Yes they can!

Thou shalt not go to war without lots of Great Weapon dwarves.
** But taking Longbeards(non-ranger) w/o them doesn't conflict with this 'commandment' in anyway?

Thou shalt not put full commmand on units of 10 dwarves.
** Javidson has pointed out a ton of merits of having Mu in units. If you're taking a small block of 10 of anything for any army, you have a specific purpose in mind for em. Wouldn't it be just as valid that having an extra Standard to regain that +1 to a combat that needs it be one of those purposes?

Thou shalt not overspend on characters.
** Impossible to do since you're limited to a % of game pts, rather than by a selection chart. Again, this is true for ANY army, and while it may be impractical to do so, isnt that up to the player? Without specifying a percentage, pts value, or ratio, there isn't ANY way to possibly keep this 'commandment'. It should probably read 'Thou shalt find a balance of characters to units'

Thou shalt not take 20 strong combat units in 2k+ games. Thou should take 25+, preferably 30+ unless gun-lining missile units.
** Im sure there is some math-reasoning behind this but it doesn't make much of a difference. As a player plays his army, regardless of dwarfs or not, he is going to adjust the number of models in his unit. ex. If a player keeps losing his unit of 20 warriors, then he's simply going to add more. On that same note, if a unit isn't getting full use of all the models in it, the owning player is going reduce the number of models to make use of the points elsewhere where they will do something for the army. If you've found that 25-30 is what works for you, then great! Is it Law that every dwarf player has to block units up in this size range? Probably not.

Thou shalt not play Warhammer DWARFS sober, unless you are under the drinking age.
** Fixed this for ya! Other armies need sobriety.

Thou shalt take at least one Runesmith. In competetive environments, thou shalt take Runelord equivalent anti-magic.
** As our only decent form of mag. def, this is a no brainer. Why does a competetive environment dictate a Runelord or not? Wouldn't the player choose (as opposed to HAVE to HAVE!), and be limited by the points of the game? What if taking the Runelord leads to your mystery 'overspending'?

Thou shalt never take a cannon without forging, or a grudge thrower without accuracy.
** Cause these weapons won't work w/o them. I'll agree with this one on being sound advice, and worth every point. Without them though, they are still effective.

I think the thing that you're good at A.Wagg is that you know the Dwarf army very well, and you truly want people to succeed. I think the thing you're bad at is that you feel that you're way is the best way, and think that is the ONLY way to win, and therefore the ONLY way to play this game. I've seen some of your comments on other posters, and this is the vibe you're projecting. There is a difference between Optimal and Viable. Also, winning isnt the only reason to be playing.

What makes a great community is the support and development of players and how THEY want to play. A few players, Javidson especially, have been a huge help already as I work on making my slayer army, and making it work to the point where I will have fun and enjoy it, even win a few games. As I read other lists/posts, they seem to do the same thing there as well. All I've seen you do, is try to pigeon hole players into playing YOUR way, then it becomes your army and not theirs. This list of commandments and all the "I Swear too much" about Quarrellers>Thunderers goes a LONG way in supporting that.

Again, Im not gonna deny that you're probably a great Dwarf player and I've got no doubt you know your stuff. You really do Bully people into your lists, then when they don't agree, they're idiots! Im still new here, but how is this good for the Brewery?

[Khazadson]

*MOVED* to golden rules thread

Edited by Khazadson, 07 January 2011 - 09:58 AM.

[Stymie Jackson]

Without deliberately offending those credited, this should be changed to '15 TIPS for Dwarf Players'

I was the one actually that came up with the commandment thingy, not Wagg. I did so for two reasons:
1) Tongue in cheeck. It was meant to be humorous
2) It's meant to evoke Moses. Not pushing religion here, but rather-
a- Moses had a big beard
b- He was dour and stubborn
c- He was one of the best military generals of his day
Add beer, and he'd make a good Dawi

Thou shalt not take non-ranger Longbeards with Great Weapons.
** Cause a modified version of Hammerers as a Core choice is bad how?

Objectively, yes. Warriors with GW are a better value in core.
Hammerers, except for the core/special thing, are just better for the points.

Thou shalt not take lots of bolt throwers.
** Bolt throwers aren't bad which is why they're in quite a few armies

One isn't bad. Going for 2 or more is. A cannon is just better for the points than 2 Bolt Throwers.

Thou shalt not take the Flame Cannon of your minuature shelf.
** Agree that it is pretty bad, but with the ability to hit something between the 12"-18" (4,6,8,10)to hit your intended target, it's actually quite reliable as weapons go. The flaming could be used to strip regen if you you're intending to shoot a regen target. Im not gonna deny that there are better options, but it doesn't make this any less viable.

No, the FC really blows. It's totally over-costed for what it does. You get one shot with it usually and it can blow up, undershoot, or miss.

Thou shalt not fail to put protection on your characters, especially your BSB.
** Some players only take characters cause they have to, so wouldn't this be more of a preference?

Due to supporting attacks and pretty much always striking last, characters need protection, or they die.

Thou shalt not take runic banners on your BSB unless you are working a Strollaz list.
** Valaya/Grungi are still viable options for a BSB. Valaya is expensive, but it would give us a +4 to Dispel. Though Grungi is avail to the BSB if Im not mistaken, so if you put him in a support block in the back, this seems to be a decent, cost effective option.

Valaya at 100 points blows. You use power dice to remove RIP spells. So you pay 100 pts for a +2 to dispell...not effective unless in very specific builds.
Grungni goes on unit standards. Doesn't need the BSB.

Thou shalt not take Thunderers without shields, unless you are taking 40+, which isn't the smartest idea, unless you have a specific strategy.
** What a load of "I Swear too much". Regardless of the number you take, if you know what you want to do with ANY unit, then it's a smart idea. With all the other stuff in a Dwarf army, if the enemy is shooting the guns, then you've really given em nothing better to shoot at. If they're in combat, then game is probably at a point where shields won't save the unit.

1 pt for a 14 pt model is a good investment for doubling saves vs S3 missile fire and a 6+ ward save in CC.

Thou shalt not take Daemon Slayers unless it's for the giggles.
** If by giggles you mean watching your opponent groan if/when he gets hit by this guy, then yeah. I've read the Javidsons Handbook, again, I agree that he's the least loved, but strip down he's a great addition to a single slayer unit or even as a loner. True he is killed easily, and your experience is greater here than mine. Does that mean that no one should take them in a comepetive environement? Yes they can!

Dragon Slayers are great. Daemon slayers, not so much. Take 2 dragon slayers and save 10 points.

Thou shalt not go to war without lots of Great Weapon dwarves.
** But taking Longbeards(non-ranger) w/o them doesn't conflict with this 'commandment' in anyway?

Again, warriors are a better investment for GW.

Thou shalt not put full commmand on units of 10 dwarves.
** Javidson has pointed out a ton of merits of having Mu in units. If you're taking a small block of 10 of anything for any army, you have a specific purpose in mind for em. Wouldn't it be just as valid that having an extra Standard to regain that +1 to a combat that needs it be one of those purposes?

units of 10 are expendable. Tossing 25 free vp into them may not be a great idea for something that can't stand up to a regular unit, and is too slow to dictate who it fights.

Thou shalt not overspend on characters.
** Impossible to do since you're limited to a % of game pts, rather than by a selection chart. Again, this is true for ANY army, and while it may be impractical to do so, isnt that up to the player? Without specifying a percentage, pts value, or ratio, there isn't ANY way to possibly keep this 'commandment'. It should probably read 'Thou shalt find a balance of characters to units'

Good point. In general, you don't want to load up on characters too much and find that 'balance' between units to characters. But I think that's hair splitting.

Thou shalt not take 20 strong combat units in 2k+ games. Thou should take 25+, preferably 30+ unless gun-lining missile units.
** Im sure there is some math-reasoning behind this but it doesn't make much of a difference. As a player plays his army, regardless of dwarfs or not, he is going to adjust the number of models in his unit. ex. If a player keeps losing his unit of 20 warriors, then he's simply going to add more. On that same note, if a unit isn't getting full use of all the models in it, the owning player is going reduce the number of models to make use of the points elsewhere where they will do something for the army. If you've found that 25-30 is what works for you, then great! Is it Law that every dwarf player has to block units up in this size range? Probably not.

Against any compentant 8th edition list, units of 20 are just too small. This has been proven repeatedly. See WoC reports.

Thou shalt not play Warhammer DWARFS sober, unless you are under the drinking age.
** Fixed this for ya! Other armies need sobriety.

Good fix.

Thou shalt take at least one Runesmith. In competetive environments, thou shalt take Runelord equivalent anti-magic.
** As our only decent form of mag. def, this is a no brainer. Why does a competetive environment dictate a Runelord or not? Wouldn't the player choose (as opposed to HAVE to HAVE!), and be limited by the points of the game? What if taking the Runelord leads to your mystery 'overspending'?

It's been shown repeatedly that one runesmith won't stop a solid magic phase. See Undead and Lizard armies.

I think the thing that you're good at A.Wagg is that you know the Dwarf army very well, and you truly want people to succeed. I think the thing you're bad at is that you feel that you're way is the best way, and think that is the ONLY way to win, and therefore the ONLY way to play this game. I've seen some of your comments on other posters, and this is the vibe you're projecting. There is a difference between Optimal and Viable. Also, winning isnt the only reason to be playing.

Again, blame me, not Wagg.
Optimal vs Viable. Absolutely good point. This is meant to be optimal advice for winning. Not just having fun.

For someone who's experienced, they can make their own decisions. For someone new...is ANY of this really that bad advice? Is ANY of it going to make a newb weaker? Maybe limited at the start, but it's a basis to grow from.

Here's a good example:
The Bearded Ones Battle Reports. His early reports were of a 7th edition list facing...other 7th edition lists. In 8th edition. He won reliable. Does that make his list 'strong'? No...playing against sub-optimal opposition, and he's got very solid generalship skills. He won a lot.

Then he switched to LOTS O' GW and larger units. And now? He's friggin' stomping people into the dirt...people playing outdated lists don't have a chance at all against him.

Can you win with a sub-optimal list? Sure. You need to be good, and facing people with sub-optimal lists usually.

[A.Wagg]

And we aren't going to say, "oh well, yeah, yeah sure, you can take that, I mean, if you want. Sure." We are going to give you the facts on how to WIN. Win a few games with a good list, get a feel for warhammer and some of the best units in out book, then sub in a dragon slayer for fun. No one would post any lists if all they wanted was reassurance that there list is great, no changes. Most want it the best it can be, or at least see the best list they could make, then add in stuff they like, rather than taking a big blob of random units with no conherency, and trying to work from there.

[Javidson]

do we post golden rules here or in the other thread?

[A.Wagg]

You need more?

[the bearded one]

The reason why you shouldn't take longbeards with great weapons is because they are 13 points. Hammerers are 12 points AND stubborn, AND immune to fear and terror when a lord is present. Cheaper and better, hammerers trump GW longbeards as unit choice because they are cheaper AND have better special rules. When looked at individually GW longbeards are cool and really strong, but when compared to hammerers the hammerers take the gold. You should go for the longbeard GW's instead of hammerers when you run out of points in the special section.

I hope that helps explain



- When taking a dwarf lord, take shieldbearers

- Reserve the master rune of gromril for your BSB

- The master rune of grungni and master rune of balance are highly advised to take

Specific commandments ( depend on armylist build ) :
- When taking big units of miners ( 15+ ), also take a steamdrill to ensure they arrive soon

- When running dwarflords run them defensively, because they are not worth it offensively ( their cost tends to equal 20-25 hammerers )

- When firing a cannon at big targets with deep bases ( screaming bells/plague furnaces, chariots, steamtanks, hellpit abominations, stegadons, hydra's etc. ) aim the cannon to fire 10" in front of the back end of the base. That way when you roll a 10 on the first artillery dice, the cannonball will still hit the back end of the base instead of overshooting.

[A.Wagg]

And 10's statistically best. Well put though.

[Akar]

If I came across has straightforward then good.

Im not blaming anyone for making the list, and humor or not, the implication was, 'Don't do these things and you are an idiot'. They are good guidelines to follow, especially for a new Dwarf Player. I have a mate getting rid of his normal Dwarf army for dirt cheap, and based off what I've read here, I might start a normal Dwarf army. Maybe I am singling A.Wagg out, but he comes across to me as one of those people who is like that.

The difference is really, when I guy posts a list w/Cannon and GT, then suggesting he find the points for the runes and a good place to remove them from is acceptable. Telling the guy who wants to bring 4 Bolt Throwers that he needs to drop 3 of em and take a Cannon, GT, etc., isn't really helping him play how he wants to. That's what originally attracted me to this place, but I've seen a few other posts leaning toward the latter.

Your breakdown from my responses Stymie are well thought out, and 1/2 of em I understood the reasoning from the original post. Im going to assume that it's based off experience, playstyle, and prob a bit of Math. I can't comment that Warriors w/GW's are better or worse than Longbeards w/GW's. I also can't comment that Hammerers>Longbeards. As a player I would be frustrated if everyone told me that paying for a 13 pt LB w/GW to get the same statline as a Hammerer as my CORE, was a stupid idea, which is the focus of my point. Probably about 99% of all forums out there will tell people to play the 'Worlds Greatest XXXX List' if you want to win.

Myself included, Im goin all Slayers. I KNOW its an uphill battle that's not using all of the Dwarf Advantages. Im not interested in how bad taking a Demonslayer is or how taking 2 Dragonslayers would be better. Im not interested in using my army as some other list using the 'count's as' rule. What Im interested in, is how I can make the army work. For me it's a lot to do with the rules at this point, and how what Im taking function. Ex. Javidson recommending using Mus. in my Slayer units and why. Even with this list of Guidelines, im trying to work in a Rune'slayer' for some Mag Def. Not really interested in 'You should really take Quarrelers over your Thunderers cause they're better' without stating why.

I like it here so far and most of what I'm reading is great stuff. I just take it a lil personal when I see threads like this, and its the reason I don't visit most of the other forums I see out there.

Thanks for the reply and appreciate the discussion.

[the bearded one]

I also can't comment that Hammerers>Longbeards. As a player I would be frustrated if everyone told me that paying for a 13 pt LB w/GW to get the same statline as a Hammerer as my CORE, was a stupid idea, which is the focus of my point.

Well, this is a bit of a specific issue. We would/should never say it is a stupid idea, but in this case it's paying more points to get a model with the same statline and equipment, but that does not have the stubborn rule. Therefore the Hammerers>Longbeards will seem logical to most.

If it were say.. people saying "drop the Ironbreakers and take warriors with shields instead" you as a player asking for advice are most certainly allowed to disregard it and play which unit you like more because there is a difference between the units. The hammerer-GW Longbeard discussion is just a case of getting the exact same for less points ( plus the stubborn rule as bonus ), which I would find quite valid advice in most situations.



For your own army you have made clear to go with a slayer theme, so players giving advice will advise you within that parameter ( or perhaps maybe give you some advise to prevent it from getting destroyed by magic ) and it would be silly if they said "drop the slayers, add moar GW Hordes!!!!"

Edited by the bearded one, 08 January 2011 - 10:10 PM.

[Tah Kazak Rik]

I realize that this was meant as a joke, but I just have a few issues with these types of things.

And on a side note the following series of comments does not really only apply to this thread, but to every over critical thread, where someone gives the same old answer to a problem, or presents the same old critical anaylsis of someones army list. Gone is diversity and fun. So here is a grumble from me once again......

All of these rules assume that every dwarf player wants to take the same basic lists: Rules like these cancel the various options we have. If one were to follow these rules, there would be no diversity. It creates card board cut out, meta gaming lists.

All of these rules assume that everyone is wanting to play in a competitive enviroment, where everyone uses meta-gamed lists: Most players here I think play for fun or in some gaming group, so while it is important to know the strengths of our army, it takes away from the game to have such restrictive rules on our armies.

All of these rules are well thought out, but they discourage young beardlings to experiement on their own: they just come here and copy and paste these types of things and never have the chance to learn from themselves, and never get to use the variety of our lists, because who the hell wants to take a flame cannon after everyone on the forum has repeately said it is a lot of cr-ap, or who the hell wants to take daemonslayers after A.Wagg and Stymie constantly bad mouth them.

All of these rules forget one thing, luck: Regardless of what math or stats say, I have ahd things happen, good and bad, that has made me rethink the value of every unit in our army. Everyone cracks down hard on Daemonslayers, but I have them do some fantastic things, but I have had them die from a hail of arrows. But that brings me to my next point...

All of these rules conflict with fun: This is a game, for fun, for people to make their armies their own, to build and paint the models and characters that we enjoy. This game is not all about winning or losing, its not about having the most powerful army, but rather its about your dwarves and how you want them to be. Rules like this, however well thought out, or however well intended harm the very heart of this hobby.

I like DaemonSlayers and Flame Cannons, I like taking Thunderers without shields, I like the fact that Bolt Throwers are reliable and dont blow up in their crews face.

We old timers who have been here forever, and those who have been extremely active need to remember to not bring down the hobby with our grumblings or advice, and instead of telling someone to go out and buy grudgethrowers instead of slayers, we should encourage our fellows to buy what they like the most. Some of us have really forgotten that and have become bitter.

End of Grumble...

Edited by Tah Kazak Rik, 08 January 2011 - 10:57 PM.

[Eric Mason]

Counter grumble

Getting your head stoved in every battle isn't fun, and is a great way to lose beardlings. A solid reliable base to an army lets them learn tactics first, then they can experiment with other things that might require more skill to pull off properly.

I started in 40k back in '93 because that is what my friends wanted to play. So I played Space Dwarfs (Squats). The point values for them were very, very, bad. So I was at a huge handicap. I lost for two years straight (generally wiped out on turn 3). Then I figured out the only winning list one could get out of the list (and became an expert on rules and errata to prevent my friends cheating by accident). I was pretty stubborn though, and most of the newbies I have worked with or observed tended to quit if they didn't achieve moderate sucessess in the first month or three.

Things they want:
1) To know that the models they forked out a mint for are worth fielding (veterans are more willing to have units they field occasionally since the financial pain is more spread out).
2) Be able to master basic tactics and hold their own

An optimal list will make those things more easily achieved. Depending on how mature the gaming population, an optimized list might be mandatory for preventing constant massacres.

Once they have hit that stride, then the less optimal, and more experimental things can come out. They know if it doesn't work, they have stuff to fall back on, rather than just feeling lost, frustrated, and ripped off.

As always, if someone doesn't want to use advice, no one is forcing them to.

Eric

[Tah Kazak Rik]

Very well put counter grumble, beardling Eric Mason.

And overrall I agree with you.

I am just tired of people, not just on this forum, being so stuck in their ways about what makes a good list and what doesnt. Its all relative and people need to understand that.

It is very drull to hear the same advice over and over, and less and less people not trying new things. When someone asks for advice on how to beat WoC, just because many of us have faced many WoC lists doesnt mean that the WoC player will bring the same old tired list. Maybe he will have 3 hellcannon, or a bunch of forsaken, or maybe a bunch Exhalted champs. All we should do is give our opinions, and not state our opinions as certainties, because you never know.

Like I said on another thread, its fine to give advice and keep dragging out the same old good and true army list, but its another to be subjective about it and ignore all other possible options.

Edited by Tah Kazak Rik, 09 January 2011 - 12:40 AM.

[Stymie Jackson]

Which is the point of the golden rules. so instead of cutting and pasting the same advice over and over, newbies can see the golden rules, get the basics...

And then use the forum for more advanced, more specific, and more fluffy discussions as needed! Huzzah!

Intead of repeating the same pro/con arguments every time!

Like this one:
Why always take shields on thunderers? For 1/14 the cost of each mini, you significantly increase it's defense. In fact, you'll notice a shield in CC even in the worst case (high save modifiers) improves survivability for 1/6 of the time...for 1/14th the cost. It doesn't help vs. stomping, or some magic, or high strength war machines, but it gives them a save they wouldn't have Vs Dark Elf Xbows, and doubles their save vs. Skink Blowguns. Again, 1/6 more survivability, for 1/14th those cost in over half of potential circumstances. It's just math, baby.

That argument doesn't need to be repeated every single time. A newbie just needs to know 'its good', and can later decide if he can use the points to better effect elsewhere.

Again, it's just the basics. Daemonslayers, objectively, are too specific to be useful in general. If you are making a Slayer list, and come for some advice on how to fight a Minotaur heavy beastmen army, then that's great. If you are new and trying to figure out what to buy, odds are someone would be "I swear too much" at spending their hard earned pesos on a Flame Cannon 'cause it looks cool' and find it useless when he plays his buddies high elf army for example. Let 'em buy the right stuff early, and then worry about figuring out how to use the 'sub-optimal' stuff later.

Sub-optimal doesn't mean 'bad'. I use quareller rangers. Many would say that is sub-optimal. Sub-optimal means you gotta work harder to have it be useful (like making an army to use it's strengths). Hell, I'm taking Longbeards with shields to a tourney because I don't have enough GW warriors done up yet, and 30 LB cost the same as 35 Warriors, so it slots right in...it's because I have the minis. You don't see that advice on the Golden Rules because it don't belong in generic, simple, basic advice.

And if you don't like the idea of the golden rules, we'll just blame you guys for when newbies constantly come here, "I swear too much" about how there's no generic guidelines on what to do as Dwarves, and any simple question gets 20 damn answers.

Just relax guys and let us friggin put up a guidelines post for the NEW GUYS WHO KEEP ASKING FOR JUST THIS VERY THING! Seriously, you gonna suggest to someone to 'try' a Flame Cannon when they have limited fund to get started? No, they should pick one up after they've gotten into the hobby for a bit!

Finally I don't get the 'stupid' comments. You aren't stupid for taking something sub-optimal and that hasn't been suggested at all by anyone. If anything kills the game for new players, it's collecting an army they can't win with, get stomped, and decide it's a waste of time and money.

Edited by Stymie Jackson, 09 January 2011 - 04:29 PM.

[Stymie Jackson]

Also...did anyone mention Musicians?

Golden Rule:
Musicians should be taken on all units, points allowing.

As a rule, musicians are pretty much nearly always worth the points, even on units of 10...in some ways, more so because they might be used to FLEE a charge and could benefit from the +1 on rallying. Larger units really need the swift reforms as dwarf (especially when combined with an anvil, it's like having that fabulous TK reform banner!).

Edit: should we be taking discussion off this thread and put it somewhere else? I can easily delete my posts and move them elsewhere.

Edited by Stymie Jackson, 09 January 2011 - 04:25 PM.

[A.Wagg]

Ok, well usually we get the same old threads that say "I hate WoC, i always loosehelpmenowpleasearghhh" and we say ok, against the typical WoC list their going to have so and so, and we give them the stereotypical army for that. Then the reader says "ok, OG's and S5 GT's are good against chosen and warriors, and he has a some of them so I'll take one GT, S5. However he LOVES marauders, so I better max out my GT allotment. I like playing a more agressive army too, so I'll take a hammerer horde and GW horde to match him in combat. And those dang shaggoths, thats how you kill them, cannons! I couldn't figure that out, so, I'll take one of those.

[Thorfinn Oakenshield]

Being a complete Young ‘Un Beardling, when I read the “commandments“ posted by A.Wagg and Stymie Jackson I took them as both Toungue-in-Cheek and sound advice for a new player (such as myself).

I was very happy to read them. They completely coencided with what I have been learning these past few weeks and were thoughtfully and succinctly crafted. Well done! At no time did I get the impression that the author was being bullying or commanding.

In my humble opinion, it appears that Akar took them to heart because his army (and its potential applied strategies) conflict with some of the ideas put forth in the “commandments”. It sounds to this Newbie like Akar is being defensive and trying to “justify” his choices by belittling the post and its author(s). Opinions being what they are, accusations and attacks should be left to the gaming table (and even then, only in fun).

I appreciate all the advice that I have been given, and if I dissagree with what is being said, I do it in private, and mostly keep it to myself. It’s okay to disagree…it’s not okay to throw stones in a forum to make point of your opinions however.

Just my two cents. Thanks for the “commandments” you guys. This noob found them quite usefull. Cheers.

[Dimetri1]

Thou shalt not take this post to seriously.
Thou shalt not take passages out of context.
Thou shalt not read statements that are not there.


I did not take this post seriously. It was fun to read and I agreed with most of it. Lighten up!

Edited by Dimetri1, 11 January 2011 - 01:11 AM.