12 replies to this topic

[Ironblood]

I tested the shooting and melee stats of 15 basic Quarrellers and Thunderers.

I used an average of ten attacks to find my data.

 

​Thunderers

​Shooting average - 4.4 Wounds

Melee average - 1.4 Wounds

 

Quarrellers

Shooting average - 2.5 Wounds

Melee average - 2.4 Wounds

 

From this data, it appears that Thunderers are a better 15 model shooter than Quarrellers. Quarrellers on the other hand, trade their shooting ability for increased melee capabilities making them a more balanced choice. I am sure people have done tests like this before, but I just wanted to share my results.

 

 

 

[Thrang Thunderforge]

Oh yes! I assumed they would both have a hand weapon, but indeed, Quarrellers are armed with a 'Ranger's Axe' whereas Thunderers merely use their 'Gun-butts'.

 

Fine by me - I prefer a good old fashioned crossbow, just the thing for popping those ha'ak Overlords out of the sky!

[JB-Sounder]

If I've done the math right, Quarrellers should be wounding on 1/4 of all attacks (melee and range).  Thunderers should be wounding on 1/3 of ranged and 1/6 of melee. 

 

So if you have run your experiment longer you should come out to 3.75 wounds for Q and 5 wounds for T ranged.  3.75 wounds for Q and 2.5 wounds for T melee.

 

Quarrellers also have an extra 4" of range.

[Thrang Thunderforge]

That extra 4" should get the Quarrellers 20% more shots than the Thunderers (ie based on 20" against 16")

 

Okay it probably doesn't work out quite like that, with charge ranges and enemy movement taken into account...

[Pendrakk]

Since these units must be taken in increments of ten, maybe doing one ten and one twenty comparrison. I would take 20 quarrelers or 10 thunderers since quarrelers get double shots at twenty.

[Ironblood]

Since these units must be taken in increments of ten, maybe doing one ten and one twenty comparrison. I would take 20 quarrelers or 10 thunderers since quarrelers get double shots at twenty.

 

Assuming you are getting your rules from The General's Handbook, you don't have to take them in increments of ten in matched play. You could have 11 models in a unit, but they would cost the same amount of points as if they were a unit of 20. I guess you would have to take them in increments of ten if you wanted peak point efficiency, but you don't have to.

[Graydon Ironshield]

Never noticed those Ranger Axes before. What I usually do is have a friendly Runelord nearby to buff the Quarrellers in their Shooting by giving those crossbows a -1 Rend. Range of a Quarreller, punch of a Thunderer, and it annoys my opponent when his crossbows can't do the same. Then again, they aren't used to facing Duardin all the time.

[Pendrakk]

@Ironblood: You are right about that but i think you missed my point, I was just sugesting doing a comparison of both units at base value and at 20 as they each have a seperate buff at 20. You wouldn't pay for a 6 pack of beer and leave some of it at the register.

[Thane Choate]

I'm not sure it's a matter of one better than the other, it's a matter of uses.

I tend to field one regiment of quarrelers per two or three regiments of thunderers. The thunderers I put in heavy fire power areas, pinch points or towards the back near my artillery. The quarrelers are always closer the the front than most of my thunderers, sometimes set askew, between thunderers so they can close combat with regiments threatening to take out my thunderers. Sometimes I'll set them near the front, tip of the sword I sometimes use them for early volleys, first strike kind of thing, then their ranger axes allow them to hold for a moment while backup shows up.

[Pendrakk]

What size games do you normally play?

[Thane Choate]

5k as a minimum

[Pendrakk]

Nice. Your tactics suggested a large scale game.

[Graydon Ironshield]

I usually play in much smaller matches myself, due to constraints on my time. If I'm lucky I can get in a 2k game. I certainly don't have enough painted Dwarfs to get in a 5k match.