1:09:16 Proud Dawi player for over 20 years Steve. I won't put you in the book for saying I haven't played the game before on account that I can see how my comment may have rubbed you the wrong way. Not my intention to insult. I just keep seeing all these unsupported ranged units up front folding. They're not getting any value, and it hurts me inside. Rangers and Irondrakes are the exceptions because they are good. I'm talking about the thunderers and quarrelers. My point is , to all my fellow Dawi, protect your vulnerable units. Instead of offer empty criticism I offer alternatives. What if you deployed your thin line of ranged in front of your hammerers. Given how hard everyone tries to avoid them you force their hand. If they want those points they'll have to risk running into your hardest hardest unit. At least you have a way to punish your opponent instead of losing a whole unit unanswered. Everyone who beats dwarfs does so by picking off their vulnerable units because they deploy too wide trying to maximize initial firepower. They take their fastest, hardest hitting units(like the pegasus knights), single out weakest isolated unit, overrun, and encircle infantry blocks. They force the infantry to expose a flank, get charged by multiple units, lose combat, get double outnumbered and it's GG. I get your point that the "efficient" way to play dwarfs can be un-fun for the opponent, possibly boring, and cause a lot of dwarf hate but the army only has so many tools. As Luka pointed out, you have no cavalry and no wizards, aside from the anvil but it's quite restrictive play-wise. You have expensive heavy infantry with a lot of static ranged. This isn't an army that is meant to fight conventionally in a long drawn out battle line. This is an army meant to be deployed in a tight formation with depth and layers. It's embedded in their lore, their style and their design. With Dwarfs you need to find ways to game the system because the system is gaming you. Don't feel bad for it. It's their purpose to be that one army that does that thing. Hopefully we'll see some spicy additions in the arcane journal.
Big agree. Both my games v dwarfs I did exactly this (PKs and a hippoduke chewing through warmachines and anemic ranged units) and only ended up coming close on both counts because I ran out of other stuff to kill and just threw my units bodily into the last brick (an inordinate amount of hammerers or ironbreakers with the hesitation rune) and bounced off. In my second game, the dwarf player punished me for multi-charging his brick of IBs by rear-charging my rear-chargers with some warriors and sandwiching them in and eating them alive. If that brick had been guarding the ranged stuff on a hill behind them I would've been infinitely more punished.
Also, the Gyros were completely wasted on the first turn. You know the opposing army is coming, why would you sacrifice your redirectors on the very first turn of the game?
@@michaldzurenda504 Nah I think that was the right call, he kept the pressure on so Luka held back his knights to protect his war machines. That's probably the move that won him the game. Redirection is a weird gamey mechanic too. I'm not a fan that a lone model changes the trajectory and momentum of a unit's charge. If I implemented one house rule, it would be that if the unit double outnumbers the target unit, then the unit receiving the charge could be forced to align to the attacker without disrupting the charge. Why should a whole bunch of knights that could charge straight in have to do a big wheel on a single entity model just because the base is square. Weight should matter.
You should totally make a video about skirmishers and charges (since most won't read this) - like a lot of ToW it's a bit confusing at a glance but it works in a cohesive way. VS *non*-skirmishers: ◉ Whether charging or charged - the Skirmishers form up in a line and any one of them that cannot make it into base contact with an enemy is put in a new rank behind the fighting rank (at users discretion but dictated by fighting rank width and movement). ◉ When charged by a non-skirmish unit, once contact is made with the closest model - the *Skirmish* unit forms up against the fighting rank of the unit that charged as described above. (Also note that insufficient movement to make it into base contact also puts models in a back rank) VS other skirmishers: ◉ Charge is made model by model, starting with the closest (going the shortest route). ◉ Once base contact is made (nothing is stated so it is assumed that the charging model aligns to the target) the other models in the *charging* unit moves up to form a fighting rank following the conditions of 1) trying to keep the first model to make contact as centered as possible and 2) as permitted by movement (i.e. high charge roll can make for a wider fighting rank). ◉ Once the *charging* unit has formed up, the charged unit attempts to maximize models in base contact with the charging unit but may only move up to their movement characteristics and insufficient movement to make it to the fighting rank puts them in a back rank (at users discretion but dictated by fighting rank width and movement).
1:41:50 Right result, wrong method. Quick shot does not ignore the -1 penalty for stand & shoot, only for moving and shooting (it does let you stand and shoot regardless of distance). However, just about every dwarven unit that can shoot either has dwarven crafted themselves, or have weapons that have it (only exception I've seen so far is cinderblast bombs for ironbreakers & irondrakes). Surprised you took the time to look up the rule and still got it wrong, but I've had those moments too and I don't even have the extra pressures that come with doing the stream.
1:41:30 Those Rangers should be blocking LoS to each other, and causing cover as a result. I see everyone playing Rangers with no LoS issues and it makes them a LOT stronger than they should be. EDIT: Someone in chat mentioned it - I understand what you mean about time, but I think it would be very difficult for you to avoid a cover penalty in the situation you were in. It would have been easier to just apply the -1, rather than 0. Also, any unit with -1 or -2 for moving, will often not be able to avoid this issue - In the case of Rangers, which are so powerful, it's no small thing. EDIT 2: And the Rangers win the game :)
Doesn't the master rune of grugni already provide a 5+ ward save for the BSB since he is part of the unit? If so, what's the point of buying 2 runes of shielding?
so rules question... with the runes for the anvil of doom do the rune go on the crew or the war machine (anvil) considering there is two different profiles? my play group says the runes go on the crew because the runes you can choose from are w/a/t not engineering which all other war machines only get to choose from. Thoughts?
@@MountainMiniatures but the crew only doent exist in the shooting phase what happens when something gets into close combat with it then? does the crew get the bonus of the runes then?
@MountainMiniatures eh I'd disagree. Why do the priest and honor guard have their own profile then. Plus theirs multiple instances that a unit has more than one type of profile despite listing only one like cavalry and chariots. So I'd say it goes on the the priest. Also pg. 197 of the bbb says warmachines have split profile. Meaning the model is a combination of 2 profile types so it actually has infantry and warmachine.
Looking at the lance rules and how they do not provide the strength bonus in subsequent turns seems legit! What are your thoughts on cavalry spears, as they are never technically replaced by a hand weapon since they provide bonuses also when not charging? Would they then keep getting the strength bonus during a pursuit? (the FAQ mentions "lances & spears" which is curious)
Cav spears don’t give any str or ap unless you charge. It’s plain simple in the rules, the fact that you don’t have to use handweapons is to reflect the “Fight in extra rank” they get in certain situations. Tldr, read the rules bro)
1:09:16 Proud Dawi player for over 20 years Steve. I won't put you in the book for saying I haven't played the game before on account that I can see how my comment may have rubbed you the wrong way. Not my intention to insult. I just keep seeing all these unsupported ranged units up front folding. They're not getting any value, and it hurts me inside. Rangers and Irondrakes are the exceptions because they are good. I'm talking about the thunderers and quarrelers.
My point is , to all my fellow Dawi, protect your vulnerable units. Instead of offer empty criticism I offer alternatives. What if you deployed your thin line of ranged in front of your hammerers. Given how hard everyone tries to avoid them you force their hand. If they want those points they'll have to risk running into your hardest hardest unit. At least you have a way to punish your opponent instead of losing a whole unit unanswered.
Everyone who beats dwarfs does so by picking off their vulnerable units because they deploy too wide trying to maximize initial firepower. They take their fastest, hardest hitting units(like the pegasus knights), single out weakest isolated unit, overrun, and encircle infantry blocks. They force the infantry to expose a flank, get charged by multiple units, lose combat, get double outnumbered and it's GG.
I get your point that the "efficient" way to play dwarfs can be un-fun for the opponent, possibly boring, and cause a lot of dwarf hate but the army only has so many tools. As Luka pointed out, you have no cavalry and no wizards, aside from the anvil but it's quite restrictive play-wise. You have expensive heavy infantry with a lot of static ranged. This isn't an army that is meant to fight conventionally in a long drawn out battle line. This is an army meant to be deployed in a tight formation with depth and layers. It's embedded in their lore, their style and their design.
With Dwarfs you need to find ways to game the system because the system is gaming you. Don't feel bad for it. It's their purpose to be that one army that does that thing. Hopefully we'll see some spicy additions in the arcane journal.
Big agree. Both my games v dwarfs I did exactly this (PKs and a hippoduke chewing through warmachines and anemic ranged units) and only ended up coming close on both counts because I ran out of other stuff to kill and just threw my units bodily into the last brick (an inordinate amount of hammerers or ironbreakers with the hesitation rune) and bounced off.
In my second game, the dwarf player punished me for multi-charging his brick of IBs by rear-charging my rear-chargers with some warriors and sandwiching them in and eating them alive. If that brick had been guarding the ranged stuff on a hill behind them I would've been infinitely more punished.
Also, the Gyros were completely wasted on the first turn. You know the opposing army is coming, why would you sacrifice your redirectors on the very first turn of the game?
@@michaldzurenda504 Nah I think that was the right call, he kept the pressure on so Luka held back his knights to protect his war machines. That's probably the move that won him the game.
Redirection is a weird gamey mechanic too. I'm not a fan that a lone model changes the trajectory and momentum of a unit's charge. If I implemented one house rule, it would be that if the unit double outnumbers the target unit, then the unit receiving the charge could be forced to align to the attacker without disrupting the charge. Why should a whole bunch of knights that could charge straight in have to do a big wheel on a single entity model just because the base is square. Weight should matter.
@@pinch1loaf They are playing skirmishers wrong. It shouldn't redirect.
@@Dom-ei8uf you need to read read all the skirmish rules
You should totally make a video about skirmishers and charges (since most won't read this)
- like a lot of ToW it's a bit confusing at a glance but it works in a cohesive way.
VS *non*-skirmishers:
◉ Whether charging or charged - the Skirmishers form up in a line and any one of them that cannot make it into base contact with an enemy is put in a new rank behind the fighting rank (at users discretion but dictated by fighting rank width and movement).
◉ When charged by a non-skirmish unit, once contact is made with the closest model - the *Skirmish* unit forms up against the fighting rank of the unit that charged as described above. (Also note that insufficient movement to make it into base contact also puts models in a back rank)
VS other skirmishers:
◉ Charge is made model by model, starting with the closest (going the shortest route).
◉ Once base contact is made (nothing is stated so it is assumed that the charging model aligns to the target) the other models in the *charging* unit moves up to form a fighting rank following the conditions of 1) trying to keep the first model to make contact as centered as possible and 2) as permitted by movement (i.e. high charge roll can make for a wider fighting rank).
◉ Once the *charging* unit has formed up, the charged unit attempts to maximize models in base contact with the charging unit but may only move up to their movement characteristics and insufficient movement to make it to the fighting rank puts them in a back rank (at users discretion but dictated by fighting rank width and movement).
Great report and AMAZING table of terrain! I would love to come to Canada one day and have a game with you guys!
you guys have such great chemistry working on these together. Keep em coming!
I’d like to think that the dwarves were here to remind the bretonians of the importance of getting an extended warranty on all that siege equipment.
New to the Warhammer table top universe, coming in from playing Total Warhammer 2/3 a ton. Thanks for these videos!
1:41:50 Right result, wrong method. Quick shot does not ignore the -1 penalty for stand & shoot, only for moving and shooting (it does let you stand and shoot regardless of distance). However, just about every dwarven unit that can shoot either has dwarven crafted themselves, or have weapons that have it (only exception I've seen so far is cinderblast bombs for ironbreakers & irondrakes). Surprised you took the time to look up the rule and still got it wrong, but I've had those moments too and I don't even have the extra pressures that come with doing the stream.
1:41:30 Those Rangers should be blocking LoS to each other, and causing cover as a result. I see everyone playing Rangers with no LoS issues and it makes them a LOT stronger than they should be.
EDIT: Someone in chat mentioned it - I understand what you mean about time, but I think it would be very difficult for you to avoid a cover penalty in the situation you were in. It would have been easier to just apply the -1, rather than 0. Also, any unit with -1 or -2 for moving, will often not be able to avoid this issue - In the case of Rangers, which are so powerful, it's no small thing.
EDIT 2: And the Rangers win the game :)
You guys make hands down the best old world battle reports, just the videos have been so dark lately.
Thanks dude! ill look into it. Ill see if i can improve it a bit for tonights game
Doesn't the master rune of grugni already provide a 5+ ward save for the BSB since he is part of the unit? If so, what's the point of buying 2 runes of shielding?
Yeah came to say this, it affects the unit so it affects him. Maybe they were runes of stone?
so rules question... with the runes for the anvil of doom do the rune go on the crew or the war machine (anvil) considering there is two different profiles? my play group says the runes go on the crew because the runes you can choose from are w/a/t not engineering which all other war machines only get to choose from. Thoughts?
its the warmachine, not the crew, the crew dont exist as ""minis"
your play group has no reason to claim its the crew.
@@MountainMiniatures but the crew only doent exist in the shooting phase what happens when something gets into close combat with it then? does the crew get the bonus of the runes then?
@@davidappelbaum1712 What is the unit type?
its "warmachine" not "infantry"
@@MountainMiniatures gatcha ok thank you
@MountainMiniatures eh I'd disagree. Why do the priest and honor guard have their own profile then. Plus theirs multiple instances that a unit has more than one type of profile despite listing only one like cavalry and chariots. So I'd say it goes on the the priest. Also pg. 197 of the bbb says warmachines have split profile. Meaning the model is a combination of 2 profile types so it actually has infantry and warmachine.
Does Luka's t-shirt say "World's Gayest Tabletop Gamer?"
Looking at the lance rules and how they do not provide the strength bonus in subsequent turns seems legit!
What are your thoughts on cavalry spears, as they are never technically replaced by a hand weapon since they provide bonuses also when not charging? Would they then keep getting the strength bonus during a pursuit? (the FAQ mentions "lances & spears" which is curious)
Cav spears don’t give any str or ap unless you charge. It’s plain simple in the rules, the fact that you don’t have to use handweapons is to reflect the “Fight in extra rank” they get in certain situations.
Tldr, read the rules bro)
I don''t think you understood the question "bro" :)
@@ThomasKarlsson-y4c the edit clarified your question a lot, this is an interesting point.
people talking shit against the dwarfs the whole game for them to win yhea we have no idea what the balance is right now
Yeah the amount of armchair generals in the chat and comment section is hilarious.
@@Yurt_enthusiast7 it's warhammer, everyone is an armchair general
Go Dwarfs!