If you are using Burlok, I recommend an organ gun. Drop the anvil for a Runesmith with 2 rune of spell breaking. Put him with Burlok. The extra points you save you can include a Doomseeker with the Master Rune of Swiftness.
I like the list. Dwarfs are not strong at the moment, but this style of list is pretty much the best we can do. Double viletide is always going to be difficult to play against. You could always drop one unit of irondrakes and buff the Thane to make him more killy, which would have helped in this game, but against other armies like wood elves he won‘t get into combat… Maybe try without the Anvil and take a runesmith with 3 runes of spellbreaking?
You did pretty well considering what you were up against :) Would it be possible to drop a Grudge Thrower to beef up the anti-magic a bit? I always used to like combat dwarfs with just enough shooting to encourage the enemy to come close, but the game has changed a bit since 8th.
Excellent report as ever, always really enjoy them. When you mentioned you were going to go Irondrake heavy my prediction that they'd do well but who knows as you usually play against pretty nasty stuff wasn't too wide of the mark! Could you have deployed the Rangers still behind his army but so that they were out of range of at least one Viletide? What happened on that front felt fairly predictable. Also can he get his Viletides off turn one if you don't put the Rangers there at all? I have a feeling he can't as the range is quite short so giving him that probably not a risk worth taking in the first place. Regardless this game was a good advert for why armies shouldn't be able to take the same spell twice. I also strongly suspect that with this spell in particular the designers had no idea how good it was when they wrote it which if that is the case reflects quite poorly on them. From observation rather than personal experience I get the feeling that your Warriors are really only going to be useful most of the time if you load up on Combat Res with them - I realise they could quite easily have won or drawn you the game at the end in this particular instance though. Are the Grudgethrowers really achieving much? Even for the netlists they seem to be a 'best of a bad bunch' pick and while I get the reasoning for that being necessary I keep wondering if there's a better way that we're not seeing. Wonder about the Anvil too especially if you're not really using it (or getting to use it) for the extra move. Did it even dispel anything? Think you did pretty well in this game and felt like you were a bit unlucky. Not sure the Beastmen player had to make too many good decisions to end up winning it, that seems to be the way of things for Dwarfs at the moment. The Hammerer champion not being able to rune up his great hammer is something I discussed with someone on Bugman's Brewery a while back. Essentially it turns out that having 'Magical Attacks' doesn't make a weapon a 'Magic Weapon'. This is definitely the case in the rules (eg Chaos Knights would never be able to use lances otherwise), but is quite irritating as the great hammer obviously must have runes on it to have magical attacks as Dwarfs have no other way of getting them. However, while I think the rules would be better if a rune could be added I still don't think you should be able to put a rune of speed on it as that or similar must be one of the runes it already has in the first place.
Having now faced the horrible power of the double Viletide, I will certainly be tracking threat ranges of future Beastmen shamans and setting up accordingly. I don't think the Warriors are a good choice. Maybe the biggest weakness of the standard Dwarf army list is the lack of good core choices, outside of a single Ranger unit. I haven't seen great success from the Grudge Throwers yet, but they would definitely come in handy during war machine vs war machine battles, or against enemies who would prefer to hide and not engage. If the enemy promise to march towards me in every game, I'd love to just take Organ Guns (if I can spare the points with the Irondrakes).
Very nice report. Agree with Jankmaster in chat about Dwarves being under manned in TOW. As I have said before I think you should run your unit of rangers in smaller blocks rather than one large one, but you keep doing the same large block strategy which often fails. As you explained from experience the anvil is a huge waste of points, I dont understand why you keep taking it. Except for the anvil I like all the units in this list. I have played quite a few games against the beastmen and the top priority to kill ASAP is always that level 4 with the fetish. Obviously dwarves dont have a lot of reliable ways to do that quickly. The other thing that the beastmen have that is an amazing force multiplier is the slugskin on a doombull in a sturdy gor unit, so watch out for that! I am kind of surprised your regular players dont deploy in a manner to counter that ranger unit. Actually any player that looks at your list before the game starts kind of deserves to get shot up by your rangers if the dont plan and deploy against them.
I don't think the anvil is usually worth the points, unless you have a specific build that makes good use of all its abilities. My next tweak to this list will feature Runesmith(s) instead. The Rangers are the only unit in core that doesn't feel like a tax. Maybe I need to start treating them like a normal unit, setting up with the rest of the army.
I don't like the idea of taking that big gamble with the rangers, personally... Even if an enemy unit or two turns around, if they kill the rangers, and keep their points, that's just a win for the enemy. Even if they are separated and behind the rest of the enemy advance... Right? Maybe using them to support your main force, potentially? I don't play Dwarfs, so I don't really know. Just an idea...
@ValhallanFieldMarshalRobert My plan for this game was to use the Rangers in the main force, but the gap was left in deployment, so I thought they'd have a good chance of killing something if I got the first turn.
@@Andy2D6 Right on. And that makes sense... But they are just such an important and costly unit to be all on their own. In my opinion. I equate it to chess and trading pieces. And to trade your queen for the chance at getting his queen (breaking even), doesn't seem worth it to me... Although, killing on the level 4 shamans could have been big... The math doesn't make that seem probably though... I dunno. I'm just thinking that putting them on their own is essentially writing them off as eventual casualties. I don't think in a defensive army like Dwarfs, where points are so crucial, that this is the best tactic. Coming off the flank in support, or deploying such a potent crucial unit somewhere where they can help and hopefully survive the battle, being supported and defended by the other Dwarf units just seems tactically wise to me. Maybe some food for thought. Just an idea...
Honestly this is a modern 40k player's list; spam what you think is broken. Thankfully most of those players are in fact quite bad at the game, and Old World takes a lot more skill to win than 10th edition 40k.
![ILLSLICK X YOUNGOHM - We're The same [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yUJNkobYR0E/mqdefault.jpg)
If you are using Burlok, I recommend an organ gun.
Drop the anvil for a Runesmith with 2 rune of spell breaking. Put him with Burlok. The extra points you save you can include a Doomseeker with the Master Rune of Swiftness.
Organ Guns are competing with Irondrakes for those sweet rare points, so it's tricky. I do love them, though, since I own 3.
I love these
I like the list. Dwarfs are not strong at the moment, but this style of list is pretty much the best we can do. Double viletide is always going to be difficult to play against. You could always drop one unit of irondrakes and buff the Thane to make him more killy, which would have helped in this game, but against other armies like wood elves he won‘t get into combat… Maybe try without the Anvil and take a runesmith with 3 runes of spellbreaking?
I think that's the first tweak. Anvil out. Runesmith in.
You did pretty well considering what you were up against :) Would it be possible to drop a Grudge Thrower to beef up the anti-magic a bit? I always used to like combat dwarfs with just enough shooting to encourage the enemy to come close, but the game has changed a bit since 8th.
I feel one isn't enough of a threat to bring certain enemies closer.
This should be called “Andy goes net listing”. Think it could be a series
Surfing the net-list.
Excellent report as ever, always really enjoy them. When you mentioned you were going to go Irondrake heavy my prediction that they'd do well but who knows as you usually play against pretty nasty stuff wasn't too wide of the mark!
Could you have deployed the Rangers still behind his army but so that they were out of range of at least one Viletide? What happened on that front felt fairly predictable. Also can he get his Viletides off turn one if you don't put the Rangers there at all? I have a feeling he can't as the range is quite short so giving him that probably not a risk worth taking in the first place. Regardless this game was a good advert for why armies shouldn't be able to take the same spell twice. I also strongly suspect that with this spell in particular the designers had no idea how good it was when they wrote it which if that is the case reflects quite poorly on them.
From observation rather than personal experience I get the feeling that your Warriors are really only going to be useful most of the time if you load up on Combat Res with them - I realise they could quite easily have won or drawn you the game at the end in this particular instance though.
Are the Grudgethrowers really achieving much? Even for the netlists they seem to be a 'best of a bad bunch' pick and while I get the reasoning for that being necessary I keep wondering if there's a better way that we're not seeing. Wonder about the Anvil too especially if you're not really using it (or getting to use it) for the extra move. Did it even dispel anything?
Think you did pretty well in this game and felt like you were a bit unlucky. Not sure the Beastmen player had to make too many good decisions to end up winning it, that seems to be the way of things for Dwarfs at the moment.
The Hammerer champion not being able to rune up his great hammer is something I discussed with someone on Bugman's Brewery a while back. Essentially it turns out that having 'Magical Attacks' doesn't make a weapon a 'Magic Weapon'. This is definitely the case in the rules (eg Chaos Knights would never be able to use lances otherwise), but is quite irritating as the great hammer obviously must have runes on it to have magical attacks as Dwarfs have no other way of getting them. However, while I think the rules would be better if a rune could be added I still don't think you should be able to put a rune of speed on it as that or similar must be one of the runes it already has in the first place.
Having now faced the horrible power of the double Viletide, I will certainly be tracking threat ranges of future Beastmen shamans and setting up accordingly.
I don't think the Warriors are a good choice. Maybe the biggest weakness of the standard Dwarf army list is the lack of good core choices, outside of a single Ranger unit.
I haven't seen great success from the Grudge Throwers yet, but they would definitely come in handy during war machine vs war machine battles, or against enemies who would prefer to hide and not engage. If the enemy promise to march towards me in every game, I'd love to just take Organ Guns (if I can spare the points with the Irondrakes).
👍👍
Dirch that anvil it will newer cancel any spells you could get 2 runesmiths on that price the anvil costs
Very nice report. Agree with Jankmaster in chat about Dwarves being under manned in TOW. As I have said before I think you should run your unit of rangers in smaller blocks rather than one large one, but you keep doing the same large block strategy which often fails. As you explained from experience the anvil is a huge waste of points, I dont understand why you keep taking it. Except for the anvil I like all the units in this list. I have played quite a few games against the beastmen and the top priority to kill ASAP is always that level 4 with the fetish. Obviously dwarves dont have a lot of reliable ways to do that quickly. The other thing that the beastmen have that is an amazing force multiplier is the slugskin on a doombull in a sturdy gor unit, so watch out for that! I am kind of surprised your regular players dont deploy in a manner to counter that ranger unit. Actually any player that looks at your list before the game starts kind of deserves to get shot up by your rangers if the dont plan and deploy against them.
You are only allowed one unit of rangers in core. Because the rangers fill up his core requirement he has to play it as a single unit.
I don't think the anvil is usually worth the points, unless you have a specific build that makes good use of all its abilities. My next tweak to this list will feature Runesmith(s) instead.
The Rangers are the only unit in core that doesn't feel like a tax. Maybe I need to start treating them like a normal unit, setting up with the rest of the army.
Still waiting on character names for the BSB, King, thanes and runelord.
You raise a good point.
I don't like the idea of taking that big gamble with the rangers, personally... Even if an enemy unit or two turns around, if they kill the rangers, and keep their points, that's just a win for the enemy. Even if they are separated and behind the rest of the enemy advance... Right? Maybe using them to support your main force, potentially? I don't play Dwarfs, so I don't really know. Just an idea...
@ValhallanFieldMarshalRobert My plan for this game was to use the Rangers in the main force, but the gap was left in deployment, so I thought they'd have a good chance of killing something if I got the first turn.
@@Andy2D6 Right on. And that makes sense... But they are just such an important and costly unit to be all on their own. In my opinion. I equate it to chess and trading pieces. And to trade your queen for the chance at getting his queen (breaking even), doesn't seem worth it to me... Although, killing on the level 4 shamans could have been big... The math doesn't make that seem probably though... I dunno. I'm just thinking that putting them on their own is essentially writing them off as eventual casualties. I don't think in a defensive army like Dwarfs, where points are so crucial, that this is the best tactic. Coming off the flank in support, or deploying such a potent crucial unit somewhere where they can help and hopefully survive the battle, being supported and defended by the other Dwarf units just seems tactically wise to me. Maybe some food for thought. Just an idea...
On the 1st turn why not fire and flee with the gyro copter instead of just fleeing? Assuming you don’t have a steam gun
@@will1228 T'was the Steam Gun.
It cant fire and flee with the steam gun it need the brimstone gun upgrade to do that
@ yea, I said that in the “assuming you don’t have the steam gun” part
Honestly this is a modern 40k player's list; spam what you think is broken. Thankfully most of those players are in fact quite bad at the game, and Old World takes a lot more skill to win than 10th edition 40k.
I haven't played the last couple of 40k editions, but the way people describe it never sounds fun.