Thommy H:
They’re equal against units that are entirely within their fire zone - so, small units that are stupid enough to get that close. Mostly when I fire my RH Blunderbusses though, I only get part of a unit because everyone knows how to avoid them and how powerful they can be. With the Indy GT version, you just have to get in range and then there’s nothing your opponent can do.
Fequiil:
tommy, i use(practise a little with making lists) your book.
i do not play tourneys or so and my group lets me use your book…
if 8th edition is comming, could you please make a 2.0 version?
Baggronor:
Not sure I see the big difference in effectiveness. I have played both versions, and the blunderbuss in RH are just as, if not moreso brutal than the annihilators against infantry.The ability to potentially hit everyone in a target unit vs the potential to hit everyone in a 12" blast zone is a big difference. The RH BBs are much harder to use effectively, as its rare that an enemy will be entirely in the zone. The Annihilators just need to get their front 5 guys within 12" and can then hit the entire enemy unit regardless of size, formation, angle etc. They are much more effective than the RH BBs when firing at a single target and it scales with the size of the enemy unit: the larger the target unit, the better they become. The RH BBs on the other hand have the advantage of being able to catch multiple enemies within their zone, but the fact they have a zone keeps their effective range a lot shorter.
maelzch:
Something we spotted at my club, which could possibly do with an amendment if there’s a revision is the Kollossus!
1) T7 is too much as the majority of things cannot hurt it. Even a Stegadon is only T6.
2) The crew of 10 annihilators give a good chance of shrugging off most cannon fire too, due to randomisation (maybe a crew of 5 or 6 max).
3) A S5 breath weapon is very powerful, IMO it should be S4.
4) Further to the annihilator questions above, having them on top a M6 kollossus is a bit much.
One other thin that the guys at my club have a gripe with is the Death Rocket, which effectively fires like a cannon with only 1 artillery dice roll, this reduces the unpredictability of ranged weapons.
I think thats it for the time being, but I’ve got another game with the list tonight, so I’ll post any other thoughts the guys have about the book later on.
Cheers,
Maelzch
saurus:
maelzch: wow that is strange as I thought both the Indy GT death rocket and collossus suck IMO. Death rocket I found very situation against high pointed, low toughness no save troops that regular archers can kill and the Collossus, well to beat that its simple. Static combat res, get in combat with it with a ranked unit and it wont even last a turn. For 330 points it needs a stubborn rule. I mean its 330points! I would rather take a hydra and its half the points!
Well I am glad to hear Matt that you are considering updating the book depenadant on the new rules. I still believe that ‘master and servant’ rules needs fixing as you see in all GW official books they are getting rid of those types of unit restriction rules ie: skaven mainstay, 0-1 choices, etc…
With respect to Annihilators, I thought just making them shoot like regular units with a 12" range, and giving them a bonus with ranks would work. Obviously Matt and Kevin play tested though, so their ideas of what works and what doesnt are certainly more valid then mine.
Spikes:
For the annihilators, I would suggest a rule stating that the maximum number of hits they could do on the target unit be equal to double the number of annihilators within range. Something like: you have 10 annihilators in range, the max. number of 4+ to hit dice you can roll is 20, even if the enemy unit has 40 troopers.
Thommy H:
tommy, i use(practise a little with making lists) your book.Whoa, someone is using my book :o That's awesome. I hope it's working out for you - if you get as far as using it in a game, let me know any problems that come up.
i do not play tourneys or so and my group lets me use your book...
if 8th edition is comming, could you please make a 2.0 version?
Fequiil
Baggronor:
the Collossus, well to beat that its simple. Static combat res, get in combat with it with a ranked unit and it wont even last a turn. For 330 points it needs a stubborn rule. I mean its 330points! I would rather take a hydra and its half the points!Yeah, this also needs addressing imo. The Kollossus may well be a collossal (sorry, I couldn't resist :)) waste of points in 8th, I don't see it getting very far against units of 40 infantry (especially if the combat resolution rumours are true).
I still believe that 'master and servant' rules needs fixing as you see in all GW official books they are getting rid of those types of unit restriction rules ie: skaven mainstay, 0-1 choices, etc...That rule is presumably to stop people taking 3 units of Wolf Riders (or Hobgobs, or Rabble) as their Cores. Its to ensure some regular CD bods actually turn up, without having to move the Hobgoblins to Specials.
saurus:
That rule is presumably to stop people taking 3 units of Wolf Riders (or Hobgobs, or Rabble) as their Cores. Its to ensure some regular CD bods actually turn up, without having to move the Hobgoblins to Specials.Yep, understand that. I said earlier that CD warriors should be 1+, but on the other hand, if you make them worth taking then people will field them. The only reason people would not take them is because they are cr@p. Why would you make a bread and butter unit like this so cr@p? People will take them if you merely make the unit worth its points, instead of saying, "you must take this unit and therefore its terrible." I cannot think of another army except maybe OK that has a rule similar to this, all the other books abandoned such restrictions. Why not just make them worth their points through stringent playtesting? Its not like GW is a master at balancing units and nor do CD have to be the same points as thier regular dwarven kinsmen. Look at TK and VC skeles, two different point values for the exact same unit.
mattbird:
well, IF we go the route of releasing a 2.0, maybe we’ll set up a system for reporting feedback. But this would have to be taken directly from games played, to keep it sane.
mattbird:
OK, have discussed with Kevin, we will do a 2.0 version. I wil start a thread for feedback. We also need a professional-type proofreader to edit the current version.
----->> LINK HERE http://www.chaos-dwarfs.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=7571
Time of Madness:
Thanks for all the hard work Matt and Kevin!
What time frame will you want for the 2.0 version? I’m assuming you will give us at least a few months with the new 8th edition before the new version comes out.
I can help out with feedback as I’ll be playing exclusively with the Indy book for 8th edition. (my group has decided to retire RH).
Time of Madness
mattbird:
it’s a good question. I think we will need to get the new book out as quickly as possible once 8th drops, to keep it playable in GTs. The rumored new magic system will play havoc with the current book…
Time of Madness:
Well hopefully this week my local store will have the 8th edition book in. Maybe I’ll be lucky enough to get some games in earlier rather then later.
Time of Madness
Fequiil:
well, it is.tommy, i use(practise a little with making lists) your book.Whoa, someone is using my book :o That's awesome. I hope it's working out for you - if you get as far as using it in a game, let me know any problems that come up.
i do not play tourneys or so and my group lets me use your book...
if 8th edition is comming, could you please make a 2.0 version?
Fequiil
But yes, I was planning to do a revision for 8th Edition. Looking back at it now after so long, I see a lot of things I want to change, and a new edition of Warhammer would be a good excuse to tweak.
Thommy H
maelzch:
If you need any extra help, me & my gaming group would be up for playtesting & suggesting amendments.
Cheers,
Maelzch
Bronze Bull:
I’ve been reading the Dwarfs of Chaos codex since I discovered it a few days ago and I was simply blown away by it. Great quality, great artwork, and it really feels like a professional piece of work. I mean that.
When I first read the Annihilators I thought they were a bit powerful. Not that the CD don’t deserve their own heavy hitter unit like other armies have, but they do have the chance for cheese. I myself was thinking of two units of 15 (5x3) so I could have Strength 5 bombardments on units!
I almost wonder if the Chaos Dwarfs wouldn’t be better off with either Handgunners or with RH Blunderbusses. It’s not that I hate the Annihilators but I see that they can be misused by other players, even if I’m not the one to do it.
Don’t get me wrong though it would be nice to have a unit that could explode such cheesy units like Vampire Counts or massive mobs of Skaven clanrats. 
TheVoice:
Matt, what sort of proof-reading do you need? General error checks et al? I would be happy to do that for you.
wallacer:
Tbh, I think the Kollossus was put in the book mostly so that people who owned a Juggernaut (lucky sods) could use it.
OK, have discussed with Kevin, we will do a 2.0 version. I wil start a thread for feedback. We also need a professional-type proofreader to edit the current version.I’m happy to proof read and grammar check whatever you want to send to me. I assume that the more people you have doing this the better? PM me if you like and we discuss what you need done.
mattbird
Bronze Bull:
Definitely post a thread for feedback! I’d be willing to submit fiction if you need it! 