[Archive] My thoughts on the CD list

Archive [Archive] Chaos Dwarf Discussion
61

Bolg:

Well I havent seen the list yet so I cant really judge. My 2 cents: I think I’ll keep playing the RH list for now as I cant really afford the book at the moment. I dont really feel like rebasing 23 centaurs but as they go on 50mm bases I can just play 2 for one. And I was holding back on building on with my CD army as they were in limbo. Now I have to decide I I’ll start building the stuff from the new list.

Question: Do Hobgoblins suffer from animosity?

62

Admiral:

The Legion of Azgorh sounds like a lacking list, about what I expected. It works for me, I might eventually even buy Tamurkhan. But how is the background (mainly on Chaos Dwarfs, but also the rest)?

63

Time of Madness:

Can anyone confirm that the Castellan only gets 50pts in magic gear?

Time of Madness

64

fonejaker:

Can anyone confirm that the Castellan only gets 50pts in magic gear?
Time of Madness

Time of Madness
He can take 75pts
65

Time of Madness:

Great, that’s what I thought! Thanks for that fonejaker.

Time of Madness

66

ryanamandaanna:

really? that seems to go against the average hero level of 50…

67

Baggronor:

really? that seems to go against the average hero level of 50...
To counterbalance the lack of a fighting lord I guess. Although, come to think of it, Dwarf Thanes can take 75pts too. Seems only fair in that light.
68

lostmember:

75pts of magic stuff seems natural for the more advanced races, who naturally have more access to such things.

69

Thommy H:

So Elves should get, like, 100 pts then?

70

gIL^:

So Elves should get, like, 100 pts then?

Thommy H
Do Elves drive tractors?
71

Time of Madness:

So Elves should get, like, 100 pts then?

Thommy H
Thanes get 75pts, so I can see where the logic comes in with allowing Castellans 75pts.

Maybe when the elves get a new book they will have 75pt access as well.
Time of Madness
72

Zhorn:

Thanes get 75pts, so I can see where the logic comes in with allowing Castellans 75pts.

Maybe when the elves get a new book they will have 75pt access as well.
Time of Madness

Time of Madness
I think it is a sign of lazy/stupid rules design. One can rationalize nearly anything but Dwarfs are actually unique in their runic system (and they badly need the item allowance  since most runes are... not so good).

Mind you, I'm not complaining - the 25 pts won't make or break the game (since chaos dwarfs don't have a pendant ;P ).

It is just another sign that whoever wrote the rules isn't very well versed in warhammer (or maybe was told to make the army list worse to not undermine any GW army lists - nah, not going to CT territory today...).

It is a gimmick thrown in that takes away some of the uniqueness of dwarfs. I'd rather have correctly priced units than these 25 pts.

But, we can exploit it: Multiple defensive Castellans instead of infernal units to block the enemy - yay! we'll become mini-dark elves! :hat off
73

Xander:

If Bull Centaurs are on 50mm (50, really? not 40?), what is the minimum unit size? 3+?

Judging by what you see, what would the optimal unit size be?

Cheers!

74

lostmember:

As I recall, High Elves get cheaper items to reflect their propensity for creating artifacts. Given that Chaos Dwarfs are being positioned as ‘the forge of all things evil’, 75pts doesn’t seem to be an odd allowance.

75

Baggronor:

There are other races that have bonus points for customisation, its hardly unusual. Ogres have Big Names, Vampires have Bloodlines Powers, Dwarfs have extra points for runes, High Elves get a cost break on their items. Its fine.

What isn’t fine is 3pts per great weapon :sick

If Bull Centaurs are on 50mm (50, really? not 40?), what is the minimum unit size? 3+?

Judging by what you see, what would the optimal unit size be?
From what I’ve seen, Monstrous Infantry seem to work best in 6-8, although that’s gonna cost a bit… K’Daai look like a better choice to me.

Looking forward to using MI actually, none of my other armies have any (Dwarfs, Vamps, DEs).

76

Caine:

Is there any way u can take the BALE TAURUS without the rider?

77

Baggronor:

Also, one thing that really bugs me: you can pay 200-odd points for a Dreadquake - a str 5 stone thrower that blows up on a 1-3 if it misfires… or for the same points you could just take a Hellcannon, which is unbreakable and scary in melee and is a str 5 stone thrower… Unless I’m mistaken (which I may be - I don’t have the book yet) someone probably should have thought this through better :~

78

Zhorn:


Also, one thing that really bugs me: you can pay 200-odd points for a Dreadquake - a str 5 stone thrower that blows up on a 1-3 if it misfires... or for the same points you could just take a Hellcannon, which is unbreakable and scary in melee and is a str 5 stone thrower... Unless I'm mistaken (which I may be - I don't have the book yet) someone probably should have thought this through better :~


Baggronor
The dreadquake mortar would probably be a good buy if it were 150 points (plus ogre upgrade, minus bad misfire chart). OR if it had other rules (i myself would prefer other rules - since the model is gorgeous and gigantic, i'd like to see something magnificent).

My impression is, that whoever thought up the rules was a (misguided) math-nerd: Adding up points doesn't make for a fun and playable army. Another example in our favor is the shrieker: Empire mortar is 75 pts, plus a random 25 pts for the special rules for our shrieker. That the empire mortar is one scary piece of equipment and seriously undercosted against half of the armies out there didn't enter the equation.

Le sigh.

We'll all play with what we're given but the difference in quality in rules writing between "proper" GW and FW is blatant. Gorgeous models, more miss-than-hit rules (and yes, i include the things that are overly good for us in here, too: just because i profit from horrendous rules writing doesn't change that i want good rules in the first place).

(Sorry, i don't want to rain on anyone's parade, i'm just miffed that my gorgeous models are not as awe-inspiring as they should be - in my not so humble opinion, of course. ;) )
79

Veshnakar:

I honestly LOVE the list, and I could care less if it turns out that it makes us underdogs! Much better than being overpowered and having people apprehensive to play against our list and have it banned at tournaments and so forth.

We have an official list now. That’s all I care about. After years and years and years of waiting.

And besides, the list might not be perfect, but we are a community of converters. If you want to use your converted big hat dwarfs as Infernal Guard then go right ahead! I HIGHLY doubt anyone will complain.

80

Zhorn:

I honestly LOVE the list, and I could care less if it turns out that it makes us underdogs! Much better than being overpowered and having people apprehensive to play against our list and have it banned at tournaments and so forth.

We have an official list now. That's all I care about. After years and years and years of waiting.

Veshnakar
Of course i agree with you! :)

But. I fear that the slightly botched rules will lend itself to the artillery train of doom (TM) play style. And while that's probably in-character ( ;P ) - it is not much fun to play against.

So, for me it is not about overpowered/underpowered but more what kind of army will you see on the warhammer table and will people like to play with and against it?