All times are UTC


It is currently Sun Dec 01, 2024 2:03 am



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Iron Hills Dwarves with Mattocks vs. Khazad Guard
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:52 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:13 pm
Posts: 227
Location: Portland Oregon
The two models are identical with two exceptions. Khazad Guard have +1 defense and Bodyguard, Iron Hills Dwarves can bash.

That's a terrible trade. +1 defense is worth a point by itself, bodyguard is very useful as well. The two models shouldn't be the same cost.

If we reckon a unequipped is worth 6pts, defense six brings him to 8pts, strength four to 9, a shield and the shieldwall rule are worth two points, but trading the shield for the mattock trades also trades away the shieldwall rule, making the mattock essentially cost 2pts. Two handed weapons aren't great, in several editions they've been free, and I'm not sold on the current standard of charging a point for them. Two points is certainly too many.

Personally I'm surprised, if GW wants to sell the beautiful new models they need to be a point cheaper or people will just buy and build the equally beautiful but better costed Iron Hills Dwarves with spears and shields.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Iron Hills Dwarves with Mattocks vs. Khazad Guard
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 7:44 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 11:09 am
Posts: 230
Location: Holland
Sounds fair, but the thing is that this is the only 2-handed option Iron Hills has and the list just needs a weakness somewere.

Comparing them to Khazads is not fair, since they're Durin's Folk which means they have other weaknesses, like per example the lack of cavalry.
It's like comparing a Hunter Orc with an Iron Guard. Hunter Orc looks better on paper, but that's totally fine since the entire list is made for offense. Durin's Folk are made for defense so it makes senc ethat the Iron Guard isn't as offensive as other lists would have a 2A model.

Personally I think the mattocks look pretty strong for mounted units, so the mattock dwarves are (for my army) only being used as dismounts for those.
Because a mount that has a 33% chance to knock an opponent down before the combat even starts gives the huge advantage to the mattocks option to pick or bash. Knocking someone down followed by a pick special strike can do some serious damage.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Iron Hills Dwarves with Mattocks vs. Khazad Guard
PostPosted: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:02 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 8:14 pm
Posts: 4
Sephalo wrote:

It's like comparing a Hunter Orc with an Iron Guard. Hunter Orc looks better on paper, but that's totally fine since the entire list is made for offense. Durin's Folk are made for defense so it makes senc ethat the Iron Guard isn't as offensive as other lists would have a 2A model.



It doesn't make much sense for Durin's Folk to be more defensive than Iron Hills, at least not for a cheap price. I understand that it is THE Khazad Guard and they are supposed to be the most elite troops Dwarves can offer, which is why i think Iron Hills should either have higher defence of be a lot cheaper. :gimli:

_________________
That's my wee lad Gimli!
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Iron Hills Dwarves with Mattocks vs. Khazad Guard
PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:13 am 
Ringwraith
Ringwraith
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 8:11 am
Posts: 605
Location: Nottinghamshire
I've found from building a few army lists, because they are a point cheaper than Iron Hills Dwarves with shield and spear you can sometimes squeeze in 2 with Mattocks instead of 1 with Spear and Shield.

They fill a good gap by be a different number of points. The problem with comparing anything with Khazad Guard is that they are great value for their points.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Iron Hills Dwarves with Mattocks vs. Khazad Guard
PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2017 10:55 pm 
Loremaster
Loremaster
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 1389
SirLazaroth wrote:
Sephalo wrote:

It's like comparing a Hunter Orc with an Iron Guard. Hunter Orc looks better on paper, but that's totally fine since the entire list is made for offense. Durin's Folk are made for defense so it makes senc ethat the Iron Guard isn't as offensive as other lists would have a 2A model.



It doesn't make much sense for Durin's Folk to be more defensive than Iron Hills, at least not for a cheap price. I understand that it is THE Khazad Guard and they are supposed to be the most elite troops Dwarves can offer, which is why i think Iron Hills should either have higher defence of be a lot cheaper. :gimli:



Meh!!!...wrong :P

Diferent units, diferent rolls. Though people forget, GW do tax a weapon being able to perform dual rolls, in case of the ironhills as well as Erebor (hammer and axe effect), even if you dont use both effects, it´s a choice you have to use. You don´t want for your own choice, cause the chance is there , where despite being situational, it can come very handy to do so.

So point by point, mattock the same as shield, so no change on points, add bonus is that mattock just as I said, can be used 2 ways, so you tax the 2nd option too, that´s why you got these at 11pts with mattock losing 1 defence to gain a two handed and 2 rules (weapon rules)

Cause they got shieldwall vs bodyguard rule (you pay for it regardless, you can´t simply ignore the rule being there).

They play diferently? Well in a way yes
And getting Ironhills complain about this ain´t right cause they got the 2 major.. .well 3 dwarven major problems solved:

1 - spears
2 - cav
3 - nasty shooting with crossbows.


Not to mention the honourable problems solved to pierce armour without compromise armour bust with base S4 models.
Having quite some impressive to defence bonus with their base infanty (base infantry!!), lack of diversity, its elites and all... but yup still Basic!! infantry.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Iron Hills Dwarves with Mattocks vs. Khazad Guard
PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 6:05 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:11 pm
Posts: 138
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Ring_of_Gyges wrote:
The two models are identical with two exceptions. Khazad Guard have +1 defense and Bodyguard, Iron Hills Dwarves can bash.


I think there's one more difference. Khazad guard can single-handed piercing strike, while the Iron Hills dwarf can feint.

_________________
Started a new blog!
www.heroichighlights.blogspot.ca
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Iron Hills Dwarves with Mattocks vs. Khazad Guard
PostPosted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 7:19 pm 
Loremaster
Loremaster
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 1389
Lord of Edoras wrote:
Ring_of_Gyges wrote:
The two models are identical with two exceptions. Khazad Guard have +1 defense and Bodyguard, Iron Hills Dwarves can bash.


I think there's one more difference. Khazad guard can single-handed piercing strike, while the Iron Hills dwarf can feint.



Indeed!
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: