Jump to content

Emmel Eitch

Axe and Hammer Tavern (1.2)

Recommended Posts

How I lost Thorvald was pretty funny actually. I swung him around a cluttered town sort of thing.. lots of buildings.. and used him to smash Snorri into paste (on defensive strikes too - poor snorri didn't have a good showing that game). Next round I charged around behind a building and made a grave for Gargram while Fishripper prepared Gargram for it. And during that round, out from behind another building, comes Logan, frothing at the mouth... Thorvald barely had time to see what was happening, and Fishripper is now friend-less :(

Did you forget that Reach cancels out First Strike?

 

Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How I lost Thorvald was pretty funny actually. I swung him around a cluttered town sort of thing.. lots of buildings.. and used him to smash Snorri into paste (on defensive strikes too - poor snorri didn't have a good showing that game). Next round I charged around behind a building and made a grave for Gargram while Fishripper prepared Gargram for it. And during that round, out from behind another building, comes Logan, frothing at the mouth... Thorvald barely had time to see what was happening, and Fishripper is now friend-less :(

Did you forget that Reach cancels out First Strike?

 

Rich

 

 

haha.... yes.... and now that you mention it we didn't make the discipline checks on her warriors to come into b2b (Logan of course is completely INSANE and ignores Horrid)... not that the warriors' presence would have mattered. Getting two shots on Logan probably would have mattered, but that's water under the bridge at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Say what!? :blink: Reach cancels out first strike?

 

 

Yep, it's in core rulebook printing 2, page whatever where it lists the SA's. I guess the logic is that if you're poking the first-striker with a huge stinking lance (or poleaxe in Thorvald's case) then the "first strike" has to go towards smacking that spear out of the way, as opposed to smacking that head clean off. Gives the target a chance to counter. Or perhaps its simply that there's no good way to get in close enough to a pikeman without him getting at least one good jab in. That's actually it probably.

 

Hrm hoom hoom... Perhaps when facing first strikers it may be beneficial to set up an inverted formation, with my halberdiers in FRONT of my warriors. If I could catch an enemy not thinking about reach, that'd neuter their first strike ability!

 

 

 

On a different note:

 

Your opinions please: In a given game - well wait, let's set out some point totals. 750, 1000. No higher because in a game larger than 1k it's safe to assume you have mutliple elite slots.

 

Which is the better model to put in your army: Margara Firetongue or Kara Foehunter?

 

I know which way I'm leaning, but I'd like to hear opinions. If you'd like we could open it up to any dwarf elite - Margara, Ivar, Durgam or Kara. Which elites find their way into your builds in what situations, and how have they done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As with anything Warlord the answer is, it depends...

 

mainly on what the intentions are compared to what the enemy has on the field...

 

both require that you protect them as they have lower DVs. Both have the ability to do good things. Both require points sunk into them.

 

For Kara, if you think she is worth having then you have to be ready to go the extra mile and dump one of the accuracy upgrades on her.

 

If you go Margra obvioulsy there are spells to be purchased.

 

If I remember right, Kara's range is only 18, so the same as teh spellcaster.

 

With critical shot both have the ability to "fire" thru the smallest of site lines.

 

i guess the biggest difference is that Margra has the choice to take an AOE type spell whereas Kara is stuck to single targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'll be the first to voice a complaint about Logan.

 

Why is it that all of these gaming companies see fit to produce the same concept over and over again. I'm tired of the bare-chested Dwarf Berzerker.

 

I've got no problem with the D&D style Battle Rager concept, but why does that mean the model has to be a mostly naked GW Troll Slayer rip-off. Nothing wrong with BattleRagers wearing armour, and not having totaly crazy hair in my opinion.

 

The sculpt is well done, and the datacard is fine by me, but i'm not impressed with the concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that dwarf, he really stands out. When you set him down in the middle of your army, he pops. It's like "oooh look, a bunch of dwarves in armor, that's cool. HEY!!!! look at that. That dude with the axes must kick @$$, he doesn't even need armor" The armorlessness just screams "Crazy B@$t@rd" Which is exactly what Logan is.

 

 

And besides, how could they justify a 9 defense if he were covered in armor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which is the better model to put in your army: Margara Firetongue or Kara Foehunter?

Personally , I'd go for Margara , just because with the faction ability , any spell that connects will kill ! ::D:

I once caught a Reven player in a Firestorm and killed 9 Bull Orc warriors ! :blink: Mind you , she had GME .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, I'll be the first to voice a complaint about Logan.

 

Why is it that all of these gaming companies see fit to produce the same concept over and over again. I'm tired of the bare-chested Dwarf Berzerker.

 

I believe the Vikings created the concept of the bare chested, crazed berserkers, not GW. Some of the barbarians the Romans fought, such as the Gauls, probably contribute significantly to this idea also. They both beat GW by a few years........

 

Castlebuilder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'll be the first to voice a complaint about Logan.

 

Why is it that all of these gaming companies see fit to produce the same concept over and over again. I'm tired of the bare-chested Dwarf Berzerker.

 

I believe the Vikings created the concept of the bare chested, crazed berserkers, not GW. Some of the barbarians the Romans fought, such as the Gauls, probably contribute significantly to this idea also. They both beat GW by a few years........

 

Castlebuilder

 

 

Get out of town!! GW invented everything!! Even the internet!! Nope, it wasn't Al Gore. It was GW. They'll tell you so, too! :lol::lol:

 

Seriously, about the "what elite would I take" situation...in a 750 point build, none. Ever. I've tried that and ended up spending too many points on a model with not enough return. If I took Ivar, everything he could heal got coup-de-graced before he could activate, or he missed his roll. :down: I didn't find it worth it.

 

I'm pretty much of the same opinion in 1,000 points. When I went to Wichita, I think one army had a cleric and one had a wizard. That was it. No one else (including myself) took a cleric or wizard. Now, I can't speak about anyone taking heros and stuff. I had two Thorvalds. They would make short work of any wussy heros. :devil:

 

Wild Bill :blues:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm pretty much of the same opinion in 1,000 points. When I went to Wichita, I think one army had a cleric and one had a wizard. That was it. No one else (including myself) took a cleric or wizard. Now, I can't speak about anyone taking heros and stuff. I had two Thorvalds. They would make short work of any wussy heros. :devil:

 

Wild Bill :blues:

 

While in 1000 point games I will sometimes take a mage, Freya :wub: with DP is all the "hero" us dwarves need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which is the better model to put in your army: Margara Firetongue or Kara Foehunter?

 

I know which way I'm leaning, but I'd like to hear opinions. If you'd like we could open it up to any dwarf elite - Margara, Ivar, Durgam or Kara. Which elites find their way into your builds in what situations, and how have they done?

 

Like I kept saying while we played, some of my elites and solos saw table time for the first time Sunday.

Both Snorri & Kara were first timers. I still haven't fielded Ivar.

 

I use Margie (Margara). I have a 750 List that I add a few to for my 1000 List, and then add to that for my 1500 List.

 

My 1501 List I did started with same concepts. I take Margie first and then build out. I did have an idea of what we were playing, but I misunderstood the scenarios (Pete was talking at me, I was sort of mostly not listening...) so my build could have been stronger.

 

I prefer Fishy & Thor(Thorvald, bear rider) for my back up solos, Grif (Griffin) is almost always my first choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have fielded Snorri twice. The first time he fired once and then got double-move charged and that signaled the end of him. The second game he survived the whole time and actually managed to wound stuff!! Woo hoo!! :bday:

 

However, he is too expensive for too little return. I'd rather take 4-5 piercers in his place!! That same goes for Kara.

 

Now that I have Logrim, I might try and see about working Ivar into the list as well...

 

Wild Bill :blues:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'll be the first to voice a complaint about Logan.

 

Why is it that all of these gaming companies see fit to produce the same concept over and over again. I'm tired of the bare-chested Dwarf Berzerker.

 

I believe the Vikings created the concept of the bare chested, crazed berserkers, not GW. Some of the barbarians the Romans fought, such as the Gauls, probably contribute significantly to this idea also. They both beat GW by a few years........

 

Castlebuilder

 

But the Vikings did not create the notion of giant haired ruin two-rune encrusted weapon using Dwarves. I don't think a chain shirt and a hair cut would have hurt ::): It just doesn't appeal to me, especially because of course we are now likely to see an entire unit of such Troll/Giant/Dragonslayer types. I would have rather seen the Dwarven Battlerager types i've encountered in the D&D genre, less insane, more heroic but none the less still Berzerkers.

 

Even if the little buggers were wearing furs or hides or something...it can get cold out on the battlefield ::D:

 

Pulled from a closed thread:

QUOTE(spiritual_exorcist @ Jul 26 2006, 12:38 AM) *

 

In fact the only change I don't like that has been made was the increase in Dwarf Warriors statistics while failing to make such warriors adepts just like every other factions main stay warrior is now.

 

 

Hey now!! Don't you be trying to nerf my warriors buddy!! They already nailed the Swiftaxes!! If they did that to the warriors too, my entire army composition gets thrown out the window. I'm trying to keep a positive spin on things for the few players I have here in Tulsa, but Reaper is not allowed to make the Dwarves crappy. Nope. I won't allow it!! ik_devil.gif

 

Although, they sure are trying by having two crappy warlords... ik_rock.gif

 

I wouldn't want such a change made now in addition to the Swiftaxes becoming adepts, but rather instead of them becoming adepts, nearly every other force had it's main stay warrior turned into adepts, but for some reason Dwarves had their Breaker turned instead, despite their Breaker being no more effective than any other breaker in the game (maybe a tad faster I suppose, but in many cases not).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×