Good report as ever. The first two games where the lines really come into play are much more interesting than the others even if it is in part a sort of horrified fascination. Thought you might be going to turn over Richie's Dwarfs this time. I guess your lines attract more opprobrium than his deathstar, but neither are exactly appealing. I suppose the lines break more 'rules of physics', but both armies are probably as far away from looking like a 'proper' Dwarf army as each other. He's obviously a very good player and seems like a really good bloke as well and I'm pleased he's doing so well, but it's also pretty clear that even he can't do that well with a traditional list.
I think the Dwarf civil war went well. I don't think I could've done too much more to kill the final Longbeard. My list definitely needs some tweaks to nudge it over the edge.
Maybe spread the word and agree on a max width of models beforehand? Like both houserules in gaming groups and talk to people who organize tournaments?
I like this idea of adding the rivers. I wonder though if it would be better to add some rules that make more sense. No swiftstride makes sense.. but why no flying and why -1 to shoot? What is the lore involved for these rules? Great video as always!
I was always hesitant to do anything sneaky with the Doomseekers, since I needed to ensure they died. Perhaps I need to run them a bit cheaper next time.
Great stuff, very interesting to see this! Do you really think Linehammer is a problem? First game, you identified that ghosts and vampire only would have frustrated your line. Second game you lost against another dwarf without (or with fewer) lines. Third game against empire, the line hammer helped you get a good win. Fourth game, the lines hepled you counter a scary woodelf army, and it was a very close game. fifth game, you fluked the death of the baron, and the lines definitely forced the bretonnians to chose to run away, forcign a draw against a top-meta army. Seem like it's powerful, but not "broken". I do agree that its a bit silly that a dwarf with a great weapon 18" away from the nearest enemy model gets to make an attack. But I don't think it looks silly: plenty of historical examples of line formations of missile troops against cavalry, and of shieldwalls. Would be cooler if the line could curve a bit here or there but obviously not going to happen with the mechanics as they are.
Think we were spared some potential reforms, FBIGOs and push backs that could have looked very silly indeed (or been very silly outcomes if the unit disappeared off the table). To me it also isn't just that the Dwarf gets to attack from 18" away that feels silly. He's effectively in two places at once - 'swarming round the enemy' to get his attack in, but also blocking line of sight and movement in his actual position and potentially taking charges in the next turn or even being overrun into in his actual position whilst also swarming around 18" away. If his unit wins and he overruns he does it from his original position rather than where he's been fighting. There's loads that's just plain daft about it.
I don't think Linehammer is overpowered at all. It's just weird and probably shouldn't be how the game functions, so hopefully they give us some tweaks to the rules and scoring. I think nerfing the fighting rank in a vacuum would be a mistake.
I like the look of the rivers, think they did a really good job with them and it's great that they're not just sticking to the very fair but rather staid terrain layouts they introduced. Bit of a shame that they came with rules that aren't very river-like. I would have thought there's a lot that could be done with them that would be more interesting - impassable stretches of rapids, greater reductions in movement, no marching, disregarding 'move through cover' as you suggest, bridges or fords. Seems that what they went for is more along the lines of 'this is a magic river that does x/y/z to contrive a different game balance' which feels a bit lame though I can believe it posed interesting tactical problems for the players in its own way. With terrain in general I think it's a shame that none if it seems to affect different unit types in different ways - there ought to be terrain that is only accessible or easily accessible to infantry, dangerous only to cavalry, impassable to heavy cav or behemoths etc.
@@Andy2D6 I don't think what he did was 'bad' in any way, even if it's not to my taste as an observer I can see that it was interesting for those taking part - just feels a bit like from one extreme to the other (from same symmetrical terrain layouts every time to magic rivers with offbeat rules). Would be nice just to see a river being a river every now and then to break things up! Hope he's willing to experiment with your ideas, it sounded like he might be on his video.
I wonder if there's an alternate piece of terrain that you could have put there instead to create that effect. Dust storms, mist clouds, or volcanic smog coming out of the ground. the problem with those is that modelling them onto the board is frustrating and like anything that would obscure targeting for projectiles, it also blocks scenic photography and clutters the board more than a river, especially if units have to capture and hold that area like they did the river in this tournament.
I think there must be a photo missing. Did he lose the first round against the two units when in the flank of the Longbeards and the front of the Irondrakes and maybe FBIGO from the Irondrakes? Irondrakes didn't follow up and end up in the flank the next turn and Longbeards got to pivot and pursue? Feel like we missed some great Linehammering if so.
Ah yes. Because I take pictures of my turn at the end of the turn, so I don't slow the game down, it doesn't show the positions of the units while they were fighting.
The Dwarf cannon thing is silly. If anything Dwarven war machines should be better-Not inferior. I'd make it the same as other cannons (smaller in size but better engineered) and give all Dwarf war machines a rule to make misfires less likely or less dangerous (roll two dice on the misfire chart, choose the best result, for example).
Could be my number one gripe in the entire Old World. Dwarf war machines should just be better than everyone else's. If that makes them more expensive, so be it.
@@Beakyscience1987 I haven't seen it in any tournaments or friendly games here in Australia (and i've been to quite a few). Maybe just different country's style of playing?
@@royalstonmusic Do you just mean that people don't use it as an overall strategy and start out wide (like Andy is in this report) or do people also not use the mechanics to go wide during the game?
yeah, the minus 1 shoot and not fly because of a river........... ruins the immersive because it doesnt make sense. random weather every round was what people usualy used todo back then. roll a D6 every start of the beginners turn. and it COULD look like this 1. snowstorm. that blocks vision. cant make measurements above 12" (including charges, shooting, magic, and so on) 2. heavy rain. that muddys the ground. -2 movement 3. thunderstorm. lightningbolts roaming. prevent fly. 4. heavy storm. -1 to range hit and one extra D3 scatter. 5. warp storm. the magic gets out of hand. EVERY double, not just double 1s on cast and dispell, will make u roll on the misscast. 6. earthquake. all units in combat become unstable. no rank bonus, no support attacks, no close order bonus feel free to change any number to a "nice weather" were simply no rule changes apply. (its what i just came up with, since i dont remember what exact list we used to use back then) this does much more sense and doesnt ruin the immersive. why would a river block my arrows or prevent fly? also, i donno why GW doesnt take action towards some simple official hotfixes. they could just release fixes on their homespage for everyone to see. like 12 max wide to prevent linehammer. or 15 max, so that you can still use the option, but dont make it redicilous. or maybe just a rule that units can always be max half as wide as they have models. so a STARTING unit of 20 can go 10 wide max. 40 can go 20 and so on. that as well would still make u able to play with HUGE lines, but it would simply double the costs to do that.
@@Pophet84 The rivers were magical. 😉 There are plenty of normal rules events at the tSN, and people knew what they were signing up for with this themed one.
Having seen a bunch of tournament reports and battle reports I can only conclude that ToW has some fundamental rules issues and problems. Enough so that I would not touch the game at all
Loving the Linehammer punk.
Yours, an admirer.
X
Your army makes me want to pick up some vallejo goblin green and go back to green rims. Nice coverage :)
i have no idea if its my pot, the colour is an excellent substitute but it really needs a varnish to stay stuck to the base.
Great video as always Andy!
Good report as ever. The first two games where the lines really come into play are much more interesting than the others even if it is in part a sort of horrified fascination. Thought you might be going to turn over Richie's Dwarfs this time. I guess your lines attract more opprobrium than his deathstar, but neither are exactly appealing. I suppose the lines break more 'rules of physics', but both armies are probably as far away from looking like a 'proper' Dwarf army as each other. He's obviously a very good player and seems like a really good bloke as well and I'm pleased he's doing so well, but it's also pretty clear that even he can't do that well with a traditional list.
I think the Dwarf civil war went well. I don't think I could've done too much more to kill the final Longbeard. My list definitely needs some tweaks to nudge it over the edge.
Great battles, and video!
Some very spicy action, indeed.
I think it's the responsibility of all Dawi players to go full linehammer to put pressure on GW to give infantry their place back on the battlefield.
One line at a time.
Maybe spread the word and agree on a max width of models beforehand? Like both houserules in gaming groups and talk to people who organize tournaments?
There has been talk of limiting unit sizes.
I like this idea of adding the rivers. I wonder though if it would be better to add some rules that make more sense. No swiftstride makes sense.. but why no flying and why -1 to shoot? What is the lore involved for these rules? Great video as always!
The air density above a river is different. I'm kidding, it's all bollocks.
They were magical rivers. I think the balance worked out pretty well.
@@Andy2D6 I think taking away swiftstride alone is a good nerf to the big dragons
So FAQ states (page 3 shooting) that unit partially on a hill will partially benefit from being on a hill.
Second rank of models on a hill can shoot.
Nice. I'm glad that's settled.
In your game vs Richy, I think that you could have tried flanking his Irondrakes with your Doomseekers/Gyro, no?
I was always hesitant to do anything sneaky with the Doomseekers, since I needed to ensure they died. Perhaps I need to run them a bit cheaper next time.
Great stuff, very interesting to see this!
Do you really think Linehammer is a problem? First game, you identified that ghosts and vampire only would have frustrated your line. Second game you lost against another dwarf without (or with fewer) lines. Third game against empire, the line hammer helped you get a good win. Fourth game, the lines hepled you counter a scary woodelf army, and it was a very close game. fifth game, you fluked the death of the baron, and the lines definitely forced the bretonnians to chose to run away, forcign a draw against a top-meta army.
Seem like it's powerful, but not "broken". I do agree that its a bit silly that a dwarf with a great weapon 18" away from the nearest enemy model gets to make an attack. But I don't think it looks silly: plenty of historical examples of line formations of missile troops against cavalry, and of shieldwalls. Would be cooler if the line could curve a bit here or there but obviously not going to happen with the mechanics as they are.
Think we were spared some potential reforms, FBIGOs and push backs that could have looked very silly indeed (or been very silly outcomes if the unit disappeared off the table).
To me it also isn't just that the Dwarf gets to attack from 18" away that feels silly. He's effectively in two places at once - 'swarming round the enemy' to get his attack in, but also blocking line of sight and movement in his actual position and potentially taking charges in the next turn or even being overrun into in his actual position whilst also swarming around 18" away. If his unit wins and he overruns he does it from his original position rather than where he's been fighting. There's loads that's just plain daft about it.
I don't think Linehammer is overpowered at all. It's just weird and probably shouldn't be how the game functions, so hopefully they give us some tweaks to the rules and scoring. I think nerfing the fighting rank in a vacuum would be a mistake.
For me its not really a balance thing, but that it looks silly.
I like the look of the rivers, think they did a really good job with them and it's great that they're not just sticking to the very fair but rather staid terrain layouts they introduced. Bit of a shame that they came with rules that aren't very river-like. I would have thought there's a lot that could be done with them that would be more interesting - impassable stretches of rapids, greater reductions in movement, no marching, disregarding 'move through cover' as you suggest, bridges or fords. Seems that what they went for is more along the lines of 'this is a magic river that does x/y/z to contrive a different game balance' which feels a bit lame though I can believe it posed interesting tactical problems for the players in its own way.
With terrain in general I think it's a shame that none if it seems to affect different unit types in different ways - there ought to be terrain that is only accessible or easily accessible to infantry, dangerous only to cavalry, impassable to heavy cav or behemoths etc.
I am all for more exciting and interesting terrain rules. I've pitched a few ideas to Rob for future events.
@@Andy2D6 I don't think what he did was 'bad' in any way, even if it's not to my taste as an observer I can see that it was interesting for those taking part - just feels a bit like from one extreme to the other (from same symmetrical terrain layouts every time to magic rivers with offbeat rules). Would be nice just to see a river being a river every now and then to break things up!
Hope he's willing to experiment with your ideas, it sounded like he might be on his video.
Not flying over the river, and a -1 to hit may be balancing choices, but are illogical and ruin the feel for me. Its a to artifical choice
I mean it was just a 1 off tournament for fun and to have something different happen
I wonder if there's an alternate piece of terrain that you could have put there instead to create that effect. Dust storms, mist clouds, or volcanic smog coming out of the ground.
the problem with those is that modelling them onto the board is frustrating and like anything that would obscure targeting for projectiles, it also blocks scenic photography and clutters the board more than a river, especially if units have to capture and hold that area like they did the river in this tournament.
Looks like an 18th century battle. 🤔
How did the rangers not end up in the flank of the longbeards?
I think there must be a photo missing. Did he lose the first round against the two units when in the flank of the Longbeards and the front of the Irondrakes and maybe FBIGO from the Irondrakes? Irondrakes didn't follow up and end up in the flank the next turn and Longbeards got to pivot and pursue? Feel like we missed some great Linehammering if so.
@ClydeMillerWynant it seems so
@@toldavf1523 Or perhaps he had to give ground - could the Longbeards then turn to face and do a drilled redress before following up?
Ah yes. Because I take pictures of my turn at the end of the turn, so I don't slow the game down, it doesn't show the positions of the units while they were fighting.
The Dwarf cannon thing is silly. If anything Dwarven war machines should be better-Not inferior. I'd make it the same as other cannons (smaller in size but better engineered) and give all Dwarf war machines a rule to make misfires less likely or less dangerous (roll two dice on the misfire chart, choose the best result, for example).
Could be my number one gripe in the entire Old World. Dwarf war machines should just be better than everyone else's. If that makes them more expensive, so be it.
@@Andy2D6 twice as good and twice as expensive, I'd take that
You’re still the only person using linehammer ( that I see) 😂 - but I agree infantry could be better. Good report- thank you!
Everbody who needs to uses Linehammer. Andy shows its limits
Literally every competitive player is using line hammer if they are using big blocks of infantry
@@Beakyscience1987 I haven't seen it in any tournaments or friendly games here in Australia (and i've been to quite a few). Maybe just different country's style of playing?
Haven't seen it around the Danish tournament scene either, aside from one chaos dwarf army who fooled around with the big flying line idea.
@@royalstonmusic Do you just mean that people don't use it as an overall strategy and start out wide (like Andy is in this report) or do people also not use the mechanics to go wide during the game?
Gyro can move 2 without fly
@@royalstonmusic It has a Move characteristic of 1, which is then reduced to 0.
@@Andy2D6 Ahh ok - I thought it was Move 2 but that must have been with a march
Stand and shoot contributing to combat res seems like an extremely weird game choice.
@@assistantref5084 It is definitely odd.
I think it’s a great change, really gives missile troops a bit of a chance……but the combination of line hammer isn’t good
@@assistantref5084 it works well in game
yeah, the minus 1 shoot and not fly because of a river...........
ruins the immersive because it doesnt make sense.
random weather every round was what people usualy used todo back then.
roll a D6 every start of the beginners turn. and it COULD look like this
1. snowstorm. that blocks vision. cant make measurements above 12" (including charges, shooting, magic, and so on)
2. heavy rain. that muddys the ground. -2 movement
3. thunderstorm. lightningbolts roaming. prevent fly.
4. heavy storm. -1 to range hit and one extra D3 scatter.
5. warp storm. the magic gets out of hand. EVERY double, not just double 1s on cast and dispell, will make u roll on the misscast.
6. earthquake. all units in combat become unstable. no rank bonus, no support attacks, no close order bonus
feel free to change any number to a "nice weather" were simply no rule changes apply.
(its what i just came up with, since i dont remember what exact list we used to use back then)
this does much more sense and doesnt ruin the immersive.
why would a river block my arrows or prevent fly?
also, i donno why GW doesnt take action towards some simple official hotfixes.
they could just release fixes on their homespage for everyone to see.
like 12 max wide to prevent linehammer. or 15 max, so that you can still use the option, but dont make it redicilous.
or maybe just a rule that units can always be max half as wide as they have models.
so a STARTING unit of 20 can go 10 wide max.
40 can go 20 and so on.
that as well would still make u able to play with HUGE lines, but it would simply double the costs to do that.
@@Pophet84 The rivers were magical. 😉
There are plenty of normal rules events at the tSN, and people knew what they were signing up for with this themed one.
I cant help but think doomseekers are a trap 🤔
@@Lev-2d6 Perhaps, but they are also hilarious.
Having lost again vs the evil dwarfs, I think the only answer is for you to get facial tattoos. Perhaps just a line across your forehead?
@@TheJankmaster I'll consider some temporary tattoos to channel the power of the line.
No one wants to look like that freak
Having seen a bunch of tournament reports and battle reports I can only conclude that ToW has some fundamental rules issues and problems. Enough so that I would not touch the game at all
@@martinjrgensen8234 the game is great fun to play!
GW's terrible rules writing and inability to provide models is killing Old World
The Old World is thriving.
@Andy2D6 bruh its not 😂