CDO Forums

i believe this should be in the tactics section...
but yes HW/shields is better... and free...
and a killy character can do wonders for your combat results...

I would honestly like to see more of this. Perhaps it might be best if someone were to compile a huge tactics list with feedback from everyone, unit by unit and warmachine by warmachine.

Honestly, I think it's a good idea to have one list instead of several things spread out everywhere. Can someone take up that cause to compile such a thing?

well no they aren't that great... but they are compared to shield dwarfs...
shield dwarfs dont kill a lot but have tar pit staying power...
a killy character in the front rank can literally double the amount of kills the unit makes... or better...
getting them out of combat quicker... so theres less risk of a flank charge...

that was a terriffic article, really topnotch!
Would a small unit of GW CDW work as a flanking unit or is it just better to use all HW CDW?

An age old question... Well not really, but I think it can work. I've tried it a few times with regular Dwarfs and it's somewhat effective, essentially you keep the big unit and the small unit together and if the small unit is charged it has to flee, then you can either charge with the big unit or just get right up in their face. Obviously if they charge the large unit, you flank with the small dudes.

Problems with it though... Shooting, it's pretty easy to decimate a ten man unit with missile fire, magic can do the same but is more random. Also, because of the movement issue you need to keep them close so you can flank right away (longer than at turn is to slow). I think it's something that is worth trying for sure, just to see if it fits in with your game plan.

Agreed. Smaller units with GW can work, the problem is speed and manuverability, not to mention cost. However, the high str if you can get the flank charge, outweighs this.

Honestly though, I'd personally go for a more manuverable small unit of Sneaky Gits with a Wide Frontage. if you have a 7 wide frontage, that would be 15 poisoned attacks coming in on the flank. VERY devastating should your rolls be with you.

Someone give this Chaos Dwarf 20 Slaves.

Thank you catbarf. By all means go ahead with this project. I would LOVE to see a complete compiled list on Chaos Dwarf Units and tactics.

It's pretty easy to get them in position I think, you just have to keep the two units right next to each other. You could have problems if one unit is march blocked and the other is not, or something weird happens like a movement reducing spell. Really though if you keep the two together it isn't THAT bad, it's not like playing Wood Elfs of course, but it's manageable I think.

I would worry about shooting in the form of things that by pass LOS. It seems like they have become more and more common. There are quite a few spells and of course Cannons and other stuff that can blow right past the screen and into your dudes. It's not a HUGE deal, but it's something to at least keep in mind. Instead of just assuming your going to safe from shooting, you never know.

There isn't really any reason not to, the HW+Shield is probably more effective. In the end I use small units of great weapons because I never use them otherwise, it's fun to have something different and that's why I do it.

well there nothing GW warriors can do that a unit of Big 'Uns can't do better...
at same the price Big 'Uns have twice as many S5 attacks...
and at 1 cheaper they have an equal amount of S5 attacks and have a better armor save in CC...
they are M4 vs. M3... sure theres animosity... but sometimes thats a plus...

You cannot fire into CC due to the "swirling melee" concept. There's no way that blunderbussiers would be able to specifically target the enemy, while avoiding shooting their own members. Page 26 of the BRB clearly states this.

I suppose what you're getting at is that if you were to come up from behind a unit that was in close combat, and the 12" firing zone had their models in it, but not yours, you could fire? Incorrect. No one can fire into Close Combat (hence the "risk of hitting your own troops") but Skaven.

If there are any friendly models in the firing zone, the blunderbussiers are unable to fire, due to the risk of hitting your own troops. If a unit is is close combat, you are unable to fire, due to the risk of hitting your own troops. No disrespect intended (I'm not being a bunghole, it's just that internet forums aren't very good at communicating tones of voice ) but I don't see how you could read the FAQ any other way. That question was intended to clarify that blunderbussiers cannot shoot when there is a risk of hitting friendly models (either in CC, or in the firing zone).

It all comes down to the swirling melee concept. To help you visualize it, here's a picture: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/R...combat.jpg

In this picture, the large blue unit is in combat with the large red unit. Even though the lone blue unit (let's say he's an archer), does not have line of sight to friendly units, he cannot shoot into the fray, due to the risk of hitting his own troops.

I hope this clears up any misconceptions about the Blunderbussiers and reasons that you're not allowed to shoot into close combat.

Good luck with your Dawi Zharr in the future!

(One last post before this thread completely derails. My sincere apologies, catbarf.)

I responded kindly in my post, but got fired back at with criticism. Lighten up, grab a beer, then read this post.

The reason given is that you can't shoot into CC because you have "...a chance of hitting [your] own units", which is the exact same reason given in the BRB of why you can't shoot into Close Combat. There are plenty of other things one could go on about GW ambiguities, but this is not one of them.

The reason that they gave us for not shooting into close combat corresponds with the reason given in the Rulebook.

One could read the sentence as if you could shoot into close combat, if the rulebook didn't already state that you can't.

  Please keep the tactical advice coming!

Orcs, all of em. Go through the Orcs since we are currently on Greenskins discussion. It seems a good idea to keep the length of that vein of thought going since we are debating it.

Should increase knowledge quite a bit.

I think you could discuss the following troops:

1.  Hobgoblin Wolf Riders
2.  Orcs/Big Uns/ Black Orcs
3.  Hobgoblin Bolt throwers
4.  Earthshaker Cannon
5.  Bull Centaurs
6.  Character choices such as Bull Centaur Lord

What you personally consider drivel others consider useful information.

80 Naked hobgoblins are nothing but a minor hiccup, whereas 40 of them fully armored actually resemble something capable of holding things still for a bit or acting as a speed bump.


Put clearly, I think you are an individual that just plays this game to win. You seem to forget that some of us do this for the hobby, and shock of all things, to have fun. For BOTH individuals on the sides of the table.

I've actually found metros advice to be more informative than anybody elses on this forum or anyother forum on the net, so perhaps you should show him some respect.

The thing is, my experience is contrary to alot of what he says, and I am entitled to state my opinions and thoughts just as he is.  

To be perfectly honest, I would treat him with respect if he worded his "Disagreements" More politely and without rudeness or carelessness for the opinions of others.

But IMO, he does not. Apparently the ignore feature in these forums do not work, because he is on my ignore list, but none of his posts are hidden from me whatsoever. Else, I would not be responding and just go on my merry way.

Put simply, it's fine to disagree. But don't sit there and say things like "Useless Drivel" or "You are beyond help"

These phrases do not exactly endear nor instill thoughts of kindness towards individuals who so eloquently wax about others thoughts in such a manner. This is a game. Plain and simple. There's absolutely no reason to condemn another individuals thoughts on something just because you disagree with them. There's better ways about going it.


Others here have disagreed more politely and with thoughts engendered towards the lines of what one might consider to be philosophical debate.....there's a large difference.

To Sum up: I have no problem with others disagreeing with me. But Snarky comments that come off as sniping does not exactly instill the respect you state I should have. Respect is earned by treating others decently.

Now then, I'll leave this be. Apoligies to all involved.

I actually think you are right overall, catbarf, but there are small differences, like the fact that hobbos can't use detachments or have magic banners.

On the issue of unarmoured hobgoblins vs. armoured hobgoblins - unarmoured hobs are definitely the way to go, if you are using them as bait, or as a sacrificial unit.

Armoured Hobs are useful when you are trying to make them a tarpit.  More resistance to damage allowing them to survive the combat is better in my experience than having a larger unit.  granted CDs do it better, but they cost nearly twice as much, and orcs can do it better, but they are a special slot, so you can't have as many units.

The above debate seems to be a debate over playstyle.  Metro-gnome appears to be advocating a horde style play, where redundant units are extremely important.  In this case the unarmoured hobgoblins shine, due to their cost.

Catbarf is trying to describe both the horde style earlier, and also a more "elite" army with smaller units and better equipment.  In his initial post on hobgoblins, he did not advocate one approach over the other.  

Both approaches are valid, and game winning, but individual players need to decide which play style works for them and build their army accordingly.

When I looked at this thread, I was hoping to get some tips on how to play chaos dwarfs differently from regular dwarfs+screens, which I did get some inspiration, I also got a lot of arguing...

I'd say that armored hobs seem to make more sense than unarmored hobs. Though my experience may not be as good with this... But arguing over which one is best seems like a conflict of tactics, and I'd say both are probably equally valid.

For me, I'll take the armored ones... mostly because they're easier to convert from the BFSP box, which is what I have. Also, as for unarmored hobs, every time I've used sneaky gits, their unarmoredness has caused them to die a horrible horrible death, very quickly. I had a 20 strong unit of them that charged a unit of 5 waywatchers (weird situation), and they were reduced to 5 guys by the time the combat was over, and I got maybe 1 of them. I broke, and the waywatchers proceeded to be a nuisance. I think the gits cost more too...

That was a series of pretty bad rolls, but if they had armor, they would have lasted.

...crap... I'm doing it too...

Whatever the case, I'd like to see tactics of the various war machines next. As much as I like the death rocket, it seems to do nothing for me, which is pretty sad. I mean, its friggin Awesome! Its a Rocket!! I mean, rockets are still cool, right?