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.