Debriefing first training day in Villeuneuve

So, here's a topic to discuss about what we can take from the training day.

First of all thank you everyone for coming. Of course the official purpose was to train our skills and test armylists, but I think it was more like a meeting between friends and I above all liked that

Special thanks to Stefan for coming from Zug !

So, here are the results of the game:

Dimitri (Empire full 1+ with tank) -- Victor (Woodies with wardancers deathstar 13-7
Dimitri (Empire full 1+ with tank) -- Arnaud (Ogers double mournfangs and maw) 18-2
Antoine (Defensive dwarves) -- Arnaud (Ogers double mournfang and heaven) 10-10
Paul (offensive dwarves) -- Alan (deamons 38 screamers) 11-9
Paul (offensive dwarves) -- Xavier (dark elves 3x assassins 2x level4) 11-9
Alan (deamons 38 screamers) -- Victor (woodies wardancers deathstar) 11-9
Stefan (Skaven bell HPA wheel) -- Aurélien (chaos dwarves kadai) 10-10
Stefan (Skaven bell HPA wheel) -- Antoine Refondini (defensive dwarves) 5-15


Here are some ideas that came out during the day:

1) Imho Skaven are the perfect draw army to send first. I think the best is the screaming bell build.
Even dwarves and Empire have problems (given the bell kills warmachine, and if he doesn't kill the bell AND the seer at the same time, the seer just goes in the unit or the Skavens plays without magic, which is not a problem against the dwarves anyway, and it doesn't give any points. Maybe 2x10 gutter runners would be better in this optic to play Empire with lots of chance to push

2) The dwarves is in my opinion a very good army, not to draw but to push. I liked Paul's list very much. 35 minors + 30 rangers with axes + anvil is a mismatch for many armies. Dark Elves just get crushed like hell.
They suffer many hard matchups, like deamons full infantery and ogers.
I like the idea of keeping them for the end, when all fragile armies like Elves are left.

3) Woodelves are a very good army to draw (to good result and lists that were nemesis), but they suffer from the lack of capacity to push. That makes opinion armies like Vampire and Skaven better army to push (they are 8+ armies when woodelves is a 8-12 one)

4) Dark Elves needs a dragon to be competitive

My conclusions with the skaven-list:
But first, I have to say, that I played twice against shooting armies, where it's really risky to play the bell to offensive. So I have to test it also against more fighting armies or elves.

Against chaos-dwarfes my matchwinner was the doomwheel which killed the k'daai (it's in my opinion the best hope to get rid of him) and a goblin hero. But also the screaming bell which killed in the same turn two warmachines with the ringing against T 7
I played the gutter runners not optimal, so I lost them and I think 2x 5 would be better than one unit of 9.

Against the dwarfes there was one round of bad luck for me, when in the second turn the hellpit get killed by a stonethrower, the doomwheel by the other and the warplighning cannon was charged by miners (I placed my slaves 1 or 2 inches to far away, so I was not able to correct that in my first turn and the miners could arrive near the cannon). In the 4th round I also lost my grey seer against the flamming cannon, never minding my 2+ wardsave against fire... Otherwise I would have tried to cast the cracks call on the anvil (I was only 18 inches away when he died and there was nothing in my way...). The bell survived but I never got the 10 or 11 when ringing, so I got only 1 war grudge thrower with the gutter runners.

Against warmachines the gutter runners would be better than the doomwheel, of course. But I'm still not sure, what I should prefer, since the doomwheel is also the best choice to get rid of dragons, terrorgheist, kdaai, treemen, treekin, vargheists, mortis engine, ogers, etc. Most of them just laugh about gutter runners. Another thing with the gutter runners is, that I have to fear each magic missile, which is the only weakness in the list against magic.

So I think I will test both kind of list, with doomwheel and 2x5 gutter runners or 2x 10 gutterers without doomwheel.

so far and thanks to all

Then go for 2x5 runners and the wheel.

I have to admit that well played, the doomwheel is very efficient

Thanks for the insight provided!
Results are in most cases close to what I would expect.

About Xavs conclusions - I do not agree.
1) Skaven can only be used as set army as long as the opponent has no 2 armies with heavy warmachine support. Dwarves are the worst matchup Skaven can get followed by Empire & Orcs with heavy shooting and Chaos Dwarfes with heavy shooting (also those builds will only be viable if the AR are changed imo (which is likely to happen as they went to far last year)). Furthermore you waste a lot of potential with seting Skaven first, as they can solidly score against nearly every other army.

2) If you use Dwarves as an offensive army you also force the player to use the nearly anvil each round. So statistically you are very likely to have at least 1 game where you anvil explodes, netting you probably a big loss depending on what turn it goes booomm.
Furthermore, there are Elven builds that are not afraid at all of an Anvil list. Look at the Italian HE list for example - I do not expect, that you will score well against those kind of elves. Lion horde lists also do not care much about the anvil neither does the flying DE circus which with T4 will become more popular probably. There are quite a few matchups that the anvil list will not like - so if you realy want to play this aggressively, than you have to provide other choices for roadblock armies.

4) Why did you play double Level 4? You need Excecutioner HB and firststrike BSB. That also makes it much harder for the offensive Dwarf to push against you. He can not go into the deathstar unit that easily anymore no matter from where he comes and how many chars he has in his unit.
Oh and if you really want to play a freaking dragon - play HE.

Dwarves are the worst matchup Skaven can get followed by Empire & Orcs with heavy shooting and Chaos Dwarfes with heavy shooting

I don't see where Dwarves or Empire are such a bad match-up against Skaven (not talking about Orcs...)
Really, if you can hide the bell, then badam you just destroy expensive warmachines with bell and poison. Otherwise, he might get either the seer or the bell (not very likely he gets both, given that he also has to care about the HPA because otherwise it's just the end for him.) and that gives no points.

I think this match-ups can't turn worse than 8-12 and might go much better!

And orcs... can they really manage the canon, the double flamers, the rocket, the HPA, the poison?

I played against Orcs three times at the ETC 2010 (ok it was 7th but still) and really I never had the feeling I could lose the game.
Take a look at the results the Skaven made in 2012 against orcs (average of 14 points)

I don't think Skaven have any match-up they can't handle, that's why I see them being thrown first in most case.
(they are a kind of 10+ army)
When Dwarves... seriously, they suffer horrible match-ups against Ogers or Deamons, that's why imho we should keep them to push armies they can go against.

If you use Dwarves as an offensive army you also force the player to use the nearly anvil each round

I didn't say to play insanely offensively, I said to push.
We have to give them good match-ups. Imho some lists just can't handle 35 minors + anvil (like my double level 4 dark elves, it's almost an automatic 20-0)
And furthermore, we don't take the risk of any pairing mistake, as even an offensive dwarves can always bunker in his corner. (playing the rangers defensively + the opponent cannot attack optimally because he has to take care to the minors, which may always arrive from the tableside of the dwarves and play a defensive corner)

Look at the Italian HE list for example

Mmmh, only the lions can handle the minors (and they are only 20, so a one or two catapult shots and they will not serve that purpose anymore) and it's going to be quite hard to hide the 4 mages. The dragon has to hide and still suffer indirect shots and on top of that the banishment may end on a 4+ and then definitely the HE doesn't have a chance to win the game.


Defensive dwarves really can't be thrown in first position, they suffer some really bad matchups and will most likely never score more than 10-10 if the opponent isn't stupid (if he can kill the dwarves he goes, otherwise he simply stays out of range)

Imho the best armies to send are the ones which do not have real nemesis.

1) Skaven
2) Vampire

And then, we have some solid builds like Dwarves, Bret or Dark Elves, and on top of that more specified armies.


And about the dragon, Andy is going to come for the training tournament with DE Dragon, we'll see how it goes

The double level 4 is definitely to forget
(although the magic was veeeery powerful)


What do you think?

I don't agree at this:

I think this match-ups can't turn worse than 8-12 and might go much better!

The build with the bell is almost chanceless against dwarves and empire. Against cannons I have to hide the bell as long the cannons are alive. So there are 1200 points just doing nothing. Also the magic is not really pressing, since I need line of sight or has to be close.

So most probably I'll lose all my rare units - of course I can have luck with the storm banner, the gutter runners and my cannon to get rid of the warmachines, but the chances are not so high. And without the rare choices I'm back 500 points, 1200 not playing and the slaves can't go forward without the bell. I think it will almost fore sure end something between 7-13 to 9-11 if nothing special happens in this game.

Also the following is not completely true:

he might get either the seer or the bell (not very likely he gets both, given that he also has to care about the HPA because otherwise it's just the end for him.) and that gives no points.

If the bell dies before the grey seer, it's really safe. If the seer dies before the bell I loose the game probably 5-15 or even more. If the seer is dead, the bell is also vulnerable to grudge throwers.

I really like the bell list which I played (with the doomwheel), and I think it can really be forcing against many armies, but its not working against shooting so easily . At least in my humble opinion.

Xavier wrote:

Paul (offensive dwarves) -- Xavier (dark elves 3x assassins 2x level4) 11-9

2) The dwarves is in my opinion a very good army, not to draw but to push. I liked Paul's list very much. 35 minors + 30 rangers with axes + anvil is a mismatch for many armies. Dark Elves just get crushed like hell.
They suffer many hard matchups, like deamons full infantery and ogers.
I like the idea of keeping them for the end, when all fragile armies like Elves are left.

Really crushing dark elves ? ^^

Stefan already said what I feel about shooting lists.
Btw Shooting Orcs with 2 Kamikatas and 2 Stonethrowers (not Orcs in general which change the result in 2012 ) that can all fire indirectly at the bell, are not a good matchup either, even if you might think otherwise. The Orc will not come to you. He will be contempt to shoot and magic away at you while his chariots will cover against the Hellpit. thus your Flamers will not have much to do or if you advance he will shoot at them, when necessary.
7th edition Orcs are not comparable to 8th in any way - there your statement was true, but that has changed massively - I will prove to you in a training day, if you want me to.

About the HE banishment ending on 4+ - he has 2 banishments remember? And the miners will die against the Lions, as they can be pushed by Light magic and will be bound by the Lions opening conters. Miners btw are only a thread as long as they have not arrived on the table. Once they are there, they lose a lot of that threat potential.

About throwing dwarfes first - that will not be necessary as there are still Lizardmen, Bretonians and Empire, that do not have that many bad matchups depending on what kind of list you build.

I didn't say to play insanely offensively, I said to push.

You can only really "push" with a dwarf army, if you use the anvil, otherwise where shall that push come from? And you were the one saying they shall be a scorer army being kept to the last in order to get favourable matchups. That usually only applies to armies that shall score reasonably high. So playing the pushy dwarfs defensively in the end, will very likely not yield your desired result thus making all the pain in the pairing before quite obsolete, don´t you think?

In regard to the DE dragon - looking forward to the results. hope that you give him as "favourable" an matchup as you had with your DE list.

Well, maybe I'm wrong about the Skaven. I really had the feeling this army could handle with any kind of ennemy, but if you aren't brave enough to think the same (well, your a Skaven after all, aren't you?) we'll find some other less coward one to fulfill that purpose


So we would now have to debate on which army would be the most appropriate to be sent first?
We have Vampires (does anyone have an objection about them?)
We need something else:

-Bretonnians? (I should have never won that tournament, damn it ! )
-Lizardmen? (hard match-ups against Brets, Empire or Ogers I think)
-High Elves? (well...)
-Empire? (ok, maybe we'll end up with them, Dim being used to suffer like a martyr for the good of the team)

The best would be to, give an acceptable matchup and take away an annoying army from the opponent (e.g. Ogers)

About the HE banishment ending on 4+ - he has 2 banishments remember?

When the spell is destroyed, it is destroyed for everyone, isn't it?

And the miners will die against the Lions, as they can be pushed by Light

Again, the dwarves has two shooting phase to reduce the white lions... wonder how many will be left over after that...
When this unit is washed away, the rest will have quite some problems imho.
Do you seriously think that 20 white lions and some spearmen can handle 30 rangers and 35 minors stuffed with characters?

It's the hammer and anvil effect... very powerful imho (I was also like... ok easy to handle... until I realized that unless the anvil exploded, I had no chance to survive this game)

That usually only applies to armies that shall score reasonably high. So playing the pushy dwarfs defensively in the end, will very likely not yield your desired result thus making all the pain in the pairing before quite obsolete, don´t you think?

For armies left over at the end here's what will be happening:

1) they get a favourable match-up (because we paired them well or because we sent them and they could pick up a good opponent)
2) the pairing went bad and we have to suffer one mismatch because the opponent managed the pairing better that us.

If the Dwarves get no1, all good !
If they fall into no2, despite many armies that would really suffer from that position, dwarves can corner and wait for the opponent who has a good matchup and needs to score.

In the end, it's like keeping a surprise up your leeve

Remember that the dwarf with anvil, 35 miner and 35 rangers is NOT an aggressive dwarf: He has as much shooting as any other dwarf, it's just a dwarf list that you CAN play very aggressively, I mean if the opponent has really too big unit for my miners I put the rangers on my side , shoot and wait. I still have a very good konga line with the hammerers and the miners just put a huge pressure till they arrive (I can slow down their arrival with the steam drill) In this case I don't use the anvil too much and it's a kind of typicall dwarf list with miners instead of hammerers ( so not so bad even played defensivelly).

This list is better in any aspect than my other list with 4 warmachine except that : if a one is rolled during the miners arrivals I can be in a deep shit, but if the anvil does not explode the list is usually better against any other army excpet a few one were 1 more cannon is very good nd where u need more quarrelers (empire skaven I think OetG too )

I agree on the fact that they can corner if the matchup is not in their favor,

You still haven't explained the 11-9 against your DE that should supposely be rapped

Cheers,

Biboun

Because I'm such an impressive player that I force anvils to explode and opponents to forget that purple sun can be cast with three dices

And even with that it resulted in a 10-10 ? Now I see your point ^^

Just a small debrief of my unique game with the Chaos Dwarfes.

Well, there are, IMO, two big questions, Kdai or no Kdai, and the Lore for the Prophet.

Regarding the Kdai, basically you sacrifice a heavy shooting power for a very strong monster. I think the main difference with classical dwarfes in a few matchups (like against Ogers, Flying Circus of Tzeentch chaos warriors, etc) is the Kdai which basically destroys any kind of units et goes against, thus making it way harder for the opponent to simply rush you. I should be kept in mind that the shooting with the Kdai is still decent though, but can be a problem when facing shooting armies, like a empire with 3 canons or a dwarfes with two canons and catapults.

Without the Kdai, you can fill 3 templates S5, which can re roll the scatter and artiellery dice thanks to the sorcerers, as well as a magma canon (flame canon with a range of 24", S5, D3 wounds). So basically your shooting becomes kind of insane, but you lack the counter attack power of a Kdai. Maybe it could be played in combination with a lot of Hobgoblin units to block.


Then concerning the magic, I had a lot of death sorcerers against Steve but the problem is I can't reach my 24 inch distance for magic otherwise I would have left the range of the engineer rule which makes the shooting very powerfulll. In that sense Hashut lore also has 24" range so I will probably go with the Lore of Fire just to inflict brut damage on whatever comes to me. But I would like to keep 2 times lvl 2 of death so I can get the -3 LD in the death lore, which in combo with the hellcanon can be decisive.

I still have a few tests to do, but I think Chaos Dwarfes have a heavy potential. Against aggressive armies like Ogers, I think it's a true rampage. You can also deal with Deamons I would say because the Kdai just rolls through the bloodletters for example. Against Skaven, and that was the test, you probably won't loose. If there is no bell, you can try and get a few points of rare units with the shooting and a few panic tests on -4 with magic and hellcanon. Against empire you need covers, if you have them you probably can slightly win by indirect shooting with the re roll on the scatter dice.


So, more more testing but there is potential!

Cheers,

Biboun

Well, maybe I'm wrong about the Skaven. I really had the feeling this army could handle with any kind of ennemy, but if you aren't brave enough to think the same (well, your a Skaven after all, aren't you?) we'll find some other less coward one to fulfill that purpose

There are already 2 Skaven that share that opinion. You brave Bretonian can rush in as much as you want, but the victory will not be yours, with that kind of "strategy" if you can actually call it that ...


So about what armies being options to be sent first:
There are several, but it will always depend on what the opponents roster is, because as you said there are several "mismatches" even for the armies that we might want to use to set down first.

Vampires - agreed, as long as you do not want them to be a scorer.
Empire - there is basically just 1 matchup that might not be so good and that are Bretonians with flying circus and HKB Lord but even that is doable
Ogers - depending on the build but imo only 1 bad matchup with Empire
Lizards - agreed as well as long as there are not 2+ of Bretonians, Empire or Ogers
Skaven - as long as the opponent has not 2+ warmachine heavy armies left
Woodelves - as long as there are not 2+ of Vampires, Empire, Skaven
Dwarves - depends on the build but generally not 2+ of Vampire und Demons + ???
HE - depends on the build you are going to choose, but can be done

So you basically can have a full roster of armies that can be thown first, if you want to and if opponents rosters allow.

When the spell is destroyed, it is destroyed for everyone, isn't it?

I thought the mage that casted it, forgets the spell. Not sure though - can anyone elaborate?

About the shooting phases - all HE units will be in long lines covering sides and backfield so that shooting will do minimal damage and Miners have no room to arrive in a sensible position using cover as much as possible. If the Dragon goes with full HP into combat, he will likely destroy them or hold the rangers with chars, killing a few of the chars. Basically a draw in the end is quite possible, even though I would give a slight advantage to the dwarf.

For armies left over at the end here's what will be happening:

1) they get a favourable match-up (because we paired them well or because we sent them and they could pick up a good opponent)
2) the pairing went bad and we have to suffer one mismatch because the opponent managed the pairing better that us.

Well, that is not a strategy, that is pure chance. So is what you are trying to say, that we should not bother what armies with which builds to bring and just see how it goes?

Buchi wrote:
Ogers - depending on the build but imo only 1 bad matchup with Empire

Nope, a well built Chaos Dwarf army can crush them hard.

For armies left over at the end here's what will be happening:

1) they get a favourable match-up (because we paired them well or because we sent them and they could pick up a good opponent)
2) the pairing went bad and we have to suffer one mismatch because the opponent managed the pairing better that us.

If the Dwarves get no1, all good !
If they fall into no2, despite many armies that would really suffer from that position, dwarves can corner and wait for the opponent who has a good matchup and needs to score.

In the end, it's like keeping a surprise up your leeve

I think you make a good point on this one Xavier. We can also presume that a lot of other times will think in the same (reducing unlucky match-up by sending an easy 10-10 army as dwarfes), therefore we should definitely built our dwarfe in orther to crush the other dwarfe!! In this way I would rather say that the offensive rooster is way better!! (Yes I know you are surprise ^^)

Well, there are, IMO, two big questions, Kdai or no Kdai

Not playing the Kdai means putting all you eggs in the same basket, I mean: only shooting and I case when the shooting do not work well (I know it's kind of impossible but it could happen) you're kind of naked ^^ Thus with the Kdai you are clearly safer (as you were against the Skavens with bell). Plus some armies can just NOT deal with the Kdai so it's all benefit to play it i would say!!

Cheers,

Antoine

@Biboun
You are absolutely right - forgot the damn CDs - they should just be not allowed... But that is only with a shooty army right?
But we can further build up the list I proposed with the opinions from everyone. In the end DIMs program will need something along these lines anyway.

@ledwarfou
Every army can deal with the Kdai as long as they have the 2+ ward save against fire and some passive CR boni. If you got warmachines, you have got further options against him.
Personally, I like Bibouns idea to probably get a shooty CD army, as rushing them is risky and staying behind is not an optimal solution either.
Ofc we have to protect the army from some matchups, but in all other cases they should be very solid and hard to bunker against.

About Xaviers "good point"

If they fall into no2, despite many armies that would really suffer from that position, dwarves can corner and wait for the opponent who has a good matchup and needs to score.

Remember that Xaviers original assumption was, that we try to pair in a way, that our dwarves at the end can score. That will in all likelyhood mean, that along the previous 7 pairings we have to make some sacrifices in order to bring the dwarfes in a good position. So our opponents will very likely already have some good matchups already. If our dwarves are then still stuck with option 2, why would the opponent need to rush, he will play safely winning with a slight margin (remember, we assume our dwarves still got a bad matchup) while the other armies will do similar. Thus we likely end with 8 games around a draw or a slight loss.
If this is a good point or "strategy" then I am somewhat lost...

I think, the flaw in your logic is that you forget there are two teams trying to do the thing: gain as many favorable matchups as possible.

Thus it is not possible for us to have 8 matchups in our favour. Somewhere at some point we'll have to give something to our opponent (namely some not optimal matchups for us) for the good of the team. I take that from the 3 ETC I took part (where we did the pairing with Aurel and Dim), is that many times during the pairing you find yourselves blocked in a corner.

Keeping 4 very specific armies for the end might be a very dangerous plan ! The armylists, in the best world, need to be able to push some opponent and to hold against others.

That's why I think the Dwarves are a good solution. Since they can push some armies and corner against others, depending on how the pairing goes (it's always more complicated than it seems at first sight when you look at the opponent's armylists, since sometimes armies you expect to be kept for the end are sent in the first positions, thus changing your plans) they can be a very useful thanks to this polyvalence they have.

The aim of the pairing won't be to make way of stone for the dwarves, of course. We simply put pressure on our opponent (because yes, many armies really have problems to face offensive dwarves!) and always keep a rescue plan in case the pairing doesn't go the way we want and that we need to "sacrify" the dwarves (making them play 10-10) in order to give our others players a good match-up.


I hope I made things clearer now

Let me reconstruct the process:
1)You were saying - Dwarves should be kept to the end as a push army for example against elves
2)I was replying that pushing with anvil is risky and that there are builds that are not afraid of the anvil
3)You were then replying, that the anvil dwarves can still corner instead of pushing
4)I was replying that keeping them as scorer to the end of pairing (your suggestion from point 1) and then playing them defensively (your suggestion from point 3) is defeating your logic from point 1 (the dwarves being used as a scorer)
5) You then replied

For armies left over at the end here's what will be happening:

1) they get a favourable match-up (because we paired them well or because we sent them and they could pick up a good opponent)
2) the pairing went bad and we have to suffer one mismatch because the opponent managed the pairing better that us.

So if the army left at the end is dwarves that shall score (as suggested in 1) then the first option is all well, but the second option will mean
that your supposed scorer now is not only reduced to playing cornerhammer for a draw (your suggestion from point 3) but is even worse off, as a bad matchup to me suggests that it might be less than a draw.

6) I then came to the conclussion that the strategy you suggested (in point 1,3 and 5) is, well, lets be frank "useless" (see my comments inpoint 5)

So, imo there is no flaw in my logic Xavier - I am just quoting/explaining what you actually said. So if there was a flaw, then it has been in your logic and that was what I was trying to show, and hopefully do with this post.


Now, what you said in your latest post reflects my opinion in each point.

What I am saying, is that yes, your logic is perfectly rigth in a perfect world where all our scorers get a nice matchups, gain large victories and Switzerland wins the ETC.


I think you're just using rethoric arguments because you want to beat me down and therefore be able to take a non dragon DE list

At least we agree it's a good idea to keep the Dwarves for later on during the pairing process? Do we?

I think you're just using rethoric arguments because you want to beat me down and therefore be able to take a non dragon DE list

Damn, was that so obvious?

But seriously, I just wanted to show that:

At least we agree it's a good idea to keep the Dwarves for later on during the pairing process? Do we?

No, we do not. It is not necessarily the best of ideas and I have just shown you why using your own logic and arguments against you.

We agree, that it can be a good idea - in case that we indeed get a good matchup in the end.
BUT!!! that involves certain risks, like having to use the anvil more often and thus having more chances to blow it up or not getting a favourable matchup despite our best efforts and thus having to hope that the other matchups go better than expected.

The later point btw will only arrise if the opponents roster/armylists is in general superior to ours.
So building a good roster with good armylists remains the priority besides having the players to use them.

Now, that in turn will be dependant on the choice of armies we select for the team, as each armybook and each armylist will have certain matchups that are favourable and certain matchups that are unfavourable. If we manage to have armies that can cover the weaknesses for others and vice versa and to pair that off idealy via DIMs program, we will succed in pairing. But upfront we have to have a composition of armies(-builds) that complement each other as good as possible.

That btw is the reason why I started the topic about the team roster.

No, we do not. It is not necessarily the best of ideas and I have just shown you why using your own logic and arguments against you.

We agree, that it can be a good idea - in case that we indeed get a good matchup in the end.
BUT!!! that involves certain risks, like having to use the anvil more often and thus having more chances to blow it up or not getting a favourable matchup despite our best efforts and thus having to hope that the other matchups go better than expected.

I disagree for two reasons:
1. I m not the best person with math but if the dwarf use the anvil every round (6) at every game (6) it means that you can be such that one time your anvil will blow up. But that is not ok? I mean as biboun said it before you have as much chance to blow up you level 4 one time in the tournament, even more because you are using it more than one time per game. So if we agree that a lvl 4 can blow up like this why not the anvil?
2. Dwarf is a really safe army for bad match ups, I mean maybe it's really hard and risky against Oger and Empire but we can easily admit that this two roosters will not be in the final quarter. Therefore bad match up means 10-10 maybe a slight lost like 9-11...

If this is not happening you can still push and take points like 12-8 or even more!!

It's a win-win situation !!

You are true, dwarf is usually not an army to score cause the enemy can hide but also good against all enemy cause the dwarf can hide.
But, when you are talking about enemy "hiding" it's not like against normal dwarf, if you really had no chance the miners and rangers will come and get you even behind a hill, that's a thing that normal dwarf can't do(you still have the 2 indirect stone to help them).

At least we agree it's a good idea to keep the Dwarves for later on during the pairing process? Do we?

With this army you don't need a special opponent, you can be trow at any moment and even ogre are not safe cause 35 miners on the flank or the back of some pack will do more than what a lot of dwarf army can! That's the good point , as defensive as normal dwarf but can be more aggressive, I don't say that you will kill everybody but you don't fear a lot of army( You don't fear the same than a normal dwarf, ogre and daemon are ok but vampire with the ghost and the lord are hard to beat)

last point: against a lot of army using the anvil one or two time is in off: if it's a success with the miners you possibly have won so you don't need the anvil anymore.

And about CD:

I am totally against an army without KD'aii: 3 warmachine it's already in-off against all the enemy and the one with cannon are still a bad match up even with 4 warmachine so not a so big difference and remember that that 4th one won't be as effective as the 3 first cause you cannot have more than 2(or 3 don't remember well) STR 5 template.
The big point is that anybody can rush you without fear and the survivor will only be faced 2 pack of 20 GW dwarf it's not in-off, you need at least ONE CaC unit and the kd'aii will give you more shooting phase cause the enemy have to get ride of him before comming!

@Buchi.
No it's the opposite a shooty CD army will be killed by ogre (I think ), by experience 4 warmachines it's just in-off if everything goes right but the smallest survivor will beat you , like 3 ferox charging the poor 20 dwarf and after u had nothing to kill the few survivor in close combat (except hell-canon )
but with the kd'aii the ogre have to take more time and try to get ride of him, not so easy if he is camping with all the army(If the kd'aii give you one more shooting phase you already have one mor shoot than with 4 warmachines!).

PS remember the score of the only CD without kd'aii 28 points , and he was italian.

Paul

@ledwarfou

one time your anvil will blow up. But that is not ok?

It is ok, if the game can still be brought to an end, where the result comes to a draw or better. But with dwarfs as the supposed scorer, that then have a potential desastrous result (obviously depending on when exactly the anvil explodes and how the opponent (can) react to that), it is not ok, as long as Xaviers dream of getting into top 3 is still the goal, as this will fuck up this plan quite badly as long as everything else goes as supposed.
Of course I am speaking strictly statistically - reallity will always be different.

So if we agree that a lvl 4 can blow up like this why not the anvil?

The anvil costs comperatively more and depending on when exactly it blows up, has way more potential to lead to a desastrous result for the player that loses the anvil, then it would do for the player losing his Level 4 at the worst possible moment.

Dwarf is a really safe army for bad match ups

The bad matchups you stated are indeed not so bad (not good either) for the army polux suggests. The really bad matchups are Vampires and some Deamon/Breton builds - Alan can surely suggest some. And those might well be found at the end of pairing depending on their goal in the opponents team roster.

@polux

With this army you don't need a special opponent, you can be trow at any moment and even ogre are not safe cause 35 miners on the flank or the back of some pack will do more than what a lot of dwarf army can! That's the good point , as defensive as normal dwarf but can be more aggressive, I don't say that you will kill everybody but you don't fear a lot of army( You don't fear the same than a normal dwarf, ogre and daemon are ok but vampire with the ghost and the lord are hard to beat)

Imo, you can not be thrown at any moment, as Vampires and some popular Deamon and Breton builds are quite bad matchups for you.
Ogres, other Dwarfs, Lizardmen with double shadow and Empire are also not the best of matchups even though, there is a lot of risk involved on both sides and much depends on how the shooting and early magic phases will work out.
But remember, according to Xaviers plan, you are suposed to score (big). With 3 potential bad matchups and 4 mediocre matchups your above statement seems a bit off to me.

No it's the opposite a shooty CD army will be killed by ogre (I think ), by experience 4 warmachines it's just in-off if everything goes right but the smallest survivor will beat you , like 3 ferox charging the poor 20 dwarf and after u had nothing to kill the few survivor in close combat (except hell-canon )

What are the 2x 40 Gobbos, the 2 Gobbo heros and the 5 Gobbo riders doing at that time? Laughing at their dwarf masters and cuddling their balls?
On a more serious note - the K´dai can also be redirected quite easily - his rage is very suboptimal. So why should an Ogre player try to get rid of him at all cost in the first place? The Ogre will be far more afraid of the multiple wound template WMs.
With that many template weapons, I suppose the CDs are not necessarily there to be sent against Ogres but against infantry heavy armies, right?