Oh bugger.. this isn't going to be pretty

Oh bugger ....I'm assembling two dwarf cannons and an organ gun for the Dwarves.. damn.. I've succumbed.. I really did intend to create a Dwarf army with no artillery, but I think it's just not going to work. After all Dwarfs are known for their machines... how could I deny them their heritage??

However, I'm still intent on keeping with the miners, and the gyrocopter... I'm still pretty determined to make sure this isn't one of those stay still and shoot armies.....

Also on the painting stocks, now that term break is here, are some slayers, but none of those namby pamby Orange dudes.. mine are celtic tough, hair smothered in blue wode types.. take that GW!! There's also a fantastic dwarf chieftain by shield bearers (love that guy), and.. well, I think a Runelord.. maybe with an Anvil of Doom...

Anyone interested in watching me crumble? Maybe not.. I don't think this is going to be pretty!!!

More thoughts on GW and WFB..

So I've played another few WFB games with the Dwarves. If it weren't for the fantastic GW miniatures, would I enjoy playing 'Paper Scissors Rock' more? This is not a problem I've generally seen with historical games, good historical rules allow historical match ups to work well, with player skill being the key determinant of success or otherwise. However with the Dwarves, I'm left with the feeling that if I don't take the right combination of troop types, I'm pretty much doomed. Not enough attention to magic defence and I get screwed by magic heavy armies. Take enough magic resistance and you are too weak to stand up to solid combat armies. Whew!!!

You see, while I'm not the world's best player, I can win at least as many games as I lose. I even won a national tournament several decades ago, in a national teams WW2 event. There are many cleverer gamers out there, but I can usually do OK on the win/lose stakes. Maybe I am using the wrong criteria to judge the game? Although I have to say that after 40 years of gaming, winning/losing still does it for me (although NOT at the expense of the other player's enjoyment).

Of course it's just as likely that I just need to get a lot more experience with WFB armies and rules, but I find several rules mechanisms irritating, not least the arc of sight rule. How can a large unit of troops NOT be aware of an enemy unit on its flank, just because they are outside the 45 degree arc to its front? I feel pretty sure that you'd know. Is the argument that a majority of the troops in the unit can't see that flank, and so the unit as a whole is unaware of the flank threat? I think they might talk inside that block of troops.... Maybe that mechanism has a higher objective: guard your flanks. OK, I can accept that, but the size of game doesn't exactly leave you with the capability to guard flanks easily. I have played the flank game regularly in Spearhead, and am pretty good at guarding, and attacking, flanks. I can even do this in the DB games systems like HotT and DBA, a system that is very different to WFB. I don't seem to be able to make this work in WFB. Maybe someone with experience can instruct me..

And how come I can hit a unit in the rear, and still get my b...s handed to me on a plate? What's that all about then?

Yep.. maybe some more experienced player needs to take me in hand, and instruct me in the subtleties of the rules and the game ..... I certainly need it.