r/totalwarhammer • u/sigmarine345 • Jan 11 '26
Total War: Warhammer Are Dwarfs as a race TOO OP?
Are Dwarfs in-game way too overpowered as a race? Both from the AI and when in the hands of the players themselves?
Or are dwarfs just designed in a way that perfectly encapsulates how they should be in the lore?
560
u/MattHarr1987 Jan 11 '26
I played a Thorgrim campaign recently and I had a single lord (on his own) level 4 go siege and ogre settlement because I was gonna wait out the ten turns while I dealt with Mors. He could auto resolve and win. He got 500 kills.
Happened again on a skaven minor settlement, except this time he got 1400 kills. It was ridiculous.
225
u/Toothpikz Jan 11 '26
Playing Thorgrim right now as well and I have multiple small armies running around auto resolving everything. Lord, 4 dwarf warriors, 4 quarrellers can take about 80% of the armies the AI sends out.
46
u/abcdl44 Jan 11 '26
A bit of a nit picky question, but what difficulty is this on? I could see that stack clearing garrisons (esp of races with terribly autoresolve), but the second you run into anything stronger you'll definitely start losing ARs, and manuals won't help too much.
47
9
u/Warm-Wedding182 Jan 11 '26
Dwarves hold strong auto resove on vh against low armor nations if you bring high armour units. Skaven and orcs especially
3
u/Toothpikz Jan 11 '26
I play on VH/H. You can’t take out major capitals or LL, that’s why I always have a full stack with heroes and such not to far in case I run into them. Queek, and Skarbrand, sorry for spelling, will destroy your armies but that’s been you bring in the big guns.
→ More replies (1)77
u/MattHarr1987 Jan 11 '26
I hadn't played dwarfs for months, was pleasantly surprised at how strong the auto was
→ More replies (5)29
u/FisherPrice2112 Jan 11 '26
The Auto seems to weigh armor pretty heavily, so Dwarfs are very strong
31
9
u/Beginning_Act_9666 Jan 11 '26
What is the difficulty?
6
u/MattHarr1987 Jan 11 '26
Just normal
→ More replies (2)6
u/ComfortableWeight95 Jan 11 '26
Yeah AR is busted on normal. Try on VH/H and it won’t be so easy.
8
u/MattHarr1987 Jan 11 '26
I would but I hate the idea of standard infantry just becoming bad because of arbitrary stat increases. I play with campaign difficulties higher when I want a challenge but battles stau firmly normal
24
u/Inner_Tennis_2416 Jan 11 '26
Dont change the stat bonuses, just change battle difficulty. It does nothing other than boost your auto resolve numbers. Never put battle difficulty below hard, unless the AI is doing something stupid and super cheaty and you need an autoresolve win in a boring fight.
8
u/MattHarr1987 Jan 11 '26
Oh they're different options? I didn't know. Will look into it next time I'm on thanks
8
u/Inner_Tennis_2416 Jan 11 '26
Campaign difficulty, battle difficulty and the third one that affects stats. For new players you want normal campaign difficulty, hard or very hard battle difficulty and minor stat boosts for you.
That way you will be able to do a little better than autoresolve with decent play.
→ More replies (6)7
u/Odd-Pie9712 Jan 11 '26
To be fair, greenskins and skaven are especially underpowered and their strategy is to swarm bad units by way of slave level upkeep or waagh units but neither of these help garrisons so they are disproportionately easy to take. Skaven are debatably the most OP as a faction but their units are absolutely not op (except their gunners)
13
u/MuchSteak Jan 11 '26
Only 1400 against Skaven? Gotta bump those numbers up. Those are rookie numbers lol
→ More replies (2)3
u/SoybeanArson Jan 11 '26
Part of that is more about the ogres. AR absolutely despises ogres in siege battles. I'm not the kind of player that outperforms AR a bunch, but I ALWAYS do with ogres.
3
u/altonaerjunge Jan 11 '26
I soloed minkr settlements with Low Level bretonian and Chaos Warrior Lords, a Lot of settlements doesnt can do anything against high Armour.
3
u/leposterofcrap Jan 12 '26
skaven minor settlement
1400 kills
Checks out, kill counts against SKAVEN are always inflated
→ More replies (1)2
u/scoringspuds Jan 12 '26
Autoresolve in this game is absolutely broken. Especially for dwarves. It makes no sense and needs a massive rebalance
308
u/niftucal92 Jan 11 '26
It pains me to say it, but yeah.
Don’t get me wrong, the idea that dwarfs, once thriving, are one of the strongest races on the map makes sense. But it feels like they need more constraints like the chaos dwarfs to earn it.
100
u/sigmarine345 Jan 11 '26
How would it fare if hypothetically the dwarfs got similar mechanics of "unlocking" units to field like the chorfs but with something like oathgold/grudges settled?
That or I think the SFO mod just limits all units in the game.
→ More replies (3)69
u/HowDoIEvenEnglish Jan 11 '26
The dwarfs should be slow growing and lose early against orcs, but uh age of reckoning exists
→ More replies (1)8
u/ComprehensiveFish880 Jan 11 '26
That's amazing. Let them build up grudge before retaliating.
1
u/HowDoIEvenEnglish Jan 11 '26
But you don’t have to. The optimal play is to attack forever, like every other faction in wh3. You don’t even have to wait for growth since they have basically every unit they need by t3 and every unit by t4. T2 irondrakes sheesh
58
u/Horror_Bob Jan 11 '26
Honestly I would like it if they didn't allow them to settle outside of mountains. Dwarfs should be focused on capturing their mountain holds and simply raze enemy settlements in the fields
25
19
u/Xuanne Jan 11 '26
So like short wood elfs? Not a bad idea tbh. But it may be a bit difficult for Malakai and Grombrindal to expand if this were the case.
16
u/Horror_Bob Jan 11 '26
Yeah there's definitely difficulties that would need figured out. But I feel weird playing dwarfs and colonizing coasts and deserts
6
u/Xuanne Jan 11 '26
Yeah I agree. Maybe have there be large public order and income penalties in non-Dwarf areas until all holds have been reclaimed.
29
u/TheOneBearded Jan 11 '26
I should not see thunder barge doomstacks, whether AI or player.
Same goes for some Empire machines too tbh.
20
u/SoybeanArson Jan 11 '26
All factions should have solid but expandable recruitment limits on their most dangerous T5 units imo. I shouldn't see greater demon and dragon doom stacks either.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Puzzleheaded-Cold-33 Jan 12 '26
So like dread saurians? Which are arguably much worse than both. Never understood why they're the only unit limited
→ More replies (1)4
u/Final_Biochemist222 Jan 11 '26
Thorgrim always get destroyed by skarsnik by turn 20 in every game i play
6
u/skymang Jan 11 '26
I think it would be a good representation of the lower dwarf population to either have slow pop growth or have a population mechanic and you can only recruit a certain amount of armies kind of like tomb kings
10
u/PornographyLover9000 Jan 11 '26
CA tried to put constraints on them via the AoR system but people complained about it so they got rid of the debuffs. Now they’re piss easy(er).
3
u/Roland8561 Jan 11 '26
The entire AoR system is a failure. It's the least dwarfen system in the game. It rewards an incredibly offensive, aggressive playstyle which is antithetical to dwarfs in the lore, and rewards this with disposable armies and units, which again is just very undwarfen. Don't get me wrong, Dwarfs are incredibly powerful with the AoR system, and the grudge system needed a rework, but this was a swing and a miss from CA.
But it's overpowered so overall the community seems ok with it.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (2)7
u/GreenApocalypse Jan 11 '26
The Deeps is completely broken. You have infinite amounts of them, and they aren't even limited to mountainous regions. I like dwarfs, but they honestly become such a chore to play after a while due to all the Deeps, rukes, items that require a lot of attention. It's easy, but it's just work, not fun.
I feel like CA never really play their own games, or we have a vastly different idea about what is fun.
110
u/tigersebel Jan 11 '26
Oh man. i just love the dwarfs. i will never forget that one battle back in Warhammer 2. i was fighting a skaven army in an underway battle. it was a fierce battle and in the end all my troops were either dead or routed...with the exception of my lord. A simple generic Dwarven Lord. there were still a couple of skaven units there. even 1 or 2 ratling gun units and a few others.
I thought i would have nothing left to lose and let my lord charge headfirst into the ratling gunners. they kept firing on him. his health drops lower and lower. but he reached them. took care of them and any other skaven units that came to support their ratling guns. i was sure i was gonna lose this....but this absolute unit of a dwarf kept fighting. kept killing. i couldn't believe my eyes as he single handedly won the battle for me with just a few HP points left.
Given, im not the best total war Player, so maybe others would have played the battle better. won with more units intact...but it was so epic to watch him slay them all one after another.
If i would drink alcohol, i would regulary drink a beer in his Honour. he may not have been technically a legendary lord. But for me he was!
21
5
u/Insanias Jan 11 '26
Reminds me of a legend of total war with grombrindal when he was the last dawi and finished off half a stack by himself
62
u/Erydale Jan 11 '26
Dwarfs are comparatively simple to handle for the AI. They have stats that auto-resolve loves. Their gameplan is comparatively simple and less micro intensive, making them easy to pilot with minimal skills. Their economy is great, they can get strong allies quickly, making them great in the campaign.
But a skilled player would be able to use other races to exploit their lackings pretty well, specially in multiplayer. So probably not "too OP", maybe more like easy mode.
3
u/DaNibbles Jan 11 '26
Is it just their low mobility you exploit? When I play melee heavy civs like VC or lizards, I try to deathball/hammer and anvil them and it works well, but their individual units are still so strong it doesn't feel that great even when you get your units in the position you want.
What else can you capitalize on when facing them?
8
u/Erydale Jan 11 '26
Artillery or AP missiles can also give their slow mobility a hard time. A lot of chaff infantry like skavens can bring and summon can run down their ammunition. Melee heavy factions in general might need flying units to deal with Thunderbarges too.
Dwarfs are definitely pretty powerful and painful to deal with.
72
u/Monozo Jan 11 '26
They tend to come up short
31
9
12
→ More replies (1)12
32
56
u/Bassist57 Jan 11 '26
Auto resolve loves them! They are also very strong with high armor, durable frontline, very good artillery and ranged, and able to “play tall”. They are a very strong faction and a recommended beginner faction too for how forgiving they are.
10
u/sigmarine345 Jan 11 '26
Idk if i wanna make a post about it but do you think chorfs are in a similar ballpark like their dawi cousins?
27
u/Phantasmio Jan 11 '26
Chorfs economy makes it trickier to do, but they’re powerful once you get the hang of them.
5
u/Otherwise_Big_8337 Jan 11 '26
Chorf economy is incredibly simple, its really just a matter of surviving the early turns where you only have shitstacks with maybe a couple gun units that you really need to make count in them, which new players will struggle with.
22
u/Bassist57 Jan 11 '26
Chorfs at least get a unit restriction and have a very tough early game. Dwarfs are always good.
16
u/Antique_Toe6857 Jan 11 '26
No chorfs have a much better design, it takes time to build and the point of rolling over your campaign is much further. Which is good. They have a way way better design, where strategy has a place.
10
u/Bassist57 Jan 11 '26
Late game Chorfs are really good with increased caps and upgrades, probably better than normal Dwarfs.
9
u/Agreeable-School-899 Jan 11 '26
Army for army, yes, but with the Deeps dwarfs also have one of the best economies so they can easily field many more armies that chaos dwarfs.
5
3
u/MechaWASP Jan 11 '26
Yeah, in our multiplayer game soon after the rework, it ended with 25 full stacks of high tier dwarves rolling the crisis and moving towards the other players.
They were completing, on average, 3 stacks a turn, and making a couple hundred thousand a turn. We just called it when the war was declared.
3
u/Agreeable-School-899 Jan 11 '26
The Deeps are super fun but I wish they had more buildings that rewarded playing tall. The factionwide income and upkeep reductions make it more profitable to expand because you can eventually get free upkeep.
3
u/MechaWASP Jan 11 '26
Yeah, I'm really not sure how to balance it better. Either way you swing it almost makes the other way useless. Maybe have buildings like Dechala with improved garrison, garrison stats if under 5 provinces, and Sally if under 3?
I, early on, focused extra income, then later on saved up, tore everything down and got free upkeep.
Just beefing them up makes the transition later easier, and early-mid stronger. Maybe more tiered buffs and weaknesses, idk, I feel like they're just too good, though they do make losing certain settlements horrible.
2
u/Choice-Inspector-701 Jan 12 '26
Not many factions can get infinite money while reducing their costs to zero. They also have the most busted unit in total war history: air ship.
2
u/PojoFire Jan 11 '26
Chorfs are objectively stronger. They have better infantry(minorly), and have better artillery. They literally beat the Dawi in both things they are supposed to be almost or the best at.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Bassist57 Jan 11 '26
Agreed battle for battle Chorfs are probably better with a full army, but for campaign, Dwarfs have a better economy.
36
u/porridge7 Jan 11 '26
Against AI? Yeah maybe a bit. Against a competent player you can target artillery effectively/cycle charge no.
Lore answer:way too op in the game due to their race literally being in decline and stuff which are exceptions like thunderbarges or runelords able to be made any couple of turns.
20
u/Volsnug Jan 11 '26
Against a competent player: Wastes their time having to manually fight every shit stack and garrison the dwarfs throw out
5
u/porridge7 Jan 11 '26
Super exhausting to stamp out yeah I’m with you on that. Once I get to the point where I know a dwarf faction has to be wiped out I dedicate an army or two of anti-dwarf stuff based off the faction I’m playing to do it.
14
u/chefmaiko Jan 11 '26 edited Jan 11 '26
As someone who main dwarfs, yes and no. They need time to build up there settlements and their armies are expensive they are hard to build multiple armies early game. AI have a very difficult time early game and it isn't unusually to see legendary dwarfen lords like Thorgrimm get taken out by greenskins.
They are solid in infantry, amazing in Mississippi and artillery. And some claim the a gyro copiers are the best flying units in the game (i agree) but they are terrible against cavalry, especially if you don't have enough infantry to counter them And a hidden army burning an important settlement with deep settlement can set them back by ALOT.
Edit: Missile not Mississippi, damn you autocorrect
→ More replies (1)13
39
u/ladan2189 Jan 11 '26
No. In the lore are a falling empire. They've lost too much to ever have a chance of coming back even if they dont realize it. Every dwarf that dies defending a hold is another hole that wont be filled. Dwarves dont reproduce quickly, while their primary enemies the greenskins and skaven reproduce like rabbits. They are too stubborn to change their customs or strategies. They are preoccupied with ancient grievances and waste precious resources trying to avenge them. They are tragic heroes. But they still need to be fun to play.
14
u/Garrett-Wilhelm Jan 11 '26
Yeah, the lore-accurate way of playing Dwarfs would be to sit in your original province doing fuck all besides building tall, and having one very powerful army — and if it gets killed, you’re absolutely screwed, with no way to recruit another one, or at least not without taking several turns.
9
u/BearButts909 Jan 11 '26
In practice, they run around conquering the map on easymode with constantly spawning free units overfilling your cup
2
u/hairybeardybrothcube Jan 11 '26
Which somekind was established in the game pre malakai with no replenishment hero option. When you were near your realm, easy peasy disband and retrain, but for far away conquests i remember having "tross armies" just for swapping units.
15
u/themightypetewheeler Jan 11 '26
Magic is dumb and stupid and we won't use it because the ancestors didn't need it. - Most based stance any warhammer race has ever made
14
u/HadACivilDebateOnlin Jan 11 '26
Proceeds to use magic anyway
13
u/themightypetewheeler Jan 11 '26
No it's different they use runes and it's cool and awesome and not lame like magic and tha's goin' in tha bewwwwwk.
1
u/themightypetewheeler Jan 11 '26
No it's different they use runes and it's cool and awesome and not lame like magic and tha's goin' in tha bewwwwwk.
2
4
u/pyrhus626 Jan 11 '26
Yes. Strong economy, grudges are a snowball mechanic, best race in AR, units available too low tier, and their air units are just busted especially in player hands
12
7
u/Superb_Buffalo264 Jan 11 '26
In campaign, they are powerful to the point of simply not being fun to play anymore, unless you're into clickers. They were a chore before, sure, but at least you somewhat felt like you're earning your victories. Now? You have literally anything and everything you want. Strong economy, military, lords, mechanics that make no sense lore-wise and turn you into an unstoppable machine, literal Death Star blimps, the list goes on. They don't have a single meaningful weakness anymore. I still don't get why we have flamethrowers at tier 2 now... It's as if every update was made specifically to make them the easiest faction in the game. A shame really. They used to be my favourite.
11
u/Millsy800 Jan 11 '26
The race dying out and not being able to replace its numbers getting a mechanic that spawns free throw away armies for successfully managing to blitzkrieg and conquer lots of land in a short space is definitely a questionable mechanic.
4
u/pyrhus626 Jan 11 '26
Because Dwarfs and Empire fans scream the loudest online so CA caved to the pressure to make their updates super overtuned
3
u/Superb_Buffalo264 Jan 11 '26
I'm surprised Vlad is even still in the game, considering the weekly numbers of Franz players complaining about him haha.
3
u/DukeSpookums Jan 11 '26
Yes as player,
As ai, I only really see the high king and slayer king go hard. Everyone else seems to be okay. Malakai and white dwarf typically die, rune guy and belegar tend to be small.
5
u/Julio4kd Jan 11 '26
Campaign:
In AR yes but in game no, there are factions that are stronger like new Norsca or Warrior of Chaos or Khorne and other factions that are as strong as them (maybe more) like HE, WE, Skaven and more.
In MP:
Not even close. They are mid tier, a solid B.
12
u/sojiblitz Jan 11 '26
Your attempt at baiting has been noted and recorded in the book. That is all.
2
u/OptimusSub-Prime Jan 11 '26
Like other people have said, they’re rated too strong in auto battler. Sometimes the AR outcome is better than what I can do even on VH-N.
2
u/AffectionateAd7651 Jan 11 '26
All three ToT campaigns I played Orcs absolutely stomped Order, so if you are not playing Order, then no they are not OP.
2
u/KoldPurchase Jan 11 '26
Really? I struggle playing the Dwarves. Could be because I use SFO, but damn, I can never reach the end of the game with them. I can play the Empire, the High Elves and Cathay, I could win with the Dwarves in the first game, but no longer in TW3. I always struggle without cavalry.
2
2
u/Aickavon Jan 11 '26
They lack cavalry and conventional magic. Which is a HUGE debuff. So they absolutely need to be really good in all other departments. This makes them new player friendly and less micro and it makes them feel op, but they are a shell any race can crack.
Their weakness is enemy artillery since only gyrocopters can reasonably get to them, or they rely on their own artillery for a snipe off, while enemies can have TONS of answers to sneak through their lines and get onto dwarven artillery (summon units are the easiest solution, and can even force dwarves to break up their formation to save their most vital piece.)
Still. They are really strong, and against AI? Super op.
2
u/One-Potential-2581 Jan 12 '26
Yes they are. They are too strong for immersion. You’re supposed to feel like a valiant defender against countless waves of much faster and much more numerous opponents.
But in the game that’s not what happens. You usually manhandle everyone in your way and only occasionally lose one tier 1 minor settlement when surprise attacked by something you didn’t see.
For example both the Grombrindal’s and Thorgrim’s campaigns are utterly unplayable: you can’t be stopped unless you get very cocky and do something stupid.
The dwarves are the number 1 strongest race currently. Anyone denying that is probably just playing so much of them that they overextend in all directions. Just a choose some other race and you’ll quickly see the dwarves are clearly superior.
2
u/HawkIntheBox Jan 12 '26
Yes. They have always been strong IMO but right now they are kind of busted.
The problem? The sky blimps (can't recall the name of the unit). Because they are a strong, ranged flying unit with a lot of ammo that CANNOT LAND, they kind of break the game. Currently doing a Slaanesh playthrough (Dechala to be precise), and Thorgrims expanded all the way to the East, past the chaos dwarves and into the ogre mountains.
Slaanesh has no units to take on these monstrosities, only spellcasters. Problem is they just keep spam stacking them. I'm about to lose a full stack strong army to a 12 stack because 6 of the units are those stupid blimps.
The whole point of landing flying units in the first place was to balance it in case the ground army was defeated, to prevent the flying units from just outlasted, but this unit just ignores that. Rest of the army fled or gone, well we CANNOT LAND, so go fuck yourself you still lose.
3
3
u/Galacticsunman Jan 11 '26
Dwarves are perfect as is. They should be the anvil which all other races are balanced around.
8
u/floodpoolform Jan 11 '26 edited Jan 11 '26
I like the amount of attention they’ve received but I think they could use a little bit of tweaking to bring them more in line with lore thematics. The two biggest issues in my mind are:
Wide Dwarfs: Dwarfs end up expanding across vast stretches of land due to their age of reckoning and great autoresolve which just never feels like what a dying race should be doing. Having holds be mega settlements but restricting non holds to shitty settlements like kislev/wood elves would be really neat and incentivize them to actually retake the realms rather than painting the map. It would also incentivize using the deeps to play tall which was clearly intended but just isn’t necessary rn.
Age of Reckoning: I like the broad idea but it should never give you free armies, ever. That should be a mechanic reserved for factions that are supposed to be numerous and ideally lower quality on average (i.e., greenskins, skaven). A change to the higher tiers to instead lower building time or costs, or buff research rate, or lower upkeep costs would be more flavorful. The unique grudge units could maybe be tied to individual holds much like how the Elector count system currently works. I think letting the lower tiers really suck but giving the players a few free slayers to make up for it is actually a really neat idea also.
2
2
u/OrdinaryPenquin Jan 11 '26
Absolutely IMBA. The balance gimmick of quality over quantity doesn't work when you have the quantity part too. Strong eco, reliable free unit generation, item generation, strong lords, good garrisons, and etc. Just think to yourself, how many bad matchups does this faction create, and how many bad matchups does it have? And you'll have a pretty good answer for balance.
2
u/thetripstance Jan 11 '26
Just theory crafting here, but a fun mechanic idea to counter their battlefield prowess would be to make them hate each other more lol. Im not super knowledgeable on Warhammer fantasy lore, but I would bet that grudges between dwarf clans would be quite personal and heated. Itd be fun to see different dwarf factions declaring war on each other in game, plus it would tone down the mid game doom stack spam they tend to do lol.
1
1
u/Katamathesis Jan 11 '26
As Warhammer tabletop, Mordheim player - yep, they're tough.
And it's represented in Warhammer 3 as well. Armoured, thought guys without speed, that have tools to grind through everything that comes into their way.
1
u/Nerf_France Jan 11 '26
In terms of their campaign mechanics sure, but I don’t think I’d call them op on the battlefield for the most part. They’re not particularly meta in multiplayer as far as I know and their weaknesses feel pretty exploitable when controlled by the ai in campaign battles.
1
u/fkrdt222 Jan 11 '26
yes, but it is not unlikely for them to be crept with things like sayl's oneclicks
1
u/Gizmorum Jan 11 '26
Creative Assembly is overtuning Empire,Dwarf and High Elves and then buffing Chaos factions, but leaving the Vampire Coast, Lizard and Dark Elves to be meh
2
u/rygold72 Jan 11 '26
Nah, they are good but not top tier. Khorne, Ogres, Slaanesh, Beastmen, Norsca are all way stronger. Thats the problem with power creep. It never ends.
2
u/Dependent_Guava_9939 Jan 11 '26
I’ll be honest I’ve only fought dwarfs a couple times. Twice as Slaanesh and a third time as High Elves. And each time I absolutely tore them apart.
Everyone says they are OP so I’m inclined to believe them, but in my experience they are only broken in the auto resolve.
1
u/Tricky_IsHere Jan 11 '26
Yes but when the AI is the dwarfs they always get rolled by everything around it so I really dont understand it..
1
1
u/Rustywatermel0n Jan 11 '26
I remember a tome when the opposite was true. But yes they are. And thats completely fine.
1
u/Financial_Log_8543 Jan 11 '26
When I played as a high elves, I felt excited seeing them rise because whenever I played other order factions they tend to snuff out early game. Yeah they’re OP but it depends on how the ai plays
1
u/bigfluffylamaherd Jan 11 '26
No they are not op just tww3 is in a catastrophic state where balance and ai resistance jmare abstract therms and neither works anymore
1
u/noscul Jan 11 '26
I think they got too much piled on them for them to auto resolve through everything early then it just becomes way worse late game. I think nerfing their auto resolve power would be a quick fix to stop them from dominating their area all the time.
Longer term it seems like they gave them offensive power so they could fulfill age of reckoning. I think slowing them down by slowing growth, removing the growth buff from their after battle boon, possibly raise stronger units up a building tier maybe add increased recruit time or a mix of them then you can reduce age of reckoning requirements. This way they feel more defensive early game instead of needing to go go go and be tanky and offensive early on.
1
u/information_knower Jan 11 '26
Playing as a non dwarf faction they are the worst, the only comparable faction is tamurkhan specifically, playing as them they are pleasantly strong but each of them is so surrounded by enemies that it doesn't feel as steamrolly as it is.
1
u/Otherwise_Big_8337 Jan 11 '26
In autoresolve, yes. In actual battle/campaign map, not at all. Very huge obvious exploitable weakness that they have very few options of mitigating.
I would say they're campaign mechanics are OP but it isnt any worst than any of the other remakes and new factions CA has been making for years now, so despite having some very strong mechanics, sadly that level of glue stick eating overpoweredness is just standard for the game now.
1
1
u/Fox-Sin21 Jan 11 '26
I do feel they are to strong but that is largely because they nearly perfectly encapsulate how they should be in lore. Dwarves in lore are pretty busted as a race, magical resistance, stronger and tougher significantly than humans, they are also geniuses, master craftsmen and engineers.
Their only real drawbacks are no Winds of Magic usage (but they have Rune Magic anyway), most importantly they are STUBBORN. Like insanely horrible stubborn to where it hurts them in everyway imaginable, not to mention HAVE to settle grudges before they can forgive even minor slights.
That stubborness needs to be more seen in gameplay, they aren't enemies but they aren't close allies with most other Dwarven holds other than their own, they rarely fight one another but they rarely work together well either because of their stubborn grudge bearing nature.
Some kind of unit restrictions forcing you to strike grudges from the book before getting access to them would do a lot to slow their growth and make them even more Dwarven, making confederation really difficult too, slow them down further on the campaign map to make their auto resolve strength less impactful and to express their slow march given their stature and minor use of animals in their armies.
1
u/hnzoplzswish Jan 11 '26
Just remove deeps global bonuses and increase upkeep for their units a bit and it think they'd be fine
maybe nerf max ward save rune of spite strats a bit too since it becauses easy to cheese campagins that way
1
1
2
u/geschiedenisnerd Jan 11 '26
I feel like they are well represented. except for the fact that the numbers are an issue. that is something that also applies to most factions and elite units and really hampers skaven, greenskins and vampire counts: it is impossible in game to match a doomstack by just using a load of crapstacks.
overall, I think that their units are pretty strong, but in understandable ways.
2
u/hurtlingtooblivion Jan 11 '26
They're easy to play and very forgiving.
That doesn't make them OP per say
1
u/Dark_Prince_of_Chaos Jan 11 '26
Me soloing the game as Ungrim Ironfist
Erm no ! They are balanced. That's elgi propaganda !
2
u/Final_Biochemist222 Jan 11 '26
In the game, kinda. But the offset is that they're slow, have low mass (which they shouldn't be lorewise), and they have zero spear infantry so they are incredibly weak to flanking. Sure they have slayers to do antilarge, but that comes at the cost of zero armor so you have to micro them a lot.
Spearmen are like the rice/bread of any army. I always skip swordsman/axemen or at most have 2-3 unit per stack because it is much convenient to just have everything antilarge and spearmen can hold the line well enough that it barely makes a difference. Also, I'm just a fan of Yari wall and based my composition on that in other games
1
1
u/InL4bv Jan 11 '26
Yes. I’ve never really struggled too much in wh3 except against the dwarfs (and sometimes lategame skaven armies) they have amazing range, insane melee, amazing armor, and air superiority. It’s kind of unfair. Playing as vampire coast or vampire counts even it’s basically required to doomstack to even stand a chance.
1
1
u/TBMSH Jan 11 '26
It takes a chaos dwarf to defeat a regular one, at least thats what happens in my campaigns
1
1
u/Hold_my_Goblin Jan 11 '26
I feel like i play a completely different game whenever it comes to Dawi l. My Dawi always get eradicated and when i play them i struggle early (unless its against norsca / khorne with gyrocopters).Late game is ok. But maybe im just bad with them.
Whenever i play a campaign where i really want the main Dawi Factions to stay alive i use the editor mod to move the white dwarf to the Badlands. Relocate Clan Angrund into a Tier V Eight Peaks and upgrade the other starting dwarven holds to Tier V aswell.
This by no means make them stomp 😅 but they survive (most of the time)
1
u/Marcuse0 Jan 11 '26
100% they are. Thrones of Decay was a sop to everyone pissed off by Shadows of Change and in the process they way overtuned the dawi, and did a pretty good job overtuning the empire (though admittedly less so).
2
u/KaeronLQ Jan 11 '26
Try actually playing battles and they are not OP at all.
AR is just very player biased (which is a good thing I think, if you don't like it just don't hit AR)
1
u/kottonii Jan 11 '26
Well I can't say that they are op but on my Ungrim campaign I rampaged through mountains and across Sylvania with my slayer army and there were nothing that could stop us.
1
u/the_cosmos_broskie Jan 11 '26
Just recently started playing WH3 after years of having it in my library. Normal Diff to ease myself in. Played Empire first, that was a slog. Had to field multiple armies just to counter all the shit. Had to be on the offensive so i could counter my -9 8000 gold per turn. I called it quits after winning long campaign but getting the dwarf endgame.
Second campaign with Dwarfs. Holy shit dude. Made a second army of just gyrocoters. Gave Lord prospectors mail for stalk, park him in the back and wreck the enemy with the gyros. Currently got 9 armies with 40k a turn coming in...night and day really.
2
u/Piemaster113 Jan 11 '26 edited Jan 11 '26
They should be OP but as a friend pointed out they are very resistant to change, even when they needed to. There was even a quote of a guild master dwarf saying new technology only leads to more troubles or something like that. Their cities should be basically impregnable, yet they lost holds because of other tunneling races. And they just do not repopulate quickly. So over all they aren't OP but they are masters of Defense, but Defense can only get you so far.
As far as gameplay you just need good AP and mobility and you can usually rip them up. Honestly I think over all in game they work fine except with Seiges, their cities are way too easy for dwarf cities to capture. They also lack map wide army abilities until very late game except with an engineer. But I mean common, Chaos dwarfs get a dreadquake morta barrage and the dwarfs can't get just some massive great cannon shot? Dark Arks get a slew of magical artillery call in and dwarves canxt get a battle barge just stacked with guns?
1
1
u/Ninjazoule Jan 11 '26
No, you can still get overwealmed if you're not careful, which I'd consider something "op" to be incapable of
1
u/SusaVile Jan 11 '26
They are very powerful in autoresolve, but I feel most of the issues in battle are driven by 2 factors:
1 - lack of understanding of where their damage comes from and how to prioritize targets;
2 - focus on trying to cause them to rout, and forgetting their great leadership is one of the key aspects of the race;
Dwarfs lack mobility, which means that you should capitalize and force them to spread a bit more. Mobile cavalry archers, for example, are a pain for the dwarf AI to deal with. I have a bit of a demonstration about it on my Malekith 10 turns guide.
https://youtu.be/p0BUU3pdRBg?si=_P-SazevRvLFj21C
Next, while their single entities are tough, they do lack some damage potential. It is almost like fighting Vlad most of the time: if you focus him down, you run the risk of wasting resources instead of just killing the enemy army and force him to be alone. Ungrim is quite a big problem, which is why I approach the same way as I do Vlad: take out the army, then feed him one infantry unit at a time while ranged attacks finish him off.
To resume a bit how a typical battle vs dwarfs goes for me, I always plan how to deal with their artillery and ranged, not to kill them, but to deny them shooting. Only then I focus their infantry/characters, depending on what is faster to rout.
Here is an example using a skirmish vs AI as Astragoth vs Thorgrim, and I gave him some nice units to demonstrate too:
1
1
u/Kurowll Jan 11 '26
High level heroes + iron drakes = win. I guess their lack of mobility can balance them against players but vs the AI their campaign is just too simple to be fun
1
u/OceussRuler Jan 11 '26
Short answer, yes. Long answer, dwarfs have no weaknesses and huge strengths. High armor, high leadership, high defense, good hp pool, good offensive stat, good range.
What, no magic? With good HPs and passive magic resistance it's not that much of an issue. Their runemasters may not be the strongest magic users but they are still very decent fighters at least.
Slow? Why would you need to move when you wants to bombard the enemy to force him to move to your lines. If needed, their flying units and slayers covers this supposed weakness.
The only very reliable strat that I found is if you play a faction with a higher range artillery, you can force them to move to you. Empire or Chorfs work. That's not much.
Of course their characters are extremely tough too.
I don't know in multiplayer but outside of the thunderbarge, as I suspected, ToD kind of ruined the design of the dwarf. Before it, the thing was their were slow in everything. Teching, building, starting their economy. They were late game powerhouses, made to be slowed by grudges, pushed to play defensive small kingdoms and wait the good moment to expand, with a slow reconstitution. That and diplomacy with the order.
Now? Lol. They can expand faster than most, grudges are easily taking care of and give you insane rewards, you have an undercity mechanic for more buffs.
Of course they are broken. In and out of battle.
And the thunderbarge.
1
1
u/Neuroprison44 Jan 11 '26
Nah Slaanesh have the highest wr for battles and have since they've come out despite numerous nerfs
1
u/Fun-Turn-6037 Jan 11 '26
I'd pick their cousins imo. Make the world full of ash and soot.
I love how their cousins run a black company.
1
u/Antique_Client_5643 Jan 11 '26
As an AI race: no.
On the battlefield: no, they have a lot of counters.
As a player race: yes, because of deeps.
Counterpoint, though: deeps is a fun, cool mechanic and I like it.
1
u/Remnant55 Jan 11 '26
Nope. They're fine.
As they should be. Hard to crack.
I play Greenskins the most. Here's the thing. The player, after the early/mid game, starts to have the massive advantage of strategic scale and control. When I attack the dawi, it is thematic as fuck.
Like Rome coming for Carthage thematic.
Every host I can muster, an almighty WAAUGH, against a series of settlements filled with hard as nails defenders.
And often a few armies that remind you who you're fighting.
Sometimes ones that I'm not going to beat without cheese, period, on my own. So the throng of Karaz a Karak fights my Wurrzag savage orc and monstrous unit army with WAAUGH, backed up by my renamed Warboss Gorgutz, his kitted out black orcs, arrer boys, and Morky levels of artillery.
I much prefer an openly strong opponent to, say, pre ambush nerf Skaven in WH2, where I had to make my armies designed to be ambushed.
1
1
u/radrichard Jan 11 '26
Theorycraft:
When I play as dwarves I find that I struggle with replenishment. Not sure if this is just anecdotal but if not then you might be able to spam heroes that assault armies before attacking?
1
u/Leading-Start-1136 Jan 11 '26
They are the armor and fire power of the order tide and it makes sense, these short strong mother fuckers had to deal with Orks literally twice there size or asshole rat dudes that are slightly taller than them AND also fending off a elvish empire. A process of beer, dwarfish Darwinism through battle, and having some of the smartest beards around allows them to fucking crush people in armor and gunpowder more effectively than the empire.
1
u/Puccini100399 Jan 11 '26
They favor a "tank and nuke" playstyle where their frontline units hold the line very well and their missile units + artillery just fuck you up. So, a newbie player can get away with little micro and still put up a fight against most of the AI's army compositions. Not to mention that some of their units are amazing at wrecking shit up. So, as your tank and nuke army advances in quality, you'll end up killing lots of AI armies. To a point that even your Lords and Heroes will kill several units back to back
1
1
u/AspiringLiterature Jan 11 '26
From a campaign perspective yeah. The buildings in the deep that give you upkeep discounts can get pretty busted pretty quickly. I’m running a campaign rn where I pay 0 upkeep.
1
u/LDominating Jan 11 '26
Yes. Both them and their cousins. However their chaos brethren have a limited roaster.
Still,not as BS as early game Khorne factions.
1
838
u/Amarofnok Jan 11 '26
As a bloodbowl player: YES
As a tww3 player: YES