Hammerers vs ironbreakers

[AltheAlchemist]

I've been looking through the book and I see that Ironbreakers and Hammerers seem like pretty tough units. However I was wondering which one of these two units is a better use of my points and/or more effective in battle. Hey, I only have so much money so I'd like to know which one is a better use of my money before I spend 40-80 bucks on a new unit. When I bought my dwarfs I got 10 Ironbreakers so should I get more of them, or get some hammerers?

[vote4pedro]

Ironbreakers are awesome with the right runes. I field a unit of ironbreakers with a BSB in every army I play. I also ussually bring hammerers for my dwarf lord to sit in. If you can only buy one I'd buy the ironbreakers.

[waЯu]

Hammerers, considering you can easily build them by snipping the axe heads off of great weapon armed warriors and glue on hammer heads from the same kit. To make them stand out more, I put all the bodies with capes to one side and saved them to make Hammerers out of.

On Ironbreakers, I don't think you really need big units. 15 of them with the Rune of Stoicism will serve you well, with their armour save and US 30 they just don't die.

[AltheAlchemist]

I have to say, in my 3rd battle with lizardmen they held out pretty well against a stegadon surrounded by saurus cavalry (not long enough I'm afraid) I'll try the converted hammerers idea though!

[poypoyking]

I pretty much field Ironbreakers in every army list I make up. The only time I take hammerers is if i am playing a 2000+ game in which I have a lord.

Ironbreakers are ridiculously difficult to kill, but as with all dwarves they have a hard time actually catching anything :)

[Stratigo]

I prefer hammerers honestly. With the way all the new armies are being built, Ironbreakers break too easily. The new army books tend to concentrate on really big hammers in a few units, which means they can and will break through Ironbreakers. Hammerers with a lord will only break on an unlucky roll. They'll loose more, but they will not run. Perfect for setting up flank charges.

[poypoyking]

The new army books tend to concentrate on really big hammers in a few units, which means they can and will break through Ironbreakers.

Sadly, mine broke and were overrun with an un-modified break test tonight :( Ahh well, doesn't happen too often to me. Does a dwarf good to get humbled every now and then. :)

[kroxigor01]

More for the case of Hammerers (as long as you get a Lord to go with them): large amounts of fear and terror causers (VC, DoC, Stegadons and Hydras) in the modern game are making ItP increasingly useful.

[Arklite]

i think it depends on your opponent and what your army actually contains.

for example, if your army has a lord you REALLY should be grabbing hammerers. if you have an anvil of doom however, the field becomes a bit more open.

against opponents with large numbers of low strength attacks or horde forces i would personally vouch for ironbreakers. while they don't have the psycology advantage of hammerers they are roughly twice as survivable in combat. with the right banner (stoicism/battle is a good one, as is courage/determination) they can prove to be battle winners. in addition they tend to carry a bit more intimidation factor than hammerers. people hear 2+ save in combat and they start to think 40k terminators ;)

on the otherhand hammerers are more suited to fighting against high impact opponents. top end knight units, chaos warriors etc. units against whom holding is more important than surviving. you absorb them in the first round of combat then you let dwarven toughness grind your opponent down. however, with weaker armour than the ironbreakers hammerers can be carved down by mass low strength attacks a lot easier.

my favourite description of the two is a brick wall and a sponge. ironbreakers are a brick wall, a knife is useless against them so you use a sledgehammer. a sponge on the otherhand can be cut apart with a knife but try hitting it with a sledgehammer and you won't get anywhere ;)

[Shai'Tan]

I have to agree with Arklite, even though I usually never look towards which enemies to fight, I just go for what I think is best. That can either be themed or diverse depending on the list.

If fielding a Lord (on shieldbearers for that Asterix look :dance:) I would always go with the hammers. In almost all other cases I would go for the breakers or spend the points elsewhere (which I usually do: One unit of breakers or hammers could easily be swapped for 2 cannons if you have the slot for it)


Sadly, mine broke and were overrun with an un-modified break test tonight :( Ahh well, doesn't happen too often to me. Does a dwarf good to get humbled every now and then. :)

Seems like a opportunity to start a new slayer unit...

[GMJoeSolarte]

Because of the mission of Iron Breakers, I always thought they should be able to HATE the Skaven as well as the Greenskins. Just seems to make more sense and be more 'in character' with them

[Turtle Master]

Well, here is my opinion. I NEVER take ironbreakers, they just aren't good enough for the same points as hammerers with shields. People gow wow because they have a 2+ armour save in combat, but guess what hammerers can have a 3+ save for the same points and on top of that they are stubborn, which is so good. Hammerers also have the option to have strenght 6 and a 5+ save if they need to. So, there we go, in my opinion ironbreakers are completely useless compared to what hammerers can do for the same points.

[Arklite]

i think you'd be suprised actually.

consider, 2+ armour is a 5/6 chance of passing. 3+ armour on the other hand is 2/3. as such we can assume that against a S3 opponent an iron breaker is twice as survivable. by taking half as many losses an ironbreaker unit has a better chance of winning a straight fight. they are also more resistant to enemy ranged fire and spells. they are simply just more durable than hammerers. hammerers will of course, hold regardless. that's what they do.

ironbreakers on the otherhand survive significantly better than hammerers. there are many situations where that becomes a lot more important than holding ;)

[Turtle Master]

Point taken, I have only used ironbreakers once or twice and i what i can remember about them is they went horrible (but that was about 8 months ago when I was convinced to start playing Warhammer by my friends). I havn't got around to using them since then and they may have just gone bad cos i was a total noob back then. So i may have to try them again to re-evaluate them. I can see how survivability can be good where the ironbreakers would lose like 1 guy in a fight where hammerers would lose 3 or 4, hammerers pass on Ld 9 of course, but then ironbreakers would still have a good chance of passing on Ld 8 and they would have more guys at the end of it. Anyway, i can see how others like ironbreakers more than hammerers and i may even be one of those people when i use them again :). The only problem i see is there is normally a character or something with similar power in most units units these days where the ironbreakers high armour save would be irrevelant against a strength 6 or 7 guy. Not many times i see a whole unit with strenght 3.

[Doomlord]

i have never used ironbreakers. but i always use a unit of 20 hammerers and i always give them a runic standard whit the rune that fives you a 5+ ward against missiles.