.png){kind=logo}
Khazad-dûm were the first proper Army I ever collected and played with in Middle Earth Strategy Battle Game [MESBG]. Fast-forward nearly 20 years, and I am still using them. Whilst we now have the Dwarven factions from the Hobbit era, Khazad-dûm remains one of the most interesting, versatile, and unique factions in the Game. It is also my favourite.
Often regarded as a solid mid-table Army by many players, Khazad-dûm has never been short on fans. For a while, it was seen as an Army that couldn’t win GBHL 100 events. Whilst this has since been disproved, they often don’t hit the competitive heights I think they are capable of.
Mustering The Throng
Khazad-dûm, as an Army, has no access to fast-moving, mounted models. This can be a problem in many Matched Play Scenarios. For this reason, small Dwarf Armies will struggle; as such, much like in my MESBG List-building Guide article, I advise prospective Dwarven players to always aim to be coming in at around the one model per 20 Points mark. This should ensure you always have the battlefield presence to win any Objective. This may require some sacrifices in your List choices, but it is the best way to succeed at events.
Heroes
Khazad-dûm (and the Kingdom of Moria Army) have some of the best unnamed Heroes in the Game. Unfortunately, their named Heroes are not on the same level, but you will still normally want one to be your Leader. Whatever you do, it is best not to over-invest in Heroes. Their limited movement means they cannot be relied upon to do the heavy lifting in the List - that is for the troops to do.
The first golden rule of any Dwarf Army is to get a model with access to Heroic March. Without it, some Scenarios and match-ups can become a nigh impossible game. This leaves you with three options; Dwarf Captains, Dwarf Kings, and Balin. Obviously, if you take Balin as part of a pure List, you lock it into the Kingdom of Moria Army, and he has to be your Leader. This is a route I would recommend if playing smaller games; at higher-level Points match-ups, he is vulnerable as a Leader (with 2 Wounds and 1 Fate), so I would normally opt for a Dwarf King instead to accompany Durin.
When List-building, it is always worth considering how the various Hero and troop choices interact when building your Army. Some models that are of great value on paper may not be in your particular Army; whilst others that are seemingly over-costed could actually be more useful.
If you take Durin, he provides a War Horn, but are you getting the most out of this investment if you then take a large contingent of models with Bodyguard in your force? If you take a King's Champion, would your main List need any further Banners? These are the sort of analytical questions I encourage you to ponder when building your List.
Whatever Heroes you opt for in your List, learning to utilise your Might correctly is important as you will often be at a slight disadvantage in terms of total Might. On average, I will only have 1 Might per 100 Points. This does not necessarily mean you will be at a disadvantage in the game though, as long as you use your Might sensibly. With high Defence and no Mounts, you can often save Might on Heroic Strikes, Defences, and Combats that Heroes from other Armies may need to call. I have gone into more detail about Heroes on foot generally (and the decrease in required Might) here. This is exceptionally relevant to understanding Dwarf Heroes and how they differ from those of other Races.
Warriors
When it comes to the troops of the Khazad-dûm Army, I would suggest a couple of guides. The first (and most important) is that 30-50% of your Army should always be Dwarf Warriors with Shields.
Dwarves are famous for their resilience, and a basic Dwarf Warrior with a Shield gives you not only D7 (meaning even most enemy Heroes or elites will need 6s to Wound you), but also a Fight (and Courage) Value of 4. Throw in the ability to Shield (in addition to the Army Bonus), and these units can match nearly any other model in the Game, Point for Point.
Once you have your Dwarf Warriors with Shields, you get to move to some of the more interesting models within the List - the elites. Under this category you have your Khazad Guard, Hearthguard, Iron Guard, and Vault Warden Teams.
Unless playing at a very high Points level, I will usually opt for 2 routes; the ‘Guard’ models or Vault Warden Teams. In my experience, these elites both require a difference in play-style to be successful, and trying to do both will leave you short of resources to implement either effectively.
If you take the Vault Warden Team route, Warbands should aim to consist of three or four Vault Warden Teams, and the same number of Dwarf Warriors with Shields. The Vault Warden Teams form a formidable centre to your line, whilst the Dwarf Warriors can protect their flanks.
If opting for the ‘Guard’ route instead, I'd recommend that your Warbands should consist of six to eight Dwarf Warriors with Shields, and four to six of these elite options. This time, the Dwarf Warriors will hold the centre, and the elites operate on the flanks to pincer and envelop the opponent. Be sure to keep a couple of models behind your front line though, in order to plug any gaps that may emerge.
Shooting
Dwarf Rangers with a Dwarf Longbow or Dwarf Warriors with a Dwarf Bow? This is probably one of the most persistent questions ever since the Dwarf Rangers were released. So, which one is better?
Well, in my opinion, neither is; in all honesty, I would go for an even split between the two models - you get the best of both worlds that way. However, I would recommend taking Throwing Axes on your Dwarf Rangers, as well as a Dwarf Longbow. Dwarves are unlikely to be able to win a shooting war, and you want to be mobile. Giving your Dwarf Rangers the extra threat of a Throwing Weapon makes them a more flexible, tactical option, and a great way to take out Mounts.
Now, the Dwarf Ballista - it's something many Dwarf players swear by. Personally, I could not disagree more, and have yet to see any Dwarf List enhanced by its inclusion. The common argument for the Dwarf Ballista is that it offers a ranged threat, gives you board control, and disrupts your opponent.
Whilst the Dwarf Ballista may provide you with a ranged threat, it needs to justify itself over the alternate inclusion of six Dwarven archers (costing the equivalent Points). Over the course of two Turns, you will need luck on your side to do this. You will only hit 50% of the time, and Wound 66% of the time when you do. This isn’t even considering the Scatter Table, with the extra chance to miss, and likelihood of your opponent choosing which model is hit. Long story short, there are many variables, and you only have 1 Might Point to mitigate poor (or even average) luck.
Six Dwarven archers will do just as much damage, and can impact a game once combat hits (or if shooting is negated). Additionally, they increase your model count, and can be used to strengthen your battle line in a way a Dwarf Ballista cannot.
The other myth of the Dwarf Ballista is that it somehow gives you board control. This, on paper, is logical; it proffers a long-range threat that can disrupt your opponent’s deployment and battle line. In practice it does the opposite, and encourages a negative approach to play, which is not successful in timed tournament games.
Be Proactive
As a Dwarf player, I do not want to be sitting in my Deployment Zone and shooting my enemy in many Scenarios. Whilst this may seem beneficial at the time, it exacerbates the main flaw of the Army - speed.
Dwarves are a good Army for Scenarios like To The Death or Lords Of Battle; they don’t die easily, and usually they don’t suffer from their main weaknesses in these games. Most Dwarf players will find these Scenarios favour them. But what do you do in more movement-based or Objective-based Scenarios?
The answer is to move, get in position, and hold the Objectives. It is always easier for Dwarves to hold an Objective from the outset, rather than have to take it by force. Make sure you are getting the most out of your strengths. Don’t just stand back because you have superiority from a ranged threat, as you'll be giving these advantages (and general control) to your opponent; you do not have the ability to then get to the Objectives and remove the opponent fast enough at the end of the game.
There is no point in having Broken your enemy if you are not on any of the Objectives. If anything, you do not want to Break your enemy until you are in position. The most common mistake I see people make is realising too late that they won’t be able to make it to the Objective in time before the game ends.
Divide and Conquer
Many Armies are built as if they will fight in one single block. It's instinctively how we imagine 'theory hammer' in our heads. A couple of Cavalry models are chucked in as the Objective-grabbers, but everything else is fighting together. This helps models support each other and cover weaknesses. Scenarios, however, will often not work this way.
For me, building a List where each Warband can work independently (when required) is crucial. Each Warband should be able to function on its own, with another, or as a single battle line with the whole Army. The principle and tactics for each Warband are the same.
The 3 Warband Pivot
I like to play Reconnoitre as a Scenario when I play Dwarves; this is something most people find surprising. Why would I like a Scenario that is all about moving models off the opponent's board edge? Well, the key to this appreciation stems from the use of a tactic that I refer to as 'The 3 Warband Pivot'.
The principle is simple; I deploy one Warband in the centre, and one on each flank; I then move them up the board. These don’t often have to be equal Warbands, but no Warband should contain enough models that you could be Broken if it was wiped out, and ideally each will be accompanied by a Hero.
This does one thing straight away - it gives you maximum board coverage. You have a Warband present in every possible position to cover and react to an opponent's (often faster) models if needed.
The second thing it does is forces your opponent into a decision. The more decisions you can force an opponent to have to make, the better, as it can put them on the back foot whilst helping you run the game on your terms.
Your opponent now needs to decide - do they focus all their forces on one Warband, or split their Army to match yours? Or do they do something in between? Well, let us look at each one of these options.
The opponent has opted to focus all their Army's attention onto one of your Warbands. You will likely have a Turn or two to react with your Warband, in order to assume a defensive position. That Warband's role now is purely to hold out for as long as possible - a purpose for which Dwarves are particularly adept.
You now have options with your other Warbands. If you have a numerical advantage, you can make for the opponent's board edge - safe in the knowledge that you cannot be Broken. Even if your Leader is in the central group being ganged-up on, you will likely see a 3-2 Win (worst-case scenario). Your opponent must now decide whether to peel off their models to chase the other Dwarves down, or send their own models to leave your board edge. Either option makes it easier for your engaged Warband to hold out longer.
If your opponent has a superior model count, you may instead bring in a Warband to flank and support. Suddenly, your opponent must now react to this threat, or risk being outflanked. Meanwhile, one of the three groups of Dwarves is still making a sprint for the board edge (and as we know, Dwarves are natural sprinters).
If the opponent splits their force in twain, the situation is remarkably similar. Two of your Warbands' primary aim is to now hold out and reduce the enemy model count, whilst your third Warband can claim the points for leaving the opponent's board edge.
Again, if you are concerned about one Warband being overwhelmed, you can use some of your third Warband to support it.
The final option your opponent has is to split their force to take on all your Warbands one on one - this plays into your strengths. Your Dwarves hit harder, are tougher, and rely on 'bubble-buffs' less than other Armies. The Dwarves will hold out longer, and can overwhelm the opponent where they are weakest. They can then get to work clearing a path to grab the Objective, or support another of your Warbands.
In all these examples, keeping track of when and how the game will end is important. You'll learn from experience how long it takes for certain actions to play out, and this can inform your decision. The ability to not kill your opponent (or occasionally make yourself easier to kill) can also be crucial to implement effectively.
Whilst I have given an example in the context of Reconnoitre, you can apply this tactic to pretty much any Objective-based Scenario.
Conclusion
As I wrap up this colloquium on Khazad-dûm, I think it is worth stating that many of these suggestions and tactics can be applied to all the Dwarven factions of Middle Earth. The other Dwarven factions may have access to more traditional battle line tactics (with Spears or Cavalry options), but in reality, they all have the same core strengths and weaknesses; they're a low-Move, high-Defence, elite Army-type which is what most of these tactics are built around (you could possibly even apply it to non-Dwarf Armies with these characteristics).
Having cut my eyeteeth on Khazad-dûm, it made me an adept Iron Hills and Army of Thror player. Being forced into learning to play with an unorthodox battle line meant I had to learn alternatives to a standard two-rank deep Shield wall. Ultimately, this bequeathed unto me a greater tactical knowledge and flexibility; I was better imbued with an ability to adapt and surprise opponents who were expecting one type of game-plan but got hit by another instead. Suddenly, Armies that had been one-dimensional on paper were much more tactically-rewarding to use.
For those of you who have delved too greedily and too deep, there is only one last bit of advice I can give you; it is a creed that any true Dwarf player lives by – NEVER TRUST AN ELF!