Thanks for your input too, Psyco!
I will try to address all your issues (sorry for the long post).
1) Why is it a must? I agree that having the Orcs as a faction as well is appealing. I even started making such a faction (we can talk about that in another thread...), but when I realised how much time it took to create all the components for a faction, I put it on the shelf. It's not like they are impossible to do afterwards. But I will leave that for others to create (for the time being at least).
2) Thank you! I agree that any Orcs faction should be neutral as well (all the Orc heroes are neutral, and it's thematic etc.).
I actually started creating Neutral Objective cards as you suggested but they felt somewhat "forced" so I decided to go with the random Good/Evil card draw instead. I think I will leave this to others as well to create. If they turn out to possess the same standard as the official objective cards I will absolutely support them!
I don't know if I have published the rules for that but they will start with a random Neutral hero, and they have no opposite alignment (this have changed a few times in the making process but this is where it landed -- so here we are on the same frequency).
I decided to give them one of each of the tactics and influence development to further emphasise that they are somewhere in between Good and Evil, I think that is enough. I don't want to disturb this concept too much. Good idea though!
3) I may not have been very clear in this regard, but the asterisk will remind you that they loose to every other faction if it comes to comparing starting influence, even to the Uthuk faction. So it's not equal to rounding down or anything like that.
Runewars seem to give a value of 2 influence for each tactics cards (see fall secondary ability, development tokens and exploration tokens) so why give equal weight to the starting influence and starting tactics cards? My hypotheses is that as starting influence gives more than just starting influence -- they are also used for tie-breaking -- making each starting influence worth equal to not 1 but 2 influence that is acquired during play (or equal to 1 tactics card if you will). So by giving the Dwarves the lowest possible rank in tie-breaks will make their starting influence actually be worth less than the other factions' starting influence.
So that's the rationale behind giving them a total of 6 influence/tactics cards.
4) I was thinking of making them dark grey, but perhaps yellow is better -- it might be too much work for me to change now (almost done with the "high definition" version of the faction sheet...). I will give it some serious thought, though.
5) I have actually already considered that. In fact the first draft is already done (see below).
6) Great to here your thoughts!
Regarding the Guard/Bolt thrower relation I find it very appealing as it is now (obviously!), it is one of the things I am most proud of. It's regrettable you don't share this opinion. I don't think I will change this though. I hope you can live with it. If not, maybe I can create an alternative version of the faction when everything is finished.
The bolt thrower's ability is certainly very powerful, but only against powerful enemies like hexagon units and such. Against light troops they are much less effective (compare this to the Roc, Dragon or Dark Knight for instance). As the ability's name suggests it's a monster slayer.
In total the Bolt Thrower is one of the most destructive units on the field. After several plays and some "battle simulation", I have not found it OP though (and I have not received any feedback at all on actual game play from other player groups, as of yet). I will certainly keep an eye on this one.
On a side note, the Bolt Thrower is at an equal initiative level as the upgraded Roc (in banners of wars expansion).
Maybe I can change place on the Bolt Thrower and the Stone Scribe, initiative wise, making it less powerful at the expense of some of the uniqueness of the unit (making them equal to the Roc, Obseen and Dragon in initiative). But then again, I wanted the Stone Scribes to be slower than Warlocks (what a mess). What do you think?
7) Great! Defender it is! This is great information. Never thought of taking unit theme from discwars before (never knew there where named units in diskwars). Diskwars and Runewars supposedly share the same universe (at some degree, at least), don't they?
Can you list all units for the dwarves in diskwars and give a brief description on what roles and powers they have? It would be much appreciated!
Are you talking about the Banners of War expansion when you say I should come up with new units? Any suggestion on a powerful level 5 hexagon unit (to follow the pattern with the other factions)?
8) Like this:
I have already been down that road and it doesn't end with a pretty sight. It's almost scary how much time I have given to think about the distribution of the units in the resource dials.
I have tried to change the places so that they have the same distribution as the siege towers (because I agree with you), but then it will mess up the rest of the units' placement.
9) Yes, I have a first draft but the new units are totally made up by me, but game mechanically wise they represent the direction I want the Dunwarr Dwarves to take.
Though I don't agree with that they must have an initiative 1 unit and fast units. The whole theme of the dwarves are that they are slow.