8th Ed. Lizardmen or Dwarfs?

[troubled_joe]

Hi,

I collect Skaven and for my next army have decided on either Dwarfs of Lizardmen - something a bit less 'random' than Skaven! The trouble is, I cannot decide at all between the two.

Swaying me towards Lizardmen: There's a lot of variety in the different models to paint, especially compared to Dwarfs. I like the background. Looks like Saurus, Temple Guard, Salamander and Slaan are some of the best in the game at their respective roles. More tactical options than Dwarfs - no reliance on warmachines.

Swaying me against Lizardmen: Powerful magic doesn't seem as if it will be as effective as powerful (and reliable) artillery. I can't see how anything in the army would survive against an dual Organ Gun + Grudge Thrower attack. Despite having lots of big monsters, I don't think they measure up against others - e.g. a Carnosaur is only T5 with 5 wounds and would be eaten alive by a Dragon or Hell Pit Abomination - Stegadons lack offensive power as well. And although there may be more tactical options than Dwarfs, there don't seem to be that many options either, certainly not compared to High Elves or Empire...?

I'll be posting a similar thread on a Dwarf forum... Any help would be appreciated!
Thanks

 

[Eladimir]

We are a little biased here but I'd certianly have to say pick lizardman. Magic is so much more flexible than artilery. Extra moves, buffs debuff AND damage.

For me the biggest selling point was the variety of units. Not counting the warmachines really all you have are dwarves with a variety of weapon. So even a big nicely painted army looks like a bunch of stout midgets with guns and axes.
Lizardmen have freakin dinosaurs, plus the painting options are unlimited, Any colour can be the skin based for a unit which leads to great variety and a sweet looking army. Dwarves tend to be flesh coloured

 

[Wildboar]

Hey there,

Being a former Dwarf player I too must say go for the lizards, don't get me wrong Dwarves are a good army and it is quite fun to blow half the enemy up before they even reach you!

However, after a few months playing Dwarves it does become a bit 'samey'. Trust me it's a word! There are different ways to play Dwarves but compared to most of the other races they are a little limited.

The main reasons I chose to collect Lizardmen as my new army were that they have a vibrant colour scheme, which allows for a very impressive looking army. Going from zero magic to a very strong magical force also appealed. (I got more than a little jealous after a while that I was missing out on a Magic Phase).

Also about 95% of a Dwarven army's models stand at about 1 1/2 inches tall. It was very appealing to have a broad range of figures with impressive models such as Stegadon's, Carnosaurs and the like. Dwarf armies simply can't compete in that regard. The biggest model in my Dwarf army is the Anvil at about 2" high!

And don't forget you will have an army full of Dinosaurs! Pretty cool IMO.

Just my penny's worth.

Obviously it's your choice and whatever you decide good luck with your army. (but pick Lizardmen!)

 

[Gor-rok]

With no disrespect intended against our short n' sturdy friends, here is why I cast my vote for Lizardmen.

If you break Lizardmen down model by model, sure, many of our units are outclassed by individual examples from other lists. We are greater than the sum of our parts, however, and taken as a whole, we have tremendous versatility and power that is the envy of the lesser races.

Yes, the dragon may outmatch the carnosaur on paper- but not after he's been pin-cushioned by skink poison shots. Warriors of Chaos will best the Saurus in close combat- but how few Warriors will be left after our Salamanders burn away their ranks? War Machines? We have chameleons. Fast cavalry? Terradon rocks will get them. And almost nothing equals a Slann in the magic phase. We have a ready answer to nearly every situation that may arise.

So do the Dwarfs, but it's basically the same answer to every question: Shut down their magic, shoot them to pieces, and chop up whatever makes it across the board. It works, but only having major activity in two of the four phases of the game (as I'm sure you noted, Dwarfs aren't spectacular in the movement department either) seems like it would get old, and fast.

I also like variety, not just in gameplay, but in the models themselves. As Wildboar pointed out, the Dwarfs can't match the wide range of model sizes, shapes, and possible paint schemes that our army offers.

It is for these reasons that I follow the path of the Old Ones!

 

[Eladimir]

So did we sell you?

 

[liath]

I'm finding this thread interesting as I've been playing lizards for 8 months or so and have recently bought some dwarves. So far I've found the two great to play because they're so different!

For me they're both quite forgiving armies (high leaderships, decent close combat) but that's where the similarities end. Get dwarves dug into a corner and they're not coming out, slam some quarrellers with some great weapons and they're a good archer who can handle themselves in close combat. On the other hand lizards have great magic and enough flexibility to fight almost any sort of battle (except perhaps a defensive gunline!).

Personally I'd say play some paperhammer, and see how they play - I imagine you'll get a feel for how different they are very quickly.

The only other thing I'd add is that painting a dwarf is a LOT more fiddly than painting a saurus!

 

[novatomato]

just to throw this little bit out there for the dwarves (I too say Lizardmen are a more fun/interesting army/hobby but nonetheless) Dwarf models are not quite as . . . one dimensional as some people here have mentioned as they have forgotten a couple things.
First off, Slayers. These guys can make a great break from painting metal and hair and are not a bad option on the table either, plus dwarves are not as slow as they used to be, they can charge and average of 10 inches! thats only one inch less than our saurus so the death dealing psychos are actually a pretty good option to have.
Next up the issue of movement as I previously alluded to. With M3 dwarves won't dominate the movement phase, but high leadership combined with musicians will guarantee they don't get overwhelmed. When they do get stuck in they are likely to stay there for quite some time.
Warmachines can also offer an attractive centre piece to the army and can be modeled and painting in varying ways to further make those small differences yet maintain a cohesive appearance on the table.

Dwarves are small, sturdy and uniform and can make a great looking army much easier than Lizardmen can as the models are so very different and must be made to have things tying them to the rest of the army (okay saurus are easy to do his way but what about stegs, chamos, razordons, salamanders etc.?)

Losing out on the magic phase may seem like a big thing but hey at least you can hit stuff further that 12 inches away.

(now don't lynch me I'm only trying to speak for those to small to stand up for themselves)

 

[liath]

Dwarves also don't have to pass a leadership to march.

The do suffer a -1 to pursue/flee though.

 

[troubled_joe]

Thanks for the replies everyone, definitely some food for thought. I haven't decided one way or the other yet as I don't need to until I'm completely happy with the Skaven army I have (well... until I'm mostly happy with them!) - I have read both army books now though and will pick up some test models from each army at some point. When the time comes I shall no doubt be revisiting this thread!

 

[Lingbei]

You should collect the army that appeals to you most. There is going to be no point in you collecting one of the armies if they don't suit how you like to play, or if you hate the look of the miniatures, cause you won't want to collect them in the end.

 

[Chaos_Bane]

previous post are right magic is so much better as not only do you have the power but you can recover your wounds also i know there not much but if you are lacking in artillery you can always throw in a teradon squad or even a stegy with howda