7th Ed. Need some help vs. Warriors of Chaos - 500pts

[thesecondman]

No contradiction apparent. By taking enough skink skirmishers you should be able to outnumber them quite easily.
I figured that since he already had saurus warriors and still had to make a post asking for help not losing, that they werent performing well enough. Does that make sense? If they were Saurus warriors were working then he would not have been losing, and we wouldn't be posting.

2 skink priests are expensive, but please note that he has paid almost the same amount of points on ONE caster, chaos casters being more expensive (if only a little). Also, the Scar vet with a great weapon is a good idea (yes, i know you can't get both).

As for the powergamer comment, fair enough. Cohorts are classy and cute, take em if you want. They die like fiends most of the time, but they are legitimate as "flee reaction" bait and as deployments.

Additionally, I'm not sure how the OP is having trouble with an army with 2 units of block troops with all the mobility that lizardmen can afford their player. Perhaps using the "flee" charge reaction more may help. You shoudn't really ever need to get in combat with either units, unless its a deliberate bait to draw the opponents units into compromising positions.

Salamanders are better *in this case* than razordons because they have a flame template (good for side-flaming block units), as well as an improved armor save modifier (improvement againt chaos warriors with shields). Mathematically, as long as player gets a good flame template off, you'll do more damage. This is why i said what i said. A razordon standing and shooting has a 1 in 3 chance of misfiring. The unit is designed to destroy fast cavalry, skirmishers or units with low toughness/armor. Chaos warriors have none of these qualities.

Feel free to counter against my re-iterated arguament.

 

[Caneghem]

Feel free to counter against my re-iterated arguament.

I'm not entirely sure what argument you are making, or what type of advice you are trying to give. I can only suspect you are an agent of chaos, working to undermine upcoming Lizardmen generals?

Razordons "almost always" better than Salamanders?

Skink cohorts shouldn't be taken?

I'd like to see a bit more support for such radical departures from common sense... there are several articles on this site that you would need to "counter" before you can really make these claims. Or you can just provide a bit more evidence. Not saying the majority opinion is necessarily right, but if you are tapping some hidden secrets we'd like to know what they are.

 

[Barotok]

I'm still confused. Have you played games against a list like this?

 

[thesecondman]

Yes, in this specific case Salamanders are better than Razordons. I meant (to be even clearer) that I would take Razordons over Salamanders normally in a tournament list, but not here.

Skink cohorts are only useful as throw-away units, and they serve that purpose ok, but skirmishers are better (because they actually do stuff occasionally as well as being cannon fodder). They are terrible in combat, and if you put a kroxigor in the unit they get too expensive to take them. I am still unable to warrant taking them when we can already get an intensely badass infantry unit, that being Saurus with spears. However, they are very cute and funky. So, whatever. You can still win games with some in your army. The points can juse be spent on better things.