• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

8th Ed. Question from a newbie - Skinks or Saurus

P
Skink

popeslob

New Member
Messages
22
Likes Received
0
Trophy Points
0
Hey guys,

Havent played Lizardmen since the 6th Edition of WHFB but am getting back into it now. Am still not completely up to date on 8th Ed rules, am still working my way through the tome that is the rulebook! Back when I used to play it was a no brainer between Skinks and Saurus - Saurus were some of the best (non-elite) infantry in the game and Skinks were glorified shields for better units. Now, however, I keep reading about how Skinks will "run rings around pretty much anything", or words to that effect. Can someone explain what people mean by this?

I suppose what I am really asking is what is the best way to use Skinks these days? Any help would be appreciated!

Thanks!
 
they do not really compete with each other. you should include both!

Saurus will beat the crap out of any non-elite infantry. They are not the best infantry in the game (any longer) but they are very very good for their points.

skinks run around and shoot. they are super fast and super annoying.

skink cohorts are a different deal. they are really REALLY bad at fighting, and they arent very cheap either. BUT this doesnt mean that you should never use them. a large unit (50+) 5 wide can be used to tarpit most things. add 2-3 kroxigors and you have a very unique unit. there are numerous threads about them around here. check em out. i for one do not think that they are worth it in an all commers list, but they have some very interesting uses.
 
In order to be charged a unit has to be in the units 45 degree arch. Skirmishers can march and shoot and have a high move speed. So they can march around wide units staying out of charge range and still be able to shoot. Wider units spend more to wheel. If you can get a good 250piont unit with a 100 pt hero in it to chase your skinks for a few turns its pretty awesome. But if they have a nice line or tend to run smaller units and no hordes, or simply ignore the skinks, it doesnt work out. All it really takes is any other unit to come in beside theirs to end the maddness and trap the skinks. But if the enemy does anything but ignore the skinks, they pretty much are worth the pionts. But you still need a core to your army. You could use skrox if you want all skinks. But the saurus have a place in the lizardmen army. I'd feel weak without them. They are still really good infintry with high toughness high armor and 2 attacks. Seems like not much has changed. Skinks still make awesome shields too. There is another thread about someone running 50 skinks in a block. You should check it out. Generally saurus still form the core rank and file troops. But not always. We have options.
 
Think I may have given the wrong impression - I absolutely love Saurus! To the point that I used to take very few Skinks, and even then only as shields for the Kroxigor. It would seem Skinks have gotten more useful as the Saurus have been hurt by the new Initiative rules!

From what I understand, the emphasis has been put on huge blocks of infantry in the 8th Ed which seems strange to me. I used to take 2 blocks of 16 Saurus and they could deal with pretty much anything. Now it looks as though people are having to take huge (25+) blocks of Saurus just to have a decent core to their army. This is probably old news to most people, but having only just come back to WH I am finding the changes strange!

Anyways, thanks for the help, I will put together a sample army list soon and then post it on the relevant board and see what people think!
 
Saurus have been helped by the new intiative rules. With the new rule that back ranks casualties well step up to replace the fallen and still get to attack, attacking first is less important than in past editions.
 
A balanced list with a bit of everything is usually best.
 
just as has been said, mixing is good. do NOT be fooled by the "initiative rules" to believe that skunks are suddenly better than sauruses at fighting. they do not even come close, even if you count point for point.
 
skinks are good on their home turf shooting things with blowpipes or javelins while skimishing

saurus's home turf is being solid infantry which when supported (magic, stegadons and or other things into the flank of the enemy unit) are a match for anyone

at 2000 points i find 30 saurus 5 wide 6 deep and 2*10 skink skimishers are the core i need and that lets me get on with the rest of the army which i tune to the foe.

temple guard with slann after a few battles is growing on me, cold one cav are a mixed bag either they hit and charge through getting involved in mutiple combats in a turn or they die horribly

on the other hand chameleon skinks haven't let me down, 2 giants killed in their first battle is probably the best they have done.
 
In my personal opinion I would say 75:25 towards skink skirmishers just because I prefer to play a shotting game and move the enemy were I want them to be and use my Saurus and cavalry to charge them when I have them. I use 16 Saurus warriors and 40 skink skirmishers (and 8 cold ones) which generally works well
 
Holy crap! That is a different game completely. When I read that line about focus being put on huge blocks in 8th, I was thinking no way! Hordes aren't that good. Then I read on and saw you played a 16block and 25+ is huge. Having only played 8th edition, I guess our views of "huge blocks" is way different. To me 20 saurus is tiny. I can't bring myself to put less than 25 in a unit in games over 1000pts.

But I am posting because I'm confused about a few things. Saurus having an initiative of 1, I don't see how making that number less important made them worse. At least I think in 8th the number matters less. I don't know the rules of 7th and before too well. But I think the rule that hurt the saurus in 8th was the supporting attacks rule. Saurus having 1 attack in supporting ranks rather than two made them worse because they went from a ratio of 2:1 to 3:2 attacks per a 5 wide unit vs 5 wide unit.

Also that 16 saurus unit made me wonder about lists in prior editions. Was it typical to run many tiny units? I mean was the standard list size still 2400-2500pts? Then I was thinking that kind of frontage made more attacks. So did that make games faster? Maybe longer due to many more moves and combats. And not losing 30 models when a unit flees in the first round of combat. Also make the breaking of a unit less important considering you only lost a few more. So leadership is now way more important. Initiative is way less important. Fear lost most of it's kick. Always strikes first isn't as good. Seems like a big jump in game style from 7th to 8th. I don't understand how they could make stats and abilities change so much in one edition and assume that balance would be maintained without printing all new army books the day it is released.
 
It use to be that whoever charged got to attack first. There was no stepping up, so anything killed didn't get to hit back. It was also only the front rank, no supporting attacks unless spears were there. VERY different. There was also no steadfast rule. Cav is no longer king because of it!
 
DanBot said:
Always strikes first isn't as good.
Click to expand...

ASF is better. If you have ASF and a higher intiative than your opponent you can reroll failed to hit rolls! Without that new rule in 8th, the High Elves would probably be the weakest army available. Now they are mid tier (first tier with Teclis but that's another story).
 
i wouldnt say its better or worse. it is DIFFERENT. you sure cause more damage due to it now, but it has pretty much no defensive benefits, which was its only real purpose in last edition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top