7th Ed. "Trashy" 2250 lizardmen list, needs critisizm

[Samick]

So this is pretty much a standard lizardmen list as far as I can tell but with a nice amount of flexibility to it.

Lord:
Slann: 510
(BSB, warbanner, focused rumination, focus of mystery, becalming cogitation, cupped hands, bane head, scroll)

Heroes:

Skink priest: 430
(lvl 2, EotG, Scroll, plaque of Tepok)

Scar-vet: 124
(LA, GW, shield, charm of the jaguar)

Core:

x17 saurus warriors: 216
(standard, spears)

(3) x10 skink skirmishers: 70 each

Special:

x16 Temple guard: 270

x5 COR: 175

x3 terradon riders: 90

x5 chameleon skinks: 60

Rare:

(2) x1 salamander: 80 each

Total: 2245

PD: 9(+slann's free)

DD: 6

So with only 3 units coming out to be over 200 points, I have a lot of flexible, low cost,"trash" skirmisher units to get into my opponents way. But the expensive units I do have really pack a punch when I get them into fights on my terms.

C+C plz

 

[Xlcontiqu]

If you want flexibility, I would really take out the Temple Guard. As good as they are at protecting the Slann, they put everything in one unit and they do not provide a good LOS for the Slann, limiting him to their LOS. I would also add some ranked skinks to allow for more redirecting. Also, drop the Hands on the Slann. Too expensive for their point cost, and their rules are very confusing. Plus, they really do not work that well. Everything else looks pretty good. And if you do drop the TG, take the Warbanner of the Slann.

 

[Samick]

I've had mixed results with taking a lone slann. It's fun and challenging but I feel that the only way to keep a competitive edge with it is to take two engines, but I want to stray away from that. With no TG I would only have 1 anvil (the saurus) and they are not the most reliable anvil ever.

 

[Xlcontiqu]

Temple Guard are not really that good of an unit for their point cost. They can not reliably break any other elite units and usually die just as quick as Saurus. I would recommend two units of Saurus instead of the unit of TG and Saurus.

 

[SiegeCommander]

Temple Guard are not really that good of an unit for their point cost. They can not reliably break any other elite units and usually die just as quick as Saurus. I would recommend two units of Saurus instead of the unit of TG and Saurus.

Dunno what you're talking about man. Temple guard are incredibly resilient with their base 3+ armor save and 2+ in cc with hw & shield, not to mention being stubborn with a slann. As far as combat goes they are saurus with 1 better WS and the ability to take magic banners and halberds. So they are no slouch when it comes to dealing damage and taking it.

And as far as TG limiting line of sight that is wrong. A lone slann functions as a monster meaning his los is actually much narrower than say a slann in a TG unit, not to mention the slann in the TG unit gets large target los.

 

[Xlcontiqu]

I have to disagree with both your points.

Temple Guard, while resilient cannot stand up to ASF Black Guard, Chosen, etc. There 2+ in close combat is good, but that assumes you are not using their halberds, which suddenly bring them to a 4+ AS. They may fight to the last man, but in the end they are overpriced for what they do. And being Movement 4 means that they may get flanked quickly, especially with very little other things in the army. I will admit that they are a good unit, and I have used them before to great success, but I also find them too limiting and overpriced. And if they do happen to break and are caught, you might lose half of the points in your army. They may fit your playing style and can be used to great effect, but I find them to be too overpriced and make the game much less interesting.

The lone Slann does not require the whole unit to turn to face a potential target. He can also just sit back and blast away the opponent's army, while letting the combat blocks get in and attack. The Slann can be put out of the way, and cannot deal with as many threats when in Temple Guard.

 

[Samick]

I actually feel that a slann is MUCH more safe inside a unit of TG than outside. And without the ability to cast as a large target, the slann becomes a lot less effective as far as using screening and cover goes. But I do see credibility in the lone slann tactic. I just feel that with this list being made up of so many flimsy yet flexible units, I need the TG as a solid anchor to hold my line to.

 

[Xlcontiqu]

With your list, I would advocate for a lone Slann even more. Since you lack any staying power, you Temple Guard can be easily surrounded and flanked. A lone Slann is more mobile and flexible, so it is much easier to keep him safe and that way not all your eggs are in one basket. With careful redirecters you can keep the Temple Guard from being flanked, but it is much easier to keep a mobile army alive.

 

[Samick]

Hmmm, so I was thinking about this list and decided that after having painted and based 20 skinks, I did not want to paint 10 more on top of 5 camo skinks so I re adjusted the list but kept with the trashy theme

Lord:
Slann: 485
(BSB, focused rumination, focus of mystery, becalming cogitation, cupped hands, bane head, scroll)

Heroes:

Skink priest: 430
(lvl 2, EotG, Scroll, plaque of Tepok)

Scar-vet: 145
(LA, cold one, burning blade, enchanted shield)

Core:

x17 saurus warriors: 234
(FC, spears)

(2) x10 skink skirmishers: 70 each

Special:

x16 Temple guard: 295
(banner, warbanner)

x5 COR: 175

(2) x3 terradon riders: 90 each

Rare:

(2) x1 salamander: 80 each

Total: 2244

PD: 9(+slann's free)

DD: 6

My magic did not change much, I just lost that jaguar bound spell but my scar vet now serves to baby sit my saurus warriors. I took out a unit of skink skirms and the camo skinks and added in another terradon unit. So now I have 1 less trash unit and my saurus warriors are now a superb fighting block.