Skellies: who's using what. - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    El Paso TX
    Posts
    549
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputation
    74 (x2)

    Skellies: who's using what.

    With the new TK, who is using what on their skellies? Warriors in particular. Sword and board? Spears? What's been working best for you?


  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Son of LO Marnepup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tokyo
    Age
    37
    Posts
    3,532
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    298 (x8)

    Mathhammer suggests that anything other than sword'n'board or bows is idiotic...the only excuse for taking light armor or shields is not having enough models for the size of game you're intending to play.

    I'd say blocks of at least 40, preferably 50 or even 60, for the melee skellies, and 15-20 bowmen for liche bunkers. I've already converted 30 of my 60 bowmen to sword and shield (I'll have two foot liches to protect, they'll each get 15 bowmen as an escort), and I intend to build ~70 more sword and shield skellies to make two blocks of 50, each of which will have an armored prince, and probably a naked 'tect, as well.
    IG since 1999 __ DA since 2002 __ Tau since 2005 __ SoB since 2007
    Brets 1997-1999 __ TK since 2009 __ Empire since 2010

  4. #3
    Senior Member Cheetahfurry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Age
    34
    Posts
    597
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    25 (x2)

    I run 62 for the first 1000 points then 42 more per 1000 after that.

    Basic setup is:

    42 with sword/board and full command in a 6*7 (or 7*6) pattern with a tomb prince attached to make them tougher and much better.
    20 Archers in a standard 5*4 when in combat and 10*2 when outside of it. I also keep my Heirophant in this unit so I tend to try to keep them out of close combat. If I have the points I add a full command but I tend not to waste the 30 points on a small ranged unit.

    The next 1000 points I add 1 unit of skeletons at the same 42 which I find to be a good number. In this unit I do not put a tomb prince but I do have a full command.

    I always run the Skeleton blocks in the center of the army setup and the archers on the right or left covered on the flank by a unit of chariots as I try to keep the Heirophant safe.

  5. #4
    Senior Member Undivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    312
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    9 (x1)

    Archers all the way i have 2 units one of 30 and on of 20-25 with banner and musician i try and smite the 30 with magic just for a bit of extra punch. Archers also cause damage all 6 turns of the game wether there in combat or not and as tomb kings are a fairly defensive army its makes the enemy come to you which is what you want. (Y)

    Sword and board are still utter garbage so i don't bother with them. Making them WS5 still makes them pretty pants cos there S3 T3 and I2 yes the statline of a combat god =P
    I see no point in sword and board at all there not even praticularly good at tarpitting considering they basicly take double combat wounds =/ Just no point in wasting points on them.

  6. #5
    Senior Member Cheetahfurry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Age
    34
    Posts
    597
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    25 (x2)

    I have to say I disagee with Undivided. Archers are alright but the mainstay of an army is a sponge unit and skeletons are a great sponge unit. S3 T3 is the average in the game which means for 4 points you will have a unit that will match the stats of most groups it comes against but with a WS5 they will have the advantage. At only 4 points each you can have a large unit to hold the enemy while your stronger units hit them from the sides. A sponge unit is needed in every army and at 4 points it's hard to beat. Plus they are unbreakable which means you can hold the enemy until the unit is destroyed which is priceless. Skeletons are not about damage, they are about surviving as your meaner units take things down. Nothing is meaner then a 250 point unit holding up a 400 point unit for the whole game and allowing things like chariots to charge in to the side of them.

    But we each have our own playstyle. I had thought about ranged Tomb Kings, so no hate todwards undivided :-D
    Last edited by Cheetahfurry; May 25th, 2011 at 14:33.

  7. #6
    Son of LO Marnepup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tokyo
    Age
    37
    Posts
    3,532
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    298 (x8)

    Quote Originally Posted by Undivided View Post
    tomb kings are a fairly defensive army
    They don't have to be...in the old book, yes, but now? There are so many more agressive options than a gunline.

    Quote Originally Posted by Undivided View Post
    I see no point in sword and board at all there not even praticularly good at tarpitting considering they basicly take double combat wounds
    That's a bit of a distortion. That only happens when you cause zero damage to the enemy and static CR is even on both sides...which is pretty rare. Far more often, even when you lose combat, it'll be by a few points, so you take a few points of crumble...rarely is that going to be even 50% more wounds, let alone 100% more, when you consider WS5 (And you're a fool if you don't put a king or prince in each block of melee skittles...and one with some good armor, so he survives long enough for I2 to arrive.) On average, you will still lose combat, but only by a little, and dropping a fistful of models or less is a small price to pay for having ZERO risk of running away.
    IG since 1999 __ DA since 2002 __ Tau since 2005 __ SoB since 2007
    Brets 1997-1999 __ TK since 2009 __ Empire since 2010

  8. #7
    Senior Member Undivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    312
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    9 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by Marnepup View Post
    That's a bit of a distortion. That only happens when you cause zero damage to the enemy and static CR is even on both sides...which is pretty rare. Far more often, even when you lose combat, it'll be by a few points, so you take a few points of crumble...rarely is that going to be even 50% more wounds, let alone 100% more, when you consider WS5 (And you're a fool if you don't put a king or prince in each block of melee skittles...and one with some good armor, so he survives long enough for I2 to arrive.) On average, you will still lose combat, but only by a little, and dropping a fistful of models or less is a small price to pay for having ZERO risk of running away.
    In my opinion i don't want to be taking combat troops that lose combats tbh not a good mentalilty to be in! =P Still the old i can cause damage for 6 turns rather than the i can cause damage for 3 turns arguement still stands. I disagree about not being defensive we can't move dude i played dwarfs today and just crawled towards him 4" a turn its not impressive =/ Means you can't easily get in the postions you want to be in just a lot more effort than it needs to be. I also find when i play defensive people make mistakes i can easily captalise on. =P My army does have combat troops and if does have some "fast" stuff just its still so slow (i mean flying only 10 is still a bit of a pain) as you just can't really on magic (not this new fangled magic anyway =P) to get you anywhere.

    And i like shooting =P

  9. #8
    Senior Member Cheetahfurry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Age
    34
    Posts
    597
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    25 (x2)

    I don't know why everyone assumes they will lose. Look at all of the armies that have their base troops Str 3/T3. Humans (All factions), orcs are onlys str 3, dwarves str 3, T4 but less WS. They are also only 4 points a model. Vampire counts, everyone but Orge Kingdoms and lizardmen are standard of 3's. So this argument they are going to lose is incorrect as far as I see it. Plus the unit is a cheap and great mainstay that can't break. 1 win is all we need while they need to wipe the whole unit.

  10. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    190
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    22 (x1)

    The main problem i see with skellies is that they are too slow to be used offensively. If used defensivly then i cann see them being effective, but if required to crawl up to the opponent at 4inches a turn, its just not going to happen. That is the only reason i agree with undivided, i dont see sword'n'board skellies as worth it when archers can do more, as well as fight in combat, they have the same stat line afterall.
    Cheers,
    Billy

  11. #10
    Senior Member Cheetahfurry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Age
    34
    Posts
    597
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    25 (x2)

    The problem is they are 50% more points per archer and only hit 1/3 of the time so assuming you don't move you get 4 hits and against unamored t3 you get 2 wounds which means in 6 rounds you get a total of 12 wounds assuming no armor saves. If your going against most armies that 240 points to cause 132 points worth of wounds (Assuming they are the same cost)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts