Skink v Saurus who dominates?

That Skinks cannot win by themselves depends on the enemy and on the list you're playing. For in a Red Host you've got those Redcrested Skinks who aren't that terrible fighters. But then, I know those aren't the Skinks discussed here.

I do believe you can win using only one of the both. There I think that playing without Saurus has more chance of winning than playing without Skinks.
Still I believe that using both of them in support of each other yields the best results. In that I heartily agree with all those above.

Finally I want to comment on one thing LG said, that Saurus are slow. It wrongs them to say that they are slow. True, they are slower than the other Lizardmen, but compared to the rest of WHFB they have an average speed. And the Lizardmen aren't an army on their own (well, fluffwise they are but in-game they aren't). They are like any army one that fights his opponent and is thus compared with them. So IMO one can better say that Saurus speed is average and that the rest of the army is just downright fast. The Saurus don't lag behind the rest of the army, no, the rest of the army has the required speed to support and flank the Saurus.
Of course if you're bound on having the whole army moving at M6, then Saurus just don't fit in your strategy. That doesn't make them irrelevant. (this last is aimed at stonehambey )


Tai'shar

I was taking comparitively to skinks and other units in the army, but yes they are considered average speed.

i also disagree on about the skinks being better alone than saurus. This does of course depend on the rest of your army, but the skinks by themselves aren't going to be able to win the game. you would hardly get hurt, exept from magic, and other auto hit ranged weapons. Also skirmishing combat units such as beast herds. But the skinks by themselves wouldn't do very much in return. If you had sallys +other things like skink priests and the like to increase your ranged potential then you have a good chance of winning.

but without consideration to the rest of your list, the saurus can inflict enough damage on their own while staying alive quite proficiently. this allows them to outperform the skinks, alone that is. Now, as i said with the skinks, other units could increase the saurus's killyness. such as krox, scor, ect. hitting on the flank with extra power. this is why i think saurus are better alone.

but then of course if you use saurus and skinks you have the best combination. Even in this team, I think the saurus still play the main role while the skinks aid them.

I don't know if anyone disagrees that a combination is best, but if you do i would like to hear your reasons and oppinions about it.

I haven't been a member of this site long, but it seems that in expressing my opinion in other threads i have been on the recieving end of a number of what i feel are quite forceful disagreements, this is especially disconcerting when a group of people pretty much tell me the same thing.

Click to expand...

Oh don't get me wrong. I'm just expressing my opinion on the matter and certainly respect yours. From the way you talk it seems like you have your experience with Lizzies and I respect that too. It's just that we disagree on the matter. And as this is also a discussion forum I just display my opinion.
I'm sure hte others feel the same about it. Know that you're most welcome!
Of course this goes for ker4 too. And ker, that you're inexperienced doesn't mean that you're wrong. Different things work for different people, whether you are experienced or not.

I realise that it is quite a bold statemant to totally negate a core choice of an army, but that is what i think, it seems that some people have difficulties with that, why does it work some people up so much?:wacko:

Click to expand...

Yes it is a bold statement. And that potentially makes for interesting discussions. It 'works people up' 'cause they're interested in the subject and they want to know why you think what you think and they want to show their opinion on the matter. Don't think wrong of it.

(Araith I understand what you are saying, but you'll never convince me buddy!

Click to expand...

I can always try.

Back on topic,
Skinks are indeed more difficult to face for certain opponents. But I find it also more difficult to face them due to Skink fragility.

It is my opinion that, for what they do in terms of their points value (aquatic, speed, poison, skirmish...) there is no reason to ever justify fielding saurus over skinks (or even jungle swarms)

Click to expand...

That depends on your style. In 40k and with the WE you have to depend on speed, flexibility and killing power. But in WHFB (in most armies at least) CR is a good method of winning battles. And for CR battles Saurus are just more suited than Skinks.
Plus you'll always have it your way. Your opponents will also fight a CR battle thus you don't have to be worried things will go completely the way you don't want it. Get into the thick of it and outslug the enemy, that's one thing the Saurus are good at. Especially when supported by special and rare units. Saurus are just unusually potent CR units, CR units which can win combats both by static CR and by racking up kills.


Tai'shar