• 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. Heavens + more passive play?

Skink

Beyonder

New Member
Messages
29
Likes Received
0
Trophy Points
0
I am wondering how valid my playstyle of the last few games is (generally vs warriors/ogres/vampires/high elves, would not apply vs dwarves/empire/?). The thought behind it is that, while I generally play a bit agressive, I notice that A) high magic isnt cutting it (mainly vs highly armored units/multiple wound stuff), and B) I generally play quite a bit agressive, but notice that my positioning lacks because of it and I cannot optimally use my redirectors. Comments and thoughts are appreciated.


My idea was to play a bit more passive (@ 2k pts, but would apply to 2.4k too) with a lvl 4 slaan with Heavens, and a lvl 2 with beasts. I try to position my temple guard (20) and Saurus warriors (30) side by side with the bastilodon in the center of it. They always slightly point towards each other that if any is charged, the other can flank. On the side/front I have my redirectors (2xskink skirmishers) and an ancient stegadon/scar vet. Somewhere behind enemy lines or in front is a unit of 7x skirmish scout elites too.

This way I feel that I can, against most armies, make them come to me, while I shoot and magic them down and prevent my magic from doing much as I get into combat. The S5/S6 hits really help me a lot. Moreover, vs dwarves and empire it would be AWESOME to have access to comet.

My worries are the lack of magical buffs/debuffs though, and I am not convinced yet. Just wondering what people here would think. Im just increasingly unhappy with high magic :(
 
I usually play my lizardmen defensively as I think that is what the army is best at. The games were I have rushed against the enemy usually ends in me getting massacred
 
Beyonder said:
My worries are the lack of magical buffs/debuffs though, and I am not convinced yet.:(

Iceshard Blizzard, Harmonic Convergence, Curse of the Midnight Wind.
 
Scalenex said:
Beyonder said:
My worries are the lack of magical buffs/debuffs though, and I am not convinced yet.:(

Iceshard Blizzard, Harmonic Convergence, Curse of the Midnight Wind.

yes this buff is very good but i prefer to have tetto eko to be sure that i will have them and a slann for some direct damage or some other lore :P
 
arcabis said:
Scalenex said:
Beyonder said:
My worries are the lack of magical buffs/debuffs though, and I am not convinced yet.:(

Iceshard Blizzard, Harmonic Convergence, Curse of the Midnight Wind.

yes this buff is very good but i prefer to have tetto eko to be sure that i will have them and a slann for some direct damage or some other lore :P

Cheaper to take a level 2 and a Slaan. Have the level 2 generate 1st, so the slaan gets the bulk of the good stuff.
 
If you want to sit back and shoot magic, you could try Lore of Fire.
 
I play defensive with my Kroak TG/Saurus blocks but offensive with everything else. I run Flamers, Rippers, and Skirmishers and my goal is for all those units to widdle the enemy down... and die... before they get to me. Come turn 5 you'll see CC with my big blocks and if I've done my job right you're going to have lost ALOT of units by the time you face them.
 
eppe said:
.... I run FLAMERS, Rippers, and Skirmishers ....

think you are taking units from a different army book and sneaking them into a lizardmen list ;)
 
Rhodium said:
eppe said:
.... I run FLAMERS, Rippers, and Skirmishers ....

think you are taking units from a different army book and sneaking them into a lizardmen list ;)

Salamanders
 
My problem is mostly tough stuff though, and that either has a ward save vs fire and/or is not too bothered by S4 hits. So I dont like fire as much :E
 
Back
Top