Are lizardmen overpowered?
Surely a lizardmen player has everything to wish for,
Cool units strong choices but this is something new.
I have heard that the lizardmen are overpowered maybe not much but still,.
First I said no way that ain't true.
But the more I think of it, the more I must say Lizardmen are overpowered.
Do they even have a weakspot?

reasons why lizardmen could be overpowered
The power of spawnings
The sturdiness of Saurus warriors
The easy arrow catching cheapness of Skinks
The flank defenders named Jungle Swarms
The awesome blow my cav away strenght of Kroxigors
The mage taking speed of Terradons
The power of there hereos

I would that that the actual Lizardmen list per se is not overpowered at all but it is quite easy (and somewhat tempting) to make a seriously cheddar army with it.

EDIT: I couldn't really give you any examples offhand, I suppose, but I'll post them if I think of any.

Any army list can be abused, I've never noticed anything wrong with lizzies.

Sure, they have lots of variety, but that isn't gamebreaking alone. They have very good core units and characters, but their special and rare slots seem relatively underused. This leaves them with an army of mostly skinks and saurus: skinks are weak in combat, saurus vulnerable to flanking. In the end the player has to balance these weaknesses, and while so much is in the player's hands (rather than the models going it alone), I wouldn't say they are overpowered.

They are one of the big 4 IMO.

Try this for tasters-
2nd Gen, full magic kit +bsb
Skink lvl 2
Jag Saurus Scar Vet
3*10 skinks
4 kroxs
2*3 terradons
3 sallies

And not many friends left!

They can play warhammer like alot of races play 40k.

I'd say it is the exact opposite. It's a very powerful list, but one that is very well balanced and therefore difficult to make into a cheesy list.

(Because nobody is prepared to paint 200 skinks, even if that option exists. They're not like goblins, they're freakin' awkward models to paint.)

And I doubt anyone is prepared to spend enough money to buy THAT many Skinks...

But when it comes to cost, Goblins must be even worse.

No army is beard or unfair as a rule, it's is the army list and the player who makes it beardy. I would happoly play a cheesy or unfair army if the player was nice, Any army can be unfair regardless of race.

A few examples which come to mind would be:

Chaos Chosen Army
High/ Dark elf Shooty army
Skaven Skyre Army

but as before it is the players who make armies sad, also you can always just say you dont want to play the army becuase it's stupid, that isnt being rude its just not going to be a fun game so yeah.

Apoligies if i have rambled a bit ^_^

Dan

I voted no. I am opposed to dubbing any army "cheesy," and any army list for that matter. Though I think certain extremes take the fun out of the game, in general powergaming doesn't bother me. Some people only take pleasure in winning. That's fine with me. Professional atheletes don't say, "hey, winning's not really important, lets just go out and have fun!" So powergaming may not be my way, but its still a mindset I understand.

Boy, and farsight thought he rambled....

You guys would both be very surprised. In fact I can't belive you would say that, seeing as how goblin/skaven armies routinely have that many models.

Dude like a voted yes afcourse
What is just bad about them
They have the best core warrior ever and when you think of it it isn't very expensive.
I also have some serious problems with loosing never lost till now
We have a seriously good core
The strongest mage of the game
Above average fight heroes and lords
And the rares or special aren't bad either
And we have the classic cold blooded rule
What is the seriously weak weak spot of lizardmen

And with overpowered I don't mean you auto win
Just that they are a bit better then the rest not much
You can have a overpowered army and have lost always it can

You know what is remarkable? that the saurus warriors first costed 14 points and now 12 with the same abilities! 2 points different is big on a standard warrior
What is the thing that could seriously whoop or ass I can't find one

Btw that thing about that you are going to deploy to many skinks and saurus is your problem the flanks are easily protected by Jungle swarms or Kroxigors al units have there own purpose make sure that they are busy with there purpose don't let cavalry takers take own units and unit takers cavalry get every unit once and you almost auto win

P.S. Think I am falling in love with some characters

Umm...I think there is a reason that lizardmen players lose about as much as other armies.

If that was true, don't you think every tournament winner would be lizardmen? Funny how I can't seem to find them in the top of most tournaments...

Lizardmen are a very solid army, to be sure. No arguments there. But they aren't particularly fast, they don't have any kind of good heavy-cav or long range shooting, the only way to get a level 4 mage is to spend a huge amount of points, and for a great magical army, they don't have a personal spell list (though they can access all of the lores on the BRB). The best lores, IMHO, are High Magic, Necromancy, and Slannesh, all of which the Slann lack access to. A SAD army could match up very well against an army based around saurus. Oh, and they don't have a big flying creature of death, which most armies do. Carnasaurs are really cool, but I havn't found them that effective, as they aren't too hard to take down with magic and shooting. Griffons, Manitcores, Dragons, Wyvverns, and the like can all fly around, get behind lines, and use cover to protect themselves.

Again, I'm not saying lizardmen aren't one of the harder armies out there, I'm just saying they are certainly not overpowered. They have some poor units/characters (skink chiefs, chameleon skins and saurus cav come to mind) and lack any kind of fast cav also. Any kind of elf army can outpace them, and often come close to measuring up to them in magic potential. They can't build an effective horde, either. At least I've never seen one.

Lizardmen also lose out on synergy between units. In most other armies, you will have a selection of different units to fill each strategic role: in Lizard armies, there is generally only one. Where Empire has spearmen, halberdiers, free company, and greatswords, or where Orcs have common orcs, savage orcs, big 'uns and black orcs, or where High Elves have spearmen, White Lions, Phoenix Guard and swordmasters, we have Saurus, and that's it unless you fork out for a Slann. The reason the Saurus Warrior is so cheap for his abilities is because he has to field every situation that requires infantry: we don't have the luxury of having differently adapted troop types for different roles, we just have to use our one infantry unit to do everything. Similarly, we only have one unit of expendable grunts, we only have one unit of cavalry, we only have one dedicated missile unit, we only have one unit of Ogre-types, we only have one monster/chariot: while on paper the weaknesses of each of these units look minor, in reality, the fact that they have to cover so many more situations than their more specialised counterparts makes them equally vulnerable. If you've ever tried to fight off an elven or a Chaotic infantry line with one of Saurus, or to engage one of the many light speed armies with a Skink force, you'll know what I mean - we just don't have the same variety within the various strategic slots that other armies do, and while we are able to cover all the phases quite well, we are less adaptable to the variations within the phases.

The humble Saurus is the one who loses out most on all this. The same unit has to slog it out with practically every other infantry type in the game, from gnoblars to Chosen. At the low end of the spectrum, where a same-sized unit of spearmen would have achieved something against a unit of say, Common Goblins, the Saurus unit has just wasted its time chewing through a far less expensive enemy. At the high end, the Saurus unit is on its own: unless the enemy opens up a flank or another opportunity to get some of the casualty specialists in (Stegadons, Kroxigor), our medium-to-heavy infantry unit has to square off against enemies that will utterly brutalise them, because we don't have anything by way of a truly elite foot soldier.

Finally, it's worth mentioning that we have some paper weaknesses as well:
1. Initiative. Lizardmen fare poorly in protracted combats, because all our combat troops have very sucky initiative. It's why I'm starting a Skaven army... initiative five!
2. Speed. The only unit capable of getting above the cavalry movement threshold is generally a liability. While we're not slow, we can't get fast either: our speed is decidedly middling, and as a result, cavalry-heavy enemies, particularly those with fast cavalry or high-charge-ranged chariots, can give us a painful time. This also shows when we get to combat: if you're using Saurus at all, you have to charge with them first, and your flankers second, in order to actually get the flank, but the flankers are the ones with the long charge ranges. Saurii actually find it very difficult to get charges on anyone, because the enemy knows they need to engage, and can reliably outmanouvre them.
3. Expense. Lizardman armies are almost invariably outnumbered, because we rely on high-points units to achieve anything... we have no cheap units that are able to engage in full combat, as you will find in most other armies. When most of our combat troops rely on flank charges to maximise their effectiveness, this can be one of our biggest weaknesses, as the enemy can always present a broad front and deny you the opportunity to get around their sides.

It would be better if Saurus could, just like Chaos Warriors or Orcs, have access to a good choice of equipment and upgrades to fit several combat roles. For example, you could have a solid defensive block with spears or a hard-hitting unit with great weapons. Or, if you could upgrade one unit in your army to have better stats (like Chosen Chaos Warriors or Orc Big'Uns).

Aye. They tried to do that with Spawnings, but as far as I'm concerned, only two of them really work: Quetzl and Tlazcotl. Neither of those really change the unit's role either, they just make it more durable.

What I'd personally like to see would be TG available independently of a Slann. That would make Lizard combat lines a lot more feasible and fun... I think you'd see less of the old Skink Skirmish Hordes that way.

Kual Anduer
That is just foolisch listen to the entire sentence
If you're army is overpowerd it doesn't mean that you auto win
You can be just a bad commander or not see the purpose of something and loose by that.

I agree that with lizardmen you have one choice,
but is that one not good (enough)?
Id rather have one choice that works then 10 that are horrible
Why lizardmen don't win tournaments
There aren't very much people that play lizardmen I guess
Or they aren't they aren't really good players
They still have got to get used with the new lizardmen
Shall I name some more reasons

We don't have many choices but does that mean that we are bad?
Against cavalry we can use Kroxigors and jungle swarms
Against enemy blocks we have our superior blocks of (spawned saurus)
Against enemy mages we have terradons and our Slann
Against numbers we have Salamanders
Against missles we have Skinks
There isn't a gap if you balance them wel you should always win

Lizardmen do place highly in tournaments. No-one is denying they are a strong army. We are simply pointing out that they are not necessarily overpowered, and that they do have weaknesses.

Furthermore, all those reasons are terrible, and you have no more. Lizardmen are a very popular army. Statistically, the chances that all Lizardmen players are poor players are minute. And lizardmen have been out for I think at least two years now. Wood Elves are already placing highly in tournament listings: if Lizardman players couldn't adapt in that time, then we would all have to be morons.

That betrays a complete misunderstanding of what we've all been saying, plus a poor knowledge of the game. If I balance my army well, and I run up against a full cav army, then I will be penalised because I will not have as many Krox or Swarms as they have cavalry. More importantly, my Krox and Swarms do not immediately counter their cavalry in the same way that rock counters scissors: they have weaknesses (already mentioned) which can be tactically exploited, so that where they would beat a poor opponent, a clever opponent will be able to get round them. With most opposing armies, you can look at a part of their army (e.g. the infantry line) and see quite a bit of variation, with which they can have a more subtle, more varied, and more inter-connected battle plan. With ours, every unit essentially has to be self-sufficient, as each choice has to fulfil every role within its slot. That puts a lot of strain on our units to perform, and while they are reasonably nicely statted for their points cost, it gives them weaknesses: an enemy who knows how to play can exploit our lack of choice flexibility to their own advantage. Only against enemies who just throw their troops at you one-on-one are these weaknesses not observable.

Don't argue with the Chillmeister B)

[inside joke]Yeah, don't forget that LordChiliPeppa has poisoned Durgrim (but it's not a crime, is it?).[/inside joke]

I voted Yes, for all the reasons that that Flame gave (quite rightly).

You only have to look at the results of this years UKGT to see which the big four are (for those that don't know the top 10 was made up of 4 armies, Brets, Skaven, Lizards and Woodies).

Overpowered is the wrong word, a better, and more fitting one is abusive.

The lizard list, can, and often is, made up to be one of those kind of lists that just isn't fun, AKA flames example, and variations of it. The problem with the list is that it can't really make balanced lists per sae. What I mean is the lizard armoies are either saurii based and crap, or saurii free and overpowered. The middle ground is damned elusive, if not purely a piece of fiction. The same applies to Skaven and Wood elves. If you don't play them the abusive way they don't do very well at all. The 40k analogy is very accute, as that is what the sort of Skirmishy armies are like, and it doesn't make for a fun game.

The lizards tournies record is damned impressive, and one that doesn't come under threat from many other armies.

The problem is that there are a few lists, 4, maybe 5 if you wanna talk chaos, that can be made in to abusive lists that are both little fun to play against and very effective at winning games. Of those four there are three that really can't play in a non-abusive way and hope to do well. Those are Lizards, Skaven and Wood elves. Obviously things are different if you go stateside, but the UK GT is a very good example of armies real power, and unfortunately that vindicates what both myself and Flame have stated.

Red Slayer :lol: :lol: Saurii,. too strong. :lol: You're pulling my leg, right?

Harry

I myself wouldn't say they're abusive - there's a difference between cheesy and abusive, because there's nothing necessarily wrong with cheesy every now and then to an extent, you expect it at a tournament.

I think Saurus Warriors are overall a bit to strong.
That is why I always take them with me
I also bless them with quetzl a 3+ Save is nothing to laugh about
Especially when coming in huge practicly "cheap" blocks.
300 points and you have 20 Saurus Warriors with full command
and a 3+ Save (3 In combat 4+ Against arrow and magic)

Saurus based not that bad you are overreacting I think
All of my Sauri army based battles haven't been lost
All of my not Sauri based battles haven't been lost
I have never lost actually and if you are wondering yes I have done more then 10 battles

Saurus based isn't bad you only need to handle them well. If you saurus base your army don't take to many units of them with you and don't try to keep them with your skinks let the skinks krox terradons and saurus cavalry damage the enemy hard and when the enemy finally gets some wins on them the saurus arrive and finish it. That is how you should do it.

I had such of a big victory today that it did actually show me another side of the lizardmen. You probaly haven't heard of Lizardmen armies that wait on the enemy well it is my first time I did this but I massacred first the enemy thought that I was just stupid. Don't blain him

In the first round I shot down 1 mage with my Stegadons and killed half of a spearmen unit with scouting skinks. My Slann stole a item of his top mage the Skink priest used there lore and take care of his crosbowmen

HE wounded one of my stegadons very badly and concetrated on my skink unit about three quarter of his combat part marched moved to my skinks while some of his dark knight things where moving to my Slann. His magic wasn't up to mine he could only kill 4 skinks with it

My slann healed my stegadon with healing hand see lore of light and he took down his cold one knights the other mages where ineffective except one that managed to cast COMET OF CASANDRA. Now I knewn this one I wanted to remain the comet so it could grow I concetrated with all my skinks on his last two mages no mather if they would stand next to a enemy or not shot both down.

HE charged all of my skink units comet didn't fall raiders came closer balistas shot one slann both failed but one came till the ward save round!.

Comet didn't fall. My mages and stegadon took down the last forces that where closen in on there postion.

HE comet didn't fall all of my skinks where killed or on the run except one. He tried to shoot my Slann again where no other targets one hit

Comet didn't fall most units didn't rally ran of the bord

HE comet finally fell and with 11 x 5 55 inch was this comet total distruction of everything that hasn't got more then 5 wounds and toughness 6 and ward save 4+ let's just say he was screwed and the rest of his army was cleaned up by my mages

1 Slann Mage Priest with 2nd Generaiton+Plaque of tepok+Plaque of dominon+Diadem of power
545 points

3 Skink Priest all with lv 2
300 points

5 x 10 Skinks all three units with brave
375 points

2 Stegadons
470 points

3 x 3 Terradons
315 points

Well, I only ever play against lizardmen and have never lost to them. Does that indisputably prove that they are the worst army in the game? Does it mean wood elves are completely overpowered?

More likely: you were lucky, you were the better general, you cheated (don't laugh, I always wonder if I get the rules right in some bizarre situations :S) etc.

What I'm trying to say: anecdotal evidence proves nothing.

And please make an effort to spell properly. Punctuation is your friend in huge blocks of text.

Here's a suggestion as to why you keep winning: your list is hideously illegal.

You have 3 Rare slots and 5 Character slots, in a 2000pts army, where the limit is 2 and 4 respectively. A 2nd Generation Slann takes up a hero and a rare choice, as well as a lord.

Your Slann is also listed as costing 545pts whereas he actually costs 560.

This puts your army at 2020pts, which I would call well over the acceptable limit.

Whats your point Red?

How does that prove saurii aren't a waste of time. Despite being illegal your list didn't include any saurii....

Myself and Chili have been working damned hard to make a saurii list work, and have got something that might be pretty good, to be tested out on Friday, but they certainly aren't the most fantastic thing ever as you seem to believe...

Harry

My points is that lizardmen always do a heck of a job anyplace anytime anywhere. With or without Saurus Warriors
With or without Kroxigors cavalry and stegadon
A lizardmen army with Saurus warriors is good, but a lizardmen army without them is better. It's you aditude against them that bothers me.

My point is that lizardmen do a heck of a job.
With or without the saurus
With or without the leaders
With or without the monsters
It is not your opion that is bothering me but how you put it.
You say
a army with saurus is worse then an army without them
I say
an army with saurus is good an army without them is better

Good for you, your just saying the same thing I am with less conviction and less expereince no doubt. The problem is good isn't good enough to win a Tournie that is AC based, and that is why Saurii are crap. Its especially bad when you see an old blood + Saurii, that gives you all the time in the world to destroy them. It is only slightly more problematical when there is a slann, but a no magic Saurii list = pooh.

Alos don't double post, its against this sites rules, and before you go critising my posting style look closer to home...

Harry

Yeah sorry about the double posting
I don't think you quit now against ho you are talking.
My englisch might be horrible that doesn't mean my play style is the same.
Btw I bet I have more experience then you

And yes I am less convinced cause it isn't quit true.
You shouldn't underestemate the Saurus.
Harry if you can name why against resons then I can name why be for then ill give you right.

Reasons to take them
-Ability even more attacks with spears
-Double attacks
-Good saves
-Ability to spawn for extra suprises
-Good toughness
-Pretty Strenghtfull attacks
-Much more fun to them with you then without them
Does that last one count for two

I am well aware of how I am speaking, its quais aggresive admitidly, but thats just because I am very self confident ;)

As for expereince, I have been playing for 10 years, of which the last 1 and a half I have spent under the tutorage of the best players in South East England. Furthermore I play for Team Shenanagins, and I am a moderator on Druchii.net. Oh, and of the two tournies I have attended I reached 8th and 6th out of 100 and 65 respectively (with a charity Druchii list), and readying myself for my GT debuet this year. On the grand scale of ability I would rank myself as good. I can play a good game, and may of the members of this site can vouch for that - Chili and Xar to name but a few, or Owaria ;). Just because I have 3 posts to my post count doesn't make me thick matey.

Why are Saurii pants? Simple, there are two reasons:

1) They are Slow
2) They are Expensive.

They might be fairly tough and hard, but the simple fact is that on the battlefield their on paper dadvantages don't hold up. Remove the auxilaries and take the saurii from any direction. They are just like Chaos Warriors (well slightly better). They just don't work well enough on the battlefield. When Saurii go down I slaways have a little smile, because I know they won't get a charge off (unless I am playing my dwarves) and that they are just easy points.

Fun they are, but that doesn't make them a good unit I'm afraid...

As Chili pointed out to me last week the problem wth saurii (apart from being slow and expensive) is that the only come in one variety. With temple guard beng restricted to slann bodyguarding one can't get better saurii. You can effectively better equip them, but one can't make them better. With no option for more hitty weapons, or magic banners or a way of getting elite Saurii without using them as Slann's bodyguards one can make an effective Saurii based army. We then spen half an hour discussing how you could, but thats not reallt appropriate for this discussion...

Cheers,

Harry

I'll vouch for Harry's amazingness, no problem.

I will however, direct him to a time that his overconfidence against Saurii perhaps screwed him up a bit. The last battle we played in fact, you had one of my saurus units pinned in the flank with cold one knights, and subsequently brought in a unit of warriors on the other flank. Bringing them in actually helped me, because of the 8 attacks I could now put towards butchering T3 4+ elves, and because most of the bonus' (flank, standard, negating ranks) had already been taken by your COKs. It ended up with both of your units legging it, handing me a minor loss (about 10pts from a draw) down from a massacre.

My point is, saurii may not be manoeverable, but 2 str 4 attacks a model means that even if you do get round their flanks, you need to have a killy or tough unit to flank them with, otherwise you do more harm than good. When I played against whats-his-name at Conflict, that Dark Elf player that tutored you. Sure he could bring his dark riders round behind me, but he wouldn't dare engage. In the end it wasn't manoeverability that killed my saurus units, it was the 9 saurus his cold one unit killed on the charge.

Amazing is very kind, I would have said aptitude, but meh, amazing fits well with my big head ;)

You are indeed Correct. They aren't awful, certainly better then non Chosen Chaos Warriors, but the thing is that they aren't competative in the way the other type of lizard army is. I am not saying don't use 'em, I am just saying that there is clearly two different lizard lists those with, and those without. Those that don't have always seem t make it to the top of the tables without having neccesarily the best player at the helms, whilst the Saurii armies give better games but aren't good enough to really do well. Which is a shame. When talking about how to revise the Lizard Book me and Chili came to the conclusion that there needed to be a better way of making Saurii bases army viable, by allowing TG not be 0-1 and not bodyguards, reducing Saurii to 11pts and introducing Skink Cohorts with LA + Shields.

Cheers,

Harry

Well that is some more then me
I play for only three years but it's fun
I place a lot of bets on me winning that is how I get money to buy more
Do you play often or not?












P.S. I never lost till now
P.S. P.S. and i wasn't planning to do so in the future

It is a common thought that you should not bet on Warhammer. It is a good, fun game but the rules just aren't concrete enough to put money on. If a problem comes up that isn't covered by the book, how do you resolve it? Do you argue for a long time?

And what happens when your opponents find out you have an illegal list? Will they demand their money back?

Illegal is a big word better call it colouring outside the lines or not legal.
Yes they will ask there money back and I will give it to them
A bet just makes the game a little more fun for me I am more excited about I game where I have bet on. Also I couldn't pay my bills without warhammer or buy new if I didn't bet on warhammer.

No I am not a 30 year old men that lives on himself and is addicted to warhammer
:P
Not that there is anything wrong with that.
I understand allthough I find it a bit creepy

They are considerably underpowered & handcuffed (like Bretonnians) from the core down. Take for instance there cheapest unit its *pts has WS2, T2 & LD5 so for 1third of the points a goblin will kick it's butt. You may think its 4 special rules would help, no. By the time it gets in range it will be charged & bye bye.

On another note they have access to the most powerful wizards in Warhammer the Slann-Mages which cost nearly 1k & suck in cc, so are often protected by Temple Guard. Which will cost the LM player his other arm & leg.

I want to say they're overpowered, but that's probably just because I've never beaten them. They just seem to have a lot of cheesy rules, a lot of good sides, and no downside. Examples:

Saurus are strong, tough, hard to kill, get extra attacks, have that leadership rule, and can move fast. Plus you can give them spawnings.

Skinks are hard to hit, get poisoned attacks, x2 attacks, can screen kroxigor, etc.

Kroxigor are super powerful, hard to kill, and can be shielded by skinks.

Their characters are super buff, their magic is really powerful, and they have all of those monsters: stegadon, carnosaur, cold ones, salamanders, terradons. They seem like a CC army, but then you see that they have super powerful magic AND siege weapons (salamanders and stegadons are siege weapons), plus they have skinks and terradons which are just a little too strong to be what I think they should be: annoyance units. Units that, although not very tough, can disrupt your plans, thin down your ranks, and reek havoc against single characters, war machine crew, etc.

Plus they all have that leadership rule, blessed spawnings, good magic items, it seems to me good everything. And while some units have low leadership, they have the 3D6 leadership rule to make up for that. Plus you can just put your general wherever he is needed to counteract the leadership bonus, which I know is something everyone can do but with lizardmen they get even more of an advantage.

Fighting with orcs, my greenskins are outclassed in CC in all aspects (worse armor, less attacks, less strength, less stable), outclassed in shooting (ok O&G shooting basically is nonexistant, but lizardmen shooting while appearing not so good is actually really good: all the poison, the siege weapons, and ambushing skinks), they're outclassed in magic (slann, skink priests with items that let them fly[!!]), and have better morale and characters. And can do all this with a not-absurd point cost. Like dwarves have a similar thing going on (super tough, super strong, hard to kill, nulls magic, good shooting, siege, characters, you name it) but are slow and costly to make up for it. I'm not trying to seem mean or dumb that's just my biased opinion. I'm not very good at Warhammer though so there is that.

Grimgor Ironhide you should include a few units of Night Goblins with Fanatics i'v found they work wonders against Lizardmen.

You happily just ignored the fact that Skinks have ranged weaponry, removing the relevence of WS, and that their high movement, Skirmish ability, and special rules all more than compensate for low T and Ld. If your local LM players are leaving them in charge range of any combat unit - even Goblins - they deserve to lose the unit.

Okay, let's clarify something here. First, 'most powerful wizards'. To me, this suggests that their best use is out of combat, blasting away with their spells in order to affect the outcome of the game that way. As such, the fact that they 'suck in cc' doesn't really seem like all that much of a handicap to me...

The fact that they

doesn't really strike me as a weakness either. If the TG are there, the unit is Stubborn, on top of the fact that the Slann can just keep blasting away from the second rank. As long as the opponent is tied up in this combat, the LM player's other units can flank charge and take out whatever unit is engaged. In fact, I believe you should be able to find some of LordChilipepa's lists around, in which he has built around this fact.

Oh, and the fact that you could only think of one unit from the O&G list which is effective against Lizzies speaks volumes, especially when that single unit is so easily countered by Terradons or (gasp) Skinks, which you were so quick to dismiss.

They work wonder against pretty much everyone. Those who know me well around here also know how much I loathe those raving maniacs that can easily kill five or six times their cost in points if used against expensive heavy cavalry. They're the most cheesy thing of all Warhammer. They should be limited to two or three per army, that would already be more than enough to cause tremendous losses to the enemy.

You'll tell me that they're unpredictable and can kill their own allies, but the loss of five Goblins is nothing compared to the loss of five Grail Knights or five Chosen Chaos Warriors.

So may the Dark Gods devour the souls of all Goblin Fanatics.

Sorry @ztech did'nt know you had a burning hatred for Fanatics. Why don't you try the Squig Herd it's not as good but when it explodes it seems to kill so many things ;).

Oh & Vriishnak what is the range of blowpipes & javelins? It isnt more than 18" is it? Also I supose almost all Wizards are useless in CC. But the Slann is more so worse due to wider base & lower I(2).

Oh, sorry I just used them as an example. Any army that can field large numbers will almost always beat Lizardmen. Orcs & Goblins were just on my mind at the time. Empire, Dwarfs, O&G, Skaven & VC core troops can crush almost any Lizardmen army.

Why would the Skinks need a range of more than 18"? I can only assume that you're using that as a number so they'd be able to fire from outside the range of cav units, but there are a ridiculous number of flaws in the logic that would lead you to deciding that they can only be useful if that's the case. Shall we go through them?

1) Cav has good saves. Skinks do low-Strength, poisoned hits. Do I need to continue with this?

2) Skinks have good movement, the Skirmish ability, and the possibility of being Scouts. That being the case, you'd have to be an idiot to have them shooting from within the front arc of a unit that can charge them the next turn, unless you're baiting for a Krox countercharge.

3) The best targets for skink fire are generally opposing low-T troops, such as mages, archers, and skirmishers, who will be almost as bad in combat as the Skinks a lot of the time. That being the case, you can probably afford to get charged by them in exchange for two rounds of firing (one on the turn you move into range, and a second on the stand and shoot). Alternatively, you could just flee from the charge, opening up all sorts of other tactical opportunities.

Let me try this again, in bold so you might catch the point I'm trying to make. Slann should not be fighting in hand-to-hand. Period. They should be casting their spells, whether it be from across the table, or behind the ranks of the Temple Guard who have engaged the enemy. Regardless of which of these is the case, their fighting stats are entirely irrelevent as they're earning back their points with magic. They could have I0, a base that takes up half the board, and a special rule that makes any wounds dealt against them in hand to hand instantly kill them, and they would still be far from underpowered - that's why the Temple Guard are there, and why they have the special rules they do.

Care to justify that? As near as I can see, an army that relies entirely upon numbers - a Skaven Slave horde, say, or an all-Goblin force - will be torn apart by the vastly superior Saurus, especially if there are some skinks, Terradons and Salamanders in support. Nevermind the magical superiority that a Slann would bring.

Likewise, any army built entirely from the core troops of any of the forces you listed will be massacred by a decent Lizzie force - I'm particularly confused by your inclusion of VC in there, as it tends to be their special/rare choices and characters that win games for them, with the core choices just soaking wounds until they can get to where they need to be...