PDA

View Full Version : Skinks water camping, dirty tactic or valid strategy?



TroyJPerez
14-02-2009, 03:22
I always hated the aquatic rule but hate it even more now that it has been clarified to allow skinks to hide in even impassible water. Most of the WAAC player I play with who play lizardmen always throw down water for every terrain peice they place. This forces me to only throw down one and then claim done so half of the board isn't coverd in water. My opponent then throws skinks into the water never to move again for the entire game. They sit there and march block and shoot my units with nothing I can really do. I play chaos, khorne demons, and orcs and goblins. My shooting is complete garbage and I usually am not magic heavy enough to get spells off reliably. This basically makes them an unkillable turret that autoclaims quarters, denies me from claiming quarters, and denies me any chance of getting points for the skinks. So I guess I wanna know is that in a game where not everybody has shooting, is this supposed to be fair? I mean look at vampires counts, orks and goblins, chaos, ogre kingdoms, beasts of chaos, Bretonia, and any demon army that doesn't include any tzeetch units. These are pretty much unkillable to these guys. I mean sure orks and goblins have bows, but they need 6's to hit skinks in water. So is this supposed to be a valid tactic or is it just plain cheap?

Shadowsinner
14-02-2009, 03:29
well it sounds pretty bogus to me if he plays it like that. while it is a legitmate tactic its a lame and uncreative one that happens to work to his benefit. before the match begins set rules or the terrain (2 pieces each OR no more of one of each type.) if he absolutely refuses then the kid is a tosser and you shouldnt play him anyway

TroyJPerez
14-02-2009, 03:38
Problem is that its not just one person, its like everyone who plays lizardmen, well accept for one friend of mine who aknowledges that its a cheap tactic and doesn't use it. I've heard that in tournaments though, there is no impassible water, its all very difficult at the most.

kroq'gar
14-02-2009, 03:45
How about rather than choosing terrain its selected at random... eg roll, a d6 1 hill 2 wood 3 building 4 water 5 obstical/wall 6 special terrain feature (eg arcane ruines or anything else you've got).

Also, do you play random terrain (place them about the table then roll scatter plus about 4d6 inches).

Finally, it had better be a pretty impressive water feature to be impassable, most are just v.difficult terrain. If its a pond them i'd reclassify it.

A single fireball or equal into t2 skinks gives 2+kill, so boost up on the offensive. Take flame templates as well, they work.



bloodcurdling roar for chaos would work
khorn deamons dont really need to worry about them....

olmsted
14-02-2009, 06:25
why dont you have another person place the terain? someone unbiased.

stashman
14-02-2009, 08:40
Don't play assh***s!

Find new gaming friends.

Neknoh
14-02-2009, 10:47
Bloodcurdling Roar and Breath of Pestilence both work.

With Khorne daemons, just run your Bloodthirster into the face of the first wizard you see and THEN blast them with magic. If mixed daemons, flamers are mean I've heard ;)

Ward.
14-02-2009, 11:00
I always hated the aquatic rule but hate it even more now that it has been clarified to allow skinks to hide in even impassible water. Most of the WAAC player I play with who play lizardmen always throw down water for every terrain peice they place. This forces me to only throw down one and then claim done so half of the board isn't coverd in water. My opponent then throws skinks into the water never to move again for the entire game. They sit there and march block and shoot my units with nothing I can really do. I play chaos, khorne demons, and orcs and goblins. My shooting is complete garbage and I usually am not magic heavy enough to get spells off reliably. This basically makes them an unkillable turret that autoclaims quarters, denies me from claiming quarters, and denies me any chance of getting points for the skinks. So I guess I wanna know is that in a game where not everybody has shooting, is this supposed to be fair? I mean look at vampires counts, orks and goblins, chaos, ogre kingdoms, beasts of chaos, Bretonia, and any demon army that doesn't include any tzeetch units. These are pretty much unkillable to these guys. I mean sure orks and goblins have bows, but they need 6's to hit skinks in water. So is this supposed to be a valid tactic or is it just plain cheap?


How about rather than choosing terrain its selected at random... eg roll, a d6 1 hill 2 wood 3 building 4 water 5 obstical/wall 6 special terrain feature (eg arcane ruines or anything else you've got).

Also, do you play random terrain (place them about the table then roll scatter plus about 4d6 inches).


This, terrain should be randomly generated to stop that and "every cannon sitting on a hill" from happening.

Find the one from the 6th edition book and only roll for 3 quarters (randomly decide which quarter you don't roll up a piece of terrain) then scatter them when they are placed.

Darkmaw
14-02-2009, 11:11
"every cannon sitting on a hill" from happening.


Well where i play, the hill where every cannon sits on is automatically followed by a forest blocking line of site placed in front of it!

Remember its deploying pieces of terrain alternating between players. And besides there is the roll-off for the table side. :)

Ozorik
14-02-2009, 11:17
Im suprised that anyone actually lets their opponent free rein to set up the terrain intheir deployment zone. Always either randomise it or get a third party to do it.

S0 many of the problems of warhammer come from dubious terrain placement.

That being said its not that much of a dirty tactic, Skinks do have aquatic for a reason.

Sifal
14-02-2009, 11:26
Do it like a GT where someone impartial who doesn't know the two armies sets up the terrain for you. 6 pieces with at least one in each quarter. WAAC players will be getting no experience or decent practice by choosing water when it's a much more rare piece of scenery at tournaments. The only army that should be able to choose it's own terrain is wood elves as a specific rule states it in the book otherwise it will be abused as you have pointed out. what's next in your group? ethereal armies with black knights on a board 95% covered in difficult terrain?

Braad
14-02-2009, 11:57
As far as I know, terrain has to be set up in a mutually agreeable manner (so, just object too all the water) or in a random order.

selone
14-02-2009, 15:38
As a side point dont you guys have hills in most deployment zones?

Desert Rain
14-02-2009, 17:19
When we play at home we take 6 terrain pieces and place them in 2 rows of 3. Then we use an artillery dice and a scatter dice and roll for each piece and move them according to the result. That works fine and it's unpredictable so you will never know exaclty what the battlefield will look like.

Braad
14-02-2009, 17:51
As a side point dont you guys have hills in most deployment zones?

As a base I go for 1 hill each. More then that, you're just improving gunlines which is not a favourable thing if you ask me. But 1 should be allowed, especially with an army as O&G, as sometimes my deployment zone is so full that without a hill artillery nearly becomes obsolete.

Dead Man Walking
14-02-2009, 17:56
Instead of crying about what lizzies have been able to do since they were invented why don't you figure out ways to fix the problem? Are you going to call wood elves dirty for being able to move freely through woods? Are you one of those types who thinks everyone elses army has unfair special rules and yours always gets the shaft?

How about terror? Magic? Breath weapons? Certainly there are things you can do to fix the problem if you put your mind to it.

Havock
14-02-2009, 19:06
Instead of crying about what lizzies have been able to do since they were invented why don't you figure out ways to fix the problem? Are you going to call wood elves dirty for being able to move freely through woods? Are you one of those types who thinks everyone elses army has unfair special rules and yours always gets the shaft?

How about terror? Magic? Breath weapons? Certainly there are things you can do to fix the problem if you put your mind to it.

Under normal circumstances you would be right, however, you can hardly blame him for complaining if the ******s he plays against insist they deploy 5 ponds or something.

Solution 1: See all above cmments about terrain placement.
Solution 2: Deploy terrain, roll of, let him deploy everything etc. Then say "I retreat, you win!". Applaud.

Harwammer
14-02-2009, 21:29
Have you had a word with your opponent to let him know your unease concerning the ponds? If he is using scouts then make sure you have line of sight to the ponds.


Are you one of those types who thinks everyone elses army has unfair special rules and yours always gets the shaft?

You mean BoC players?

TroyJPerez
14-02-2009, 23:05
I have no problem with wood elf and forests. I can send chaos spawn through forests, or take sigvald and march a unit through it, or send a Hellcannon unit into forest since it techically counts as a skirmisher unless it charges. I have nothing in my army that can move through water and shooting at something with -2 kinda sucks. And well lizardmen have decent magic usually and can shoot down most spells. Plus what if I dont' like taking wizards? Does the presence of skinks that can camp in water without any way to get to them mean that I am forced to take a Dragon, Wizard gunline, or two hellcannons?

Famder
14-02-2009, 23:38
No, it means you have to play smarter. The skinks have a range of 12" Don't get within their range and they have to come to you. It sucks that they will deny you a part of the board because of it, but it is fair. The marchblocking shoundn't be an issue since you have a banner all your units can take to ignore it.

McMullet
14-02-2009, 23:53
Sticking a unit of Skinks in a lake and shooting/marchblocking is all fair. Placing 3+ lakes on the board every game and doing it is just taking the Michael.

All you have to do is ask that the terrain be more balanced. The clue here is that you seem to be playing in Swampland every week. Suggest you play over a farm, desert or hills instead.

Thurizdan
14-02-2009, 23:57
Another very simple solution is to take Kislev and use the Ice Queen. One of her spells turns a water feature into open ground and kills everything inside.

Boondock
15-02-2009, 00:09
Another very simple solution is to take Kislev and use the Ice Queen. One of her spells turns a water feature into open ground and kills everything inside.

Haha, that would be absolutely hilarious to pull off.

W0lf
15-02-2009, 00:15
Yer untill you realise you took a lvl 4 caster with a aweful lore to kill a 70 pt unit.

.... :wtf:

sroblin
15-02-2009, 02:33
I think the main distinction to keep clear is that the tactic of using water for protection is legitimate, the 'tactic' of deploying an improbably number of impassable water features is not. A map should rarely have more than 1 impassable wate feature, if that many.

The random terrain scattering is a good method for both fairness and unpredictable battlefield calculation; I also just like to make 'themed' maps that 'feel' organically (people can take turns, etc.) Maybe sometimes you pay in the Lustrian water park land, but than others you play in the desert, and most often you play in a temperate or mountain environment where there maybe at most 1 major water features or none at all.

Captain Plowman
15-02-2009, 05:50
Well, you could play like my mates and I do, and decide that you play for fun for both players. This means one player sets up the board, then asks his mate who he is plating against whether he likes it. If its ok for both then its ok. If not the other player makes suggestions to make it fairer. If one player is obviously nerfing the board for his advantage the other player tells him he is a loser and finds another opponent.

sulla
15-02-2009, 06:08
Problem is that its not just one person, its like everyone who plays lizardmen, well accept for one friend of mine who aknowledges that its a cheap tactic and doesn't use it. I've heard that in tournaments though, there is no impassible water, its all very difficult at the most.What about every time your opponent places a water feature, you block it's LOS with another piece of terrain? That's what I do with hill-spammers. I spam forests etc right in front of them.

That or take a chaos dragon and kill a unit per turn.

Angelust
15-02-2009, 07:12
Don't hills see over most terrain features?

Qiqel
15-02-2009, 07:41
It is not fair at all. It's manipulation of the rules to get advantage. Terrain types are defined precisely and on the top of that both sides HAVE TO AGREE on the terrain types. It's especially important when one of the sides tries to be arbitrary in terrain type assignment and ignores the BRB guidelines.

The guidelines are available on the page 15 of the BRB and define the types of terrain more precisely than most assume:

If the water he places is just a small muddy pond, you can always say it falls under "Fords, streams and shallow water" or "Marshes, bogs and thick mud." Both are merely difficult terrain. He really has no choice but to agree - it's him trying to change the terrain category into impassable and he needs your permission for that.

It'd be very difficult terrain if it was fast flowing but still fordable river.

It'd be impassable terrain if it was a wide river, lake or impenetrable swamp. I'd argue such a feature would take a sizeable part of the entire table or would be only partially visible on the edge.


To sum up, since both sides need to agree on the types of terrain, simply disagree on moving relatively small bodies of water from "Difficult Terrain" category to "Impassable Terrain". You have full right to be categoric here and he has to compromise.

dsw1
15-02-2009, 09:46
This, terrain should be randomly generated to stop that and "every cannon sitting on a hill" from happening.


As a base I go for 1 hill each. More then that, you're just improving gunlines which is not a favourable thing if you ask me. But 1 should be allowed, especially with an army as O&G, as sometimes my deployment zone is so full that without a hill artillery nearly becomes obsolete.

Sorry, but I wanted to ask, why place ALL your cannons/bolt throwers or any other piece of artillery on one hill? That is a beginners tactic (mistake) if you ask me, just because one area effect spell could take most of them out, one terror causer could also do the same, 1 flier unit could threaten all of your artillery in one go, one tomb scorpion could engage 2 cannons in one go if placed right (three if they are really close together) etc etc.

A gunline tactic with everything placed on one hill is rather stupid if you ask me, as a gunline will have next to no CC capabilities so an army of fast movers could reek havoc (assuming they are fast enough to get there without being killed) where as if you had say one or two on a hill and the rest in-between your hand gunners/bowmen or what ever else you take, then they have a greater chance of surviving plus you will not have everything hiding behind that one forest that blocks all your LoS.

ANYWAY - where exactly does he place these marshes? and what type of skinks does he put in them? I am asking because if he places the marshes near your deployment area and then places his skink in there from the get go, then he is cheating (unless cammo skinks) as skinks can no-longer scout :cries:. If he does place the terrain near your Deployment area, the place a unit so close to it that he can not possible get a unit in there due to scouting rules.

It is also a good thing to remember that no terrain can be placed within 12" of the centre of the board (if my memory serves), and if you want to have as little marshes as possible (which as others previously stated is difficult terrain) then when setting up deployment, if you get the first go just don't place anything and say "that is my last piece of terrain", if if they ask what piece, point to a corner of the board and say "that open piece", and they will only be allowed to place one more piece then terrain is over.

This way, they get a maximum of 2 piece of terrain (if they get the first go).

selone
15-02-2009, 12:07
In my small games 1000-1250 I'd put most if not all of my limited shooting/artillery on the hill with my 2 spearchukka's as spread out as can be. I'm unlikely to face terror causers and they're far enough apart not to panic each other. In larger point games I'd not put everything on the hill. I've played 3 games now and I played one on a small 4 by 4 and I lost the roll for the side with the hill and it made deployment a real PITA let me tell you. I don't think its unreasonable to have 1 hill in each players deployment zone but more than 1 is a bit whacky.

Sorry for the OT as to the OP it seems pretty bad play to insist on having impassable water terrain and doesnt make sense background wise either. I wouldn't mind playing on a battlefield which had difficult terrain pond/lakes once every few games but constantly every game an impassable bit of water, yes I would.
I heartily recommend you suggest a compromise to this player whereby it just counts as difficult terrain, (s)he gets his aquatic special rule and you get to be able to deal with it.

w3rm
15-02-2009, 14:44
It is not fair at all. It's manipulation of the rules to get advantage.


Dude, that is how you when in Warhammer. You manipulate the rules to your own advantage. Its not fair that the front rank of 18 Plague Monks can get 19 attacks? Its not fair that Cannnons don't allow armour saves? Quit whining and play the game......

happy_doctor
15-02-2009, 15:29
Ok, I'll try advocating the other side here:

Sure, playing with 3+ lakes counting as impassable terrain is not exactly entertaining.

Let me share my experience with you: I've been playing Lizardmen since the 5th edition and I've only gotten to use the "aquatic" special rule once. Every battlefield we play in seems to have a couple of forests, a hill or two and some kind of ruins.

Have you ever tried to play wood elves without woods? It's really difficult and wood elf players will whine about how they are paying for their "move through woods" special rule.

Due to the constraints in terrain building, swamps, rivers and lakes are a lot less common than forests and hills. However, I regard a lizardmen player placing a water difficult terrain as cheesy as a wood elf player placing a wood.

Historically speaking, some of the greatest battles of ancient (and modern) times have been decided in "watery" battlefields, be it the Granicus river or the shores of Normandy. I can't see why you should encounter forests more often in your battles (generally a dangerous feature, as you risk ambushes etc.) than you would see lakes or rivers (effective ways of securing a flank).

Niibl
15-02-2009, 16:04
The problem is simply the "impassable" water terrain.
If it just were difficult ground (as it should be IMHO) it would be no problem.
A block of Goblins could drive the skinks out.
I play warhammer for quite some time now and the only times I have seen impassable terrain on the board was with terrain unsuitable to put models on or in.
For small ponds I am with Qigel here:

If the water he places is just a small muddy pond, you can always say it falls under "Fords, streams and shallow water" or "Marshes, bogs and thick mud." Both are merely difficult terrain. He really has no choice but to agree

Havock
15-02-2009, 16:41
That's option three, and possibly the best "this is shallow water, it is difficult unless you are aquatic".

Necromancy Black
16-02-2009, 00:23
The problem here is not the auqutic rule at all, it's your terrain deployment method.

As someone said before, how would WE feel if they only had a single peice of forest terrain to work with.

In all seriousness, randomise your terrain. I've started doing this and I really like it. Neither oppanant will get an advantige and it can really make that roll for sides much more critical.

Make up some rule where it's 1-2 is forest, 3-4 is hill, 5-6 is water. Then if you want do water as 1-3 is difficult terrain, 4-5 is very difficult and 6 is impassible.

StarFyreXXX
16-02-2009, 00:29
We do terrain is random...like mentioned, unless is a themed table, do 1-forest, 2-ruins, 3-water, etc.

Sanjay

ScalySkin
17-02-2009, 01:41
I am a lizardmen player and while I would enjoy a battlefield with a heap of impassable water (for the first 30 minutes), I think that there should only be 1 impassable water feature in a game, and if it is a large river that requires others to go a long way around it, it shouldn't be in every game. I don't think there is any problem with multiple passable water features, as long as both players agree to them. The lizard players that you play against need to give themselves a real challenge, the lizard army is well-equipped to take on every army so that each battle will come down to who is the better general and this is how the game should be played.

sroblin
17-02-2009, 19:45
As someone said before, how would WE feel if they only had a single peice of forest terrain to work with.

Make up some rule where it's 1-2 is forest, 3-4 is hill, 5-6 is water. Then if you want do water as 1-3 is difficult terrain, 4-5 is very difficult and 6 is impassible.

While I agree with the gist of your post, I think that water features shouldn't be comparable in frequency to forests (unless you are playing in a rain forest or swamp themed map). Patches of trees are going to be about the most common terrain features in many environments, while unless we're talking about the aforementioned jungle or marsh, there's rarely reason for their to be more than one impassably deep lake or river on a battlefield. Shallower water features are another matter.

But I think you are squarely right in identifying the problem as one of terrain generation.

Raxxit
17-02-2009, 21:15
I think battles are just as likely to be fought near rivers as around mostly open fields with sparse tree growth. Honestly, I'm trying to think, and even though trees are very common terrain for warhammer, it's not very often that you come across a field in real life that has scattered patches of trees. Since so many options have been suggested for ousting the skinks, I'd say that having water, within reason, could probably happen most of your games and still be fair. Just don't forget about terror!

Qiqel
19-02-2009, 07:21
Dude, that is how you when in Warhammer. You manipulate the rules to your own advantage. Its not fair that the front rank of 18 Plague Monks can get 19 attacks? Its not fair that Cannnons don't allow armour saves? Quit whining and play the game......

You are quite wrong.

If you know the rules, and use them to your advantage, you win. It's not manipulation at all. There's nothing unfair about Dark Elf lord with reversed save or 19 attacks from 18 Plague Monks as long as it's what the rules say.

If you don't know or omit the rules to get unfair advantage (counting on your opponents not knowing them too) it's manipulation and that is not fair play.


If you'd read my entire post, you'd have seen I had provided some arguments to show why this type of "trick" wasn't really legal in WHFB. The TLDR version is:

Not asking for agreement on terrain type in this case is already cheating.

Moreover, Lizardmen player shouldn't even try to play small placeable bodies of water as anything else than difficult terrain to begin with - guidelines in the BRB are clear enough in this case.

sroblin
19-02-2009, 14:27
Honestly, I'm trying to think, and even though trees are very common terrain for warhammer, it's not very often that you come across a field in real life that has scattered patches of trees.

I can't agree there, I live in the North Eastern U.S. and I see them all the time. I would argue too that Warhammer battles are supposedly fought in a world where folks haven't gone as far in the process of chainsawing down all the random patches of trees for housing developments.

Given the small size of a Warhammer board, having it full of impassible pieces of terrain is also IMO not conducive to fun gameplay, unless its a special scenario.

Stuffburger
19-02-2009, 15:02
Second on the scattered patches of trees- most old (100+ years) farmland in reasonably hilly terrain has rows of trees to divide fields, clumps of vegetation, old collapsed barns and stuff they haven't gotten rid of yet.

Get up into new england and then the fields get even smaller and stone fences pop up everywhere- I can absolutely see O&G and empire fighting to the death over some part of upstate Massachusetts.

As for the OP, I think a LM player has a right to expect a water piece in most games, 2 in lucky circumstances and 0 in unlucky ones. A pond would be impassable, but more likely a bit of swampy ground which would be very difficult at worst. With appropriate terrain scattering, picking sides and a fair limit on terrain (I like 2 hills, 1-2 forests, 1 water, 1 rock outcrop/building, 1 fence/wall) the skink camping problem should be a reasonable one to deal with.

Or just build yourself an impassable rock outcrop or two and place them in his ponds.

blackjack
19-02-2009, 15:15
What are you guys talking about. Of course lizardmen are going to try to fight battles on good terrain. The same way dwarfs always try to find hills to fight from and wood elves put up as many forests as they can. In each case the armies are trying to make the terrain reflect the terrrain their army would naturally fight from.

In real battles in the real world selecting the right battle field was a vital part of generalship. Some generals in history ran away from an opposing force for months before finding the right place to stand and fight.

I never object when an empire or dwarf player try to slap down a hill in each dep zone so I can't see why anyone would object to a swamp. Each side is trying to find a battle field they can use to thier advantage and the terrrain setup rules simply reflects this.

On the other hand I have no problem with the random or third party generated terrain idea either. Just don't B*tch and moan when using the I place you place option that people will place terrain that benfits them, thats the POINT of that system.

Qiqel
19-02-2009, 15:43
On the other hand I have no problem with the random or third party generated terrain idea either. Just don't B*tch and moan when using the I place you place option that people will place terrain that benfits them, thats the POINT of that system.

When they place a terrain which is "difficult" by the BRB and claim it's impassable because that suits them, without asking for your permission, that's whey they cross the boundaries of the system. That's the argument.

I don't have a problem with agreeing that a small mountain lake with rocky shores, or some 20" wide basin, is impassable. If someone brings 6 inch wide muddy puddle and claims it's a lake, then sorry, that won't work. It's difficult terrain at best and that's it.

It's still beneficial for Lizardmen to hide in it. It doesn't make them unchargeable.

And the rules call for mutual agreement on terrain types precisely to avoid such gamey terrain (ab)use.