Talk Fantasy Football

I started an undead team (which is vastly different from my beloved elves/skaven ) and i was wondering about the choice between zombies and skeletons. After 1 game (2-1 victory for me) my rosters is:
3 ghouls
2 wights
2 mummies
6 zombies
3 RR
10FF
20K in treasury


My next choice after that is going to be another ghoul, but past that, I was wondering, what balance of zombies and skeletons should i have? I was leaning towards all zombies, because of AV8, but the extra MA of skellies might come in handy too...

i never use skellies. or just once, which is supposed to become my dirty player if he ever lives enough to level.

seriously, when i play against UD and they have skels, i am happy cause i know these will be easy CAS. how useful is an extra MA if you are stunned or worse ?

just look at the khemri... i would get zombies instead of skellies any day, for their staying factor on the field.

I always take zombies. With 4 ghouls and 2 wights, I have enough guys who can move. Add in 2 mummies and all I need are 3 guys to stand there, give the occasional assist, foul and take hits. Skeletons may move faster, but I'd much rather have the extra point of AV.

I've played an all Zombie team, and a All Skellie team, and let me say, Zombies are vastly superior.

Zombies/Skellies are meant to be linefodder and stand-ins, so they need to stay around to tie players up.

Skellies are about as useless as they come, they are slow, unarmored and have no skills (except regen).

I vote for All Zombies... even Zombies can foul if you worry about that part, MA 4 is plenty to foul LOS.

Lamoron wrote:Zombies can foul.

They do it all day I think.

Only take the skelies if you have a special plan for them. It's amazing how little you miss the movement when the player stays on the pitch.

If you've been playing elves and skaven you might find the extra movement of skeletons much better than the slower zombies.

I always take more skeletons than zombies and make full use of the movement available. Zombies are just too slow for me.

However, I'm not a very good Undead coach, so maybe you should ignore my advice and listen to the experts.

If you've been playing elves and skaven you might find the extra movement of skeletons much better than the slower zombies.

Who will you place on the LOS then? even Elves can knockdown your Mummies with ease on the LOS, unless you stack your LOS with all your tough players, it WILL get knocked down, and if you only put skellies on it, they WILL die horribly (again).

Scenario 1.
All your players are stacked up front, and your opponent runs his Elven Catchers right by you, and you have no chance of covering them all. = You loose, and he dodges his people on the LOS away, wich means you get to hit one elf, and he scores.

Scenario 2.
You have three Zombies on the LOS, and the rest 2-4 squares back (Mummies only 2), thus negating his speed, because you can easely cover his players when they swarm through.
The Zombies will take a beating, but with AV8, Regenerate and 30k cost, they rarely die, and if they do, you can allways buy another.

The Zombies are there to take a beating, to mark the Rat-Ogre and tie him up, to force the opponent to waste ressources trying to remove a 30k tough as nails player from the field. Skellies don't cut it, they break to easely.

When I've played undead its mostly the zombies for the reasons given. I do tend to keep one or two skeletons around for the extra move and to make a dirty player of (or to commit fouls when I have no DP).

Definately a preponderance of Zombies, though.

B

I prefer Zombie because with AV 8 they'survive' a longer time and are good canonfodder for the LOS.

I only would put in one Skellie and give him Dirty player for the first skill.
He's a little bit more mobile and therefore he could reach the victims easier.

Like everyone else, I prefer Zombies over skeletons. I don't like to give my opponenet a chance to gain extra spp's from fragile skellies.

But I do usually keep one as a back field defense and dirty player.