 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Grumbledook |
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 05:39 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 922
Status: Offline
|
|
| they were from fouls from what i gather |
_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'
Jon
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 05:55 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Jon-
That might be, but that makes the opponent irrelevant. If he was using guard to help facilitate knock-downs and further more casualties...the opponent is not relevant.
Had he caused the casualties in this way, they would have counted and his objective would have been met. (For taking the skill.) He did not get the numerical advantage that he was looking for, but again had he gotten these casualties from non-fouls...the regeneration would have actually been to his benefit. If these guys come back he has more opportunity to inflict more casualties...thereby getting more for his money with the Guard skill selection.
But...if you are correct, he had fouled to get these other two casualties, and as such undermined his own attempt to rack-up valid casualties for winning that category.
Who knows...
-Rob |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
 
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Spazzfist |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 06:20 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3953
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
But casualties caused by fouling do not count towards the total. Not at the Spike! anyways. I don't know how other tourneys are being run.
But bravo Zombie on the "Barbie" comment. That was very clever. Just because I don't agree with you I must now go and play with a little girls' toy. That's quite good.
Maybe I will take you up on that. Maybe I will start an Amazon team or order some of those Shadowforge Blood Bowl bunnies. I can call them the "Barbies"! 
But this has got off topic. Willi, I hope this bantering has been of some use to you!  I suppose to go back to your call for advice, decide what style of play you want to go for and then work it from there. If you want to take Zombie's advice and go for the tactic of dwindling the numberes of the other team, then you could do that. Just because I do not agree with his style of play does not mean that it is not a viable tactic. but if you want to go for a more standard style of BB play, then I think that your #1 roster is really the best bet.
Zombie certainly makes a good case for the cheapness of the basic line-zombie. At 30,000 gp each, you can hardly go wrong stocking up on a lot of them! Combine that with the obvious strengths of your other players, the necromantics are certainly a formidable team!
One thing I would certainly advise is keep the two werewolves as you suggest and also keep the wights. I found that many a time, my team's lack of block skills bit me on the butt! (played against two dwarves and a norse team!)
Well, I have to go and organize a tea party with my dollies now. 
Spazz |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 07:25 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
KarlLagerbottom wrote: P.S. I also have seen you refer to things you have seen in your tournament experience, but counting Spike! this site only has two tournaments to your credit. That hardly counts as a wealth of experience in my book.
When i talk from experience, it's usually with regards to leagues. I've been playing Blood Bowl pretty much non-stop for the last 10 years now.
When i talk about tournaments, it's usually either theoretically, or based on league starts where all teams start at TR 100. I've seen at least 15 or 20 of such league starts. |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 07:30 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Rob, i don't buy your theory. If undead players come back, that doesn't make it easier to get more casualties later on. All it means is more opponents on the field, which means i'm losing the numbers game, which makes it harder to manage 2 dice blocks and casualties. Also, losing the game means my opponent doesn't need to put tackle zones on my guys and i get fewer free blocks. My blitzer that got injured on turn 1 (and that my apothecary failed to heal) was the one with guard.
The opponent is not irrelevant. If i had played against a non-regenerating team, the 3 CAS caused would have given me numbers superiority and then i could have used that to score some real CAS.
And yes, Grumble is right, i had 1 CAS from blitzing someone into the crowd and 2 CAS from fouls, therefore none counted. |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
Last edited by Zombie on Sep 28, 2004 - 07:46 PM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 07:34 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Spazzfist wrote: If you want to take Zombie's advice and go for the tactic of dwindling the numberes of the other team, then you could do that. Just because I do not agree with his style of play does not mean that it is not a viable tactic. but if you want to go for a more standard style of BB play, then I think that your #1 roster is really the best bet.
Agreed. However i would argue that if he wants a more standard style of play (assuming that not fouling at all can be called standard, as it's not in my book seeing that i foul even when playing wood elves), then he would be better off playing another team, as necromantic are not very well suited to a non-fouling game. It's like playing amazon and never making a single dodge roll because you don't like dodging! |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 09:58 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie-
I thought you stated that you selected guard to make your team a more effective blocking squad. If this is true then it should help you regardless of the opponent.
Since you played against a team that regenerates, that lets you get multiple casualty opportunities against the same player. (Therefore more casualty opportunities overall.)
In my opinion, if you have guard players, than this gives your team a numerical advantage even if they have 11 players on the pitch. They may have 11 players, but the ratio of assist-able players on your team is greater.
Had you not fouled them, but set-up the guard assisted blocks, you may have gotten the casualties that counted, and won that category.
-Rob |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 10:07 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
KarlLagerbottom wrote: I thought you stated that you selected guard to make your team a more effective blocking squad. If this is true then it should help you regardless of the opponent.
No, i didn't say why i took guard. But since you're asking, i took guard after game 2 so that my minotaur could make 3 dice blitzes. It had nothing to do with scoring casualties as i only went for most casualty on game 6 after my loss on game 5 kept me out of any hope for the league cup. Guard was pretty useless overall and i would take tackle instead on the blitzer if i were to do it all over again.
Quote: Since you played against a team that regenerates, that lets you get multiple casualty opportunities against the same player. (Therefore more casualty opportunities overall.)
No, it lets me be outnumbered and get fewer casualties because of that. You get a lot more casualties from playing 9 against 6 than from playing 9 against 11.
Quote: In my opinion, if you have guard players, than this gives your team a numerical advantage even if they have 11 players on the pitch. They may have 11 players, but the ratio of assist-able players on your team is greater.
I had a single guard player, and none left after turn one. Besides, why do you keep babling about guard? That's not the point! The point is whether dirty player was useful!
Quote: Had you not fouled them, but set-up the guard assisted blocks, you may have gotten the casualties that counted, and won that category.
There can't be any guard assisted blocks since there are no guard players! Are you even reading my posts? |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 10:16 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
I should also mention that having 3 dirty players is pretty useless when playing against an undead team that has 2, as my opponent did! You can't win a fouling war against undead, because their sent off players are worth less than yours and because their injured players are prone to regenerate anyway.
I ended up fouling a lot less than i would otherwise because it turned the ref towards me and helped the undead more than it helped me! And there's not much use in having dirty players if you can't use them! |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 10:35 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
babling? What???s babling...maybe you mean babbling. 
You're right though...I misread one of your posts. I had thought you stated the reason that you took guard. MY point is that I believe that Guard is easily as good as Dirty Player. Sure Dp gives you +2 to knocking out prone players, but even a single fast player with Guard can change the complexion of a game. He can potentially use this skill twice per turn without even rolling a single die.
All this without making fouling a major part of a coaches game plan. The whole point of this thread is to discuss possibilities for Necro rosters. On that I agree with Spazz that the team???s flexibility is their strength. Sure the cheap/expendable foulers are AN option, but that is not the only, or even the best way to go...imagine playing with the intention of scoring...the one dimensional foulers are not well suited to adapt to every situation.
Anyway...that's my two cents. Let the babbling come to a close. |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 10:55 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
I agree that one more guard player is better than a 3rd dirty player (having one dirty player is crucial for any team, having two is better, having 3 is overkill for anyone but undead, necro and khemri). However, like i already said, i didn't have any player with strength access left to give guard to! I had 2 players with strength access; one took block and the other already had guard! If i had one more available for a skill, i would have probably given him mighty blow though. Now that gets your CAS rate up pretty nicely!
Back on topic. Like i said, having one dirty player is crucial no matter what race you play. It can help you get rid of that pesky wardancer or bull centaur or rat ogre or... well, you get the point. Having a second dirty player is great because it lets you foul all you want until your player gets sent off, while still being sure of having a dirty player available for the second half. However, in tournaments you usually get very few skills so there may be something better for your team than a second dirty player.
When it comes to regenerating teams though, going with less than 3 dirty players is arguably a bad move, and going with less than 2 is a huge mistake! You've got really cheap players, which means that you can easily bring a team of 15 or 16 players to a tournament, facing mostly teams of 11 or 12. Trading players 1 for 1 through fouls then gives you an incredible advantage.
Undead have 2 main strengths : mummies and cheap linemen. Khemri have 2 main strengths : mummies and cheap linemen. Necromantic teams have 2 main strengths : werewolves and cheap linemen. Playing necromantic without two werewolves is a big mistake as it ignores one of their greatest strengths. Playing necromantic with only 11 players, similarly, is just as huge a mistake if not more.
You should not ignore your team's strengths. Would you go to a tournament with a skaven team that has zero gutter runner? Would you go to a tournament with a wood elf team that has zero wardancer? Would you go to a tournament with a goblin team that has zero trolls? Would you go to a tournament with an undead team that has zero expendable player? Sure you can, but that's not a very wise choice.
You should always maximize your race's strengths. And if you don't like those strengths (e.g. you don't like fouling), then you should pick another race. Dwarves are best at playing the clock and scoring 8 turn TDs. If you don't like stalling, don't go to a tournament with dwarves trying to make 2 turn TDs with passing plays! Just pick another race instead. If you don't like fouling, don't go to a tournament with a regenerating race fielding only 11 players! Pick another race that better fits your tastes. |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 11:12 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Basically, it comes down to this. You say A is viable, i say B is more viable. I provide reasons why A is not so good (overpriced FG, lack of replacement players) and why B is better (30k dirty players being a great asset that any team would love to have). Then you just come back saying "but A is also viable".
Unless you can provide reasons why A is better in some way, or problems with B, i don't see any reason why someone should go to a tournament with A. More to the point, i don't see any reason why we should encourage someone to go with A in a "strategy and tactics" forum like this one. |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 28, 2004 - 11:20 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Just to be clear, i do try to score with such dirty player heavy teams. In fact, i often try to score as soon as possible, if only so i can replace sent off players by new bodies. I always try to win, and win by as many TDs as possible. But i truly believe that with regenerating races, this is the best way to do it.
Besides, 2 werewolves and 2 wights can do plenty of passing and scoring. After all, werewolves do have 8 MA and catch! But don't forget that they also have frenzy and claw and can rack up casualties just as fast as mummies! Use them to their full potential! |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Spazzfist |
|
|
Post subject: !
Posted: Sep 29, 2004 - 06:34 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3953
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie wrote: Agreed. However i would argue that if he wants a more standard style of play (assuming that not fouling at all can be called standard, as it's not in my book seeing that i foul even when playing wood elves), then he would be better off playing another team, as necromantic are not very well suited to a non-fouling game. It's like playing amazon and never making a single dodge roll because you don't like dodging!
Now here is where your argument goes out the window Zombie. Just because somebody does not agree with your idea of how a team should be played does not mean that he should have to play another team. I have played against necros before (and not a dirty player in sight) and they gave me a real hard time! Now I know that I am leaving myself open for a cheap shot here, but I did win the Bunker Dungeonbowl league and was (almost) undefeated in the Bunker's Spike! league before that, and so do speak with some experience. Played properly a necro team without dirty players can be a really solid team!
The necro team has many advantages and strengths. What I feel to be it's greatest strength is it's flexibility. Some teams (like dwarves) are made to block, they are too slow to do much else, and their skills dictate it. The Wood elves are too lightly armoured to get into protracted combats and need to keep dodging and moving. But the necro team can do it all: they have the S3 M8 werewlves with catch (and frenzy) and the M7 ghouls with dodge both of whom make excellent catchers; they have the S4 Stand firm Blockers; the M6 A3 blitzers with block, and then the super cheap linemen to fill in the gaps. They can punch holes, they can do running plays, they can pass and fake out with werewolves running deep. I have seen this many times in facing them, and no player on the team should be underestimated. In a league their lack of an apothecary can be nail-biting, but in a resurrection tourney they have no fear!
As for your argument about the Amazons, they are meant to dodge because of their low armour value and their dodge skill. To not dodge with them is not only suicidal, it is not making use of the skills that they have. This does not equate to the undead team. Just because you can have more zombies does that mean that they are meant to be sent off for fouling? Provided your opponent does not foul you back (which they would be foolish to if you had so many dirty players) then you are going to be caugvht on a 4+ after the first attempt.
And forgive me if I am not as willing as you to do the math, but perhaps you could explain to me how your math supports this idea that fouling is a sound strategy. For the sake of the argument, say that you are able to get an assist or two and punch through the armour every time (which you won't). The odds are greatly in the favour of the injury only being a stunned result. The number "7" is the most common rolled on 2d6, so that part is simple. But then you might get caught and sent off. Do it again and your chances are 50/50 of getting caught but your chances of injury are not improving. Couple this with a turnover suffered, and then also consider the extra players that you are so fond of are not going to come on until the next half or touchdown, and it seems like a pretty dodgy theory to me. One that lacks flexibility as well.
So this strategy you suggest could be viable but only if the dice were improbably in your favour. You yourself admit that it is only based on theory (in a tournament) so I think maybe we should wait until you have tried it more extensively or maybe hear from someone else who has tried it and they can tell whether or not it has worked for them.
Spazz |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 29, 2004 - 10:46 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
| I agree that Necro can do it all, should do it all, and would do it all if played by me. They are indeed a flexible team. But you can do all that AND foul. If you don't, you're denying yourself one of the greatest strengths of the team and shooting yourself in the foot. You have yet to give a valid reason (or any reason at all for that matter, as you haven't addressed the issue at all) why fouling with them doesn't increase your chance of winning. |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
