| Author |
Message |
jigplums |
|
Post subject: lrb 5 mummy "6+4"
 Posted: Aug 13, 2009 - 05:51 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 03, 2009
Posts: 44
Status: Offline
|
|
| so +MV seems favourite to me, but av is tempting, or is a normal skill pick better than both? He has piling on already |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Hullekoenig |
|
|
Post subject: RE: lrb 5 mummy "6+4"
Posted: Aug 13, 2009 - 07:38 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 10, 2005
Posts: 43
Status: Offline
|
|
i find that neither +1 ma nor +1 av are too tempting.I would go for stand firm or guard. maybe even break tackle (your mummy is not that easily pinned down).
But then again i will never ever take +1 armour (except maybe a fully skilled player that i don't know what else to do).
+1 MA i only give to ball carriers or maybe blitzers. Never linemen or "big guys". |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
jigplums |
|
|
Post subject: RE: lrb 5 mummy "6+4"
Posted: Aug 13, 2009 - 08:18 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 03, 2009
Posts: 44
Status: Offline
|
|
if it weren't for it being a mummy, and was a regular big guy i would agree with you. with the mummy's MV 3 when he's knocked down, or gets back up after piling on, he can blitz without going for it, or move back into position to put opps in tackle zones. If it keeps him potentially piling on every turn, i think thats quite filthy.
With the AV10 when he piles on and my opp decides to put the boot in, it will make him less likely to be damaged. The diff between AV 9 and 10 is pretty big on 2D. 1/12 vs 1/6
why wouldn't you take AV? i find it hard over things that would "help me win" but then again winning the war or attrition can certainly help me win
If i was going to take a skill it would likely be guard, then break tackle next. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
DarkDancer17 |
|
|
Post subject: RE: lrb 5 mummy "6+4"
Posted: Aug 13, 2009 - 08:57 AM
|
|
Joined: Sep 19, 2003
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Posts: 211
Location: Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Status: Offline
|
|
AV can be nullified.
I'm hesitant to take AV on any player - but I have on a lark before.  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
jigplums |
|
|
Post subject: RE: lrb 5 mummy "6+4"
Posted: Aug 14, 2009 - 06:48 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 03, 2009
Posts: 44
Status: Offline
|
|
by nullified you mean crowd push, stab, claw etc im guessing.
ive decided on the MV, makes him harder to get away from and should help with the piling on |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Axtklinge |
|
|
Post subject: RE: lrb 5 mummy "6+4"
Posted: Aug 14, 2009 - 12:48 PM
|
|
Joined: May 29, 2006
Portugal
Posts: 325
Location: Portugal
Status: Offline
|
|
Not sure if thats what DarkDancer ment but "Claw" can easily nullify AV.
Thats you call on the advance but I wouldnt give it the extra MA as mummys (as other big guys) are far too easy to pin down because of their low AG.
Like it was sugested before I would choose between Guard and perhaps Break Tackle for more mobility.
I know its rather frustrating when those big advance rolls (10+) come to players that wont realy benefit from them...
Cheers
A. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: lrb 5 mummy "6+4"
Posted: Aug 14, 2009 - 02:31 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
| MV4 mummies are great - can get up and hit players in their TZ on the Blitz without making a GFI. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
PubBowler |
|
|
Post subject: RE: lrb 5 mummy "6+4"
Posted: Aug 15, 2009 - 09:18 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 26, 2007
Glasgow UK
Posts: 44
Location: Glasgow UK
Status: Offline
|
|
Not the AV for certain.
Very little statistical improvement and just as vulnerable to Claw.
I'd take MA but wouldn't think you were foolish to take Guard, Stand Firm etc instead |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
jigplums |
|
|
Post subject: RE: lrb 5 mummy "6+4"
Posted: Aug 17, 2009 - 08:54 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 03, 2009
Posts: 44
Status: Offline
|
|
| the ma would also make a latter choice of break tackle that bit more useful, wouldn't you think? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
