| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject: Re: !
 Posted: Sep 29, 2004 - 10:52 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Spazzfist wrote: 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 caught on a 4+ after the first attempt.
I've already told you that even at 4+ send off, in the second half as long as you foul a player worth at least 50k you're coming out ahead. I could show you the whole table i made which contains dozens of entries if you want, and explain the math behind it.
For now, suffice it to say that you obviously forgot the biggest use of the dirty player skill, which is not to give +2 to armour, but rather to give +2 to injury. Also, the chance of getting sent off with the eye on you is not 1/2, but rather 5/12. |
_________________
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 - 12:05 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3953
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie wrote: I agree that Necro can do it all, should do it all, and would do it all if played by me.
Ummm... okay.... so are you really all that?
Zombie wrote: 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.
Like I said I have seen the team VERY effectively played without fouling. While I have said that fouling could be useful I think it is a far stretch to suggest it is their greatest strength. But then that would mean that you are wrong, and that could never happen.....
Zombie wrote: 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.
Zombie, Zombie, Zombie..... You are so fond of accusing other players of not reading your previous posts, yet now you have chosen to ignore what I have said (and not said). I said that it could work, and I said that it was a possible strategy if you should choose to play that way. I think it lacks tactical flexibility, but then hey, rigidity seems to be your thing. Of course, if you can remove the players by any means it will increase your chances of winning. I never said that it didn't nor couldn't work.
All that aside, Zombie, your other "strategy" is becoming clear - in that you will not ever concede that you may be wrong, or that there may be another valid opinion besides your own. People get tired of arguing with you and then you deteremine that they have stopped arguing because you must be right.
Argue all you want. I say that your option is possible, but lacks imagination and flexibility. It is one option, but so far it only seems to be your opinion that it is the best. But how many times have you actually pust this team to the test in a tournament? Oh that's right you haven't yet....
Let someone with experience playing the Necros in a tourney talk Zombie.
Do us all a favour and just agree to disagree and then leave it alone!
Spazz |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 29, 2004 - 12:39 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
How does it decrease flexibility? You can play your game the same way you normally would, except that at the end of every turn, you reserve one player for a foul action. That's all i'm proposing here. No ganging up, no making this the primary objective, just something else that's added on top of everything else. I don't see any decreased flexibility from that.
I do admit when i'm wrong. I've done so numerous times in the past, including in this very forum. But first you'll have to provide decent arguments. So far you've not really provided any argument at all.
Arguying about exprience is ridiculous since i was probably playing Blood Bowl long before you even knew it existed. Hey, maybe before you were even old enough to learn it. You're just resorting to personal attacks because you're starting to realize that you have no real arguments to present. |
_________________
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 - 01:40 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3953
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie wrote: How does it decrease flexibility? You can play your game the same way you normally would, except that at the end of every turn, you reserve one player for a foul action. That's all i'm proposing here. No ganging up, no making this the primary objective, just something else that's added on top of everything else. I don't see any decreased flexibility from that.
Simply because you are eliminating the punchy strength of the golems, their access to strength skills, and you advised to only go with "dirty player" that does not seem like a very limited game function (at least things like "sure hands" have more thsan one use on the field.
Zombie wrote: I do admit when i'm wrong. I've done so numerous times in the past, including in this very forum. But first you'll have to provide decent arguments. So far you've not really provided any argument at all.
Whatever. 
Zombie wrote: Arguying about exprience is ridiculous since i was probably playing Blood Bowl long before you even knew it existed. Hey, maybe before you were even old enough to learn it. You're just resorting to personal attacks because you're starting to realize that you have no real arguments to present.
Uh huh. This is a pretty grand assumption seeing as you know nothing about me. Not only do you assume that I have not been playing for very long, but you also assume that you are older than me. Wrong on both accounts.
I have been in the hobby for 17 years, and have been playing BB since the first edition. Just so you know.
I don't know why you have to be so beligerant about this. But I do not want to argue this one anymore.
Go with team #1 Willi!
Spazz |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 29, 2004 - 01:57 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
The golems are a whole other discussion. Even if i wanted to play Necro with zero dirty player, i still wouldn't take any golems, simply because in my mind they are grossely overcost players and therefore not worth having in such a limited money environment as a TR 100 tournament. I'd rather have extra ghouls, zombies or rerolls.
As for the lack of other skills, it's true that this limits the team's flexibility. But having 3 rerolls helps in this regard. Also, keep in mind that the dirty players should be targetting the other team's skilled players, so the opponent will also lose in flexibility. You still come out ahead flexibility-wise.
The example that you bring up is sure hands, and that happens to be a perfect example to illustrate my point. Sure hands has two funtions : providing a reroll for picking up the ball and protecting you from strip ball. The team i'm proposing has one more reroll, which takes care of the first aspect. As for opponents with strip ball, well dirty players can take care of those!
Willi, if you want to win, go with team #3! |
_________________
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 29, 2004 - 02:03 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Spazzfist wrote: Not only do you assume that I have not been playing for very long, but you also assume that you are older than me. Wrong on both accounts.
The first assumption was a decent one to make since the vast majority of the online Blood Bowl crowd has only starting playing recently (by recently i mean in the last 4 or 5 years). As with all assumptions however, it can be false!
How do you, however, assume that you're older than me? I said "probably" and "maybe". You state as a fact that you're older than i am. What makes you so sure of that? |
_________________
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 29, 2004 - 02:08 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Spazzfist wrote: Let someone with experience playing the Necros in a tourney talk Zombie.
Funny that you should attack my limited tournament experience because i've only been in two so far. I just checked and the Spike! was your first tournament!
This isn't meant as a personal attack. I just thought it was pretty ironic. |
_________________
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 - 02:46 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3953
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie wrote: ...Also, keep in mind that the dirty players should be targetting the other team's skilled players, so the opponent will also lose in flexibility. You still come out ahead flexibility-wise.
Okay, I can see your point on this one. |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Willi |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 30, 2004 - 06:28 AM
|
|
Joined: Sep 04, 2003
Germany
Posts: 56
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
|
|
Ok. Thanks everybody for input (especially Spazzfist and Zombie, I liked your discussion).
To sum it up there seem to be 2 main possibilities: Take lots of players and foul a lot or take more positional players and play the non-fouling style.
I havn´t decided yet which option to take but I promise to report how the tourney went and which roster I used (but that will only be in December).
Thanks again everybody |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Spazzfist |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 30, 2004 - 06:49 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3953
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Willi wrote: Ok. Thanks everybody for input (especially Spazzfist and Zombie, I liked your discussion).
Never guessed you would have sparked such a heated debate, eh? 
I would be very interested to hear how your team makes out. Good luck to you.
Spazz |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 30, 2004 - 07:03 AM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Willi wrote: Ok. Thanks everybody for input (especially Spazzfist and Zombie, I liked your discussion).
To sum it up there seem to be 2 main possibilities: Take lots of players and foul a lot or take more positional players and play the non-fouling style.
I havn´t decided yet which option to take but I promise to report how the tourney went and which roster I used (but that will only be in December).
Thanks again everybody
Be careful Willi...you might not want to publish your choice. I'm sure ZOMEONE will tell you its wrong regardless of what it might be.
As a matter of fact that someone might even tell you that your interpretation of the debate is wrong. 
-Rob |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
 
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Spazzfist |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 30, 2004 - 07:08 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3953
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Actually, I think I would be more interested to hear how the tournament went for you if you went with Zombie's ruff and tumble style of play.
Not only would I be curious to hear about how the team fared in wins/losses but also a general feeling of how your opponents felt about the team.
Zombie may like the theory and numbers game, but I am more a hands-on experience kind of guy.
Spazz |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Sputnik |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 30, 2004 - 08:33 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 512
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Old_Man_Monkey |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 30, 2004 - 08:34 AM
|
|
Joined: Apr 16, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 1252
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spazzfist |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Sep 30, 2004 - 08:41 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3953
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Sputnik wrote: I actually played against two very similar lieups and found it quite amusing!
Could you explain what you mean by this Sputnik?
And what you said also reminds me of advice that I once received: "do not act out of your nature, as you will not be prepared to receive the consequences." what I mean by this is that even though Zombie's team is viable, I would probably not do very well with it as it is not my normal style of play.
Thanks Sputnik! |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
