| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Sep 30, 2004 - 10:55 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Willi wrote: 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.
Even if you don't foul a single time you're still better off taking more players. For the price of a reroll, you can have 2 extra zombies. For the price of a flesh golem, you could have 4 zombies. That's a very small price to pay to have extra reserve. |
_________________
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 30, 2004 - 11:46 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3953
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie wrote: Even if you don't foul a single time you're still better off taking more players. For the price of a reroll, you can have 2 extra zombies. For the price of a flesh golem, you could have 4 zombies. That's a very small price to pay to have extra reserve.
I would tend to agree with that. You cannot count on regeneration, and there is nothing worse than being lower than your opponent with they players on field. Zombie's previous point is very valid - the zombies are dirt cheap, and this is one of their main advantages. Foul or not, it would be wise to capatalize on that.
Wait a minute...... did I just agree with Zombie???  
Spazz |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Sputnik |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 01, 2004 - 01:53 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 512
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote: I actually played against two very similar lieups and found it quite amusing!
Could you explain what you mean by this Sputnik?
Well, I could go into this in detail in form af a game report, but I won't. My best advice to anyone is to test rosters against the same opponent and the same team to see the differences. Again, personal preference and own style of play makes you chose one golem, two of them or none at all, 12 players, 13, 14, skill choice etc. 
I encountered two Necro teams with tons of zombies and no golems at all. One had no ghoul, one had one included, so "similar" to Zombies suggested lineup. Both times the zombies were in for the fouling game, too. Base line is that the weres are really good. However, if you concentrate on them and hunt them down at any price, the opponent is left with zombies and two wights. It then becomes more a game where you have to rely on luck for the last turns to get anything going.
The extra zombies were a nice addition in both games and I was outnumbered both times early, but the many zombies do have trouble scoring, and in the end the one with more TDs wins, not the one with the most zombies on the pitch.
In a tournament with more than four games you either get fast teams finishing you off in the first half before they lose too many players, or you get slow teams like orcs or dwarfs where your bench won't come into consideration much and your lack of anything except zombies might become a problem after a while. Pushing it to the limit in a six game tournament with said roster is quite hard, and it might work half of the time, but not six times in a row, from my limited experience. So if you go for not being last after six gamnes, well....
And if you don't know what exactly to do but your opponent knows and is prepared, then you play uphill before even touching yout turn marker for the first time. The number of zombies won't be helpful at all if you are lost at the board.
People sometimes tell you stories about how a team should be played and how that lineup or that lineup will work. They will construct theoretical apects to point out strength and how their masterplan works brilliantly. They will point out why you failed, too. Most of these people consider rolling a "1" bad luck, but if they roll a "6", that was brilliant tactics.  So in the absence of them giving you a demonstartion how successful you can be with that setup, take their ideas to your board, find out yourself whether their ideas hold any merit and get your personal opinion from testing. That really helps!
Sputnik |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 01, 2004 - 02:00 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Sputnik wrote: or you get slow teams like orcs or dwarfs where your bench won't come into consideration much and your lack of anything except zombies might become a problem after a while.
Could you explain that? From my experience, it's against bashy teams that having numerical superiority helps the most, and it's also against those teams that having lots of reserves is most important. |
_________________
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Sputnik |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 01, 2004 - 02:36 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 512
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote: Could you explain that? From my experience, it's against bashy teams that having numerical superiority helps the most, and it's also against those teams that having lots of reserves is most important.
Sure.
Slow teams like dwarfs, CDs or Orcs might go for long, grinding drives. Thus, every player your Necros lose is gone for that drive=basically that half. Any replacements won't help you until the half ends or the TD is scored in turn 8. Your necros have less AV, less block skills, only ST3 (like the dwarfs, granted) and you have to carefully position them since they are too slow to cover ground if needed. You will have a hard time getting one of the opponents players out by blocking, and fouling might get you sent off as well, leaving you with less and less players as well. The opponent might be a bit more successful against your zombies due to no block/AV8 on your side. Your necros lack a cage breaker or the strength/skills to go 1-on-1 too much. Against Orcs with some BOs and a big guy, even one zombie more is still a tough matchup.
Having a dirty player helps, but let's face it: you will get one skill after a match in a tournament most of the time. And your weres with frenzy should get block as a priority so as to successfully knock players over, not eating too many of your rr by just blocking with a both-down result, and it helps them not being knocked over themselves when being blocked. The weres are your best players, IMO you should really skill them up first since they will do most blitzing/blocking and have to be proctected a bit more due to no reg/apo. Which leaves you with a dirty player after game 3. Fouling AV9 guys without a DP however makes it less effective.
An Orc player with only ten Orcs for the second half, but with a big guy and some BOs will still have a good chance to pull this game off IMO.
As I posted earlier: it might work from time to time to go with this lineup, but I am not sure whether therewith you will suceed six games in a row in any given tournament without really being lucky.
Sputnik |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 01, 2004 - 10:52 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Granted, this would work better if you could have 4 skills by the time you play against tough teams. Here, a tournament like the Death Bowl where you get 2 skills before the tournament even starts helps a lot.
However, i'm not sure i agree with your point about drives lasting whole halves. I say if they want to do that, let them! Sure they'll have you outnumbered in the first drive, but they'll be in trouble in second half!
The typical dwarf game goes like this. Opponent receives and scores in 2 turns. Dwarves receive and score in 7. Dwarves receive and score in 8. 2-1 win. In this case, we'd get necros receive and score in 2 turns. Dwarves receive and score in 7. During first half, 3 dwarves are fouled off, 2 zombies sent off, 4 zombies CASed (2 regenerate). This is pretty much a worst-case scenario. Second half starts with 8 dwarves vs 11 necros. Dwarves can't score in 8 turns and probably even lose the ball.
I still think that this roster is better equipped to face dwarves than wood elves. After all, you can outnumber wood elves 11 to 3 and still lose! |
_________________
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Kolja_TBBF |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 12, 2004 - 05:35 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 72
Status: Offline
|
|
Here's what I think is a good roster:
2 WW
2 Wights
2 Ghouls
6 zombies
3 RR
5 FF
That gives 12 players, which is vital in the tourney setting, and 3 RR which is vital in general. 12 players is great for keeping from being outnumbered (bad for a team with MV4 players) and also to allow for a dirtyplayer to foul a bit.
Another option is:
1 Golem
2 WW
2 Wights
2 Ghouls
5 zombies
2 RR
3 FF
Also 12 players but with a bit more strength for facing orcs, etc. The trade off of the RR and the Golem is a tough call.
Kolja |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Grumbledook |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 13, 2004 - 11:27 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 922
Status: Offline
|
|
wasn't that golem roster the one i beat you with when i used a 900k team ;]
ok you got the last laugh in the actual tournament when i rolled get the ref, though from the times I have played against necro teams, I have found if they get the early cas they are very hard to go against
if they don't then I don't seem to have much trouble against them
and zombie assuming you fouled 3 dwarfs off don't forget they also have thick skull and are going to be harder to get the assists against them, they may well have got your weres as well, so while they might not win, they still have a great chance at a draw
and well setting up a roster for draws in your average tournament imho is silly
must admit though playing against golems is a right pain, worth their money is another question though |
_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'
Jon
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 13, 2004 - 01:57 PM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie wrote: 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!
Really? I've never taken any on my Undead team in a tournament. Do you think if I took your advice I'd do better next time?
I've only played a few games with a TR100 Necro team so I'm still quite undecided on the best way to go with them. I've not been particularly impressed with the Flesh Golems but I really wouldn't want to be without the Werewolves, Wights or Ghouls. I am actually quite surprised that people seem to be overlooking the Ghouls so much, they really are very useful players. I'd use them as throwers/runners linking to the Werewolves as catchers/blitzers.
I'm not convinced that the Zombie horde and foul tactic will come off too well. You lack the strength to get enough easy victims by sheer force and don't have enough block skill and mobility to do it by skill. And it would be too easy to tie your dirty players down.
I think I'd go for Kolja's first roster, because 1 Flesh Golem by himself would not be enough of a strength boost for my liking. I'd prefer the third re roll. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 13, 2004 - 02:19 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
You don't have the strength and you don't have the skills, but you do have the numbers, and that's the most important thing when playing the numbers game (obviously). Having a team of 15 or 16 players against a team of 11, you are going to have more than your opponent come second half, there's no way around it.
And i agree, ghouls are pretty good players and you need both of them in a tournament environment. |
_________________
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
longfang |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 14, 2004 - 12:54 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
Posts: 189
Status: Offline
|
|
I wish everyone submitted posts as helpful as Sputniks  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
LouisX |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 15, 2004 - 06:45 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 518
Status: Offline
|
|
What's happened to LF's original post ? It summed up what most thought about this thread...
No need to write 4 pages to explain us you don't have anything intersting to say about necros Zombie. i never played them at 100 TR but doing what you suggest would be as usefull as shooting yourself in the foot. |
_________________
Insidious&French
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Deathwing |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 15, 2004 - 08:46 AM
|
|
Former President
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
England
Posts: 1289
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
LouisX wrote: What's happened to LF's original post ? It summed up what most thought about this thread...
It was self edited after advice was sought and given as to whether it was 'over the top' or not. You know Del! |
_________________
 Ex-UK NTO,ex- Senior Tourney Co-Ordinator, ex-VP and ex-President....because Lycos says that new members don't know who I was..
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
LouisX |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 15, 2004 - 08:56 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 518
Status: Offline
|
|
| It's such a wonderful world |
_________________
Insidious&French
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
juck101 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 15, 2004 - 03:29 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 04, 2004
England
Posts: 74
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
skele/zombie team sounds a laugh but against a decent player i cant see the 30k boys cutting the mustard. at the end of the pick necro if you want were's and if not take undead as they offer something else. - personaly i cant cope without block and dodge on my stars, thus im better with wood elf.
only ever play to your strengths - or if you can paint play with some decent figs  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
