FUMBBL :: Online Blood Bowl League

Wreckage

Joined: Aug 15, 2004

Posted: Jul 10, 2016 - 11:28

Well I said go into contact when you have higher strength, to add numbers against a target you are already in contact and when you have guard given he doesn't. I think that's pretty sound advice and by no means indicates no contact whatsoever.

Purplegoo

Joined: Mar 23, 2006

Posted: Jul 10, 2016 - 11:29

Well. Sort of. Likely a forum language mix-up.

There are precious few actually good Blood Bowl strategy resources around. Perhaps we're seeing why. Wink

Wreckage

Joined: Aug 15, 2004

Posted: Jul 10, 2016 - 11:37

Purplegoo wrote:

There are precious few actually good Blood Bowl strategy resources around. Perhaps we're seeing why. Wink

Uhm, why don't go write your own then.

Purplegoo

Joined: Mar 23, 2006

Posted: Jul 10, 2016 - 11:48

For exactly the reason we've just uncovered?! Smile

Half-joking aside, I've put bits together here and there. To be honest, Blood Bowl nerds are a curious group. For every time you say something sensible, someone will be all loud and explain how their strategy of Accurate on Saurus wins them games because they 'make it work'. After getting lost in the noise a few times, most of the sensible voices go away. See: TFF. Wink

Anyhow, enough of this nonsense. Back to scrummages.

licker

Joined: Jul 10, 2009

Posted: Jul 11, 2016 - 19:32

Hmm...

I sort of disagree there guys.

I think BB is actually a fairly simple game once you understand the rules to the extent that you need only concern yourself with positions and not with trying to figure out if a war dancer can leap into your cage or not.

Now, that doesn't mean that I think playing the game is actually simple, but that the general strategies you should be looking to employ for set ups and then after the kick off roll has resolved are not really so many and varied that it's difficult to master them (because it's not).

What's difficult (for some) and where you begin to see the spread in skill level is when you start taking the risk management aspects into consideration. That's where there is no real obvious answer (other than on turns 8 and 16 probably). That's where the difference between risking a 1/9 block failure vs. securing a position with a 1/36 dodge take precedence.

Before I left for vacation I presented a fairly straight forward quiz from a pretty standard type of position players would find themselves in. The answers were very uniformly 'just score' as they should have been.

Yet...

Some of the 'what ifs' shed a bit of light on how different coaches approached those situations.

Is it worth risking a 1/36 block with your cpomber on the opponent on turn 8 if double skulls means you don't score?

Of course, there are a lot of 'it depends', but that's where the general strategies need to be understood and covered. If your team wins by massive player removal (like high TV chaos vs. high TV elfs) then do you risk the 1/36 no TD to attempt the removal to make the 2nd half easier?

Again, 'it depends', but the basic premise of what you should be trying to accomplish on your drives (other than score, duh) isn't hard to learn.

As asked in this thread...

When to scrum and when not to scrum? Well that's not really the question. The question is, if you are playing the 'weaker' side, why did you allow a position which resulted in a scrum?

If you are playing the 'stronger' side, why did you not try to force a position with a scrum?

Goo already pointed that out, but the basic idea isn't that hard to communicate. Now, how you go about 'forcing' your positions on your opponent is a different matter.

pythrr

Joined: Mar 07, 2006

Posted: Jul 11, 2016 - 19:37

i like big scrums and I can not lie.

wait, what are we talking aboot?

_________________

pythrr

Joined: Mar 07, 2006

Posted: Jul 11, 2016 - 19:38

Wreckage wrote:

Well I said go into contact when you have higher strength, to add numbers against a target you are already in contact and when you have guard given he doesn't. I think that's pretty sound advice and by no means indicates no contact whatsoever.

unless you are zombies

zombies should always go into contact

reason: zombies like hugs

_________________

mrt1212

Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Posted: Jul 11, 2016 - 20:16

licker wrote:

Hmm...

Goo already pointed that out, but the basic idea isn't that hard to communicate. Now, how you go about 'forcing' your positions on your opponent is a different matter.

To expand on this -

I think positioning really is a zero sum game. Against better coaches their positioning makes yours worse, your bad positioning makes theirs better. It becomes obvious the more games you play and where you find yourself in the pecking order on this aptitude.

pythrr

Joined: Mar 07, 2006

Posted: Jul 11, 2016 - 20:32

mrt1212 wrote:

licker wrote:

Hmm...

Goo already pointed that out, but the basic idea isn't that hard to communicate. Now, how you go about 'forcing' your positions on your opponent is a different matter.

To expand on this -

I think positioning really is a zero sum game. Against better coaches their positioning makes yours worse, your bad positioning makes theirs better. It becomes obvious the more games you play and where you find yourself in the pecking order on this aptitude.

yeah. it's a dynamic process, like dancing or wrestling. a mixture of active and reactive, bluffing, guiding, second guessing. we loves it.

_________________

Wreckage

Joined: Aug 15, 2004

Posted: Jul 12, 2016 - 11:15

licker wrote:

Is it worth risking a 1/36 block with your cpomber on the opponent on turn 8 if double skulls means you don't score?

Of course, there are a lot of 'it depends', but that's where the general strategies need to be understood and covered.

I think the answers there were probably leaning a bit more often towards the 'just score' than they would actually go down in games just because it's a theoretical example.
In the heat of a game you may feel the incentive of a turn8 cas much stronger.

licker

Joined: Jul 10, 2009

Posted: Jul 12, 2016 - 19:15

pythrr wrote:

mrt1212 wrote:

licker wrote:

Hmm...

Goo already pointed that out, but the basic idea isn't that hard to communicate. Now, how you go about 'forcing' your positions on your opponent is a different matter.

To expand on this -

I think positioning really is a zero sum game. Against better coaches their positioning makes yours worse, your bad positioning makes theirs better. It becomes obvious the more games you play and where you find yourself in the pecking order on this aptitude.

yeah. it's a dynamic process, like dancing or wrestling. a mixture of active and reactive, bluffing, guiding, second guessing. we loves it.

It may indeed be zero sum, but it's also very dynamic. One good roll of the dice on your turn can flip the table. A couple timely stuns is all it takes sometimes.

Of course your opponent might counter by just killing your players instead Smile

licker

Joined: Jul 10, 2009

Posted: Jul 12, 2016 - 19:17

Wreckage wrote:

licker wrote:

Is it worth risking a 1/36 block with your cpomber on the opponent on turn 8 if double skulls means you don't score?

Of course, there are a lot of 'it depends', but that's where the general strategies need to be understood and covered.

I think the answers there were probably leaning a bit more often towards the 'just score' than they would actually go down in games just because it's a theoretical example.
In the heat of a game you may feel the incentive of a turn8 cas much stronger.

I agree with this, but to be fair to the answers, I did caveat the question by stating that spp and other considerations were not an issue, only winning.

Though I did feel that people overlooked a bit how attrition plays a role in winning for the bash teams vs. the agile teams.