Kam
Joined: Nov 06, 2012
|
 Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 01:47 |
 
|
Say his name 3 times in the mirror and he appears.  |
_________________
GLN 17 is out!
 |
|
seanh1986
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 02:42 |
|
| licker wrote: | | mrt1212 wrote: | | Licker channeling Rat_Salat levels of team building dogma ittd. |
Not really.
Necro simply play better without ghouls. It's just that simple. |
I strongly disagree with that statement. I think Necro is a much stronger team with a ghoul ball carrier. It frees up your 3 ag players to help with the battle on the front lines. Without ghouls, you have only 4 players with 3 Ag, which is very little room for error when those guys end up in the KO box or get stunned.
My win % skyrocketed as soon as I factored in ghouls. |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 03:12 |
|
Yes, you have 4 ag3 players, but importantly, 2 of them are MA8 av8 with regen.
Ghouls look good, but really they suck, your TV goes up and you don't get much back in return. Undead find them a necessary evil, but few undead teams play with all 4, necro simply don't need them to be successful.
Now, if you are trying to build a 2000tv necro team then play with them, but frankly, that's not a tv range where necro is strong. |
|
|
seanh1986
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 04:03 |
|
I think Necro are ideal with one ghoul. Sure Hands is necessary and block is ideal. All you want him for is to run around, secure the ball, and not get hit while you allow your wolves / wights / golems to clear the way.
Without a Ghoul, you need to sacrifice either a wolf or a wight to deal with ball-duties and I found that severely limits your options offensively. Necro is just a better team with even just a rookie ghoul dealing with the ball.
I Ghouls have a short shelf life though, so I usually try to keep a spare ghoul on the bench.
My Necro team has been quite successful, I think. I attribute that mostly to the use of the ghoul which allows to free up the other players. My ranked necro have only a near 50% record as compared to ~80% wins for my box necro. The issue was not that I'm terrible at picking... Although that may also be true... My ranked Necro I started out without a ghoul and only recently added a ghoul (winning one game).
Clearly, I don't play much with my ranked necros, but when I started playing with my box necros I noticed I struggled without a ghoul and threw one into the mix, I haven't looked back since. I always thought necro was better without ghouls until I started using them.
Undead doesn't usually use 4 ghouls because 1) it's near impossible to keep 4 alive long enough and 2) it becomes a liability to have too many non-regen players.
The lack of regen on a ghoul makes them a huge liability in the long-run, but in the short run their 7 ma is helpful. On undead they are a necessary evil because you don't have werewolves and mummies are too slow / few in numbers to anchor the whole team alone.
For necro, you don't need ghouls to do everything you need them to do as undead, they are there just to support the other players, if a ghoul dies, who cares! But they are most certainly extremely valuable as ball carriers for necromantic.
At another extreme, bghandras, the #1 coach on the site's necro team uses 2 ghouls and no flesh golems! Which is a funky/weird idea that seems somewhat revolutionary. I personally think golems are a great bargain for what they are, but clearly he's having success with their mobility and keeping them in a TV bracket where necromantic is stronger, etc.
EDIT: I do keep a 2nd ghoul now that I'm at high TV because eventually ghouls die and honestly having a spare ghoul can make all the difference offensively |
|
|
MrNomad
Joined: Mar 24, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 04:27 |
|
Ghouls are cheap for what you get out of them. Besides it's necro team...what else is he going to spend money on? Ghouls add more speed and an extra ball handling player....always important to any team. |
|
|
Demercel
Joined: May 10, 2014
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 16:57 |
|
Hello againg.
Many thanks for your advises. Finally i get +Ma but i like all the points of view. Probably i will try to do a new team without gouls and try wich option is more reliable for me.
All the comments, make me think and try to be better coach, and i have to much to learn. So thanks againg |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 18:00 |
|
| licker wrote: | | Necro simply play better without ghouls. |
Maybe when the goal is to set a new banking record?
...What's it at right now? 11 million? |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 18:02 |
|
| Demercel wrote: | Hello againg.
Many thanks for your advises. Finally i get +Ma but i like all the points of view. Probably i will try to do a new team without gouls and try wich option is more reliable for me. |
If I'd skip something it would be the golems... not the ghouls... |
|
|
Nextflux
Joined: Jan 22, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 18:06 |
|
I would also say +ma but he will die before becoming a legend, first of all he is a target simply for beeing a ghoul, then for having av7, and beeing a goalscoring threat.
I would use ghouls on all undead teams that can have them, though they will all die so they should be used to have fun with and score with untill the inevitable happens.(I would just use max 2 of them though) |
|
|
akaRenton
Joined: Apr 15, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 19:25 |
|
| Wreckage wrote: | | licker wrote: | | Necro simply play better without ghouls. |
Maybe when the goal is to set a new banking record?
...What's it at right now? 11 million? |
Not for long. Cranberries are at about 10.66mil and climbing steadily. Once we get the record we'll do a crazy inducement splurge match with full inducements possible
Back to the OP, I'd say having a MA9 ballcarrier that leaves your wolves free to bash is great. Maybe fire the other ghoul if you're going to fire one. It's not like sure hands is a double for the MA9's next skill. |
_________________
Dirty Cranberries - All zombie funtimes
Fumbbl Image Library - Free images to make logos, player bio pics etc |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 20:32 |
|
Ghouls are NOT the weak points. At low TV flesh golems are bad for the money, and at high TV wights are some kind of bloat compared to ghouls, as block is easy to get on any player, and I want to blitz with the wolves instead of the wights. |
_________________
 |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 21:12 |
|
AV7 no regen no apo
vs.
AV9 regen thick skull
Yep, one of those is definitely a weak point.
I suppose you could play without either and totally min/max a low tv team that would rip everything apart (in theory). Heck, you can even play with just one wight and two wolves.
But the key for me is really S access. Ditching Wights and FGs means not much guard, and that's a positional problem for a team that is low AG, low MA, and low ST. I grant that wolves are one of the best positionals and values in the game, they cover up a lot of deficiencies, letting you play with or without other positionals successfully. So to a degree it is a matter of playing style.
However, I will continue to maintain that ghouls are completely unnecessary for Necro, and ultimately hurt the team. But if you are really careful in R and don't play any one with tackle (not saying anyone is doing this, just saying...) you can probably survive with your ghouls better. |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 21:36 |
|
| licker wrote: |
Ditching Wights and FGs means not much guard, and that's a positional problem for a team that is low AG, low MA, and low ST. |
Nonono. Ditch ONE OF THEM, not both. They are competing for the guard spots. Guard is necessary, but 2+ guard is not necessary. Plus 1 zombie will get guard at some point. |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 22:15 |
|
But the real issue is that early you need a wight for tackle/pomb, since there's no guarantee you'll get it on a wolf ever. Wolfs are great, but starting with no base skills means you are that much slower to build them. They are durable, and they can earn spp easy, so it's not as bad, but why do I want a ghoul stealing spp from my best players?
Ghouls are fine later in the teams development, if you plan on going to higher TVs.
Otherwise they are worse than a wolf in every way imaginable (ok, you get dodge for free, but you lose MA, AV, ...), and cannot fill the same role wights fill.
Necro are a cool team though, but they are cool because of the Wolfs and FGs. Block/Guard on a FG and he's basically set to be the kind of annoying road block you dream of. Sure, you'll argue CLAW, but meh, I'll just argue TACKLE and we'll be even 
And since we (well not you) were posting random R teams...
https://www.fumbbl.com/p/team?team_id=689184
It's true, this team did buy a ghoul at one point, but never again! It's even a pretty bloated team that fairs better playing down than facing other 2000tv teams.
https://www.fumbbl.com/p/team?team_id=765494
The B version of it, though I don't play that team that much. Also only 12 games, so YMMV, but I fail to see how a ghoul would help either team.
Neither team proves anything other than that I've played Necro my way
Also this team I retired because I didn't like it.
https://www.fumbbl.com/p/team?team_id=653443
Ran 2 ghouls and won great, because the one stat freak ghoul... But man I wish I had those stats on a wolf instead. |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2015 - 22:15 |
|
|
|
|
| |
Chaos Draft League R...
Search
