60 coaches online • Server time: 21:26
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post NBFL Season 32: The ...goto Post Creating a custom to...goto Post Secret League Americ...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Synn



Joined: Dec 13, 2004

Post   Posted: Dec 14, 2007 - 19:24 Reply with quote Back to top

It helps when the roster doesn't have a MA 10 guy on it like it used to Very Happy

__Synn
Macavity



Joined: Nov 23, 2004

Post   Posted: Dec 14, 2007 - 19:37 Reply with quote Back to top

So, if I read your implication correctly, MY opinion doesn't matter because I'm not a "well-known" stunty coach, like Synn, or Shdow, or others, but the fact that they aren't interested in play-testing YOUR race suggestion doesn't matter either, because...... it's yours?

If you have been play-testing a lot, let us in on things you've noticed. How did they match up? Did the Bray take Guard? Did you find that the opponent commited their DT players to the Guard? Did they do better against certain races? Did you find that you went for a lot of one player blocks due to the increased number of ST 3+ players. Did you find you really avoided other team's BGs?

In short. IF you have been play-testing, should it not have resulted in....... something? Either propsed changes, or evidence for or against our concerns? That is the purpose, no?

_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis
Craftnburn



Joined: Jul 29, 2005

Post   Posted: Dec 15, 2007 - 02:30 Reply with quote Back to top

Macavity wrote:
So, if I read your implication correctly, MY opinion doesn't matter because I'm not a "well-known" stunty coach, like Synn, or Shdow, or others, but the fact that they aren't interested in play-testing YOUR race suggestion doesn't matter either, because...... it's yours?

If you have been play-testing a lot, let us in on things you've noticed. How did they match up? Did the Bray take Guard? Did you find that the opponent commited their DT players to the Guard? Did they do better against certain races? Did you find that you went for a lot of one player blocks due to the increased number of ST 3+ players. Did you find you really avoided other team's BGs?

In short. IF you have been play-testing, should it not have resulted in....... something? Either propsed changes, or evidence for or against our concerns? That is the purpose, no?


No that was not my implication in any way. No need to try to pick a fight when it's not there. You asked if it had been tested against various races and coaches, I answered that question. My point about the "well known" coaches (which of course you are one) was that I wasn't trying "hide" the playtesting among a select group, but was trying to get as many experienced coaches as I could playtesting them.

Obviously the playtesting has resulted in a lot of changes, what you see in the first post has been edited to reflect the results of those tests.

My playtest results have basically confirmed what my intent for the team was, it "feels" an awful lot like playing chaos. Fairly good at bashing, but with 7 players without dodge, they have a little trouble with "balling" Their wins tended to be a lot of 1-0,2-1 kind of wins, while there losses tended to be more 0-2,0-3. Either the bashing game worked, or it didn't and the team struggled

I have tested with several guards and it tended to help more on defense (oddly enough) because it made it harder for the opposing team to break through, but on offense it was difficult with the lower MA to get them every place they needed to be. If I used the guards for caging my outlying players got gang smashed, if I used them on the front wedge the got bogged down and I was vulnerable to blitzes around the edges.
johan



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Dec 15, 2007 - 03:33 Reply with quote Back to top

I think this team is probably good to go. I'm slightly concerned about the Guard still, especially on the Dodge players, but this isn't something that anyone can judge properly through Theory-Ball.

I'd like to see playtests with a high-end team, say one that has Guard+PO on a significant amount of players (good thing that's anti-synergistic, at least). Or an 11 Guard team (not the easiest thing to get, but not unachievable either.

_________________
”It's very sad
To see the ancient and distinguished game that used to be
A model of decorum and tranquillity
Become like any other sport, a battleground...”

—Benny Andersson & Björn Ulvaeus, Chess
Macavity



Joined: Nov 23, 2004

Post   Posted: Dec 15, 2007 - 15:14 Reply with quote Back to top

Thanks for your real, and involved, response, Craft. I did apparently imagine the slight, my bad. One more question: Did you find that the positionals were all there right away? I'm of the opinion that buying many positionals should mean you crap out on Re-rolls, does it seem like people will choose between, say, Gors and a Re-roll (as stated in my own proposed team thread, I won't be play-testing until we've hit the million games, so I'm just gonna poke at others!)

_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis
Craftnburn



Joined: Jul 29, 2005

Post   Posted: Dec 15, 2007 - 18:51 Reply with quote Back to top

Macavity wrote:
Thanks for your real, and involved, response, Craft. I did apparently imagine the slight, my bad. One more question: Did you find that the positionals were all there right away? I'm of the opinion that buying many positionals should mean you crap out on Re-rolls, does it seem like people will choose between, say, Gors and a Re-roll (as stated in my own proposed team thread, I won't be play-testing until we've hit the million games, so I'm just gonna poke at others!)


The roster I primarily tested with contained all the positionals and that may not be the best strategy in the long run because, as you say, it puts the team short on rerolls.
Craftnburn



Joined: Jul 29, 2005

Post   Posted: Jan 18, 2008 - 05:05 Reply with quote Back to top

*******Attention*******

Ok, after MUCH consideration, testing and soul searching, I've decided to err on the side of caution with the team. Brays will have A Ph access, not S Ph.

IF they make it into the league, when the evaluation period ends we can decide if they need a boost and possibly switch it then. I think that's a better way to go about it than to let people build teams that Might later be deemed too powerful and have to be wiped clean.

1st Post & Wiki updated with changes...
Jackbedead



Joined: Mar 01, 2004

Post   Posted: Mar 08, 2008 - 07:31 Reply with quote Back to top

I liked the old bray herd when the whole team had frenzy. This team doesn't fit any niche in stunty. There's no real different concept behind it to make it any different. It's basically chaos dwarfs in stunty as it is. I say give the ungors and centigors frenzy. Without G access and no block they'll be a lot of fun and cause a lot of turnovers.

Change the Star to Morghor, lose tail and give him foul appearance and str 4.
garyt1



Joined: Mar 12, 2011

Post   Posted: Feb 19, 2012 - 11:12 Reply with quote Back to top

Ungor are worse than human linesman so shouldn't be 60k. They are Strength2 except for the odd blitz.
Craftnburn



Joined: Jul 29, 2005

Post   Posted: Feb 19, 2012 - 16:41 Reply with quote Back to top

garyt1 wrote:
Ungor are worse than human linesman so shouldn't be 60k. They are Strength2 except for the odd blitz.


Stunty pricing and "regular" pricing don't equate. Players have to be considered in the environment that they're in. St 3 Blitzs against a league of overwhelmingly St 2 players is going to cost you.

btw, Nice Necromancy Wink
Craftnburn



Joined: Jul 29, 2005

Post   Posted: Apr 03, 2016 - 23:07 Reply with quote Back to top

As discussion of new teams in stunty has begun to resurface...

And given that Gnomes haven't shown S access to be completely OP...

I think it's time the Bray's switch back to their original S/M access. 1st Post edited according.
DeathJester74



Joined: Oct 11, 2015

Post   Posted: Apr 03, 2016 - 23:28 Reply with quote Back to top

I do not approve this roster.
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Apr 04, 2016 - 00:01 Reply with quote Back to top

Craftnburn wrote:
As discussion of new teams in stunty has begun to resurface...

And given that Gnomes haven't shown S access to be completely OP...

I think it's time the Bray's switch back to their original S/M access. 1st Post edited according.


I think Ungors should be the lino and the niche being they don't come with the Stunty skill. Both a good and a bad thing.
pokrjax



Joined: Dec 01, 2014

Post   Posted: Apr 04, 2016 - 02:27 Reply with quote Back to top

DeathJester74 wrote:
I do not approve this roster.


Really? It seems rather up your street.
Craftnburn



Joined: Jul 29, 2005

Post   Posted: Apr 07, 2016 - 02:53 Reply with quote Back to top

harvestmouse wrote:
I think Ungors should be the lino and the niche being they don't come with the Stunty skill. Both a good and a bad thing.

I think the concept of Bray's (vs. Ungors) is really more fitting for stunty (It's certainly not much of a Bray Herd without the Brays Wink ) . Furthermore a roster with Ungor linemen would likely be too expensive to maintain (even with the added durability provided by losing Stunty).
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic