Pirog
Joined: Jul 13, 2006
|
 Posted:
Dec 13, 2007 - 16:41 |
 
|
Ok, looks more reasonable. I don't like G access on ST 3 players though since the main point of the Winds of Change was to put the stunties in focus.
Maybe this team shouldn't even have G access, since they have so many other skill choices.
They would be good blitzers anyway and with ph access they can tie up opponents with tentacles to avoid having to roll WA rolls every turn. |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2007 - 16:49 |
|
I have zero issue removing G access from the Gors.
__Synn |
|
|
Furious_George
Joined: Aug 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2007 - 17:10 |
|
I guess my opinions on that are price dependant. 3 positionals as weak as those in a world of chainsaws et al could be very brittle.
I would have considered giving the blitzy chaps sprint, but again, it depends on the costs. |
_________________
Dead Men dont tell tales... But they sure play a mean game of Bloodbowl.
"Hugh Mann eh? Now theres a name I can trust!"
Me Loves Futurama |
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2007 - 17:17 |
|
Then keep G access. Makes them terrors but fragile. Kinda like beastmen in Ranked.
__Synn |
|
|
Pirog
Joined: Jul 13, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2007 - 18:13 |
|
If G access is removed from the ungors there should be room for a couple of pretty standard ST 2 positional players with G access. (Like MA 5 ST 2 AG 3 AV 7) That way the team is still a team with pretty much focus on the little ones.
But personally I'm not sure that this team really need G access. It would be quite interesting to only have S and Ph to force the coaches to use the skills more diversly than just showing claws and tentacles. |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2007 - 18:18 |
|
Well..... claws and tents are doubles.
Taking away G access from the gors makes them more likely to use doubles for block.
Even if they had G access... two players with the possibility of getting tents or RSC is not too bad considering they have to focus their hitting power. Not sure how mnay coaches would take tents on a mino either.
__Synn |
|
|
Pirog
Joined: Jul 13, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2007 - 18:25 |
|
Tentacles on a mino should be very good. I haven't had the chance to try my tentacle mino yet, but since one of the big threats for Wild Animal Big Guys without G access is that the opponents just dodge away from them every turn it should allow him to throw a lot of blocks without having to use up the blitz.
I kind of like the idea of the gors likely taking tackle on a double, because having a ST 4 blitz with block, tackle and razor sharp claws is really good. It resembles the old killing machine big guys a lot, at least for the stunties... |
|
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2007 - 19:08 |
|
Gonna try and explain this once more. Guard is not a deadly skill. Guard with dodge AND Stunty is. Try and make a cage.
X-X
-X-
X-X
I have ONE guard. He makes one dodge, with skill re-roll, un-affected by tacklezones, and I walk a regular guy up to the other side.
X-X
gX-r
X-X
Now, a regular lino needs to make one dodge (with skill RR, unaffected by TZ) to get a two dice block on your man in the centre of the cage. I know my diagrams are crap, but what coach would not go for that? 2 3+ dodges each re-rollable, to blitz your ballcarrier with a 2 dice block, and still have your team RR to help guarantee a POW?
Caging is not a perfect strategy, but being able to consistently smash a cage in one turn, with only one or two skilled-up players, is un-balanced, in my no-so-humble opinion. Make more sense? |
_________________
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 |
|
deckerCKY
Joined: Feb 24, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2007 - 19:31 |
|
No...since those will be 5+ as often as not with diving tackle.
Synn....I think that team is really missing a backbone. 3 WA is really weak, particularly with no player with decent AV. I really don't think the 'gors' need more than bonehead (RS if you feel it needs toning down).
I don't know why you insist on gor, when your making it a completely different thing than gors typically are in bloodbowl. Just call it a centigor and give it sprint...no general access. Then the frenzy actually can make sense.
Ungors aren't S1 stunties...just call them brays and remove horns. S1 S access players is different to say the least.
Then give ungors as we had listed before, but with general access. Then, you have 1 S5 AV8, 2 S3 AV7, 2 S2 AV7 (with G access) and the rest S1 AV6. |
|
|
nexusvalhees
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2007 - 03:34 |
|
TENTS MINO =GOD |
_________________
At the end of the day it's not about who won or lost its about who's got the most Blood on their Boot
Remember folks if you don't go out of your way to kill good players AGING IS YOUR FAULT!! |
|
Craftnburn
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2007 - 14:48 |
|
Synn,
Stop trying to make every damn thing in Stunty St 1!
And please take your suggested Brays to a new thread instead of cluttering mine.
Everyone,
I've already suggested that if S access on the Brays proves too good, we could change to A access for them.
Before we go off speculating about the effects of "4 or 5" guard players, you should do some testing to see how well this team does. They do NOT rack up spp very quickly at all in my playtesting experience. And as has been pointed out, by the time you get several guards, the other team will likely have several DTs to limit their positioning.
And Ph access isn't nearly as enticing because most doubles will get used on G skills instead. |
|
|
nexusvalhees
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2007 - 17:21 |
|
Craft sereiously you telling us that you've play tested something gives me the same amount of faith as jj sayin he play tested something you don't play the same game as everyone else |
_________________
At the end of the day it's not about who won or lost its about who's got the most Blood on their Boot
Remember folks if you don't go out of your way to kill good players AGING IS YOUR FAULT!! |
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2007 - 17:26 |
|
I agree with Craft in that playtesting does not always bring out the negatives with a roster. It tends to occur in a small group and at limited TR with varied levels of skill involved. Plus, it can always be used as justification by saying "they got smoked in game _____"... "therefore they must be balanced."
And for the record... i don't think guard is overpowered in Stunty at all. I support the idea of giving these guys guard. That being said, i also don't think ST 2 guards should be in high demand. There are ST 1 races out there and one guard means a 3db. St 1 and horns means for the basic guy to do that, you require a blitz.
__Synn |
|
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2007 - 17:27 |
|
| Macavity wrote: | | Has any of the play-testing been against other coaches and races? |
|
_________________
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
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2007 - 19:12 |
|
| Macavity wrote: | | Has any of the play-testing been against other coaches and races? |
Yes, they've been playtested against a large variety of stunty races, and usually I'm not the one playing the Brays (though I have quite a bit of course). Steelthunder and I have tested this roster several times.
But by no means do I consider what's already been done to be sufficient. What I'm asking for is people to playtest, not claiming it's not needed. I've asked numerous coaches (I'm pretty sure I've asked Synn, Shadow and several other well known coaches) but haven't gotten much interest in testing at all. |
|
|
|
|
Exempt teams
Search
