bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
 Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 11:13 |
 
|
This poll is inspired by the rule of 5 thread. I would like to measure what is a typical protected player. It might be a kicker, or a leader, or a legend wardancer, or a serial killer. But what about players which are bearing core skills, which protect them for certain extent? Do you hide them, put them on the LOS, or right behind the LOS? |
_________________
 |
|
PacoSillas
Joined: Feb 02, 2009
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 11:26 |
|
It will depend on race/opponent/the rest of the team .. you can't really get a proper answer to your question from a sole player. |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 11:27 |
|
I agree. You are free to elaborate here. To make it simple I suggest to vote for the most common way (even it is "only" 60% or whatever), then list your most notable exceptions. |
_________________
|
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 11:32 |
|
With faster teams where my defence is sacking the ball carrier - I tend not to protect my players so much on defensive drives as I need them to be able to get to the action quickly and effectively, I will often string them across the pitch so they are all "exposed" bar one sweeper. Blodge lineman would normally feature as a corner player in this setup. |
|
|
Balle2000
Joined: Sep 25, 2008
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 11:34 |
|
Depends entirely on race, current roster, opposition, and phase of the match.
But I'd like to think I've protected him already by picking blodge. |
_________________
Join the SWL
Get your team bios here!
Putting the romantic in necromantic since 2010 |
|
PaddyMick
Joined: Jan 03, 2012
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 11:58 |
|
I'd put him on the LOS instead of a rookie lino if opponent has no tackle and is unable to get 3 dice blocks, because there is less chance of a knockdown. If some of your line is still standing after the first turn that puts you in a good position defensively. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 12:28 |
|
| bghandras wrote: | | I agree. You are free to elaborate here. To make it simple I suggest to vote for the most common way (even it is "only" 60% or whatever), then list your most notable exceptions. |
Pointless poll. You forgot the "it depends" option. Also the "pie" option.
We could at least have treated "pie" as "it depends". It would have been more meaningful than the other three options. |
_________________
[SL] + Official Stunty teams. Progression KO. Old & new teams welcome. 29th May! |
|
Leilond
Joined: Jan 02, 2012
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 12:31 |
|
It depends of the opponent, how many turns to the end, if I'm winning or not and so on |
|
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 12:45 |
|
Simple question, simple answer.
If he's one of your 5 best players, you protect him.
Unless your opponent has no tackle... then he goes on the LOS. |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 16:45 |
|
I haven't really followed the other thread. I don't think it depends so much on the race you play against as your and your opponents skilling.
Generally speaking a Blodger is a very protected player, that makes him ideal for the loss.
I'd say generally you want him there but there are so many exceptions that it defacto rarely really will make sense:
Generally speaking an unfavorable line is for instance a combination of multiple differently protected players. Say a Blocker, a Blodger and a skillless player.
Simply because your opponent can then put a skilless player against the Blocker, a blocker against the skillless and a Tackler against the Dodger.
Thats a lot of ifs but it's also one of the most common scenarios: The opponent has players to counteract what you have but just one... and you have just one player of each type too.
If your opponent has one Tackler and you have 3 Blodgers, it already makes sense again to put them all on the line.
Finally it makes sense to put a Blodger on the line when it helps to divert attention from another more valuable blodger in the second line (who you don't want to put on the line because of his hgih value but you don't really have the space to put him third row either). That is if the opponent has only one Tackler. He then has to essentially make a pick and it won't matter that your blodger is on the line if he were second row otherwise.
Entirely protecting a Blodger (third row) makes very little sense because his biggest assett ability is his resilience. You want him in conflict situations as often as possible, but obviously only if the opponent player cannot counteract his strengh.
If for instance you were to go against a dwarf team, the one blodger should focus on constantly tagging the runners.
But of course when your team is very new and has a lot of cheap players or even a large roster you may want to keep him third row because losing him matters and losing others doesn't.
This is also another very important factor: A large roster makes it generally more favorable to put cheap players in front, while with a small roster you want to put resilient players in front that can survive a while.
When you put an av10 in front and your opponent has claw however, the suppesedly resilient player just isn't really resilient.
Same principle applies to a Blodger facing a Tackler.
If you are fighting an opponent with exactly one Tackler and you have exactly one Blodger he absolutely belongs in third row... unless the other team has a separate Mighty Blow and the opponent again has to choose between the Mighty Blow and the Tackler to blitz.
Of course this all assumes that the frontline and second line are in fact not all equally weak. If you really have a bunch of utterly skillless players it probably will not make much sense to put a single Blodger in between them.
So, all I can answer to your generalizing poll is really pie. |
Last edited by Wreckage on %b %12, %2015 - %18:%Apr; edited 2 times in total |
|
KidCrestHill
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 16:52 |
|
Linemen are only on the team to support the key players |
|
|
C3I2
Joined: Feb 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 17:40 |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 18:18 |
|
I don't like to put Blodgers on the LOS, especially if they have low AV. The best protection is not Blodge, but avoiding blocks at all whenever you can, POWs might ever be rolled, you know.
Thus I would put the Blodger not in LOS, but behind it, or behind some unskilled players acting as screen (this choice is of course roster-dependent). If my opponent has a tackler and wants to blitz him at least he must use his Blitz action there. |
|
|
AegisTheHyena
Joined: Nov 22, 2014
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 19:30 |
|
I haven't followed the other thread, mostly because I hate the idea and am one of the "spread the SPP around" types. If you want to protect just five, you play rats and dump the SPP on the gutters. That said, I don't like the idea of skilled people on the LOS under any circumstances. All it takes is one bad block and you lose good players. |
_________________
Civilization 7 is on Hiatus until August. Then the Katha enter the Iron Age! |
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2015 - 19:50 |
|
| AegisTheHyena wrote: | | That said, I don't like the idea of skilled people on the LOS under any circumstances. All it takes is one bad block and you lose good players. |
The good thing is: When you have too many good players and some die on the loss, you have less players to protect.  |
|
|
|
|
Exempt teams
Search
