Verminardo
Joined: Sep 27, 2006
|
 Posted:
Aug 18, 2014 - 18:46 |
 
|
Skaven usually bring that natural one-turner anyway so there is no set-up that can stop them.  |
|
|
Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2014 - 09:05 |
|
| Verminardo wrote: | | Skaven usually bring that natural one-turner anyway so there is no set-up that can stop them. |
yes, there is! it's called chainsaw-DP gangfoul  |
|
|
straume
Joined: Dec 01, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 09:40 |
|
So...I saw the link at Reddit and suppose it is time to Necro the thread. This is interesting, and something I am not good at. Joe posted this as the best way to do it.
_ _ _ _ | X X X_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ X C _ | X _ _ X _ _ X| _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X _ _ X| _ _ _ _
C= WE catcher assuming the pushes work out. To score from there he now needs: 4+ catch, 4+ dodge, 3+dodge, 2+ dodge, gfi, gfi, gfi = 39,8% with a reroll, 24,1% without
However, if you do like this:
_ _ _ _ | X X X_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ X C _ | X _ _ X _ _ X| _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X _ _ X| _ _ _ _
The same WE catcher would need 3+ catch, 3+ dodge, 3+ dodge, 3+ dodge, 3+ dodge, 2+ dodge, gfi, gfi, gfi = 39,2% with a team reroll, 21,169 without.
So...the second setup is better. Or am I missing something or miscalculating something here? |
|
|
straume
Joined: Dec 01, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 09:51 |
|
Let`s try the same with against a pesky Gutter Runner:
_ _ _ _ | X X X_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ X G _ | X _ _ X _ _ X| _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X _ _ X| _ _ _ _
G= Gutter Runner again assuming pushes are done okay. 4+ catch, 4+ dodge, 3+ dodge, 2+ dodge, gfi, gfi = 39,3% with a team reroll, 19,29 without.
_ _ _ _ | X X X_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ X G _ | X _ _ X _ _ X| _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X _ _ X| _ _ _ _
3+catch, 3+ dodge, 3+ dodge, 3+ dodge, 3+ dodge, 2+ dodge, gfi, gfi = 38,5% with a team reroll and 19,052 without.
Also here marginally better, unless I am missing something  |
|
|
Squiglet
Joined: Aug 13, 2015
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 09:58 |
|
I assume the issue would be an infield push putting the catcher on the right of your diagram giving him a 3+ 2+ dodge diagonally into the clear with 2 gfis = 79% with TRR |
|
|
straume
Joined: Dec 01, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 10:02 |
|
And finally let`s play Dwarves or Chaos Dwarves and get some tackle on the pitch:
_ _ _ _ | X X X_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ T C _ | T _ _ T _ _ T| _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X _ _ X| _ _ _ _
T= Tackle player. C= WE catcher.
The cheating Wood Elf Catcher now gets: catch 4+, dodge4+, dodge 3+, dodge 2+ (with dodge), and gfi, gfi, gfi = 32,8% with reroll, 14% without.
The second set up:
_ _ _ _ | X X X_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ T C _ | T _ _ T _ _ T| _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _| _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X _ _ X| _ _ _ _
3+ catch, 3+ dodge, 3+ dodge, 3+ dodge (with dodge), 3+dodge (with dodge), 2+ dodge (with dodge), gfi, gfi, gfi.
35,5% with a team reroll. 15,5% without. So with Tackle the first setup is better. |
|
|
sann0638
Joined: Aug 09, 2010
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 10:09 |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 13:09 |
|
I read this entire thread through a week ago after stupidly misplacing players against a skaven coach (who almost burned me on it, but snaked the final gfi, talk about giving notice!). It's one of the best threads on fumbbl I've seen and I'd love to see more like it |
_________________
 |
|
straume
Joined: Dec 01, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 13:38 |
|
| Squiglet wrote: | | I assume the issue would be an infield push putting the catcher on the right of your diagram giving him a 3+ 2+ dodge diagonally into the clear with 2 gfis = 79% with TRR |
True, but to get to that position it would take (edit:) 3 pushes (I think), and then it gets (edit: a bit more) complicated. |
Last edited by straume on %b %17, %2016 - %13:%Feb; edited 1 time in total |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 13:43 |
|
I do enjoy it myself, I have to say. I was a bit surprised by the luke-warmish reception the link received when I posted it, is there a better answer to the question on the Internet? The BB Internet is infamously light on good tactical discussion. Anyway, I digress, Reddit is (I suppose) a young format and as such will be a bit variable.
My thoughts have moved on a bit since the OP / bulk of the discussion, but not by orders of magnitude. I spent a while with 10 men before a tournament recently trying to work out what happens when I'm down on players. Because I'm sad like that. Could that be discussion phase 2? |
|
|
straume
Joined: Dec 01, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 13:45 |
|
Ten man set up is a different cup of tea, yes. So that should really be phase 2.
I failed to see any conclusions on the 11 player defence, however, and would love to see it. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 13:49 |
|
I'm not in a time rich week right now, or I'd calculate and compare the default defence I currently use (which I arrived at by maths a little while ago and I forget the numbers now) to others. Although it absolutely doesn't have to be me; anyone as interested in the little things can drive it. Looks like you have the baton currently!
So long as anyone reading the thread is inspired to do better than 'hands across the endzone', we're winning! |
|
|
Diddyboy
Joined: Dec 29, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 13:55 |
|
Read all of it and have changed my tactics because of it! |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 14:04 |
|
Good man!
I don't remember if we were LRB4 or CRP when the thread started. I guess that could be something to do with why the OP problem is framed as stopping a WE Catcher. Playing Frenzy makes the equation different, what if you're not defending with 11... It's an almost endlessly 'interesting' subject, if you're the type of nerd that is interested by the problem! |
|
|
straume
Joined: Dec 01, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 17, 2016 - 14:20 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | | the default defence I currently use (which I arrived at by maths a little while ago |
Okay, this got me interested. Are you saying you are using a different 11-player defence than one of the two I have outlined above?
Or are you talking about 10-player defence? |
|
|
|
|
| |
TSC Draft
Search
