Need ideas for buffing humans - round 4: Proposal

[plasmoid]

[Shrug] Aestetics aren't a prime objective. And they certainly don't ensure balance or fun.
But if I can have all 3, I definately won't say no

As for the amazons - I like 'em.
But either way, a little bit of symmetry is not the same thing as the extreme case of the amazons.

Cheers
Martin

[Pink Horror]

As for the amazons - I like 'em.

Sorry, that completely invalidates any judgment you've ever made.

[plasmoid]

Heh. For the record I don't like playing them
But I like playing against them.
And despite claims to the contrary, I just don't find them broken at all.

And what I didn't like was the fact that we had 2 cookie cutter teams: Norse and amazon.
Now that we just have the one, I think it's a team gimmick just like any other team gimmick.
Works for me

[mattgslater]

I completely agree with Martin on both the relative value of symmetry and the impact of the new Norse on Amazons. Amazons were boring because they were a rather bland variation on Norse. They're still rather bland, and they still have some superficial similarities to Norse, but their blandness is itself exotic (show me another team with a uniform statline) and their Norsiness is very fluffy.

As a side note, I'm starting to find Amazons a surprisingly good first team for a rank newbie, and they also make a good stalking horse for the same. They have it all: blocking skills for comparison, no convenient defensive 2TTD, armor problems without cost issues, lots of 3+ rolls, and no major positional-value considerations (at least as rookies). All players have the same profile, so there's no remembering "the guy with the plume is a little faster, and don't block with the one with its hand in the air."

Playing against Amazons as a newbie teaches just how frustrating mass Dodge can be, but also virtually ensures that the new coach will be able to dominate at least one segment of the game, something that's particularly important when you have a new coach dead-set on playing a more advanced team list. The opponent can also focus on his own profile: he knows more-or-less what your guy has (just one position has a skill that matters in the opponent's turn and isn't universal).

[Joemanji]

Disclaimer: I have played lots of Humans, probably more than I have with any other race.

I'm baffled by the attitude to Human Catchers. +1AV is totally out of character. Catchers are described on page four of the rulebook (before any of the rules) as:

"Lightly armoured and very agile, they can’t afford to get into fights. In the open, however, they are unmatched – and nobody is better at catching the ball. Catchers specialize in waiting near the End Zone for that all-important touchdown pass to come sailing in out of the blue. The only problem in being a Catcher is if someone should catch you!"

How much clearer could this be? They are fast but fragile.

The problem with Human Catchers IMO is that they are poor value for money, especially in comparison to players of a similar type:

vs Gutter Runners : -1 MA, -1AG, +Catch = 10K less
vs (new) WE Catchers : -1AG, -Sprint = 20K less
vs HE Catchers : -1ST, -1AG, +Dodge = 20K less

If you made these players the same using Improvement rolls the relative TVs would be:

Human 140K < 9247 Catch, Dodge > Gutter Runner 100K
Human 130K < 8247 Catch, Dodge, Sprint > WE 90K
Human 160K < 8347 Catch, Dodge > HE 110K

The Human Catcher is clearly getting a bad, bad deal. I'm not saying the others are underpriced. But surely this demonstrates that the Human might be overpriced. Especially since his price by the cost forumula is only 60K. The Skaven, WE and HE all pay their exact value by the cost formula (counting Sprint and Catch as 10K skills). So why does the Human catcher pay a premium?

And if +1 AV is not considered appropriate, then a price reduction must be. It goes back to what I was saying about deflating Human TV. The Human teams/armies traditionally win by weight of numbers and organisation.

Low TV = more Inducements = more wizards, bribes, babes, special play cards. This feels to me an intrinsically human way to win matches.

Also cheap players = easier to replace. Human teams are incredibly vunerable at mid to high TVs and have a hard time replacing players. 90K for a blitzer with AG3 and AV8. We all know that means they are easy to damage and difficult to get out of trouble with.

[mattgslater]

60k Catchers would be a bigger buff than AV8 Catchers: I agree with that. 1M would be 12 players with a Thrower, 2 Catchers, 4 Blitzers, 5 Linos and 4 TRRs. Or 13 players with 3 TRRs. Or 3 TRRs, 4 Catchers, 2 Throwers, 4 Blitzers and 2 linos. A 60k Catcher could be turned into a great fouler! This would be especially true early-on. By 20 games in, the 60k guy will be more expensive than the same guy at +10k and +1AV.

And just so you know, I for one consider ST2/AV8 fragile. People will take opportunity shots at you without an assist. So you're likely to survive any given one, but still ST2 players end up on their butts a lot.

[SillySod]

With st2 and av8 human catchers would still be fragile, certainly they wouldnt be great fighters.

A big problem is that human catchers just dont make it onto the pitch... being cheaper might make them more likely to show up as reserves but it is unlikely to change peoples minds about having them in their starting eleven. To be honest while they have St2, av7, and Ag3 they are never going to be a player of choice so they need a stat boost. I think giving them av8 preserves their character much better than any other stat change.

[mattgslater]

See, either way I'm fielding one on defense. And either way there's no chance that I'm seriously going to consider four on my roster (might contemplate for a moment). Two maybe, but if so one of those guys is a reservist or dedicated O player. And I have one dedicated O Thrower....

So at 60k Catchers, I'd probably start two Catchers with 12 players, and eventually buy a 3rd. I'd field two on offense and one on defense. The first develops as the starting safety and plays backup on offense. The second one goes for Dirty Player, starts on offense, and is the first backup on defense. The third gets Block, then fired if he doesn't get something cool at 16, and becomes a secondary return man and safety valve on offense (last guy off the bench on D). Note that none of these guys is a primary receiver, 'cause a "primary receiver" is a bad thing to have. 60k Catchers means you can totally run 14 guys and get a nice looking toolbox going, with no true benchwarmers but no excessive TV commitments. (60+60+50=170; 250-170=80k=4 improvements on the bench = no worse than the elven ideal).

At 70k Catchers, I only take two, either not taking a Dirty Player or making my DP out of a Lineman. I might still take 14 players, but then I always have a Lineman on the bench. This is true regardless of the Catcher's AV. #1 starts on defense, and sees action on offense in a hurry-up package, or if he's got a great improvement, or if he's within 6 SPP of improving. #2 is a true WR, for use as a safety valve, but develops the same way as #1 (I just use my lesser guy as my safety valve 'cause I want to bring him up without starting him on defense). AV8 would be very welcome, but it wouldn't change how I play. It would definitely change how I manage my treasury.

[besters]

I won a 3 game non-NAF tourney with

4 Blitzers
4 Catchers
2 Throwers
2 Linemen
2 TRR

It worked OK, 3 wins 10 TD's scored non conceded.

Seems to work ok. I also have 4 catchers in my PBeM team and win 50% of my games, I usually field all 4 on offense and defense.

I would agree it needs a buff to be more than lower middle Tier 1, the question is how much.

I would agree with Joemanji that an AV increase doesn't really fit the fluff, but an agility 4 with a 10k cost increase would. As a Human player I would be happy with this, just concerned it is too big an improvement.

[Digger Goreman]

Agility 4 is the bane of this game.... One luck roll from ridiculous domination....

[Rhyoth]

I fully agree with Joemanji here : a discount on catchers is a hundred times more appropriate than an AV bonus here.

60k Catchers would be a bigger buff than AV8 Catchers: I agree with that. 1M would be 12 players with a Thrower, 2 Catchers, 4 Blitzers, 5 Linos and 4 TRRs. Or 13 players with 3 TRRs. Or 3 TRRs, 4 Catchers, 2 Throwers, 4 Blitzers and 2 linos. A 60k Catcher could be turned into a great fouler! This would be especially true early-on. By 20 games in, the 60k guy will be more expensive than the same guy at +10k and +1AV.

And just so you know, I for one consider ST2/AV8 fragile. People will take opportunity shots at you without an assist. So you're likely to survive any given one, but still ST2 players end up on their butts a lot.

I can't see how 60 k Catchers would be a bigger buff than AV 8 (if you play more than 3 matchs in a row) : a cheaper Catcher won't avoid Stunned/KO's/CAS as well as an AV 8 guy.
In fact, that just allows you more inducement or one more reservist (and also a slightly better start)
It's true that a St2 Av 8 player is fragile ... if we don't consider he as Dodge, and easy access to Block and Sidestep.
(For running a DE for a while, i can tell there is a huge difference between AV 7 (Furrries) and AV 8 (Blitzers) for a Blodging SideSteper.)

To conclude i'd like to remind you some sandard of the game :
_every rookie player with ST 2 (or less) is also AV 7 (or less)
_every rookie player with Dodge is also AV 7 (or less)
_the only rookie player with both MA 8 & AV 8 is the Werewolf ...

note 1 : if you consider both 60 k Catchers + 80 k Blitzers, that could make Humans damn good in the first 10-20 matches, which could be problematic in Tournament /Short League. (that's why i recommand a 60k TRR in this particular situation)

note 2 : I know it's kinda late, but what about giving Sure Feet for free to the Catchers ...

[plasmoid]

Like Mattg, I also consider a ST2 player a fragile target.
Yes - you're right - it is hard to argue that he is lightly armoured, but is the quoted section isn't a race specific blurp text, but a general one, I don't mind the exception.

In my experience, it's the AV7 that makes me not want to field them. But you have a good point that compared to other catcher types, they're harshly priced.

So, why not kill 2 birds with 1 stone:
Bump to AV8, keep the same price (70K) and they'll be more appropriately priced.

Cheers
Martin

[Joemanji]

As Besters and Matt Slater indicated above, good coaches do use Catchers. You might not like them Martin, but they are excellent players (if a bit overpriced). The key asset of a Human team is speed. They are the 3rd fastest team in the game. Catchers are that speed.

I use Catchers. I had three on my MBBL team and they had a 73% win ratio. Better than any Human team running now, and they have 2 or less undeveloped Catchers. Now those games were played in the testing phase a few years back, and the team struggled once the rules settled down (and they reached high TVs). But the fact remains.

Btw, I don't have a problem with Humans getting a boose in tournaments, because that is where they struggle most anyway.

[plasmoid]

Don't worry. I field them. I just said AV7 makes me not want to - i.e. doing so always comes with a sense of dread.

I love them on offense. And I love their speed on defense. In my experience though, humans are often at a severe disadvantage against the classic 2-1 grind. And if that's what you're headed into, fielding your ST2 AV7 players on defense can be a painful experience. A few players easily removed can spell doom for their outnumbered buddies.

Anyway, I don't see how AV8 @ 70K doesn't meet your requirements.
It's a price cut that will make them more comparable price-wize to other catcher types.
And it's a change that will help the team "pull its weight", i.e. not make them weaker than their TV.
I see it like this: They first get your price cut, and then a paid for stat-increase
But hey, that doesn't mean you have to like them.

Cheers
Martin

[plasmoid]

PS, I don't know how you develop your catchers, but I generally o for block (for survivability) and then dauntless, to use them as super fast blitzing threats.