Down-Men Defense

[mattgslater]

One-off game between my Dark Elves and my opponent's Necro. Two rookie teams. It's halftime, I'm down 0-1, and I have 9 guys (3x Blitzer, 1x Runner, 5x Lineman) to my opponent's 11 (2x FG, 1x WW, 2x Wight, 1x Ghoul, 5x Zombie). I also have a KO'ed Blitzer. I lost the coin-toss and received first. The first half, I just totally got Nuffled, took 2 KOs and a BH even though I kept him to seven knockdowns, didn't break armour once (rolled 8 against AV8 five times, and 7 on the Ghoul once), fumbled a 3+ dump-off and got Pow'ed on the 1/d blitz, and saw all of my TRRs either fail or fail on the next action. Still, I have to say, he's learned a lot about formations. This makes me feel good-bad; I taught the guy everything he knows, and now he's kicking my @$$.

Ugh. I'm quite confident that my luck will turn, but since I'm down men, down points and kicking, I'm going to have to bust the cage and score. I have the added concern that, from my league's perspective, a tie is basically a loss. So I have the onus of winning.

So, the question is, how do I set up? How do I want him to play? He's got four AG3 players and a lead to protect, so he's likely to cage up and run the ball. I figure I should set up shallow, because I have to score in four turns or less if I want to win. I don't have the personnel to man the "spine" of the field, the screen of five men that puts a zone everywhere; I mean, I do get six guys for my backfield, but he can break in anywhere, and has Frenzy to boot. So I think I have to give 'em a hole.

Do I give him a pair of sideline openings, stuff up the middle, leave the WZs open, and hope to flow to the action, or do I go asymmetric and hope the ball falls right? Either way, the basic plan is the same: isolate AG3 players, try to keep a good cage from forming, one-square as a last resort. I haven't been in this position very often, but I'm no stranger to three-turn takeaway scores from down men, and Dark Elves are among the best at this.

1) I could cede both wide zones, and stack the midfield to force him wide, with no players outside the 4-column (just outside the WZ markers). If I do, I can be pretty sure my opponent won't cage at midfield, but with 2x Stand Firm, Necro sideline cages are pretty solid. Then again, it would ensure none of my guys get cut out of the action.



2) I could go asymmetric, letting him have one sideline but not the other. Then, it's sort of a 50/50 gamble; if the ball goes wide the wrong way, I'm hosed. If I take this option, I have also to decide whether to keep my line centered on the middle, or offset one or two squares, or to make the line itself asymmetric. Say I defend the left side, but not the right. Should I stuff my LOS on the left side (321----) to keep his Zs out of position, or should I spread one out a bit to the right (32--1--), since I can ward off a midfield cage through numbers? Or should I stay symmetric on the line (-2-0-2- or --101--).

[Don__Vito]

In situations like this where I'm:
a) Men down
b) (Far?) more agile/fast
...then I always screw symmetry and line up with three together at the end of the central line of scrimmage, then an overstacked sideline on the far side, setting up a couple of squares from the LoS and leaving one or two behind the front three slightly deeper.

The theory being a blitz, perfect defence, or an early turnover gets me right out of jail and in a very strong position (Assuming he takes the bait and stacks the weaker side with the three presented on the LoS), if not then I have the speed or agility to bring the gamble back and defend his sideline offence.

When you're men down, you have to roll dice, simple as that.

[mattgslater]

So you like option two, with the D-line set on the side with the unprotected WZ?



I kind of see it. That way, either he cages up, and my guys just get in position, or the ball is wide open and closer to my guys than to his. Makes sense. Any other advice out there?

I put the blitzer forward in the middle, because I want to be able to rush deep. I'd rather do that in the WZ, but on a rookie team with no SS, I have to take out the Were before I can make that happen.

One thing I could do is move the Blitzer and Lineman on the wings in one square. This would let me put both Blitzers one square behind scrimmage without tempting a crowd-push, no? That adds a whole square to my blitzing range.

Here's hoping for a 3TTD and a recovery on my KO'd Blitzer! If I get him back, he'll take the place of the lineman behind the LOS players, and that guy will move two squares outside, just inside of the WZ marker, and back one square. But that's next drive, and conditions may change again... if there is a next drive.

[Smeborg]

Matt - I would suggest you concede only one wide zone (you have little choice as you are a man short of being able to contest both against Frenzy).

I would recommend spreading all the players wide (the 3 LoS players wide rather than in the middle, and the second line spread out to the max). Let your opponent take extra blocks on the LoS if that's how he wants to waste his actions (the game will be decided in 2 or 3 turns). Spreading the play = advantage for AG4.

Do you have Kick?

[mattgslater]

Do you have Kick?

Nope. All rookies. Got one lino with a completion.

Are you saying I should put the linos in the 3, 1 and 1 columns, or should I spread them all the way out? I figured the reasoning behind bunching them together is to force the opponent to overload one side.

[Asperon Thorn]

I go with the symetric setup.

But I go with asymetric positionals. Which means I weight my positionals on one side. So I'd go with the first option but on one of those wings I'd put both blitzers, the other blitzer and the runner in the middle. It would ussually cause them to try and swing to the opposite side then you have your faster players capable of swinging over.

I'd also tighten your back 6 one square closer to the LOS. If he swings to a side You can have one or both of your wing blitzers hook around his backfield rather than yours. . . .

. . .a dropped pickup just puts you that much closer. I can't tell you how many games a freak failed pick-up and having that Blitzer just off the line rush in and swoop it up has changed a game to my advantage.

Asperon Thorn

[Drool_bucket]

I still go symmetrical. You can't give the coach that kinda leeway to advance to midfield in a strong position. He doesn't have to score, but by giving him that widezone he can move into it and set up camp.

While its nice to hope for blitz! or perfect defense or something, I'd rather set up and start whacking his guys hoping to get a 10-9 or even match up.

[Smeborg]

Do you have Kick?

Nope. All rookies. Got one lino with a completion.

Are you saying I should put the linos in the 3, 1 and 1 columns, or should I spread them all the way out? I figured the reasoning behind bunching them together is to force the opponent to overload one side.

Spread them all the way out. The bunched set-up is over-rated, and is simply a device for protecting players in a league setting, not for winning drives. The situation you are in is more like a tournament game now.

You want your opponent to take multiple blocks against the Linos. Suppose it takes 5 blocks to knock them down, plus 2 players for the blitz (assist + block), that "consumes" 7 players, leaving you with at least 5 standing players (maybe 6) against your opponent's remaining 4 (one of whom has to carry the ball).

All the best.

[mattgslater]

Sort of. If he's building for a midfield cage, he'll be glad to have the screener, no? And if he doesn't get a knockdown, one of my linemen is hopelessly out of position. The way I see it, the bunched line is there to force him to stack the line and telegraph where his cage will go.

Hmmm... that's an interesting way to frame the debate. A line stacked to the open side is a straight-up gamble. A line stacked to the covered side encourages a bashy cage game, which doesn't seem to work in my favor. A split-out line may protect one of my players, or draw focus off his cage.

I don't need to maintain any kind of formation with the line, right? How about 32----3?

[mubo]

Don't like the asymetric here. A bad-ish kick (to top left on your diagram) means he can knock down the 3 on the line, blitz the #15 and you're in trouble.

Without kick (skill)/blitz/PD there is too much to go wrong for me.

[mattgslater]

Yeah. My concern is that however I go, I have a problem to address. With 11 men, I'd be trying to hold him out with a 101 Zig. But strip out the two safeties, and it doesn't look so hot anymore.

Perhaps I should go with a 3-3-3 stack, with three players in each of the 3 and 0 columns, on the line, two back, and three back? That way i still maintain the double-trap-screen in the box, forcing the opponent wide. Another option would be to run a pair of V-traps, with men two-back at the 1 and 3 columns and three back in the 2 column. That lets me have four guys up front, and the Necros aren't mobile enough to make any hay up the middle against that formation. Should I move outside one? That does open me up to interior runs, but given the tempo concerns I don't see that as much of an issue.

The upside of symmetry here is that there's no chance to have players caught on the wrong side. The upside of asymmetry is that there's a good chance I'll be overloaded on the right side. I'm thinking asymmetry is the gamble here, but at the same time I can totally see a symmetrical 9-man deal getting locked out across the board, especially if I leave the WZs open.

Factors I think matter:

* I'm down 1 TD and two men with eight turns to go. My opponent would call a tie a moral victory; I would call it defeat with an asterisk. So I have to establish two different, successful scoring plans, or just one if I get lucky once. A lucky kickoff alone won't save me, and though two might, I'm assuming that's not likely.

* My opponent has the fastest guy on the pitch, but his all-around mobility sucks. My mobility is fine, thanks, but my top speed is only fair. So a deep kick favors me, by making him roll dice. But he'd have to have a mental error or a bad bit of luck to get cut off, because his carriers, for all their faults, are pretty fast.

* My opponent, a guy we all call Lucky, lived up to his name in the first half. In Turns 1-2, I had taken 10 actions and rolled dice on four of them. I kept him to two AV rolls in that time: a Cas and a KO. I forced five dodges and two 1d blocks (both pows, though I pow'ed on one too), fumbled a 3+ dump-off and haven't yet broken AV, despite getting 40% more AV rolls than he did on a better percentage of 2d blocks, with the same AV per player (except one hit on an FG). But I have a feeling Nuffle will give me an opening somewhere in the second half, if I keep my eyes open. I get that a lot. If I squander a TD in the first half, I tend to have a bad second half. If the first half falls apart on freak rolls, the second half tends to go well. Maybe it's psychological, maybe it's a distortion in my mind.

[mattgslater]

I think I'm going to try this 3-4-2 formation, built on a pair of V-traps, with all nine men in the box and a 303 line.

It's either that, or move the Blitzer and Runner one square, into centerfield, Runner behind Blitzer.

I'm on my way; I'll let you know how it goes.

[mattgslater]

Defense went great, lost anyway. Swarmed the ball, turned him over, scored, kicked off, touchback going into T12 (six to the 3, scatter to the 2 ). Nearly turned him over at the line on T13, nearly stalled the game indefinitely on T14, forced him to score on his T15, but got a Riot so I only had one turn and had to settle for a 1-2 loss and another garbage comp.

He's getting better, and I know why. Every time he used a screen, or dropped a fence with a FG at an interior post, he named the structure. But he still made a few mistakes; one gap he left was what led to the TD, and he left me a couple openings in the last real drive, but ended up making all the hard rolls along with most of the easy ones (he ended the first half with an unused TRR counter, and the second half with three, though he did get Cheering Fans). This is a good thing. He got beat up last season, and I think he'll be fearsome someday soon.

One thing I learned, that I really wasn't expecting to learn, because it should have been so obvious, is this.

If you put up a symmetrical 303 kicking LOS (that's X--X--X) with rookie players, and your opponent gets a push or knockdown on his first three blocks and follows in, he's set up a screen, right where your linemen were. My opponent put an FG in the 4 column on the left side of the line, just outside the hashmarks, and lined up his Zombies from left-1 to right-4. When he went to set up his cage, he had a double screen waiting for him, one square past scrimmage, with a Golem and all four AG3 players free to move, as he went right and built a cage that I would have had a heck of a time breaking. Two of my three players were caught in screen-locks, with no chance at a 1d on block or blitz. The far end got cas'ed the first time; the second time that end was instrumental in my near-successful recovery attempt and did fine. I burned an action standing, and when I tried to get cute I ended up spending a TRR on a dodge.

In the second drive of the half, I very nearly stalled him twice, the first time because he miscalculated the space between his players (a "broken screen" or "free gap"), the second a desperation maneuver that got within one die roll of working on pure Yahtzee, even after the blitz failed, and also forced his hand on T7, leaving me room for the 2T try that got wrecked by the Riot. Sigh, Nuffle giveth and the kickoff table taketh away.

I scored my one TD for a combination of two things: he forgot to support one of the Zeds in his screen, and his 3+ handoff attempt failed (I will take credit for killing his TRR on a forced GFI that turn). Everything else he did went great. It felt like he got as many Cas as pushes in the second half (not really, but he did get a ton of knockdowns on 1-2 blocks per turn, and the dice smiled on his injury rolls). I broke AV only once the whole game, even though we ended up getting a roughly equal number of knockdowns; he niggled a lino, gave a Blitzer -1MA (should have stayed in the KO bin, but he's a keeper anyway), and gave me two each BH and KO. I have a bunch of guys with 1, 3 or 5 SPP, which would be a mild bummer if this were the regular season.

I don't have much experience running with or against 303 lines, and I don't think I'd ever do it again. If I were to consider it spreading my line way out, I'd do a 323 (XX----X) or 313 (X-X---X) instead, with two players together at one end and one player split all the way out. Yes, it cedes midfield, but at least it doesn't cede midfield in the course of giving my opponent AV rolls. Otherwise, I'm putting the LOS wherever I want him to line up.

I guess that's the meat of the asymmetric 321 line (XXX----) argument. It pretty much guarantees that there will be a wall of Zombies right where I put my line, or one square back and to one side or the other. Yes, they're closer to the cage if the ball goes to that side, but guys who are blocking define the cage where I put it, and guys who aren't blocking will take Move actions anyway, and will just have a more varied composition (a Wight or two, in positions that will probably move off the LOS into safe spots anyway... or blitz). And then if the ball goes the other way, that mob of Zs is not too hard to just remove from the play.

[Smeborg]

Matt - without the benefit of playing any games against you, I can only comment that your style of defense appears to be the opposite of mine. My style is based on denying space to my opponent (among other things), yours seems to be based on conceding masses of space to him (!).

All the best.

[mattgslater]

How so? What are you basing that on? Have you read none of my writings before this thread? I'm not normally into conceding space to my opponent; the entire theory of the Cult of Position is to keep the field as small as possible. It kind of rings hollow to suggest that the guy who's always touting Side Step as a #1 and Stand Firm over traditional B+ skills is into conceding space, no?

But you can't deny facts on the ground. When you have no Dodge, Guard, Side Step or ST4, your D-line will get knocked down, and the opponent will follow if he wants, and if that doesn't happen you don't get to take any credit for it. What you can do is dictate where he follows to. If you want to overload one side and keep him from responding, stick your line on the other side. Yes, he'll cage up, and no, it doesn't work well against deep action (which Necro can't do). But it means that if the ball falls the way you're hoping, the cage is on the wrong side of the field, and your numerical disadvantage suddenly doesn't matter!

I guess what I'm trying to say is this: a block that results in a desirable follow-up is better than a block that doesn't result in a desirable follow-up. If you follow up on a 303 line, your men are at 3, 0 and 3, which is the core of the spine. So if the 2d Block action pays for its value on the dice, then without any actions whatsoever the opponent has bought himself the ideal starting formation for a midfield cage. No me likey. I'd rather dodge my guys away from a bunch of guys all packed together, where I can block them off with zones.

I don't know if this diagram works without code, but I'll take a crack.

This:
o|o - o o - - o|o
-|x - - x - - x|-

Becomes this:
-|o - - o - - o|-
-|o x - o x x o|-

With three actions to block or move. That's six guys, and he has seven MA4 guys with four ball-handlers. He can either cage at midfield or own midfield on his way to a sideline cage, making it very hard for me to wrap around and pinning my line down in a ton of zones.

Seriously, man. Back to 101 or 321 for me.