why dwarf runner?

bigallium · Post by **bigallium** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:45 am

Has anyone else always wondered how Dwarfs have two MA 6 players (the same MA as every Elf lineman bar the WE lineman)?

to me, the runner is a way just to give the dwarfs what they are lacking, and it means the starting Dwarf 11 is pretty much the complete package, which also seams wrong.

to me, I would always have prefered to see them have 0-4 Blitzers instead, and give the coach the choice of developing any of them into running types (surehands, pro, kick-off return).

now I know that its never going to change, and I also realise that most Dwarf coaches are going to lay it upon me, as they love their runners, but I think it both fits the team more and even ups the balance of the starting dwarf team (which is one of the best starting 11 in the game).

neverdodge · Post by **neverdodge** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 8:29 am

Please don t slow them more, they already are to boring to play against

(jk)

Seriously, i think the runners fit the dwarf lineup, even with 2 MA6 players they still are slow.
Even being a slow and bashy team you need some options for ball handlind and some (kind of) speed. Having 2 MA 6 players don t make your team a speed team, not even an average speed team.

Just try them for 1 game, you ll immediatelly see you have to be very careful where you put your players, as you ll hardly recover from bad position on the field. I mostly play speed teams, and was caught by surprise the first time i tried them.

Post by **Old Man Draco** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 9:19 am

Might it be an option to deny them General skills? That way the don't get block as a first skill to become great runners. Only strength skills and the rest on doubles. You could do the same for orcs. Dwarves and Orcs are mainly bashy teams after all.

Other thrower types should be looked at on an individual basis of course.

Aliboon · Post by **Aliboon** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 9:21 am

Having no 6 MA players would also make it very difficult to score 2-turners (3 gfis with a MA5 player). And although dwarves should never try to score quickly, sometimes they have to and without any MA6, it would be even harder that it is now, which would be a bit rough.

Also, a runner is a career in Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and although I may be wrong on this, I'm pretty sure the dwarf team was the only of the original teams to have a runner and I reckon it was named after that, not the runner positional that we now see. (Originally the positionals were named after Warhammer troop types, Longbeards, Storm Vermin, Lion Warriors etc)

TuernRedvenom · Post by **TuernRedvenom** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 9:27 am

Draco wrote:Might it be an option to deny them General skills? That way the don't get block as a first skill to become great runners. Only strength skills and the rest on doubles. You could do the same for orcs. Dwarves and Orcs are mainly bashy teams after all.

Other thrower types should be looked at on an individual basis of course.

Dwarf runners have no strength access, only passing and general. Taking away general seems awfully harsh to me.

fen · Post by **fen** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 9:37 am

The Dwarf Runner is the best designed part of the Dwarf team. It's MA is correct for a young dwarf runner. They've always in all of WH fluff been faster than the rest of the Dwarfs.

The correct BB movement for normal Dwarfs is 5, old Dwarfs is 4.

In short, there's nothing wrong with the runner (or the Blitzer and Trollslayer) in the Dwarf team.

Post by **Old Man Draco** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 9:47 am

That's why they would get strength acces INSTEAD of general acces.

(In reply to Tuerns post)

Jural · Post by **Jural** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:46 pm

fen wrote: In short, there's nothing wrong with the runner (or the Blitzer and Trollslayer) in the Dwarf team.

Aaah... so just the linemen, re-rolls, coaching staff, fans, and the beards.

Snew · Post by **Snew** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:52 pm

Jural wrote:
fen wrote: In short, there's nothing wrong with the runner (or the Blitzer and Trollslayer) in the Dwarf team.
Aaah... so just the linemen, re-rolls, coaching staff, fans, and the beards.

You forgot the coaches themselves.

stashman · Post by **stashman** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:08 pm

How many leagues have Over-Powered Dwarf teams???

In 18 season leage only ONCE did a dwarf team win!!!
http://www.arosbb.dk/

In the league I play only one dwarf team have won three times (and we have Rookie, Minor, Major, Super and Cup for 13 seasons)

http://www.mafoc.org/

I don't think dwarf needs more nerfing.

bouf · Post by **bouf** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:13 pm

stashman wrote:I don't think dwarf needs more nerfing.

You're right! They nerfed them too hard last time!!! We need to get the RRs back to 20,000 and we need A skill access back on all dwarf players... This Current roster is WAY too under powered!

stashman · Post by **stashman** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:34 pm

bouf wrote:
stashman wrote:I don't think dwarf needs more nerfing.
You're right! They nerfed them too hard last time!!! We need to get the RRs back to 20,000 and we need A skill access back on all dwarf players... This Current roster is WAY too under powered!

Hmm.. In your league is there a big problem with long term dwarf teams?

Jural · Post by **Jural** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:25 pm

stashman wrote: Hmm.. In your league is there a big problem with long term dwarf teams?

You didn't ask me, but in OUR league, dwarves win far and away more than the other races.

IN 4+ LRB 5.0 seasons, dwarves are 39-9, an 81% win rate! This is spread over 3 different tezms, one of which played in 2 seasons.

Further, 3 of those losses came against a Pro elf team which had 2 Strength 4 blitzers after it's first game, and one loss was a dwarf team vs. dwarf team!

That's so good that the dwarves as a RACE actually have a better record than any single (Non-Dwarf) TEAM during that time period.

As for league championships, one dwarf team made the finals twice and lost, and one dwarf team won it all. The third is currently in 1st place through 6 games (at 4-2, with a 4-0 preseason record.)

bouf · Post by **bouf** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:05 am

stashman wrote:Hmm.. In your league is there a big problem with long term dwarf teams?

I've never complained that the Dwarf win Rate was asque... just that the roster is Rubbish. No line man should have Block... and Tackle is making other teams seem under powered. And what possible excuse does the team with the most survivability have for 40,000 RRs???

Yes the Dwarf teams in My lague do well... One coached by a rookie coach is pretty good (not great) the other, coached by a Good coach is struggling to get games because no one wants to play him. Not because he is a good coach, not for fear of losing the game, but for fear of getting murdered.

He plays Dwarves for all the reasons I hate... He knows that he won't win in Season 1, but once he gets enough Guardners and Mighty Blowers, he'll take more heads than anyone else. What other team can take Guard and Mighty Blow for it's first two skills with total confidence? He loves to foul too... with all the extra cash he has from hie low Casualties against he buys extra lineman and once his team is filled out he buys extra re-rolls. If some one dies, well who cares, their replacement will have Block anyways... Get right back into the mix.

He knows that in season 2 he'll be swinging an axe at every team that he plays.

I just can't believe that you think they have been nerfed? Nerfed how??? Is it the extra skills and skill access? Is it the extra addition of the death roller that made the roster worse in your eyes?

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:27 am

Dwarfs have hands down the worst positionals of any top-tier team in Blood Bowl. They also have hands down the best linemen. I think they should pay 50k for re-rolls, maybe, just 'cause no other team pays only 40k, but they're really not better than Orcs, Humans, or Woodies, anomalous league statistics aside.

Should that Dwarf roster be redesigned? Maybe. Is it broken? Not really. Just very good, right up there with the other really good rosters.