Wild Animal Rules - Suggested Change

[Marcus]

I'd like to float this one once more before October rolls around (has already been discussed on BBC while TBB has been out of action)

As it stands I've found the WA rule to be so crippling it's not worth getting a ratogre for a skaven team.

I've had a good run with my RO under the new rules and he is essentially less than useless.

The standard suggestions of "defend him with another player" or "use him as a defensive sweeper" really don't amount to much in the games I've played. A decent player will swarm your ratogre and force you to turn over at the start of your turn. Against said decent player a complete loss of a turn will mean a touchdown.

It's the fact that a RO's negative trait causes him to lose the team the entire turn that I have a problem with. With an Ogre you have a 1 in 6 of the player losing their turn. With a ratogre, even with block, if you force a 1 die block you have a 1 in 6 of the whole team losing their turn. These odds increase if you don't have block or if s/he can force a 2 die s/he chooses block.

I have no problem with being able to neutralise a player with a negative trait but all games I've played with the new rules have turned into a "play the ratogre, not the ball" game, If the gambit comes off then you get a whole turn's advantage, if it doesn't then one of your players gets hit. I've done it and I've had it done to me. Simply because it's a low risk - high reward play. It also takes the focus off the play of the ball and I don't think it's good for the game.

A couple of suggestions:

(1) A WA that starts their turn standing next to a player may declare a block, a blitz or may pass the players turn entirely The WA just stands there howling with rage. This would allow coaches to neutralise an opposing WA but would mean that they would not get a star of turn TO out of it. The risk balances back - the opposing coach can mark the WA but loses some field position in the process. The risk then comes back to the WA coach - they can choose to make the block and risk the turnover or they can just admit defeat and lose the player's turn.

(2) Failed blocks by WAs do not cause a turnover - much like a thrown goblin. This makes some sense: given that a WA cannot claim assists and cannot use team rerolls, whatever he does really should have little bearing on the flow of the team's turn. The team just lets him do his own thing and plays around him. While this does make sense I think it tips the balance back in favour of the WA again and could be prone to abuse. This could be balanced by saying that a WA cannot carry the ball - they are too wild to have any clue or care about scoring.

What do people think?

Marcus

[Thadrin]

The second one makes a lot of sense to me...but we're back into exceptionsville again aren't we? apparently thats not a good place to be.

I still like the old "roll a dice, on a 1 he goes completely monkey excrement and will hit the nearest player, friend or foe...even if he has to use the team blitz to do so" rule...the must go first thing can stay too...but the must block/blitz thing is reduced to the simian poo thing.

[Xin]

I'm not an expert at Bloodbowl (nor am I afraid of making a complete fool of myself, obviously) but I see problems with the free block thing (though I liked your explanation for it, made a lot of sense) since you would be able to do some pretty risky stuff for minimum penalty. I would block/blitz anything, even if I had the odds against me (read. 2 dice opponent's choice), and with Block, Multiple Block and Pro... well then the rat ogre's sure gone wild. Logical in a roleplaying aspect, but for balance?

Again I stand firm (pun non-intended) to my stance that I am no BB expert.

[Dangerous Dave]

I am not so sure Rat Ogres are:-

essentially less than useless

Yes until they get block they can be a liability. Having said that, once they have Block even left on their own, they are tough to bring down... get Pro as the second skill and they are even tougher. Have a Leader on the team and it is very difficult to get a turnover.

I played against a Skaven team (with Undead) in the MBBL and lost in O/T. Basically whichever team received scored. I set the Rat Ogre with Block up 6 times. 4 times against a Mummy where a push first up meant 2 dice against. Once a Wight pushing into 2 dice, and once where the first block was 2 dice against. The Rat Ogre failed the roll once in 6 times (the closest "normal" result was twice). Now, I was a little unlucky. However, that's the way the dice go. The important thing is that because I was trying to set up the Rat Ogre my defence was not set up in an ideal way. Hence because the Rat Ogre passed the blocks, the Skaven had a better chance to score / attack the ball. Its a bit like fouling - if you move several players to assist a foul, your attack / defence is weaker elsewhere.

I don't buy the Ogre / Rat Ogre comparison. Sure a failed Bone Head roll doesn't cost a turn. But when did an Ogre really win a game (except Morg). They are there to hold the line and don't do much else. A Rat Ogre is much more potent - it is fast, always has its Tackle Zone and is great for blitzing opposing catchers (if you don't get them down they will find dodging much more difficult).

So I don't agree that Rat Ogres need to have Wild Animal toned down. An AG3 Big Guy ball carrier is very potent. Yes if you put a rookie Rat Ogre on the line (or easily reachable), you are asking for trouble. Once they have a skill, often you don't need to protect them. But don't allow Big Guys to carry daggers or other secret weapons......


Dave

[Deathwing]

I don't think WAs are a real problem in League play, 16 SPPs, Block and Pro go a long way to alleviating the drawbacks. There's also the point that Skaven remain plenty good enough without them (in the right hands).
They've certainly cost me games, but they've won me a few as well. Nature of the beast I guess....

[McDeth]

The last time i made such a post about Wild animal i was berated saying that the rule was ine as it was and that it was my coaching that was at fault.

[Marcus]

I've seen a lot of this criticising the coach bit which is why I wanted to throw my weight in.

In my experience, you can play your WA cautiously but in doing so you limit your team options. You either have to pull players out of position to defend the WA, compromising your field placement, or you have to keep running your WA out of position, neutralising his usefulness.

My main concern is this: When a WA is on the pitch the game can easily turn into "play the WA, not the ball" because the payoff for causing a failed block with a WA is so great. Any rule which takes the focus of the game off the ball I am uncomfortable with.

It's this issue I'm trying to address.

Marcus

[DoubleSkulls]

To back up Marcus's point, in the ECBBL he lost 5 games in row after buying the Rat Ogre, after having won 9 and drawn 1 of his previous games. He didn't suddenly become a bad player.

Its far too easy for the Rat Ogre to cause a couple of turnovers a game, and that's all you need to win.

Its made even worse by the RO not being able to use TRRs.

Ian

[Marcus]

Tactical advice in another forum from Ian:

Anyway, since you have LRB Wild Animal swarm his Rat Ogres. But the Ogre next to one and a pair of BO's next to the other. Or if you can set it up for 1/2 die blocks (esp if he doesn't have block). That should make him turnover often enough that you'll win easily.

This is what I'd like to avoid. It's a sound tactic, perfectly legal, but it relies on exploitation of a game mechanic rather than tactical play on-the-ball.

Marcus

[Acerak]

I'm also not keen on the "play the Wild Animal, not the ball" angle. Legal? Yes. Good for the game? Doubtful.

Marcus - Your league is in prime position to test something like this. Why not go with Option 1 like this?

* Must take action first.
* Can neither lend nor receive assists.

If the coach wants to declare a Move action and go nowhere, fine. See if people think the WA is still worthwhile, too powerful, whatever.

Cheers!

-Chet

[Marcus]

Yeah but I want to play undead next season

From my experience with our old proto-4th ed WA rules I can tell you that allowing a move action first up takes a huge amount of pressure off the WA and would mean a major swing back. The main reason for this is Stand Firm. Under our old "version 3.5" rules it was the second skill I gave my ROs, giving them the opportunity to move first and attempt a dodge away, without risking turnover. The only risk here was if you decided to declare your blitz with a dodging ratogre and failed, you lost your blitz.

Currently, Stand Firm's status as a trait makes this hard to come by. There is of course Break Tackle but this is of lesser value due to a ratogre (although useful for a minotaur) and still carries an attendant risk of turnover.

The inability to claim assists, coupled with the inability to move other players in to cancel those assists, should greatly enhance the opponents ability to neutralise a WA. Judging from the games I've had, even with the forced block rules, this shouldn't be too hard to do - which IMHO is the way it should be. He's wild, you put him in a position where you take a big risk (make that block or dodge) or you don't use him at all.

If it will help with getting a decision by October I'll run the rules past the ECBBL and see if anyone's keen to test it. If so I'll keep playing skavs for the next season.

They won't like it though. They've all been relishing the fact that my RO started a 5 game losing streak =)

Marcus

[Pantera]

I'm with Marcus on this, Wild Animal needs to be changed in the RR2002.

Check my post in Big Guys forum, where I ramble about how bad it is.

[Dangerous Dave]

Sorry but to compensate for stats of:-

6538, MB, Frenzy and Prehensile Tail (and access to physical skills)

Their negative trait must be negative.

Personally, I don't believe that Chet's suggested test of:-

* Must take action first (which can be a zero square move).
* Can neither lend nor receive assists.

is negative enough.


Sure a Rat Ogre can be a liability without a skill. But get them Block and then Pro and you have a very nasty beast. As I've stated before, chasing the Rat Ogre can work against you too - if you put 4 ST 3 guys around a rookie Rat Ogre, and he makes that first block (push, push or better - just less than 50% - 16/36) then your opponent has 4 players who are not going to be in a good position to defend the drive.

Once the Rat Ogre has block, the chance of failure is 30% (roughly) on the first block - give them Pro and a Leader reroll and the chance is pretty slim.


OK against an Ogre the chance of failure is 1/3... but then you are getting a free hit against their most dangerous player - and the chance of getting the Ogre down without a t/o is also 1/3. Also, if you put a Rat Ogre in range of an Ogre then you are asking for trouble. (Of course you could tempt your own turnover by leaving him 7 squares away)


IMO if Wild Animal is up for review, then either:-

Wild Animal must still be one of the most negative traits (I'm excluding Big Guy teams from this); or

The Rat Ogre / Minotaur stats need to change; or

The cost of the Rat Ogre and Minotaur needs to go up a lot.


Finally, if you don't like Wild Animal, there is a very simple solution - don't buy a Rat Ogre or Minotaur. Skaven don't need a Rat Ogre to succeed.


Dave

[Thadrin]

Reinstate the old "on a roll of a 1 pre action, the Wild Animal goes completely mental and attacks people at random" rule.

[voyagers_uk]

I agree with Thads but I would suggest to give them the MBBL2 Trait Uncontrollable. roll of 1 then D6 in a random direction, so it might be a goof thing, but could pull off a startling advantage.