What is a believable peasant statline?

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 8:23 am

Hi all,
another poll concerning Bretonnians:

My team employs peasants/commoners/people with a fairly rudimentary training as their linemen.
I want these players to be quite bad on the pitch, too counter-balance the fight that the "knights" are pretty good. So I'm aiming for something worse than your average hobgoblin/thrall.

With that in mind, which statline do you think is the most believable?

Cheers
Martin

Duke Jan · Post by **Duke Jan** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 8:43 am

Actually, 6-3-2-6 would be more accurate. Little experience in ball handling and poor, if any, armour. Their physical labour means they've got a decent strength.

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 8:48 am

i'd go for Hobgoblin stats 6-3-3-7 ... if you want something unique, drop a point of movement (peasants back hurting from the long day on the fields) and make them 5-3-3-7 (keeping the 40k price tag).

But think of it that the cheaper the lineman position becomes, the better the lineman actually gets! I'd take a 30k Zombie over a 50k human lineman most of the time!

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:00 am

Hi Tim and Jan,
Jan - it seems that you get the reasoning behind both AG2 and AV6. Duly noted.

Tim,
yes - I want something different than a hobgob. I want something worse!
I do have a problem with a stat decrease and no price change. You can see it like this: If the decrease wasn't sufficient to put him at 30K, then he isn't a significantly weaker player.

I do hear you about the zombie. But, IMO, that is due to the zombies AV8 (and regeneration for that matter). Durable linemen are good.

Would you take a skeleton over a human lineman?
Or a hobgoblin?
Cheers
Martin

Vero · Post by **Vero** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:16 am

No less than ag3, why wouldn't they dodge as well as a standard human?

David Bergkvist · Post by **David Bergkvist** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 12:14 pm

Thralls have 6 3 3 7, and bretonnian peasants are the same thing, so they should have the same stats.

I really don't understand the argument "but X already have that statline". Why would every player type have to be different from one other? The teams they play in are different anyways, and that's what should matter.

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 12:28 pm

I dislike the AG2 and AV6 options. AG2 is reserved for BigGuy/Undead/Dwarf clumpsyness. Even Orc linemen have AG3, no (living) human should be below. And AV6 would be too low as well, that's Halfling level. Even tiny halfnaked Goblins have AV7.

So if ST3, AG3 and AV7 are set, there's only the MV left to modify. 6 would generate a thrall/hobgoblin, 7 a Skaven, so imo 5-3-3-7 is the only unique option.

So, if you go 5-3-3-7, you could lower the price to 30k if you prefer that. Compared to a Hobgoblin/Thrall, it's -1MA, compared to a skeleton it's +AG -Regeneretion, so it's OK.

Really depends on the pricing of the rest of the team. The idea behind 40k was that you could discount the positionals a little. With 30k, the knights have to be really expensive.

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 12:36 pm

Hi Tim and David,
the idea wasn't that they had to be unique.
The idea was that they should be worse than thralls.
The rationale was that the peasants are reasonably fit specimen, but don't have good equipment or good training.

>The idea behind 40k was that you could discount the positionals a little.
>With 30k, the knights have to be really expensive.
This is where it gets tricky.
Don't you mean that the knights should be really good? Not expensive.

See, I don't believe much in "fake" pricing.
If the linemen are bad enough to warrant a 30K price tag, shouldn't the other positionals be good enough to deserve a pretty high price tag?

Cheers
Martin

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 12:47 pm

Nope, i'm fine with "real value" pricing. And it's OK as the first option for the team. However sometimes team balancing can require a slight deviation from the standard price, esp. in the very low region of 40k or 30k ... maybe 35k would be the best price tag, well, i think you get me.

If you want to go for expensive knights and cheap peasants, i'm fine with that. I have always been a fan of the brettonian team and i'm looking forward to your list.

David Bergkvist · Post by **David Bergkvist** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 1:00 pm

plasmoid wrote:Hi Tim and David,
the idea wasn't that they had to be unique.
The idea was that they should be worse than thralls.
The rationale was that the peasants are reasonably fit specimen, but don't have good equipment or good training.

Thralls don't have good equipment or training either (which is represented by their AV 7 instead of 8. ), so I don't see why peasants should be worse than them.

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 1:04 pm

Hi Tim,
OK - so we're on the same page

I know that pricing on cheap players is hard, because they do have value simply for existing.

I only reacted because lately I've been told that a team is too good if it can afford all it's 8 position players within the first million.
My point is that if the players are priced correctly, then that would indicate that the players really aren't that powerful - and that the team will get into trouble in a longer season.
(I mean, gobbos can afford all their (0) position players right from the start

)

I'll post the team soon enough.
It's not the first time that one of it's incarnations have been posted here.
But I'm a bit stumped about the linemen.
I could go with 6337 (40K), but we've playtested with worse ones.

Cheers
Martin

Pink Horror · Post by **Pink Horror** » Sat Dec 11, 2004 6:50 am

Stick with your team idea. I see no reason why a uman can't be AG 2. Are Blood Bowl linemen just pulled off the street at random? They're athletes, who are stronger, faster, and tougher than normal people. If you decide that your peasant linemen should have no more dodging or ball handling skill than a human off the street, make them AG 2. Also, I have to point out, ST 2 catchers make even less sense than AG 2 linemen. Anyone who is incredibly fast ought to be at least ST 3, if 3 is considered the amount of strength that any old human has. Furthermore if Black Orcs, the most skilled fighters of the entire Orc army, can have poor enough coordination to be AG 2, so can a few human beings.

Post by **Dave** » Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:54 am

whe I play soccer I love going up against a Big (BOB) sized opponent, and I (relatively average not counting my tallness) will be able to 'dodge' around him

small, fasst guys give me the creeps as they tend to be able to run rings around me .

same in BB .. a lino (me in this example) will be average. ST3 and AG3 are just that.

BOB's are stronger, bigger, clumsier
catchers the opposite of that.

The stats are pretty solid as is, I'd prefer a 5/6-3-3-7 guy, as the thralls aren't really on the top of their physique either are they ?

Vero · Post by **Vero** » Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:34 am

Pink Horror wrote:Stick with your team idea. I see no reason why a uman can't be AG 2. Are Blood Bowl linemen just pulled off the street at random? They're athletes, who are stronger, faster, and tougher than normal people. If you decide that your peasant linemen should have no more dodging or ball handling skill than a human off the street, make them AG 2. Also, I have to point out, ST 2 catchers make even less sense than AG 2 linemen. Anyone who is incredibly fast ought to be at least ST 3, if 3 is considered the amount of strength that any old human has. Furthermore if Black Orcs, the most skilled fighters of the entire Orc army, can have poor enough coordination to be AG 2, so can a few human beings.

For the same reason they're not so strong so make them str2 too. (=Yes, they're peasants, but picked peasant).

McDeth · Post by **McDeth** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 9:35 am

Didnt vote for either, fluff wise i guess i'd like to see something like 6 3 2 6, but they'll be so cheap, you could probably max out the roster after only a couple of games. How about 6 2 2 7. Your not gonna get much weasker than that