starting lineup for woodies

[Scipio_Publius]

and i'm saying it has nothing to do with luck but with the DIFFERENCE IN PLAY BETWEEN FLINGS AND CHAOS DWARVES.

you're looking at the two ends of the spectrum of team's power.

So Woodelves can't stand up to Chaos Dwarves? Hummm...something to think about I guess.

I guess my point is more or less...despite the valuable formulae from the internet "sages" of bloodbowl (who say this is the best team and no other...and I am not saying they are wrong either)...mileage from any of these formulae may vary.

I wonder sometimes what happened in the good ole days before this became so competitve.

[DoubleSkulls]

Or just maybe comparing two WE teams, one that starts against the weakest team in the game - with no tackle or block - and one that starts against one of the stronger teams loaded with block and tackle - isn't a fair comparison.

[Scipio_Publius]

Or just maybe comparing two WE teams, one that starts against the weakest team in the game - with no tackle or block - and one that starts against one of the stronger teams loaded with block and tackle - isn't a fair comparison.

LOL...fine I guess if noone is actually going to read what I wrote then hey thats IT! Exactly dude.

[Gus]

well, actually, you're the one who is not paying attention.

two posts from here, you say:
"So Woodelves can't stand up to Chaos Dwarves? Hummm...something to think about I guess. "
WHERE did we say that ? just stop making things up.

simple things: halflings are a WEAK team. Chaos Dwarves are among the BEST teams. when you compare two things, you want to compare them in the SAME kind of environment. that's like watching a light bulb without sunglasses and saying "okay, i do not understand how you guys cannot look at the sun without getting blind, because i did look into a light (who cares if it is not the same power at all) and it works fine."
and your remark about things becoming competitive is completely out of topic. you are saying your lineup did better than another. you ARE comparing things.

[Scipio_Publius]

@Gus - when did I say that "my" line up was better then the "Holy Bloodbowl sages" 10 Line 1 WD?

My point was I have better "luck" with a different setup. Wether it be because of hey I drew first game or maybe the dice went my way...the Holy internet Formulae work for certain folks.

Point = use what ever lineup you want...

[Gus]

and how many guys will we need to bring in to tell you that it was because you faced rosters that are radically opposed in term of game's strength, and not because of the dice, for you to finally understand our point ?

take whatever roster you want: TRUE
luck in the first games decides a lot: TRUE
chaos dwarves and flings are the same kind of team when it comes to measuring some lineup efficiency: FALSE

[plasmoid]

Hi all,
on page 2 I described a wood elf team with 4 catchers - and even sometimes putting them on the LOS for defense. I got a lot of for that!

I just wanted to point out that if your opponent does not have block or tackle, then your catcher is less likely to be hit with a 3 dice block than a lineman is with a 2 dice block. (42% vs. 56% hits).

If the opponent has block only, then this is also true, though admittedly the difference is minimal (70% vs 75% hits).

Only if the opposing team has block+tacklers will the catcher be in bigger trouble than the lineman. So, when facing dwarfs, you put your linemen on the LOS.

And let's not forget that if the opposing team has a big guy and can get 3 dice on a lineman, then the catcher has significantly better odds of getting out of there in one piece.

Cheers all,
Martin

[darthvincor]

I've never played for a wood elf team, but I have played against them very often.
And on the basis of this experience, I can say that I find WDs scary players, as their starting stats and skills are already very impressive.
So the mere presence of a WD can already have a psychological effect, which is also something to take into account.

In short: take at least 1 WD in your starting line-up, in my opinion.

[Gus]

@plasmoid
that's not including the price/usefulness of the player, nor the ability of your opponent to easily setup SEVERAL 3D blocks, increasing the risk to have your shiny 90k player crushed to dust ^^

[plasmoid]

Hi Gus,
facts are:
It is easier to set up 2D blocks against the linemen (1 man and 1 assist) then 3D blocks against the catchers (1 man and 2 assists).
And the catchers have the same AV as the linemen.

I'm not saying this is a tactic to use in the mid/late season - but it is a very decent starting tactic.
Cheers
Martin

[Scipio_Publius]

and how many guys will we need to bring in to tell you that it was because you faced rosters

<sigh> NM...U missed the point...again

And thats more my fault because aparently I can't articulate it...my fault...sorry

[Gus]

@plasmoid
unless you put more than 3 guys on the LoS (yummy) i can pretty easily hit 2 of them three times with 3D blocks. and that's without moving anyone. moving a player can allow me to hit all of them with 3D.

seriously, i would like so much that my opponents put their crunchy av7 catchers on the LoS, but they never do...

[plasmoid]

Hi Gus,
I'm not saying that you couldn't get those blocks.
I'm just saying that it is actually easier to get 2D blocks in linemen - and by easier I mean requires less assists.

And, as I've demonstrated, 3D blocks on dodge players compares favourably to 2D blocks on non-dodge players.

Statistically, the catchers will survive better than the lineelf (until opposing teams develop block+tackle players).

And for me the added kicker is that if they do survive the LOS round, which they quite frequently do, they can stand up and dodge away without risking a team reroll.

>seriously, i would like so much that my opponents put their crunchy av7 catchers on the LoS, but they never do...
When the linemen are also AV7-crunchy, they take worse beatings.

Cheers
Martin