Zombies vs Golems on a Necromantic team

fen · Post by **fen** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 6:07 pm

stashman wrote:
fen wrote: I did play a season with an alternative Necro team this year. It had 0-4 toned down Werewolves instead of the 0-2 Ghouls. It was very cool.
What was the stats for that werewolf. Seems more necro to have more werewolfs!

They were 7338 Frenzy, Regenerate - GA (I forget the price, the roster isn't here).

It was clear that with four of them something had to go, they lost a movement. The decision to remove Claw was a tough one, but in the end it was decided Frenzy was tactically more interesting, less powerful and more in character (keeping them more in line with Ulfwerenars). We toyed with cutting their AV to 7, but testing showed that was too much of a nerf to the Necro team. So it stayed at 8, but one could go to 7 if the weres got Dodge in compenstation.

The team was fun, it didn't feel overpowered compared to the current necro team. The Weres played much like a mix between the existing werewolf and ghouls. Having four of them was amazing, the sidelines were constantly threated with crowdpushing. But missing Claw did make them a lot less effective against high AV teams.

I'd probably play the team like that again if I had the chance.

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:06 pm

I think mattgslater's post is very close to the mark.

We did discuss reducing reroll cost too, but that didn't receive a majority and we decided to see what the affect of the golem cost change would be. If the experimental necro teams are still under performing in October '08 I'm sure we will look at it again.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 3:25 am

ianwilliams wrote:I think mattgslater's post is very close to the mark.

We did discuss reducing reroll cost too, but that didn't receive a majority and we decided to see what the affect of the golem cost change would be. If the experimental necro teams are still under performing in October '08 I'm sure we will look at it again.

Your opinion, Ian (and others): which would make a more balanced starting team? I'll houserule whatever I do for my 1M League, and that's my tiebreaker criterion.

A) 100k Fleshies, 70k RRs
I: 2x Were, 2x FG, 2x Ghoul, 5x Zombie, 3RR, 10k.
II: 2x Were, 1x FG, 2x Wight, 1x Ghoul, 5x Zombie, 3RR.
III: 2x Were, 2x Wight, 2x Ghoul, 5x Zombie, 3RR, 30k.

Each way, you've got two positionals to buy with a total net cost of 170k+leftover cash, plus replacements and ideally a 140k re-roll and one or more 40k benchwarmers.

B) 110k Fleshies, 60k RRs
IV: 2x Were, 2x FG, 1x Wight, 1x Ghoul, 5x Zombie, 3RR
V: 2x Were, 1x FG, 1x Wight, 2x Ghoul, 6x Zombie, 3RR
VI: 2x Were, 2x Wight, 2x Ghoul, 5x Zombie, 4RR

IV leaves two positionals worth 160k, a 140k RR, and maybe a Zombie. V leaves two positionals worth 190k and a 140k RR. VI leaves two positionals each at 110k and maybe a Zombie.

That actually is a pretty big power difference, isn't it?

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 9:58 am

Marlow wrote:I would like the team to be able to have its own identity.

I really like the idea of Golems getting mutation access, though I'd personally disallow them from claws and prehensile tail (for fluff reasons).
Unfortuantely, they're 2 of the only 4 mutations I can see a FG taking (others being Tentacles and perhaps Dist Pres).

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 10:46 pm

I think the reduced reroll cost is more likely than any other cost adjustment. Flesh Golems are just too good for a 100k price tag. Thick Skulls & Stand Firm are good skills for LOS fodder and compared to a BOB at 80k, 30k seems a reasonable price increase for them.

I think the only other option I'd look at would be increasing the number of golems to 4. It would be interesting to see how much difference that made.

Joemanji · Post by **Joemanji** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 10:52 pm

ianwilliams wrote:I think the only other option I'd look at would be increasing the number of golems to 4. It would be interesting to see how much difference that made.

Sounds scary to me. I've played against Necros plenty of times where the Golems have cost me the game with their Stand Firm. 4 of them in addition to Weres, Wights and Ghouls sounds like overkill.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:03 pm

Undeady rosters really scream for a limited number of positionals. 8 is about the most I could see.

stashman · Post by **stashman** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:25 am

ianwilliams wrote: I think the only other option I'd look at would be increasing the number of golems to 4. It would be interesting to see how much difference that made.

In the longterm - damn good. Lets say you have skills on all 4. Two with block, two with guard.

Necros will probably get the best cage in whole of blood bowl with four ST4 Stand Firm AV9 players! I rather see 4 unpredictable werewolfs in the team, than 4 very safe golems.

Digger Goreman · Post by **Digger Goreman** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:20 am

Interesting... when I first mentioned having 4 Golems in another thread, the response was "why would I take 4 of something I don't want to use 2 of...?"

I would really like having four Weres, too! But, at 120k, it will do nothing (as will having 4x 100k Golems) for the starting teams....

Strangely, Ian, reduction to 90k was exactly what I would suggest next....

stashman · Post by **stashman** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:13 am

Digger Goreman wrote:Interesting... when I first mentioned having 4 Golems in another thread, the response was "why would I take 4 of something I don't want to use 2 of...?"

I think there is two camps

DamianTheLost · Post by **DamianTheLost** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:17 am

stashman wrote:
Digger Goreman wrote:Interesting... when I first mentioned having 4 Golems in another thread, the response was "why would I take 4 of something I don't want to use 2 of...?"
I think there is two camps

I'm on the lets bump them back to 110k reduce rerolls to 60k but give but drop FG's ag to 1 and let them have grab or something else camp

stormmaster1 · Post by **stormmaster1** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:07 pm

4 FGs would be broken. that's 4 black orcs with stand firm. an awesome cage. plus with MA8 on the team if caging you only need to advance few squares to get in scoring range. you would also only need 1 single solitary zombie on the team.

Marlow · Post by **Marlow** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:36 pm

ianwilliams wrote: I think the only other option I'd look at would be increasing the number of golems to 4. It would be interesting to see how much difference that made.

What about increasing it to Three?
Apart from lone Big Guys everything is always an even numbe!

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:29 pm

Marlow wrote:What about increasing it to Three?
Apart from lone Big Guys everything is always an even numbe!

Jervis has a phobia of odd numbers, so that's the reason all positions other than BGs are even.

Seriously, 0-3 was sggested for various positions early in the vault process, and JJ nixed it.

stashman · Post by **stashman** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:16 pm

DamianTheLost wrote:
stashman wrote:
Digger Goreman wrote:Interesting... when I first mentioned having 4 Golems in another thread, the response was "why would I take 4 of something I don't want to use 2 of...?"
I think there is two camps
I'm on the lets bump them back to 110k reduce rerolls to 60k but give but drop FG's ag to 1 and let them have grab or something else camp

I vote GRAB.