Last thread from me: Allies

[voyagers_uk]

I am not in favout of allies, just saying

[atropabelladonna]

You might have given Dwarves a boost though, you could drop the deathroller and replace it with an ogre or a human blitzer, both tempting.

Good catch. The Dwarves do not need this kind of upgrade. Turning an expensive and not too effective player into a human blitzer, even with Loner, is a great deal.

[Patchwork]

I think multiple allies is a recipy for disaster, so I'll back off from that.

Yeah. If you allowed even two allies, you'd then have to limit it to only linesmen and even that would bring a huge amount of balance problems. Which is a long way for me to say I agree with you

Well - ogre can't be taken, as it already has loner.

Ah, sorry I missed that. I like that restriction.

As for Loner affecting finesse players more:
Agreed, so you'd have to consider whether they were worth it. IMO, some of them will be. It depends on the team. And bashers too can be greatly in need of a GFI too.

As long as some coaches feel the finesse players are worth considering, then that's good enough. The one's with some re-roll skills are likely to be the best to consider. While you're right about GFI being important for bashers as well, I think it's easier to plan around that with a basher, although I was thinking specifically with the elf team. Would be much more of an issue where your ally is one of your fastest player or a key player. For example, for the mentioned human blitzer on the dwarf team.

[DoubleSkulls]

I think you need to prevent teams swapping out their own big guys (Dwarves replacing the DR, Chaos Dwarves the Mino, Skaven the Rat ogre) where that big guy choice is seen as marginal by many coaches. So just say you can't take or give up a position with Loner.

[plasmoid]

Hi Doubleskulls,
having thought about it, I think you're absolutely right.
I already have the rule that you can't take an ally who was already a loner, so I'll add the rule that neither can you forfeit a player who is a loner.

I think that would help a lot.
I guess I'd better tweak my list then.

Cheers
Martin

[plasmoid]

Hi Slup,
I respectfully suggest that the CLBBBL have a lot of special rules, and that they've been using allies under very different conditions than the current format - so I appricate the feedback, but I don't think that the CLBBBL can be used to actually prove (as you say) anything.

1) expensive teams (elves) taking cheap players allowing for an early boost:

I don't think DEs are brilliant early on. I have no problem with a zombie for them.
For wood elves, I can see the fling used too some effect. I don't think he is a monster deal, but I'll look at wood elfs again, with the above change in mind. With the treeman unavailable as a trading item, some of the other elf lists can be used for weak allies

then later replacing for strength skills (and even mutations for DE)

I gotta say that in an invironment where every game counts, I think it will be excruciatingly slow to save up for a big bruiser and then skilling up the poor Loner to do anything useful. But as stated, Chaos will probably go as an option for darkies.

2) Human catcher on Dwarves (catch+dodge means loner is moot), thought too broken for CLBBBL

Having actually played with that, in the CLBBBL, there was no complaints at the time. Maybe that was at a later point? Or just on the drawing board? Either way, I think catch and dodge does not make loner moot. Not even by a long shot.

3) Vampires on undead, both balance and blood lust

This I'm not worried about.
If anyone gives up a mummy in order to get a loner with blood lust... well, they deserve some bang for their buck, before he leaves the pitch.

4) AV9 nurgle warrior on skaven, AV9 on skaven proven broken by CLBBBL

Apart from the proven bit - I can see AV9 being a bit much. With the above suggested rule, the AV9'er would no longer be available, as the skaven couldn't swap their RO for him.

Cheers
Martin

[Thadrin]

Amazons: Humans/Norse or Lizards....you have it different in the posts on the first page.

The idea of playing a team of Amazons with a Skink ally (+2 move, +stunty, +Ag access, -1St,-G access for 10k compared to a linewoman?...yes please....you can have one of my Thrower slots any day of the week.)

The idea of Allied players will always be interesting...neither for or against...but sceptical having seen so many attempts fail before.

BTW - I'd let Pact get Chaos Dwarf allies rather than Creeper allies. They can already have a rat or a gobbo...anything that would let them have a normal CD would be great.

[Darkson]

We were going to add the following:

A coach may take ONE player from the 0-16 position from it's list of allies (which I won't bother to post, as I can't find it). The playergains the Loner skill, and costs twice it's listed price, both in Gold and TV. The Allies cost is also doubled for any Skill increase.

This let humans, for example, add a Dwarf Blocker for 140K. Once it gets Guard, it costs 180K.

[Thadrin]

Double seems harsh...but adding 30k at purchase (as per mercenary inducement) and a 10k premium per skill would do the trick... (that Dwarf with Guard would count for 130k. harsh IMO)

[plasmoid]

Hi Thadrin,
thanks for joining in

Amazons: Humans/Norse or Lizards....you have it different in the posts on the first page.

Hey, I only posted the list once!
Humans/Norse was Joes idea (for a much expanded list)

The idea of playing a team of Amazons with a Skink ally (+2 move, +stunty, +Ag access, -1St,-G access for 10k compared to a linewoman?...yes please....you can have one of my Thrower slots any day of the week.)

I'm OK with allies being useful. I expect the power of all teams to go up slightly.
But I've put amazon in my tier one, which means it shouldn't be an absolute no-brainer.
Is it?
Using a player that can't get blodge (like the other gals), has +1 to his injury rolls, and who has loner so he is very unreliable for a lot of stuff like picking up or catching the ball (or for running, when he meets a tackle player)?

BTW - I'd let Pact get Chaos Dwarf allies rather than Creeper allies.

From feedback I've decided to not let big guys be traded.
That leaves pact with almost nothing to trade - certainly nothing that is more expensive than the 70K pricetag on a CD.
But they could get an orc lineman - I guess he just isn't worth the dark elf.

Cheers
Martin

[Thadrin]

Using a player that can't get blodge (like the other gals), has +1 to his injury rolls, and who has loner so he is very unreliable for a lot of stuff like picking up or catching the ball (or for running, when he meets a tackle player)?

I was thinking of using him as the link man: Pick up the ball with Thrower (Sure hands, KOR), give it to the Skink (who gets Catch first skill - there's the reliable reroll), then have him sprint upfield to give the ball to the catchers you've already moved into scoring position.

It's not HUGELY better, but it gives the roster a little spice. You could also use him as a deep threat receiver once given catch, spreading the defence a little more.

[plasmoid]

Hi Thadrin,
I have no trouble with "a little spice" - or interesting options.
What I'm trying to figure out is whether it's an absolute no-brainer - or whether it might appeal to some, but not to others.
Hard to say.
Maybe I should just set up a million polls

[Darkson]

Double seems harsh...but adding 30k at purchase (as per mercenary inducement) and a 10k premium per skill would do the trick... (that Dwarf with Guard would count for 130k. harsh IMO)

Harsh is what we wanted. Only those really desperate for an ally would pay for it, and the double cost on-going would make it more likely these players would be cut.

[Thadrin]

Double seems harsh...but adding 30k at purchase (as per mercenary inducement) and a 10k premium per skill would do the trick... (that Dwarf with Guard would count for 130k. harsh IMO)

Harsh is what we wanted. Only those really desperate for an ally would pay for it, and the double cost on-going would make it more likely these players would be cut.

Hum too many harshes.

I doubt you'd EVER see it with your costing. I think you went too far. Cut it back a bit - not much -and it possibly becomes at least thinkable. Maybe "add 50% rounded up" on the cost (40 for a Dwarf or Dark Elf, 30 for a human, 20 for a halfling etc.)?

[DoubleSkulls]

I think +30k and loner is probably bad enough. Any more and you just won't see them at all.

Of course if you are increasing the options above the OP then you might need to do something else. So a loner 130k Chaos Warrior vs a witch elf doesn't seem that great a trade off to me. Not one you'd immediately rule out, but one that would need some serious consideration.

Another nerf would be to extend animosity so that the ally needs to roll 2+ to pass or hand off as well have a 2+ roll if someone wants to pass or hand off the ball to them.