How should I develop a MA10 Wardancer?

[Smurf]

Sick...

Slap Sprint on him.

Shadowing and tackle will be also very good.

MA10 means that any Move 5 cannot get away, 6 on a 12, 7 on a 11, 8 on a 10... That's right MA catchers have a 1/6 chance of leaving the MA10.

If the league is sensible the Wardancer should be targetted.

[Carnis]

1/18 sounds very high for a rookie build, but obviously it depends on the team, the defender & the OTTer. A MA10, AG5 Surefeet / Sprint /catch will certainly have better odds than 1/18 for instance.

I'd probably look at fend too, tbh, just to keep the gem alive.

Later on you got 3 more skills to pick, I'd be looking at tackle, ss, dauntless at least..

[Joemanji]

Really? Wow! I'm glad you told me that. I never would have thought it.

[cyagen]

As an unskilled Zombie or Rotter

Depends on your league but I would forgo Shadowing and go Side Step, Tackle, Sure feet.

A dancer job is to knock the ball loose. With 10 MA Blodge, Leap there is almost no square that he can't reach.

[inkpwn]

A foul proof vest and a personal apothecary. That and strip ball.

[Smeborg]

For 3rd skill roll: +1AG. For 4th skill roll: magic codpiece to protect against fouls. For 5th skill roll: magic force field to protect against lightning bolts, chainsaws, stabs and other incomings.

All the best.

[Smeborg]

Joemanji - I read your comments on OTS with interest. Thanks for that. However, I am not sure there is such a thing as a generic OTS defense anymore! The following teams begin with skills that negate the 2 defenses recommended by you:

TTM/R-Stuff: Gobbos, 'Flings, Ogres, Orcs, C-Pact, U-Pact
Frenzy: Chaos, C-Pact, CD, DE, Dwarfs, Necro, Norse, Skaven
Leap: WE, Slann
Stunty: Lizzie

That's 16 teams out of 24 (or two thirds) that don't fit the generic standard! The majority of them have a fair chance of scoring an OTS in my experience, especially if they have a team re-roll in hand. If you add other acquired skills (e.g. Grab), plus acquired versions of the above skills (e.g. Frenzy on Humans), plus stat increases (MA or AG), plus Star Players (e.g. Nurgle with Brickfarth+Grotty), that 16 starts to go up and approach the full 24. For all such teams, as you point out, the standard defenses recommended by you risk helping the opponent.

I find the 8 man defense at the back to be fine, especially if you have 4 Tacklers in it and are facing Dodge but not Leap. On the LoS, I have found my current Nurgle team (Beast and 2 Warriors all with Block. S-Firm, F-App, D-Pres) to be rather effective... Not scored against yet (but it is theoretically possible, with Frenzy/Juggernaut, an MA10 player with Sprint, or plain old TTM).

All the best.

[Joemanji]

Obviously I'm not talking about TTM, just chainpush OTS. Just obviously. We're in a thread about WEs. Why even mention it?

The following teams begin with skills that negate the 2 defenses recommended by you:

TTM/R-Stuff: Gobbos, 'Flings, Ogres, Orcs, C-Pact, U-Pact
Frenzy: Chaos, C-Pact, CD, DE, Dwarfs, Necro, Norse, Skaven
Leap: WE, Slann
Stunty: Lizzie

That's 16 teams out of 24 (or two thirds) that don't fit the generic standard! The majority of them have a fair chance of scoring an OTS in my experience, especially if they have a team re-roll in hand.

Are you high? Are you seriously suggesting that Dwarfs could OTS the centralised defence? (I specifically mentioned that the off-centre one is vulnerable to Frenzy.)

I posted two defences and commented that race/skills alter which you should use (or something else). I clearly mentioned that. In my experience the two setups I posted (or some close derivation) make OTS virtually impossible for anyone but Skaven or WEs (who always have a good chance), barring Quick Snap or stat ups.

If you are really saying that the majority of teams have a "fair" chance of OTS then perhaps you need to look at your own defence.

On the LoS, I have found my current Nurgle team (Beast and 2 Warriors all with Block. S-Firm, F-App, D-Pres) to be rather effective...

Well done mate! Kudos to you. Obviously that's a great setup (and just the DistP would usually be enough: at least -3 on any catch). But that really isn't helpful, constructive or relevant. And obviously if your opponent has a MA10, AG5 Wardancer with Sprint these setups are no good ... but what is? Certainly not 8 men holding hands.

Here's a little anecdote: At the Eurobowl (widely accepted as the most competitive BB tournament on the planet) this year, one of the last games to finish had a turn 16 OTS attempt. Several coaches on our team crowded round to watch. The opposition setup 3 men together on the LoS and '8 guys holding hands' vs our Skaven coach. At this point everyone on our team breathed a collective sigh of relief as we all assumed the Skaven would score. They did. We laughed about it later. That is what good coaches think of '8 guys holdings hands'. As you can see, it even has its own derogatory nickname.

The quality of posts on this forum has degenerated to such a level that it beggar's belief. Did you know that virtually all of the coaches I respect have vowed never to post here again because of the nonsense posted by your unholy trinty? It just isn't worth their time. I'm starting to see their point. The sheer bludgeoning arrogance with which some people repeatedly post such tripe is mind-boggling.

[Carnis]

Mostly people set up with "8 men holding hands" in perpetual, because they don't want to give a 4th player to be a blitz/foul target on T16 in a non-critical league match & put 3 rooks on the LOS.

Obviously it is not the best way to counter an OTT-attempt, but it is the simplest and best known version for sure - and the one that will leave your team in best possible shape for the next match.

Your last diagram I've never seen in practice, the intent is to force the first push into an empty square to waste a free chainpush square, I assume?

[Joemanji]

Oh, holding hands is fine if you aren't defending the OTS (e.g. vs Dwarfs). I do that all the time. The point of the setup you mentioned has several benefits ... add assists for the initial 'backwards' blitz, force one chainpush sideways rather than towards the endzone, force dodges if the chainpush works, layer TZs for the handoff. The actual layout of the guys is fluid depending on skills etc. Another bonus is that if you have 2 guys with useful skills (Tackle, DT etc.) they cannot be avoided.

[mattgslater]

Joe, you misunderstood me. I'm leaving it at that, because it was far back in the past of this thread. You're so eager to prove me wrong that you're happy to put words in my mouth. I'd find it funny if I didn't find it so irritating. My objective wasn't to be more precise than to suggest a fence outside of blitzing range.

Which fence, I think, depends heavily on what you've got and what you're facing. I agree that your blue diagram is better for a rookie team or against ST2 1TTD players. Certainly, with the yellow diagram you have, you want to put your SF/Tacklers on the wings. I think that's all you really need, as 3x3+ is only 8/27, about the same as knocking down a Dodge player with 2d. If you don't have quite enough spam positioning skills, you can cover for a hole, or even two, by using that extra man.

[Smeborg]

Joemanji -thanks for the abuse. No hard feelings though...

I think we are talking at cross purposes here, so let's clear things up. We are in the league section of the forum here, not the tournament section, thus my comments were aimed at practical league play. Further, my advocacy of the "8 men holding hands" defense (I rather like the name) assumed that the defense was facing a team with relevant skills (e.g. Frenzy, Stunty) which might do particularly well against the 2 defenses recommended by you. My apologies if that was not clear. Of course if a team is facing an OTS attempt by a team without TTM, Frenzy, Stunty, Leap, or MA9 players, then something like the 2 defenses described by you might work well in practice. But I was trying to make the point that in a league of coaches who understand OTS, beyond the first few games, such situations might be rare, and to use the defenses recommended by you in other situations might help the opponent. My advice was aimed particularly at newcomers to the game.

By "fair", I simply mean that I have observed a majority (at least 11) of the 16 teams listed scoring one-turners (not necessarily against me, in case you think the coaches are gaining a benefit from my defensive skills). I did not mean to imply that their chances of success were as good as Woodies or Skaven, just that they should be regarded as reasonably possible.

My comments on my Nurgle OTS defense were likewise made with the aim of showing newcomers (should they be concerned about OTS defense in a league) that there are ways to develop a league team that will improve its OTS defense (3 players with S-Firm being one method). The 3 x D-Pres is in itself of little relevance against an experienced coach, as he will push the receiver away from all but one of these players before giving the ball to the receiver.

I am sure you enjoyed your team-mate's success at OTS at EuroBowl. These moments are always sweet. I had a similar moment at the first Blood Bowl in 2002, when my club-mate did it (also with Skaven). I had shown him how to do it the night before.

All the best.

[Carnis]

My apologies if that was not clear. Of course if a team is facing an OTS attempt by a team without TTM, Frenzy, Stunty, Leap, or MA9 players, then something like the 2 defenses described by you might work well in practice. But I was trying to make the point that in a league of coaches who understand OTS, beyond the first few games, such situations might be rare, and to use the defenses recommended by you in other situations might help the opponent. My advice was aimed particularly at newcomers to the game.

The 3 x D-Pres is in itself of little relevance against an experienced coach, as he will push the receiver away from all but one of these players before giving the ball to the receiver.

Heh, funny stuff ;D.

1) In what situations do you figure those setups would help the opponent to OTT in particular?

2) Really, irrelevant? So a good coach is expected to get 3 pushes in, and all sideways away from the DPs and preferably start on the other corner to even be able to avoid the 2nd dist pres at all? Also even then the pass will be more difficult, as the passer can't become part of the chainpush formation due to the DPs.

I kind of agree the level of discussion on this board is taking a downturn with the decline in regular posters, but then again I can't figure how not posting at all will really help raise it back up again.

[Smeborg]

1) In what situations do you figure those setups would help the opponent to OTT in particular?

2) Really, irrelevant? So a good coach is expected to get 3 pushes in, and all sideways away from the DPs and preferably start on the other corner to even be able to avoid the 2nd dist pres at all? Also even then the pass will be more difficult, as the passer can't become part of the chain-push formation due to the DPs.

(1) The defending players can become useful to the attacker by filling spaces that he would otherwise have to fill with attacking players in order to make his chain-pushes work. Simply put, that is the main danger of putting defending players near the LoS.

(2) No, the attacker only needs at most 2 chain pushes to achieve this (the receiver normally starts with at least a 1 square advantage in getting away from the other D-Pres). This might be reduced to 1 chain-push in some circumstances. Most teams, however, excepting Skaven and Woodies, will need 3 chain-pushes anyway in order to get their receiver to within scoring distance. I did not say that D-Pres would have no effect. It has several effects: (a) it encourages the attacker to pass or hand-off the ball after the receiver has been chain-pushed, not before, thus potentially making the pass or hand-off manoeuvre more difficult, (b) it potentially consumes one more player to get the ball to the receiver (e.g. pass plus hand-off), and (c) it will put the receiver at -1 to catch the ball, provided the defender who has been chain-pushed is still on the pitch. In the context of chain-push odds, these influences are worthwhile, but not play-breaking.

[Demagoge]

Hi,

sorry if I´m asking some stupid stuff, but how does Grab on the treeman and Side Step on the Wardancer improve the chance of a OTT? I don´t find the point. Can anyone help?

Thanks.