When is +AV a good choice (general discussion)?

[Lunchab1es]

Assuming the roll is (6,4):

Wood Elves: Never.

Really? Never on a Wardancer?

I heartily disagree...particularly if they got some previous stat boosts (Ag or Strength come to mind...) They are already such foul magnets it seems like a wise investment to me.

[dines]

Matt> Disagree totally regarding lizardmen, Sauri do need so many other skills and AV 9 is perfectly good. Their only real nemesis is claw heavy teams and elves and there +AV doesn't do squat...

[nick_nameless]

I disagree with the sentiment that it's only ever considerable for pieces with low armor. I don't think going from 9 --> 10 AV has diminishing returns, especially if that AV9 piece is really valuable to the team. Taking a piece from 9 --> 10 means their armor will break 50% less often now (17% of the time to 8% of the time). That's like an unmodified 4+ save, so to speak.

The diminishing return is that the decrease in % chance of armor break from 7-8 is much greater than the decrease in armor break from 9-10.

There are so many more useful things that most armor 9 pieces can do.

For a Dwarf or CD lineman, +mv is much more useful than + AV. On a black ork as well. On a Saurus there are so many skills they can use well that the +armor would never be a consideration for me.

On a krox that had guard, SF, break tackle and grab, then maybe.

on a MV3 mummy, give me the +mv.

On a tomb guardian....I would consider it because of decay.

Again, it's just that most of the time there are better choices for those pieces.

[Smurf]

Assuming the roll is (6,4):

Wood Elves: Never.

Really? Never on a Wardancer?

I heartily disagree...particularly if they got some previous stat boosts (Ag or Strength come to mind...) They are already such foul magnets it seems like a wise investment to me.

For Wood Elves:

Thrower - Move or Agility
Wardancer - AV or Agility
Catcher - Move or Agility
Linemen - AV
Treemman -??? what's that.

Yup, Matt is alone there I think. Feels unusual for me to be on this side for a change

[mattgslater]

+MA Wardancers are awesome. +AV would be good, but MA increases are just too valuable.

Likewise, maybe a 3rd improvement for Wood Elf Linos.

[dines]

Haven't played woodies, but can see the point in MA over AV on wardancers. They are really good from 0 spp, so its not that big a deal if you loose one and MA is a game changer.

[juck101]

+MA Wardancers are awesome. +AV would be good, but MA increases are just too valuable.

Yeah I can see logic in that. The real issue with a 10 roll is some are give the choice of doubles (5+5); great players want the movement, poor players have little reason to take any stats. The net result for the bland average players many dont need extra armour so its a rare pick.

I like the suggestion of av on WD, WE, werewolfs but the +ma is normally better so its a tough call

[Smurf]

At higher levels the AV is better. I remember playing against WDs vs my WDs and with on skill mine dominated his.

[SunDevil]

This one is for smeborg and SunDevil in particular...

... How about +AV on a Blitzing Pestigor? Would that give him that much more protection? If you got the +AV on his first roll would you then consider steering him in that direction. Would the extra AV be worth it on your ball carrying Pestigor also?

If it were his first roll, I'd give him a movement increase and he probably wouldn't wind up becoming a blitzer. For the Wrestler-types, probably MA too. I might have given it to my slayer Pestigor, and might still, as I'm concerned about keeping him around long-term. Still, the way I use him, MA might work better for protection than AV.

I agree with Wanchor. If its a first skill, +MV over +AV for a Pesty. If you already have one developed into a special ballcarrier (+AG or Dodge or whtever), then +AV as a fourth, MAYBE third skill. On a specialized killer Pesty, I could see +AV as well but not sooner than 4th. Would go well with Pile On.

[Smeborg]

I agree with Chance - I would take +1MA rather than +1AV if it was my first Pestigor advance. However, if I already have a well defined Pestigor Runner, I am inclined to ignore 6,4 on the other Pests, concentrating instead on the key Blitzer skills (which for me are Wrestle/Fend/Tackle). At 4th or 5th skill I would consider +1MA, and would probably take it (2-Heads being the most likely alternative).

+2MA is of course golden on a Pest. You don't get there without taking +1MA first! You should also probably commit fully to +1MA or +2MA by taking S-Feet, Sprint on doubles choices (plus of course KoRet if it is the Runner).

The Pests are commonly targetted by opponents, but I don't think that makes the case for +1AV. They are the most dynamic players on the team, so +1MA tends to suit their role(s) better. But for the Pest Blitzers, +1MA is not an automatic choice.

Hope that helps.

[mattgslater]

I think it's best expressed by some relationship between skill/MA value, player value, and injury exposure. The lower the perceived utility of a new skill or +MA and the higher the player's value and exposure to injury, the better the AV increase.

As to whether it's low AV or high AV that gets the most benefit, I'm kind of agnostic. The lower your AV (down to 6 or 7), the more permutations you save, but the lower your AV (no limits), the smaller the fraction of the total injury odds you cut. I think this favors high AV over low AV, but reasonable minds may differ. Let's call it a wash. How do they relate to each other?

AV to break: Perms/% of whole, Perms/% change for +1, Perms/% change for -1.
10: 3/8.33, na/na, 3/100
9: 6/16.67, 3/50, 4/66.67
8: 10/27.78, 4/40, 5/50
7: 15/41.67, 5/33.33, 6/40
6: 21/58.33, 6/28.57, 5/23.8
5: 26/72.22, 5/19.23, 4/15.38

If we set the two methods of consideration (perms vs percentage) as equal factors for the value of +1, we get:
AV9: 3x50 = 150
AV8: 4x40 = 160
AV7: 5x33 = 166.67
AV6: 6x28.57 = 171.43
AV5: 5x19.23 = 76.92

It's not for Snotlings. Otherwise, the difference is not significant.

So, our factors are:

1) a value attached to the player's TV add, replaceability, and in-match utility as-is; times

2) "knockdowns" ÷ "lost uses", where
2a) "knockdowns" is the number of knockdowns the player takes per match, and
2b) "lost uses" is the number of times per match the player would use the skill or MA increase he didn't take to save a turn or TRR (failed GFI, both-down result), plus some fraction of the number of "lost uses" per match that yield a suboptimal result but don't cause a turnover or TRR (like not risking a GFI, or rolling a both/push on a block vs. rookie).

Am I missing anything?

[Wanchor]

What.

[mattgslater]

I'm saying the relevant factors that make AV more likely are:
The more likely a player is to be knocked down
The less likely a player is to use the skill you'd take instead
The less likely a player is to use the +MA you'd take instead
The less likely you are to replace the player immediately
The more dependent you are upon the player, in the scope of the current match

Less relevant:
The player's TV add
The player's replacement cost, unless you can't win without his position and don't have the money
The player's current AV, if 6-9; can't take AV if AV10, shouldn't if AV5 or less.