V-Traps explained?

[Hasdrubal]

Looking at the side, I found the following defensive set-up suggested for a Chaos Pact team:
http://www.play-creator.com/viewplay.asp?viewplay=9350

I assume its target is to channel the opponent to the sidelines, then converge the V and the safeties to stop the ball carrier. Is it how it works?

Would that be a sensible set-up with a rookie Chaos Dwarf team like this?
- 6 dwarfs (LoS and V tips)
- 1 bull centaur (safety)
- 5 hobgoblins
- 3 RR
- 40k banked for apo or 2nd bull

[pauli42]

i got this explanation from mattgslater:

Those v-shaped formations.

Trap: one player behind the other to protect the latter and prevent follow-ups on the former.

V-trap: two players one square apart, with a third player between and behind the other two. This creates a secure trap formation, protecting one player well, and inhibiting follow-ups on two players.

[mattgslater]

I think Hannibal's brother got the meaning of the term. But yeah, that PM text pretty much explains the V-trap structure. I like V-traps an awful lot in mid-drive development, and I frequently use them to protect cages from getting all trashed up. I don't usually use it in defensive formation, but yeah, I think the goal is to force the action wide while preventing follow-ups after the offense blitzes the wingman.

Can't speak for the defensive formation. I like a more aggressive defense.

[Ullis]

I don't like that set up and I have no idea why anyone would set up so far back with the two players. If you want the opponent to go for a sideline, then I'd much rather force him down one, not giving him a choice like in this set up.

[mattgslater]

I don't like that set up and I have no idea why anyone would set up so far back with the two players. If you want the opponent to go for a sideline, then I'd much rather force him down one, not giving him a choice like in this set up.

I share Ullis's concerns. I was only praising V-traps in general BB play, not necessarily this defense. I don't like running deep safeties, and especially not two of them. My idea of a deep safety is 4 squares back and protected with a double-screen, unless maybe it's against Skaven or WE: then I might do something deeper... with one guy.

However, giving your opponent the choice of WZ is great ... if you can keep them out of the middle, and keep free players deep enough to stop any sideline cage. The posted defense, with its two deep safeties, can handle the latter function admirably. It's stopping action up the middle that concerns me.

[Smeborg]

Agree with Ullis. A bizarre set-up needlessly conceding acres of space.

[pauli42]

i tired this formation with my Chaos Pact and it works well against any non passing team.



#4 is my DE ball hunter, ready to move or blitz forward
#5 is the skaven back field safety, he is out of blitzing range and ready to assist anywhere

My opponents always choosing the side where my oger is standing, so the other side V-Trap with my mino is moving to middle while the mino is hunting some players at the sideline. With MV6 on any marauder i am able to stop the offense at turn 2 and getting a blitz on the ball carrier. My opponent has a couple of problems: the mino is hunting the sideline, the dark elf the ball carrier, the Troll with his 2 Marauders holding the LoS and the Ogre + 3 Marauders are stopping his offense drive and my skaven is waiting out of his reach.

I dont think that this formation works well for other races, but for CP its fine.

[klauser]

i tired this formation with my Chaos Pact and it works well against any non passing team.



#4 is my DE ball hunter, ready to move or blitz forward
#5 is the skaven back field safety, he is out of blitzing range and ready to assist anywhere

My opponents always choosing the side where my oger is standing, so the other side V-Trap with my mino is moving to middle while the mino is hunting some players at the sideline. With MV6 on any marauder i am able to stop the offense at turn 2 and getting a blitz on the ball carrier. My opponent has a couple of problems: the mino is hunting the sideline, the dark elf the ball carrier, the Troll with his 2 Marauders holding the LoS and the Ogre + 3 Marauders are stopping his offense drive and my skaven is waiting out of his reach.

I dont think that this formation works well for other races, but for CP its fine.

I like the plan. Makes me wanna play Chaospact. Careful though, a bash team that can level your LoS (Orcs mostly, and Chaos) would almost certainly go after your DE for the first blitz. Not sure if that can be helped. Maybe hide him in one of the V-traps?

[mattgslater]

That's much stronger.

[Piousman]

Looks like a tighter Crossbow, no?

Is it common to cede the wide zones in order to trap an opponent? I ask because most of my formations (Zig, 1/2 Zig or Crossbow aim at keeping the other team pinned around the LOS.

Am I loosing a golden opportunity?

- Piousman
(playing Necros currently)

[mattgslater]

Looks like a tighter Crossbow, no?

Is it common to cede the wide zones in order to trap an opponent? I ask because most of my formations (Zig, 1/2 Zig or Crossbow aim at keeping the other team pinned around the LOS.

Am I loosing a golden opportunity?

- Piousman
(playing Necros currently)

Crossbows are pretty race-specific. If you can't field immovable or unblockable midfielders and SS wingers, you can't really run a Crossbow. Necros can do it well, Pact cannot. One half-measure that sometimes works well is to run an Arrowhead, so your ST3 opponent needs to put up an extra man to blitz the interior. It's also easier on your wingers. g=Golem in this diagram.

– – – –|– – x x x – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – x –|g – – x – – g|– x – –
– x – –|– – – x – – –|– – x –

Leaving the sides open is dangerous against fast teams, but works okay against slow ones. You don't want to give up a downfield formation, but if your opponent has to cage up and OSPT, you really don't want to let them control centerfield. However... I like the wraparound power that a sideline defense presents against a midfield caging team. I see interior defenses as "a way" and not "the way" to handle the bashers.

One I see a lot against my Orcs on FUMBBL is:

– – – –|– x – x – x –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|x – – x – – x|– – – –
– – – –|– x x – x x –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – x – – –|– – – –

But you can use a basically Arrowhead formation and get the job done too.

– – – –|– x – x – x –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – x|– g – x – g –|x – – –
– – x –|– – – x – – –|– x – –

Or go for something a tad more offbeat....

– – – –|– x – x – x –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – x|– g – g – x –|– x – –
– – x –|– – – – – – x|– – x –

[Ullis]

One I see a lot against my Orcs on FUMBBL is:

– – – –|– x – x – x –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|x – – x – – x|– – – –
– – – –|– x x – x x –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – x – – –|– – – –

But you can use a basically Arrowhead formation and get the job done too.

– – – –|– x – x – x –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – x|– g – x – g –|x – – –
– – x –|– – – x – – –|– x – –

The difference with these formations is that the upper one let's the opponent protect 5 players from the blitz. Against your Orcs, the opponent is most likely expecting an 8 turn half anyway, so letting you into his side doesn't really matter in theory since he's calculating that a fast score from orcs would be in his favour.

Myself I almost always go for a spread column defence that only let's the opponent through in the middle and only if he can punch down the whole los first. If the opponent can go down a sideline with impunity, he get's several squares into your half and his caging efforts become much easier since he doesn't have to form a full cage.