A Few Thoughts on Necros

[crimsonsun]

I like to have 1 Wight for killing, and one for guard SFing, because (...)
there is many a time where u do not want you PO killer to be frenzied, it provides another must hit target for your opponent combined with ghouls and WW's. I also like to keep my wolves safely screened behind my team (...)

I understand your reasons for having a killer Wight. But how do you cope with the lack of Guard? Tried some exotic build for Wights, but usually the lack of Guard was taxing to me (TT leagues, under 30 games).

I have never found the lack of guard to be a serious concern, mainly I think because I play Necromantic teams in a targeted way, I target a specific part of the other squad and strike there, while using zombies and to some extent golems to tie up a part of the other squad or contain there movement. IMO Even with guard, Necromantic teams cannot stand up in a fight with any of the true bash teams for an extended length of time but on the other hand they cannot touch you on speed, and that is what I attempt to take advantage of. I have not yet felt that I have lost games due to a lack of guard with a Necromantic team, something I have run into with standard undead and even Khemri once I lost a couple of players at highish TV. My overall intent with this team is not to have a massive scrum, instead using hit & run style techniques and use skills like SF to control channels of movement.

Crimsonsun

[MKL]

Thank you for the explanation

[mattgslater]

Funny enough, I have a friend who says the same thing, and plays sort of a strange, sticky elf-ball with his Necro. That said, Guard is always Job One for both his Wights. It's good to have mobile Guard when you need it. He had a Guard/Dodge/SF Wight who was very frustrating to play against even BEFORE he got +ST at 51 SPP. The power of that track is magnified by the presence of Golems.

[MKL]

Funny enough, I have a friend who says the same thing, and plays sort of a strange, sticky elf-ball with his Necro (...)

Interesting. Can you elaborate?
It's dawning on me that my problems against bashers can stems from my reluctance from risking hand-offs.

[BarmiArmi]

Versus bashers my usual is to tie them down with zombies and golems whilst the rest aid the ball carrier. A fast moving loose cage of wights, ghouls and ww can usually outmanouver a bashy defence, simply switch from left to right and back until you can punch a hole and get your caging players to move through. If you can get the ball carrier into their backfield with 3 or 4 players supporting a bashy team usually can't stop you.

[swilhelm73]

Versus bashers my usual is to tie them down with zombies and golems whilst the rest aid the ball carrier. A fast moving loose cage of wights, ghouls and ww can usually outmanouver a bashy defence, simply switch from left to right and back until you can punch a hole and get your caging players to move through. If you can get the ball carrier into their backfield with 3 or 4 players supporting a bashy team usually can't stop you.

Same here. I usually don't need to hand off because the Defense can't move through your screens quickly at all (like say elves can).

Do remember you don't need to score in a rush though - you generally want to score on T8 so going back and forth before breaking down a win is critical.

The problem is the FG/Zs need to stay on the pitch long enough to let you gain position.

Of course if you can trade value opposition players for your rookie/1 skill Zs you can also still win the attrition war, especially because half of your Zs will come back from CAS...

[MKL]

As I wrote early, I don't hand-off unless the situation is desperate. And desperate games with ag3 are not pretty.

Same here. I usually don't need to hand off because the Defense can't move through your screens quickly at all (like say elves can).
(...)
The problem is the FG/Zs need to stay on the pitch long enough to let you gain position.
(...)

This.
Once numbers are dwindling, more and more of my players are marked, and I have to take riskier actions to keep the "loose cage" moving.
Or the opponent can play for a total shut-off (think some Nurgle or Khemri). Speed without ag4 can led you to a bad turnover.

So I'm curious about MattGSlater friend and his "sticky elfball" play

[mattgslater]

I must confess that he lost a lot of games getting good with it, and discovered it only accidentally when he gained and suddenly lost some statfreaks. What it centers around is keeping the speedy players free with lots of Wrestle and Fend, and hopefully some Guard/Fend, on Zombies. It doesn't involve a lot of passing or handing off, really, but neither is it anything like a traditional cage game. 7 guys are there to play tar-baby, and 4 to do the maneuvering. I don't know how well it would work with rookies; he had lots of 2-skill Zeds by the time he started winning with it. Also, while the style seems to be effective, his risk-management instincts are poor, so he's still pretty much .500 in our pretty-much 150 league.

But when he figured it out, he got dangerous suddenly. And when the key positionals died, he stayed dangerous.

[Shteve0]

I like the concept of "sticky" players. To me it's evocative of Blodge/Guard/StandFirm types - like your "annoying" wight description from earlier, built on the precise same route as I consider optimum for 'zon blitzers. I'm not sure if that's the image you were conveying, or an interpretation from my own imagination, but the name appeals to me a great deal.

[mattgslater]

Yup. Shteve0, that's pretty much the style I'm talking about. Sticky Zombies is not that different from Reefs and Sharks, except that it presupposes you don't have the ST/AV/skills to go toe to toe, so is dependent on speed, tactical fouling, and early positional smarts to engineer at-will scores on offense. On defense, he'd play sideline, and wraparound to Frenzy and chain-games to break cage, then spirit the ball away. The main break with "elfball" is that instead of dodging to control space from the clear, he'd prevent chain games with SF and Fend, and redirect the action on the edges with Frenzy and the basic mobility of Ghouls and Wolves. His cheaper players (especially his #2 Ghoul) took a lot of damage, but did a fair amount too, and his Zombies earned their share of SPP. His main goal was to minimize the number of clear players on the opponent's side: the age-old undead adage that crappy players have tackle zones too. He'd tend to run 14 men.

Add Fend to that list of "sticky" skills, BTW. If you double-mark a key player, you can have the Fend guy line-up exactly where you don't want the opponent to go, and after he takes the hit, he can go reposition. It's also great for hosing Frenzy and PO, and in combo with Block and Side Step, it's even better. It's decidedly less good than SF or SS when you're locking out space in the open, because you can still be pushed out of the way.

[MKL]

Thank you Matt.

Not being a native english speaker, I have have to ask for a clarification
When you say "On defense, he'd play sideline", do you mean: "he funnel the opponent along the sidelines" or "he deny the sidelines to the opponent"?

I tried to make out the answer from the context, yet both interpretations are somewhat viable.

[Shteve0]

Okay, great. Just making sure I'm on the right page!

So, if I'm hearing this right, the idea is to (eventually) spam position and hassle skills on about 7 players, then use a handful 'proactive' players to swing the battle in key areas - relying on the resilience of your markers frustrating your opponent as s/he gets bogged down in the wrong areas of the pitch.

So key skills for your "sticky" players:
vs bash: wrestle, stand firm, side step, guard (+block), fend, dodge
vs speed: tackle, diving tackle, side step, prehensile tail

It occurred to me a while back that moving a blodge/stand firm/guarder without tackle is like trying to push water uphill. You need an open pow just to switch them "off". I'm hoping to get involved in a league with amazons to try this out at some point, and I think (with a linewoman plan involving wrestle/fend, and catchers with sidestep/diving tackle) my - admittedly theorybowl - strategy is in line with what you describe.

[mattgslater]

"On defense, he'd play sideline", do you mean: "he funnel the opponent along the sidelines" or "he deny the sidelines to the opponent"?

The latter.

[spubbbba]

Thank you Matt.

Not being a native english speaker, I have have to ask for a clarification

Don't worry, most of us native English speakers struggle to understand Matt sometimes too. He does like inventing some interesting turns of phrase for BB.

Does anyone else want sharks and reefs renamed to sharks and jets? I could just see a necro and undead team squaring off to each other with lots of lame choreographed zombie dance fighting.

[MKL]

Another question for the assembled coaches.

Necro are all about positioning and flexible thinking: the former has been explored, while about the latter... has anyone successfully built a passing game with Necros?
Successfully is the key word here: I built a good passing Wight once, but the team as a whole suffered in defense from losing a blocker/blitzer.

Yes, I know the passing game is almost heretical, but I'm curious to know if there are other possible roads to tread for the team.