Do you get rid of -ag Orc Blitzers?

[Hitonagashi]

Whoa... isn't TV bloat only true if you lose games because of it?

Seriously if the dude likes his team then fairplay to him, if he wins brilliant.

+1.

Well, he did ask for advice in a tactics forum .

Sure, if you like playing a certain way, keep it up! That said..if you want pats on the back and reassurances that your way is always the right way...a thread on tactics is not the way to go about it. It's the nature of the game we play (dice) that a bad tactic can still win games.

Spubbba has it right on the thrower I think. Starting with one is great for Orcs, but in the middle game (1400-1900), I usually see blitzers carrying, then at 1900+, there's enough 'slack' in your TV for the thrower to be a good investment again.

[swilhelm73]

Rookie BOBs in a developed league may not pull their weight...but even with one skill they are nice. ST4+AV9+block for 100K? I'll take it.

Though ironically Orcs have a problem with too many positionals. 4 BOBs+ 4 BZ + 2 TH + 1 Troll = 11 players - who do you put on the D line with the Troll?

I had a fair amount of success in LB4 with an orc throwing team that used a goblin as a receiver. Basically advance in a cage - and when you needed to score break the goblin free. Generally teams couldn't stop both the cage and the receiving threat.

[mattgslater]

Though ironically Orcs have a problem with too many positionals. 4 BOBs+ 4 BZ + 2 TH + 1 Troll = 11 players - who do you put on the D line with the Troll?

Format matters here. My home league has a dearth of Chaotic types: the only Claws I see are Werewolves and Snow Trolls. At high TV, as an alternative to a Goblin or Dirty Player, I may run a second Thrower with a runner build, because I can run 13 men (4/4,Troll,2 linos, Thrower, choice); on the way there, I mostly run 12.

The LOS for this build is really dependent on opposition. Two distinct lines develop: cheap and good. Having 5x ST4+ and four more guys with Guard means you can "waste" value on the line against non-Claw opposition, because you can gum up the works and keep the action on his half of the pitch. Alternately, you can throw two Linos up next to the Troll, because those are the expendable guys. Which one you want to do depends on what kind of team you're facing. The same build can do either.

My favorite kind of game is the one where my opponent's first block is a push into Stand Firm, and his whole scrimmage plan is wasted, with five guys tied up in tackle zones and no obvious route to get them out better than 1d'ing into SF and hoping for a pow. Like 5/18 to get a Blitz! result, only one where your line (and their backfield) get to act. Linemen can't do that.

This, the forcing of unfavorable blocks and dodges through mobbing, out-ST/Guard-ing, and corralling, pushing for control, is what I call the Sea of Little Red Dots. The aim is to make your opponent make a few hard rolls while you make a ton of easy ones; you fail as much as they do, but you succeed a whole lot more. Sort of the anti-Hitonagashi.

[SunDevil]

I just rolled doubles on a rookie Blitzer, took Jump up for an eventual POMBer...and he got -AG in his next game.

The team is now saving up for his replacement.

[MattDakka]

I just rolled doubles on a rookie Blitzer, took Jump up for an eventual POMBer...and he got -AG in his next game.

The team is now saving up for his replacement.

Jump Up is good if you already have Mighty Blow and Piling On.
Taking it earlier is not TV-efficient.

[Darkson]

Jump Up is good if you already have Mighty Blow and Piling On.
Taking it earlier is not TV-efficient.

If you could guarantee a double, I might agree.
As you can't, and adding in the fact that Jump Up isn't a bad skill anyway, I don't.

[MattDakka]

Jump Up is good if you already have Mighty Blow and Piling On.
Taking it earlier is not TV-efficient.

If you could guarantee a double, I might agree.
As you can't, and adding in the fact that Jump Up isn't a bad skill anyway, I don't.

1) While you are waiting for Mighty Blow and Piling On Jump Up is not as great as Mighty Blow, Piling On, Guard or Tackle, each match you play with subpar skills makes them not TV-efficient.
2) Jump Up is not a bad skill but Mighty Blow, Guard, Tackle, Piling On are better than it; if you want to use the double and you are at low TV Dodge is a better choice.

[Hitonagashi]

Yeah, I'm with Matt here.

The thing is, that JU is not an essential part of the stack (say, like claw would be on a Skaven Blitzer, or CDB). It's strictly a nice to have, and if you don't roll a double later, it's not the end of the world.

Block/MB/Tackle/PO/Frenzy/Guard is a perfectly good player on it's own, with Juggernaut and Grab as further options. You have a *lot* of killer options, and the hit in killing power while he gets tackle/po/mb is not worth the little extra benefit Jump Up adds.

[Darkson]

1) While you are waiting for Mighty Blow and Piling On Jump Up is not as great as Mighty Blow, Piling On, Guard or Tackle, each match you play with subpar skills makes them not TV-efficient.
2) Jump Up is not a bad skill but Mighty Blow, Guard, Tackle, Piling On are better than it; if you want to use the double and you are at low TV Dodge is a better choice.

1. Did I say it was as great as MB or PO? And TV efficiency is not the be all and end all of BB. It might be important in a flawed enviroment like MM, not so much in proper play.
2. Again, did I say it was?

But I had great success with my 2 JU Orc blitzers.

[MattDakka]

1) While you are waiting for Mighty Blow and Piling On Jump Up is not as great as Mighty Blow, Piling On, Guard or Tackle, each match you play with subpar skills makes them not TV-efficient.
2) Jump Up is not a bad skill but Mighty Blow, Guard, Tackle, Piling On are better than it; if you want to use the double and you are at low TV Dodge is a better choice.

1. Did I say it was as great as MB or PO? And TV efficiency is not the be all and end all of BB. It might be important in a flawed enviroment like MM, not so much in proper play.
2. Again, did I say it was?

But I had great success with my 2 JU Orc blitzers.

You didn't.
I was explaining, by a simple comparison with more useful skills, why Jump Up is a bad choice if taken before them.
If we don't use TV-efficiency as an objective way to judge skills then every skill choice is valid and discussing them is rather senseless (if we don't use TV-efficiency to judge, then each skill may be a valid choice, even the crappy ones such as Sneaky Git and Pass Block).
I'm happy you had great success with your 2 JU Orc blitzers, but with more useful skills you probably could have had more success.

[dode74]

Usefulness is context dependent. TV efficiency is a good measure in the context of matchmaking, but not necessarily in other contexts.

[mattgslater]

Ditto conventional wisdom "skill quality" ideas. When it comes to that mythical team-development flowchart that sort of exists in your head and kind of blends with your gut as reality intervenes, coaching style and tendencies are king, format is queen. Other considerations ain't worth jack.

[MattDakka]

Usefulness is context dependent. TV efficiency is a good measure in the context of matchmaking, but not necessarily in other contexts.

Since in league matches TV difference can give away inducements, we can't dismiss the importance of TV management in league context too.
I agree that in league TV is not as important as in MM, but this doesn't make poor skill choices better.
Another important factor is the length of the league, in a short private league I wouldn't take less efficient skills, I would go straight to the essential ones (because I will not probably get many skills so I need the best ones as soon as possible).
I would probably take efficient skills even in a long private league, but this is another topic.

I never said "Thou shalt never take Jump Up", I simply stated that it is not TV-efficient before having Mighty Blow and Piling On.
If a coach wants to take Jump Up as first skill, good for him.

[mattgslater]

Usefulness is context dependent. TV efficiency is a good measure in the context of matchmaking, but not necessarily in other contexts.

Since in league matches TV difference can give away inducements, we can't dismiss the importance of TV management in league context too.
I agree that in league TV is not as important as in MM, but this doesn't make poor skill choices better.
Another important factor is the length of the league, in a short private league I wouldn't take less efficient skills, I would go straight to the essential ones (because I will not probably get many skills so I need the best ones as soon as possible).
I would probably take efficient skills even in a long private league, but this is another topic.

See, what I'm saying is that value is relative even beyond that. League composition and schedule, other skills on the team, individual coaching sense of risk and turn management, number of players on the team, number of games to be played and relative importance of each, the way you use the player on each side of the pitch, all of that plays in. It's one thing to say that, all else being equal, do this that or the other, but there are always little exceptions, where for a skill that might be second-tier, "but I like doing it this way!" really is a good argument.

[MattDakka]

Usefulness is context dependent. TV efficiency is a good measure in the context of matchmaking, but not necessarily in other contexts.

Since in league matches TV difference can give away inducements, we can't dismiss the importance of TV management in league context too.
I agree that in league TV is not as important as in MM, but this doesn't make poor skill choices better.
Another important factor is the length of the league, in a short private league I wouldn't take less efficient skills, I would go straight to the essential ones (because I will not probably get many skills so I need the best ones as soon as possible).
I would probably take efficient skills even in a long private league, but this is another topic.

See, what I'm saying is that value is relative even beyond that. League composition and schedule, other skills on the team, individual coaching sense of risk and turn management, number of players on the team, number of games to be played and relative importance of each, the way you use the player on each side of the pitch, all of that plays in. It's one thing to say that, all else being equal, do this that or the other, but there are always little exceptions, where for a skill that might be second-tier, "but I like doing it this way!" really is a good argument.

Value is relative within certain bounds.
Some skills are ever good, some others are situational or so-so, and others are plain crappy.
But, to stay on topic, I can't figure the league in which I would take Jump Up as first skill.