The temptation of woodelves

[dpwright]

Sirsebstar, yes, I am aware of how long it will take to get the money for the positionals when starting with 11 lineelves and 4 rerolls.

I assume you were joking when you scornfully asked what I was going to do with 4 rerolls. Starting with 11 lineelves is a great way of going into a long term league and one I have used many a time.

[sirsebstar]

I wasn't trying to be scornfully, so i stand corrected. But I am really curious. I used to get loads of trr, but now I get one or 2 and have more then enough to do the really important things. Most of the time, I just fail something and leave it at that. Only gamewinning (or loosing) rolls are being rerolled.

Anyways, if it works for you, thats just great. I think I should try it myself and see if like it.

best of luck

[quozl]

I don't see that having 1 or 2 re-rolls with woodies would be a good idea.

If I'm defending against a cage with them, then it usually involves a number of 2+ dodges back one square, every turn.

Doing that with only 1 or 2 re-rolls doesn't sound like a winning proposition to me - if the first elf fails his 2+, you can't leave the few others in a position to be bashed.

And you can't rely on dodge re-rolls if your opponent has some tackle, especially against dwarves.

Admittedly, I did it with only 2 re-rolls for half the last league season, until I could get a leader re-roll, but the difference between 2 and 3 was big. Between 1 and 2 would be even bigger.

[poochée]

Hi there,

I wasn't able to check the forum until now, so thank you all for your advice. I think I'm gonna try something like:

8 linos 560k
1 catcher 90k
2 wardancers 240k
2 ReRolls 100k

10k in the bank saving up for an apo...

[PubBowler]

Several people have had success in tournies (so somewhat off-topic) with WE line ups with 1 or 2 rerolls (often from Leader).

In a league I'm not sure this is the way to go.

It's cost implications and no earnings which force a tournie coach to do this.

With journeymen enabling you to keep your earnings solely for positionals and regular earnings I don't see money spent on 2 (or more rerolls) as a waste.

Personally, I'd go for 2 at the start and Leader on a thrower.

[plasmoid]

I too have tried 11 linos and 4 rerolls.
It was along time ago, and with high elfs.
Short story: It tanked.
Personally I'd never do it again.

Cheers
Martin

[besters]

Several people have had success in tournies (so somewhat off-topic) with WE line ups with 1 or 2 rerolls (often from Leader).

I can certainly say that this is a lot of fun and can be succesful. It's not necessarily good for the nerves though!

In a league I would go for two re-rolls and as many positionals as I could get, leaving Linemen to be supported by Journeymen as required.

Jim

[mattgslater]

Several people have had success in tournies (so somewhat off-topic) with WE line ups with 1 or 2 rerolls (often from Leader).

In a league I'm not sure this is the way to go.

My experience in fixed leagues says that not having all your positionals is really bad, 'cause you'll never get your money together in time to buy them and develop them, and it'll cost you early matches. You absolutely should not start with fewer RR than you need, but the converse, that you absolutely should not start with more RR, is just as true. 2 is plenty. 1 is sufficient. Even back in the day when 9FF was de regeur, you could still add a WD and two lesser guys and still have the one TRR you couldn't do without. 11 linos is nutty, IMO.

If you don't think 2RR is enough, get 3. But even then, that leaves you with a Wardancer and a Thrower or Catcher. I still think that's silly and will play havoc with your team economics in a way that a lost 50k at midseason never could.

[s031720]

dpwright:

Think like this: in lrb 4 you had all linemen because you had no choice but to get FF 7-9.

Now you can have an FF of 0, that means, take a team of linemen, and upgrade them with about 90k, and you will have the same amount of RRs as in lrb 4, but more positionals.

ie:
11 Linemen + 90k
=
8 Linemen, 1 wardancer, 2 catchers.

The way you build your team in lrb 4 and 5 is diffrent, and this is why. Its not sensible to waste that much money on RRs, 2 should be enough. And if it isnt, take two anyway and learn to play with less risk. 2 should be enough.

[mattgslater]

Note that 11 linos is 770k. Add 90k and you have 860k. 2 TRRs leaves 40k left over, which isn't enough to buy a TRR. That's two positionals (two Catchers or a Thrower and a Catcher) right there. Even in the old days, I saw a lot of Wood Elf teams, and I never once saw one with more than nine linemen for this reason. I saw a lot of 9 linos, 2 WD, 1 RR, FF8 back then. I'd keep FF1 in the current rules and use the remaining 7 points to grab a second RR and a Catcher.

[dpwright]

I think all the line ups suggested are valid...I love the fact everyone was throwing in their tuppenceworth, I threw mine in, it got taken serious issue with!

1. Playing a lot of tabletop LRB5 and with 400+ games with wood elves on FUMBBL for LRB4, I realise the differences, thank you.

2. Like I said before, it's not to everyone's liking! It is a valid tactic that can work well.

I like risk in my gaming...it's fun when it pays off! I have a few common setups that I like for leagues (only 1 for tourneys really).

The 11 lineelves route; the four catchers route (less so now they are MA8 for LRB5b); the wardancer and 10 lineelves route...the list goes on and on.

I prefer the 11 linos to start...but each to his/her own! So stop with the "in the old days", "back in the day", "when I were a lad" statements. It's valid!

[DoubleSkulls]

When I am starting in a league I take:

11 lineelves
4 rerolls
30k treasury.

It means that unless you roll a 1 for your winnings (and if you win it is automatic) you have an apothecary and 4 rerolls in games 2. All of your money can then go towards positionals; it means that your lineelves get the SPPs before the SPP hoggers come along.

Oh, and always take kick as the first skill. It wins games.

Under LRB5 I really think this is sub-optimal for starting wood elves. Long term that many linemen aren't really worth having. A maxed out positional team with 14 players, 5FF and 4RR is 1.5m. That only needs 5 line elves. That's also only about 10 or so skill ups off hitting spiralling expenses.

So I'd argue under LRB5 the strategies which create the best long term teams under LRB4 don't work as well. Having a large number of highly skilled line elves is cheap and TR/TS efficient on FUMBBL. On LRB5 you are better investing that TV in developed positionals.

[dpwright]

It's nice to see that everyone has their own opinion on this one! Let's leave my penchant for starting with 11 lineelves to one side and debate the following:

4 catchers: still good now they are MA8 rather than 9? I think 2 is probably enough now.

[one_second_of_insanity]

4 catchers: still good now they are MA8 rather than 9? I think 2 is probably enough now.

Yes they are still good, some of them will now follow a different development path now that they have sprint to start with, I dare say many will be giving sure feet as first or second skill to match the reliable M9.

I would probably have 3 catchers, 2 go deep (with a wardancer too) and 1 stays on the LoS to receive the backfield pass from the thrower.

[Ullis]

I've never really tried Wood Elves, but now that one_sec suggested giving them Sure Feet early on, I'm beginning to get around to the fact that starting with Sprint can be pretty good.

Having Sprint increases the marginal value of Sure Feet, and could make it desirable to pick as opposed to other skills. Right now I can't think of any position who should take Sure Feet alone and as one of the first skills. Having Sure Feet means that the new WE catcher can move 10 and 11 squares with less risk than the old WE catcher (granted, moving 9 squares is more risky for the new catcher, even with Sure Feet).