Mortlach
Joined: Jan 05, 2009
|
 Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 13:06 |
 
|
| Wreckage wrote: | e) its kind of a countermeasure against stalling the entire turn and makes stalling teams helpless, wich havily rely on the opponents inability to score in the same halftime
|
Stalling is just as lame as one-turning, so stalling teams shouldn't complain too much  Maybe it's just me, but I like an opponent who tries to make a desperate two-turn play over one who just sits there bashing the LoS for casualties.
And with the rule that you have to set up as many players as possible up to 11, the countermeasure is just whittling down the opposing team until the coach is forced to field the one-turner. |
|
|
Snowmelter
Joined: Aug 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 13:07 |
|
point a) is the main reason together with e) an f) it is what I wanted to express earlier.
And for stalling there are good countermeasures. And for effective fouling also. So it is harder to complain.
On a second thought, there are complains about stalling and fouling |
|
|
torsoboy
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 13:22 |
|
| Synn wrote: | Natural one turners are different than built one turners. If someone has a MA 11 Gutter or Woodie Catcher, then it is sound to do so. But for skaven coaches in particular to use doubles on VLL and then stack sprint, its just a bad idea. Mainly because they don't need that extra MA to one turn.
A lot of newer coaches see the opportunity of having a one turner and do so quick. They then use it all the time. What happens is that the team becomes unbalanced. Plus, by always one turning, you are always playing defense. That is not a good thing if you are AV 7.....
__Synn |
They don't need all those extra skills to do it but it sure helps. What if you play against a team with 3 sidesteppers or 3 sf players?
The other reason, that the oneturning player soaks up all the spp and unbalances the team - you've got a point there. How about if one uses the oneturner only when needed? And what about those claw/rsc players, they get used every single time and they tend to soak up all the spp as well...
| Wreckage wrote: |
| torsoboy wrote: |
Fouling and stalling are cool because they're effective yet they don't get the same negative spin, I suspect community double-think here. |
.....doh... now you just turned your own thread into a fouling, stalling, o -score thread... .. |
I like opening can of worms!  |
_________________
The plural of anecdote isn't data. |
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 13:22 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | | Quote: | | a) its because they can score without giving the opposing coach a chance to create real countermeasures |
Thats the reason which I always hear being quoted. Personally I dont buy it... games have 16 turns so its not like they're hitting an "I win" button without giving you any sort of countermeasure. I think the real reason why people hate them is that they screw up clock control and alot of people arent so hot at thinking of alternative tactics in the heat of the moment, they're too indoctrinated in the whole "stalling is good" thing. In the Warpstone Open I saw an extremely entertaining skaven team that had not one but two oneturners, its made me extremely tempted to make myself a wizard/oneturner team just to piss people off in majors |
I like the way you're thinking! |
|
|
torsoboy
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 13:29 |
|
| Snowmelter wrote: | point a) is the main reason together with e) an f) it is what I wanted to express earlier.
And for stalling there are good countermeasures. And for effective fouling also. So it is harder to complain.
On a second thought, there are complains about stalling and fouling |
Whether or not you can counter it is irrelevant. If winning is the most important thing, notions of "fairness" go right out of the door in my opinion. I don't choose break tackle on human blitzer's 6spp roll because it's way less effective than say, guard or mighty blow. Needless to say, some skill choices are better than others, and I choose the most effective ones to help me win my games. It just strikes me wrong that creating a one-turner seems to be a bad idea in "common knowledge". |
_________________
The plural of anecdote isn't data. |
|
rostern
Joined: Jun 12, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 13:29 |
|
Just score like a real man! |
|
|
torsoboy
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 13:34 |
|
| rostern wrote: | | Just score like a real man! |
 |
_________________
The plural of anecdote isn't data. |
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 13:47 |
|
| Synn wrote: | A lot of newer coaches see the opportunity of having a one turner and do so quick. They then use it all the time. What happens is that the team becomes unbalanced. Plus, by always one turning, you are always playing defense. That is not a good thing if you are AV 7.....
__Synn |
Ok, now consider a oneturner in the hands of a competant coach. This dosent happen much because competant coaches tend to shy away from them, its the fashion to do so. Suppose your competant skaven player....
1) only oneturns when they have one turn to score in (so they play a proper offensive drive)
2) only oneturns when it will change the outcome of the game
3) hires a wizard each game
4) knows how to play properly and crush weaker teams in the normal way but minimises damage against bashy teams (one defence of everyone who goes down stays down and refuses to stand again) and uses the wizzie/oneturner to scrape through the tricky games
5) actually manages the team properly in preperation for a major
Its not perfect but everyone knows the rookie errors that oneturners tend to force such as team balance... please tell us about the unavoidable problems.
PS the whole "lame" argument can go to hell too. Its an in-game option just like stalling and fouling, heck its actually a pretty interesting one because it totally thwarts the standard "bash bash bash stall bash 2-1 I win" attitude that so many coaches think is a winning formula. |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced." |
|
vanGorn
Joined: Feb 24, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 14:03 |
|
Aren't skaven throw-away teams anyway? Thus becoming unbalanced would be a minor issue. |
_________________
Gimme a pint of fungus beer!
Then we will climb the ladder.
|
|
Snowmelter
Joined: Aug 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 14:08 |
|
| torsoboy wrote: | | Snowmelter wrote: | point a) is the main reason together with e) an f) it is what I wanted to express earlier.
And for stalling there are good countermeasures. And for effective fouling also. So it is harder to complain.
On a second thought, there are complains about stalling and fouling |
Whether or not you can counter it is irrelevant. If winning is the most important thing, notions of "fairness" go right out of the door in my opinion. I don't choose break tackle on human blitzer's 6spp roll because it's way less effective than say, guard or mighty blow. Needless to say, some skill choices are better than others, and I choose the most effective ones to help me win my games. It just strikes me wrong that creating a one-turner seems to be a bad idea in "common knowledge". |
You asked why people complain, not whether it is a working way to win |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 14:09 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | | 4) knows how to play properly and crush weaker teams in the normal way but minimises damage against bashy teams (one defence of everyone who goes down stays down and refuses to stand again) and uses the wizzie/oneturner to scrape through the tricky games |
This used to be an excellent option when you were allowed to only field 3 players.
Nowadays, DPs can make this approach extremely dangerous against certain teams. |
|
|
torsoboy
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 14:11 |
|
| Snowmelter wrote: | | You asked why people complain, not whether it is a working way to win |
Fair enough.  |
_________________
The plural of anecdote isn't data. |
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 14:20 |
|
| torsoboy wrote: | | So, it has come to my attention that some people consider player that are built to be one-turners are lame. Can they explain why? |
Perhaps the reason is this:
Even though some khemri, chaos, dwarf whatever side managed to totally demolish your team, your shiny one-turner managed to ensure the team one last triumph before being retired for good.
It just ain't fair! |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 14:26 |
|
One turners can often be a sign that a coach lacks in skills to score otherwise. |
|
|
Gromrilram
Joined: Aug 28, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 14:31 |
|
main argument against oneturners is:
you cannot take action against them and so it becomes game of pure luck.
at the same ttime you hear "its not necessary"...
now... when its not necessary as you can score in 1 turn without creating a ma13 (with gfi) player, obviously its not the coach who makes it lame by choosing skills, its games workshop who decided they want to give teams the options to score in 1 turn.
so much for the lame part.
now... i would however not try to create a 1 turner with skaven on my first mutating gutters.
a) they hog spp
b) you can get much more needed skills like horns or dauntless
c) you can do 1 turn td without it.
on a 6+4 i would still take the movement however |
_________________
Every problem can be solved by a Desert Eagle .50 |
|
|
|
Blood Bowl 2024 Edit...
Search
