SolomonKane
Joined: Jul 21, 2005
|
 Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 07:13 |
 
|
So hopefully this thread won't degenerate into another 'fouling sucks/fouling is a part of the game' fight. I'm curious in a different take.
I generally don't foul when I play my matches. It's partially because I don't like having people rant at me when I kill players through fouling, and partially because I like the challenge of playing the ball 'correctly' and utilizing my blocking to open holes properly. The main reason I don't foul, though, is because I'm still largely unclear how to use it effectively. I might foul to remove a key player from the pitch, but I don't usually get into every-turn fouling.
With that stated, I'd like to get some answers to the fouling questions:
1) In a match in which a team begins the match outnumbered (due to injuries), is fouling a good idea to attempt to even the odds?
2) If yes, how do you make it effective, especially in the event your players are going to get sent off? Should you not worry about getting sent off since you're probably going to get hammered anyway? Should you allow the opponent to score so you can keep your players together to both protect themselves and take more opposing players off the pitch before the score?
3) With teams where fouling is often essential (Khemri, Dwarves, etc.), is it worthwhile to foul every turn? Is there some point you should stop fouling if you've been getting sent off but are failing to break opposing armor/score casualties?
4) Should some teams avoid fouling simply because, due to their overall AV count, they can't really afford a fouling war? Or are those the teams that should be fouling the most?
I'm interested to hear your insight. Answer however many questions you like. |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 07:26 |
|
Solo: Good question. Usually i spot a player that will provide my team the most problems. A lot of times the answer is not so obvious as the mega star of a team might not be the most dangerous player for my chances of WINNING the game.
When i have the ref on me, i only foul when there is a damn good reason. Classic example is a prone witch elf within scoring range. Even without a dp if i can get a stun i might be able to prevent a score or stop someone from blitzing my ball handler.
Generally if you are short players then only foul sparingly and when it is completely in your advantage. your goal there is to at least get the offending player off the pitch so the numbers even up. If the opponent fouls in return then stop. Let the eye be on them.
These tactics should help assuming you and your opponent has only one DP. Fouling another dp with yours is a tactic i don't like believe it or not..............
__Synn |
|
|
Tinkywinky
Joined: Aug 25, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 07:44 |
|
Depends a lot on different things but in general fouling works best when you have more players/reserves than the opponent.
Short answers to your questions:
1) No, your opponent will gain more than you. (you should of course still foul the first turn when the eye is on no one)
2) see 1
3) Yes as long as you have more players than your opponent or don't feel there is a risk that you will go below 11 players before your opponent.
4) No not at all
Things to consider when kicking with the eye on you:
1) ALWAYS use a dp.
2) You should have more players than your opponent because you are as likely to leave the field by ejection as they are because of injury and you will STAY off the field when the KO'ed players get back. (If you both have several reserves it is still good to get one of his good players off if
3) Armour is NOT an issue. In fact fouling is a very good equaliser against orcs teams. One of the key factors in orc vs chaos matches I would say.
4) Teams with relatively cheap dp:s can afford a deeper bench and multiple dp:s better. Amazon teams works GREAT with lots of dp:s.
5)If your opponent has a dp left and you are down to your last dp, think twice before fouling or he will no longer have to bother taking the eye off you. |
_________________
Do you play ranked and wonder where all the good coaches are? Are you also from Sweden? Then join the Swedish league! |
|
macike
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
|
 Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 09:17 |
|
| SolomonKane wrote: | | 3) With teams where fouling is often essential (Khemri, Dwarves, etc.), is it worthwhile to foul every turn? |
Is fouling with these races really essential? I ask 'cos I have no experience playing them. However I have played quite a few games against dorfs.
They are able to outnumber opponent since the second quarter. Usually it's hard for opponents to get dorfs off the field. Being sent off is more probable than being beatten by opponent.
What is the reason that makes the fouling essential for them? |
_________________
Hold him, thrill him, kick him, kill him!!! |
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 09:28 |
|
It isn't. Because Dwarfs don't get cheap players (like khemri), and are perfectly capable of beating the hell out of their opponents standing (unlike sissy elves).
I'd say that Dwarfs have the least impetus to foul. |
|
|
macike
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 09:44 |
|
| Snappy_Dresser wrote: | | I'd say that Dwarfs have the least impetus to foul. |
That's what my common sense was whispering to me.  |
_________________
Hold him, thrill him, kick him, kill him!!! |
|
MrMojo
Joined: Apr 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 09:51 |
|
Fouling should be considered as a calculated risk. I have a 70 K lineman, a dorf, will I foul with him, for example a 30 K skelly? Certainly not. How about a 120 K wardancer? Absolutely! but then and only then if he has DP, which I never bother to take when playing with dorfs, so basically I don't foul with dorfs. |
_________________
My post count
Jesus loves me this I know, 'cos my Bible tells me so. |
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Jan 26, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 10:36 |
|
| Snappy_Dresser wrote: | It isn't. Because Dwarfs don't get cheap players (like khemri), and are perfectly capable of beating the hell out of their opponents standing (unlike sissy elves).
I'd say that Dwarfs have the least impetus to foul. |
I second that.
When playing dwarves, I almost never consider fouling as the clumsy little fools got so much else to do that opportunities for decent fouls are very rare. |
|
|
Kamahl
Joined: Oct 24, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 10:52 |
|
Why would any coach use fouls as a central piece of dwarf strategy 
I will not risk my dwarf to be sent off even when the eye is on the opponent. On low tr there is no player i consider extra dangerous to them - and later on i will not remove the eye from the opponent and free up his DP.
Fouling is generally great equiliser of BBowl for starting teams - it enables starting teams with no tackle  to deal with BlockDodge players from the opposing team on more permanent basis if necesarry, or to shut down jump up/str4+ player that can turn the table on your field position when left prone on the field. |
|
|
Gumbo
Joined: Oct 11, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 10:55 |
|
Blood Bowl is a numbers game. A cliche', i know, but it still holds true. The only time ill consider NOT fouling is if it involves a high value player to foul with and im fouling a low value guy. but if its a 1/6 chance of a send off ill usually do it any way. I've never understood why this is such a touchy subject.... |
_________________
Question: Who discovered how to milk a cow and what did they think they were doing at the time? |
|
macike
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 10:59 |
|
| Gumbo wrote: | | I've never understood why this is such a touchy subject.... |
Please don't make it another 'fouling sucks/rocks' stupid thread. Let's talk about tactics and strategy. |
_________________
Hold him, thrill him, kick him, kill him!!! |
|
macike
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 11:12 |
|
| Gumbo wrote: | | but if its a 1/6 chance of a send off ill usually do it any way. |
That's why I do not waste my SPPs for DP skill. I restrain from fouling and increases your chance to 1/2. IMHIO that's the best countertactic (not mention 8, 9, 16 turn fouls just in a revenge).
I remember the game where a stonger human team's DP fouled my human catcher (first was sent off while latter just stunned  ) in spite their win was almost sure. So I spent turns 8 and 9 on knocking down and gang fouling his ogre. There was no more fouling in that game.
The same goes for GTR. Action triggers reaction and next time it could be my team who will GTR.  |
_________________
Hold him, thrill him, kick him, kill him!!! |
|
zerkalo
Joined: Dec 12, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 11:22 |
|
Fouling is wise when it is likely to be profitable in mathematical sense.
70k player fouling 90k player.
Probability to ko - succeeding next ko roll - 10%
Probability to ko - failing next ko roll 10%
Probability to cas - 17%
There's 8 turns left, you assume that opponent scores on turn 4.
So 27% chance you get him off for 8 turns, 10% chance you get him off for 4 turns. Expected value is 2,56 turns. That multiplied by 90k = 230,4k
Probability to get ejected = 43%
0,43 * 8 turns * 70k = 240,8k.
So the expected outcome would be that fouler would lose slightly more manpower.
But if the player getting fouled is the opponent's only good blocker, or only good ball handler, then his value to his team is much more than 90k.
If your 70k player has only Dirty Player skill, then you should do the calculations with adjusting player value by how many turns are left. DP skill value = 25k. It is that before the match. But if there are 4 turns left, then his value is 25% of that.
There are dozens of exceptions and so on to this. But that is the basic thing. There should be a good reason to foul when the expected outcome is on opponent's favor.
One of the most typical foul happens on turn 16. Reason is frustration for 0-3 loss, or that your star got killed. Or just not liking the opponent, or his playing style.
One of the best ways to protect a player is to foul with him and not argueing the call... Killing the prone player is only a nice bonus.
ps: Ruutu vs Jagr  ... |
|
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2006 - 11:32 |
|
| MrMojo wrote: | | Fouling should be considered as a calculated risk. I have a 70 K lineman, a dorf, will I foul with him, for example a 30 K skelly? Certainly not. How about a 120 K wardancer? Absolutely! but then and only then if he has DP, which I never bother to take when playing with dorfs, so basically I don't foul with dorfs. |
Wardancers and Werewolves should always be fouled. I'd almost go so far as to say fouled, even with no assists if it's early in the game if no assists are possible. |
|
|
SolomonKane
Joined: Jul 21, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 26, 2006 - 05:38 |
|
And something I'm realizing is a team like lizards would have a helluva time fouling anyone at all. It's hard to justify putting DP on a Saurii, and Skinks can't get it as a normal skill. I would suppose it's hard for lizards to maintain a numbers advantage since the stunties they use aren't cheap to replace. I could see fouling with a skink even with the eye on, since an ejected skink is a live skink. My experience with lizards, though, is that they really don't play the bashy (and fouling) game as well as they play the score-in-two-or-three-turns game. Maybe I just don't know what I'm doing yet.
About Dwarves and fouling being essential or not for them...I was working from the assumption that dwarves would want to foul in an effort to remove players faster than they from the pitch - which is almost everybody. Dwarves have always been described as 'removing everybody from the pitch, leaving nobody to stop them from scoring.'
I can certainly understand the argument for NOT fouling with dwarves - AV 9 on two dice armor checks makes them much harder to remove from the pitch compared to a 4+ (with IGMEOY) on any given foul. So why remove your own players from the pitch unnecessarily? So perhaps including them next to Khemri was a bad idea, but at least everybody got my drift.
What teams would you consider fouling to be essential, besides Khemri? Flings and Gobbos? Vamps? Chaos/Nurgle? None? |
|
|
|
|
| |
Cindy is back?
Search
