MrMojo
Joined: Apr 17, 2004
|
 Posted:
Nov 25, 2005 - 08:34 |
 
|
| BiggieB wrote: | | or rather #fumbbl_academt on chat. MrMojo keeps on enlighten us with his wisdom. |
I'm actually rather stupid. My IQ is below 150. |
_________________
My post count
Jesus loves me this I know, 'cos my Bible tells me so. |
|
BiggieB
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 25, 2005 - 08:41 |
|
I´ve got news for u bud: Intelligence and wisdom aint the same thing. |
|
|
MrMojo
Joined: Apr 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 25, 2005 - 10:47 |
|
I know, that's why I'm stupid. |
_________________
My post count
Jesus loves me this I know, 'cos my Bible tells me so. |
|
El_Jairo
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 25, 2005 - 10:53 |
|
If you know that you can't be stupid. Most people don't even get to seeing the difference. |
_________________
By the way Pheadrus, do we need anybody to tell us what is good and what is bad?
NAF n°: 21249 |
|
MrMojo
Joined: Apr 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 25, 2005 - 11:00 |
|
But when lacking both intelligence and wisdom, I am, by definition, stupid  |
_________________
My post count
Jesus loves me this I know, 'cos my Bible tells me so. |
|
NeilCollins_
Joined: Dec 02, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 15, 2007 - 11:21 |
|
Well Im new here but this kinda got my interest as I almost always start a team with high fan factor.... The one thing I kinda dissagree on is needing alot of rerolls... Generally I start with 1-2 and never sacrifice buying positional players to get rerolls.
Heres my thinking behind that; OK yes rerolls are more expencive after you start and the positional players stay the same throughout. But I find that having a few (Im not saying alot) or positional players and lower rr is more than a fair trade off if the positional players are used correctly (shockingly in their position). The reason for this is in them selves the positional players are like "free" rerolls. When they do what they are meant to be doing (be it dodging, picking up the ball, passing, catching - OK blocking is a little different but kinda follows the same idea) and the balls it up they get a reroll... This is given to you "free" and if you use it twice in a game that ability that cost you say 20k over a lineman suddenly had the same effect as 100k of rr's. And then if two players did different things that required their positional reroll you can. Where you can only use one of your brought rerolls once a turn.
So yeah... there it is. Im sure many will dissagree with what Ive said (remember I would always say to start with at least one reroll so a lineman can use it or whoever) but even with the up in price if you have a high ff then you can still soon buy rerolls. My woodelves started with one I think, and are now up to 5 (and Ive had to buy back quite a few players that have died). |
|
|
Colin
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 15, 2007 - 16:35 |
|
| NeilCollins_ wrote: | | The reason for this is in them selves the positional players are like "free" rerolls. |
I agree, though it depends on the roster. For example, take Chaos. You can either start with just 1 Chaos Warrior, and have 3 RRs, or start with 3 CWs, and lose one RR. You may find that the simple presence of 2 extra Str 4 players in your side, especially early on, will save you a lot of RR use. You just have to play very cagily - Chaos are not the block-crazy team they're painted to be in their infancy at least.
Vampires are a special case, but they highlight the value of stocking up on RRs early. Humans, because they have so many reroll skills already, don't need so many. Amazons and Norse players are all the same, more or less, so there's little point in not stocking up on RRs - you can start a very competent Zon team with 5 RRs!!! (See Variation 3 here). All Elven teams have that delicate balance of planning to survive the early stages, so both positionals and RRs sometimes have to make way for extra Fan Factor (to secure steady income), Apothecaries and extra linemen to make sure 11 players get on the pitch as often as possible.
It's a balance between planning for the long term, and allowing the team enough early strength that they actually make it that far - a team that gets drubbed repeatedly loses players faster and accumulates SPPs slower, wiping out the benefit of avoiding double-price team RRs. Some folk here have played a massive number of games, and are content to play through the early painful times. I play once in a blue moon, so I like to get more immediate results. |
_________________
Join The Cult of Tzeentch, mutate randomly! | Hug a newb! Join the Faculty of Academy Instructors! |
|
NickNutria
Joined: Jul 25, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 26, 2008 - 03:56 |
|
I think it depends on your playstyle and your race how much money you spend on RR. I had really bad experiences with some front-loaded teams while others worked quite well. I also played only-linemen teams and i have to say, development isn't that easy, you'll have a hard time wining your first games.
I now try to take a middle way, buying some positionals but not all. Getting a high fan factor no matter what team i play. RR on vampire teams are really essential, i would always buy at least four RR to start with. With Elf teams you might only need one RR to start with, if you allow at least three specialist players in your team. An apo is also quite important for the not so bashy teams. |
|
|
Belo
Joined: Feb 22, 2008
|
| Posted:
Mar 03, 2008 - 21:53 |
|
Somebody could help me to do a ogre team??? i now they are no very good. But i'm a ogre player (warhammer fantasy) and i would like to play with them over here.
5 ogres and 6 gobos to star. But with the rest of the money... what can i do? buy all in rerolls or FF? |
_________________
La guerra no consiste en que mieras por tu bandera, consiste en hacer que tus enemigos mueran por la suya. |
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 03, 2008 - 21:56 |
|
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Mar 03, 2008 - 22:05 |
|
Only really viable set up for a new ogre team is 5 ogres, 6 goblins, 1 re-roll, FF9. |
_________________
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." |
|
Belo
Joined: Feb 22, 2008
|
| Posted:
Mar 03, 2008 - 23:36 |
|
Thx for help, and like u said the only real option for a leage is 5 ogres, 6 gobos, ¡1 re-roll!!! and 9FF.
 Somebody should try to change a little these team to make it more competitive. |
_________________
La guerra no consiste en que mieras por tu bandera, consiste en hacer que tus enemigos mueran por la suya. |
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 03, 2008 - 23:37 |
|
| Belo wrote: | | Somebody should try to change a little these team to make it more competitive. |
Well, it's been changed. But in a way you might not like … |
|
|
Mightypeon
Joined: Jan 13, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 21:57 |
|
I think that there are some teams where starting with full positionals may be prudent. Lizards with their very hard to skill Saurus spring to mind, orcs with their BoBs too.
Since I am only "experienced" with Lizards, the 6 Saurus 5 Skink 3 rerolls and 4 FF start may actually be a bit better than starting with 5 Saurus and 6 Skinks and 2 more FF.
My reasoning is like this:
Since you totally need an Apo, you will need at least 3 games to get that 6th Saurus. In this 3 games, you will have higher odds of Skinks getting MVP than Saurus, and you will be likely outbashed by just about everyone, provided they know when a 1-Die Block is prudent.
Apart from that, "protecting" 6 Skinks with 5 Saurus can be very difficult, and will propably lead to more CAS received. |
|
|
Moxy
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 18, 2009 - 22:08 |
|
Wow holy necro threading batman, well done sir |
|
|
|
|
| |
Finishing the 60 Gam...
Search
