Wallace
Joined: May 26, 2004
|
 Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 05:12 |
 
|
I had a thought the other night (I haven't yet tried this) that the ultimate cheesy min/max strategy for a race that was strong at lowish TV might be to completely eschew RRs and Apo (note that I'm probably talking about [B] here).
Depending on your race, each RR is worth something like 3-4 regular skills, that's 3-4 players extra players with block (say) for each re-roll you ditch. If you do maintain a good win %, you'll probably get a fair number of kick off table RRs coming your way as well.
With the nerfed Apo the healer is possibly a little expensive and if you accept that your stars will have to fend for themselves, they may not live as long, keeping your TV somewhat suppressed so that your overly skilled team keep facing noobs.
Fire all nigglers and injuries that matter (-AG on a BoB is probably okay, just make him line fodder) and do whatever cheesy min/maxing is relevant for your race.
From a perspective of purely trying to maximise win % (or BWR) any way possible, does this makes sense? Has anyone given it a crack? |
|
|
Overhamsteren
Joined: May 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 05:17 |
|
That is indeed a 'good idea'. I think most players like to have 1 reroll though.
Works great with clawplomb  (of course what doesn't...) |
_________________
Like a Tiger Defying the Laws of Gravity
Thanks to the BBRC for all the great work you did. |
|
Soranar
Joined: Sep 25, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 05:54 |
|
Actually you'll block less often and cause less cas that way. Since every turn has a chain of actions to take, even easy ones like 2d block with block, you might double skull on your first (or second or third) block which will in turn prevent every other roll that turn: severely reducing your involvement in the game and letting your opponent smack you with impunity and /or score. I find every team should have at least 3 rerolls (or 2 with a leader). And teams with demanding playstyle (say Slaan since there are no skills to reroll leaps) will require more.
Double skull is a 1/36 result, most games will see around 30 blocks which means the chance of having 2 is pretty high, now that's only from blocking.
Some races might seem well suited for it, like woodies who can get a ballhandling reroll on key players (a passer with surehand/pass) and several catchers with catch. But it also means anything not ball related will be riskier and those dreaded GFI or dodges with rookies will inevitably leave a mess.
The only team I can think of that doesn't benefit much from rerolls is humans since they start with a lot of reroll skills.But their rerolls are so cheap (50k) you won't gain much from not buying them.
Your win % will be considerably lower with a skilled team than with a team with a few rerolls since having the option to reroll any roll is far more useful than dodge on a few players. Even the best coaches can't predict how every game will go as every kickoff is chaotic and any snake eyes or double skull will also leave you out of position and forced to take risky actions.
There is such a thing as too many rerolls mind: if your team's rerolls are worth 70k, don't have 5 or more unless you have a very special playstyle.
Finally, at higher TVs, you'll find game differences won't matter that much when your team is over 2000. What's the point of no buying rerolls when you take extra training as an inducement? |
|
|
Craftnburn
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 06:26 |
|
| Soranar wrote: | | teams with demanding playstyle (say Slaan since there are no skills to reroll leaps) will require more. |
Which is why Sure Feet should let you reroll failed Leaps!
Just sayin... |
|
|
Igvy
Joined: Apr 29, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 06:31 |
|
Sure, but remember it is pointless to go below 1000TV as you can't really get games. This means you are just talking about 1000TV minmaxing. Which is really common.
TBH life is kinda sweet below about 1200TV.
EDIT: 0rr isn't a very good min/max as you won't be able to get 100% win ratio with that. Usally most min/maxing requires a specific method of play to cover for the weakness. |
|
|
Malmir
Joined: May 20, 2008
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 07:08 |
|
What a depressing thread. |
|
|
Bloodrazor
Joined: Feb 08, 2008
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 08:19 |
|
I find beating undeveloped teams with my min/maxed low TV team that's played 50 more games makes feel really accomplished. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 08:37 |
|
| Malmir wrote: | | What a depressing thread. |
This.
I played a 7 man Chaos team the other day that hadn't filled out with Journeymen. Scared the pants off of me; his killer Beastman made light work of my 1 or 0 skill players, and soon the numbers advantage had gone up in smoke. That might be a dangerous old school minmax strategy. Do you remember those days when we used to win games men down? /Rosetintedspecs  |
|
|
Wallace
Joined: May 26, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 08:37 |
|
It's just a different type of challenge that may or may not appeal to you. No need for the hate if it's not your cup of tea!
On Topic, rookie teams with little to no block, dodge, sure hands etc are going to need to use a lot of RRs that those skills would avoid. You will always be forced to make risky moves at some point regardless of how well you play, but the same goes for your (presumably much less skilled) opponent. On balance, where is the optimum?
Putting it another way, how much more expensive would a RR need to be before it was better to have 0RR than any? There must be some break even price, and that point (probably) changes with TV. For TV1000-1200 or so, is the optimum price more than a RR costs? |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 09:11 |
|
Griefers Gonna Grief went down to 0RR for a while as an experiment, it wasn't too bad actually. When loads of guys have Block you don't need RR very often.
No Apo is obv the way to for minmaxers, go check Qaz's Pyrates Royale. |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
Reisender
Joined: Sep 29, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 09:28 |
|
i heard fielding 6 blodgers at TV1000 is a good way to win... |
|
|
freak_in_a_frock
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 09:52 |
|
Just a side note. If you hang around TV1000 with a min/maxed team picking on rookies you won't actually gain any BWR or CR, both tams have to have played a certain amount of games before it is counted towards your ranking. This was done to prevent this sort of exploit (back in LRB4 days too, just to prove min/maxing was always there) |
Last edited by freak_in_a_frock on %b %18, %2011 - %09:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
Adar
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 09:52 |
|
| Reisender wrote: | | i heard fielding 6 blodgers at TV1000 is a good way to win... |
My record is 4 Blodgers and 8 players with dodge. Is that also okay? |
_________________
For all his rage, he's still just a rat in it's cage. |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 10:00 |
|
| freak_in_a_frock wrote: | | Just a side note. If you hang around TV1000 with a min/maxed team picking on rookies you won't actually gain any BWR or CR, both tams have to have played a certain amount of games before it is counted towards your ranking. This was done to prevent this sort of exploit (back in LRB4 days too, just to prove min/maxing was always there) |
Wasn't that mainly because TR 100 was / is a crap shoot? And because you're likely to come up against new guys with awful builds (so rather than minmax to stay there, Mr. Hightower would just stay there to select the newest newbies)?
Why doesn't [B] have the 4 game rule too? Out of interest? Seems to me it would be sensible. |
|
|
Igvy
Joined: Apr 29, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2011 - 10:05 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | | freak_in_a_frock wrote: | | Just a side note. If you hang around TV1000 with a min/maxed team picking on rookies you won't actually gain any BWR or CR, both tams have to have played a certain amount of games before it is counted towards your ranking. This was done to prevent this sort of exploit (back in LRB4 days too, just to prove min/maxing was always there) |
Wasn't that mainly because TR 100 was / is a crap shoot? And because you're likely to come up against new guys with awful builds (so rather than minmax to stay there, Mr. Hightower would just stay there to select the newest newbies)?
Why doesn't [B] have the 4 game rule too? Out of interest? Seems to me it would be sensible. |
It doesn't. Only the first game doesn't count. So long as both teams have played at least one game... BWR for all! |
|
|
|
|
Finishing the 60 Gam...
Search
