SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
 Posted:
May 31, 2010 - 22:51 |
 
|
Duke... that seems like a very different topic.
Maybe it will be worthwhile when we see underworld teams (who threaten both kinds of oneturn) but until then they might as well be seperate topics in seperate threads. The basic TTM defence has a few variations but I suspect you would get a much more interesting thread if you discussed ogre/halfling/goblin two turn touchdown options. |
_________________
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." |
|
MadTias
Joined: Jun 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2010 - 22:53 |
|
This is a very good idea for a thread. Good job, Purplegoo. Will supply my OTS defense setups in a bit. |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2010 - 23:02 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | Duke... that seems like a very different topic.
Maybe it will be worthwhile when we see underworld teams (who threaten both kinds of oneturn) but until then they might as well be seperate topics in seperate threads. The basic TTM defence has a few variations but I suspect you would get a much more interesting thread if you discussed ogre/halfling/goblin two turn touchdown options. |
I know, I just threw it in there as I thought it was worth a mention. |
|
|
MadTias
Joined: Jun 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2010 - 23:04 |
|
I have two setups that I've used that I've probably stolen from someone else. Haven't worked out the probabilities but they seem to be harder to crack:
"MadTias 1"
| Code: | _ _ _ _ | _ _ X X X _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X X _ _ _ X X | _ _ X _
_ _ _ X | _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | X _ _ _ |
"MadTias2"
| Code: | _ _ _ _ | X X X _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X X X X | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ |
|
|
|
MadTias
Joined: Jun 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2010 - 23:19 |
|
| MadTias wrote: | "MadTias2"
| Code: | _ _ _ _ | X X X _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X X X X | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ |
|
Reading through the thread more carefully, I think this can be improved by moving the third row guys back to the fourth row to add another dodge. Possibly it would be better with a space in the front row as well. Like so:
| Code: | _ _ _ _ | X X _ X _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X X X X | _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ |
I will be very interested to see where this goes, good idea again Purplegoo. |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2010 - 23:24 |
|
| MadTias wrote: | I have two setups that I've used that I've probably stolen from someone else. Haven't worked out the probabilities but they seem to be harder to crack:
"MadTias2"
| Code: | _ _ _ * | X X X _ + _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ x X X X | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ |
|
I feel the MadTias2 is especially easy to crack. Provided you get the ball to the catcher, you just need 2 pushes and 1 push or POW followed by a 2+ dodge and 2 GFI.
Even worse:
If the third block is a push instead of a POW, you can choose a different route where you actually eliminate 1 GFI by pushing one extra square without much risk. In addition, a quicksnap gives your opponent a complete field day allowing him to eliminate all GFI if I see it correctly.
You blitz from the * position and place then 1 player at the + to chainpush the non-capital X to the right in order to dodge into the open.
Also this play can be done with 6 players and 1 in the back. |
|
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2010 - 23:30 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: | | SillySod wrote: | Duke... that seems like a very different topic.
Maybe it will be worthwhile when we see underworld teams (who threaten both kinds of oneturn) but until then they might as well be seperate topics in seperate threads. The basic TTM defence has a few variations but I suspect you would get a much more interesting thread if you discussed ogre/halfling/goblin two turn touchdown options. |
I know, I just threw it in there as I thought it was worth a mention. |
These days I find that FUMBBL is very light on tactics and strategy discussion. Maybe its always been quite light on that sort of thing - this forum might as well be called the skill choices forum. IMO we need more of the top coaches (any coaches really but top coaches will probably find it easier) to pose interesting questions with a clear direction for discussion. These are almost always the only threads that lead to actual discussion of tactics.
It'd be cool if you wrote a post ready to kick start a new thread on TTM defence once this one has died out.
I've got a thread or two that are ready for discussion.... if we get organised we could have a whole string of in depth strategy and tactics discussions. |
_________________
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." |
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 01, 2010 - 00:09 |
|
| MadTias wrote: | | Code: | _ _ _ _ | X X _ X _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X X X X | _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ |
|
I use this alot when I'm serious about stopping a oneturner... albeit in a much more dispersed version.
You can afford to push the left flank backwards a little to make it less vulnerable to quick snap. You must also spread out the right flank to make sure that:
a) your opponent cant push a player right through the line
b) your opponent cant use your players to fill up space and aid chainpushes
c) a quick snap doesnt utterly screw you
I go for something that looks like...
| Code: | _ _ _ _ | X X X _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ X _ _ X _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X _ _ X _ _ X | _ _ _ _ |
... well, it doesnt look like that either but I'm sure you see what I was getting at above  |
_________________
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." |
|
avien
Joined: May 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 01, 2010 - 01:04 |
|
| MadTias wrote: | I have two setups that I've used that I've probably stolen from someone else. Haven't worked out the probabilities but they seem to be harder to crack:
"MadTias 1"
| Code: | _ _ _ _ | _ _ X X X _ _ | _ _ _ _
_ X _ _ | X X _ _ _ X X | _ _ X _
_ _ _ X | _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | X _ _ _ |
|
Not so hard to crack really, as the catcher can easily be pushed to the position you see him here with blitz and 2 pushes, just chainpushing the lineman marked as "T" to the side. From there it's 3+ 2+ 2+ 2+. As a bonus, he can maybe be pushed a third time, making it 2+ 2+ 2+. The hard part would be to get the ball to the thrower, which will be a 4+. as you can see, we are left with similar rolls as the goalline setup*, that's 4+, 3+, 2+ and GFI, however with one more reroll (catch), with a possible bonus 3rd push and with the chance of a QS. I conclude that it's no point vs 100TR woodies.
Maybe vs skaven? If they don't have a reroll, it comes down to 4+ catch vs 3rd push and QS chance, which might be better.
*(normally the catcher will recieve the ball at 2+ with RR with goalline setup, which does not change the numbers much) |
_________________
 |
|
Timlagor
Joined: Feb 13, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jun 01, 2010 - 02:58 |
|
It's late so perhaps I'm being dim but it looks like the defenders in teh second row are more potentially useful for the pushers (fililng squares and beign potential blockees later on) than they are being given credit for.
There's definitely something to be said for doing something surprising so that the other coach has to work out an approach from scratch though as they are likely to feel pressured to get on with it (however nice you are).
The rolls for those pushes could also use more attention (a non-pow push isn't as likely as you might like: only 5/9 for 2db against a non-dodger) ..but perhaps hese approaches have equal numbers of pushes. Hmm that makes the extra push at the end to save a GFI seem a mistake but I'm hoping for a pow at that point to save me a dodge roll as well as a gfi (but should I take the pow a block earlier if I have the choice?). |
_________________
Time for a new .sig |
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 01, 2010 - 12:07 |
|
Well, it depends so much on what you are facing. Many teams (especially WE and skaven) can one turn without any pushes with a quick snap, so a forward defence becomes a big risk in that case, as he will probably just need one push on a blitz. While setting up all your guys along the back means you should at least have to make him dodge 3 times - and hopefully into 2tz or through tackle/diving tackle/tents.
If you're defending the chain push then stand firm and sidestep are your greatest friend. The rest of your set-up becomes incidental. All the guys along the back in that case means he still needs to make 3 dodges, but your opponent wont get to gang foul one of your best players if the pushes dont work out for him. |
|
|
maysrill
Joined: Dec 29, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 01, 2010 - 14:32 |
|
| Quote: | | - - X X | X X X X X X X | X X - - |
In all seriousness, how hard is it to score against this if you need 2+ pushes? How many teams could pull it off (skaven, WE?) and how many players would they need to set up? It's a total noob setup for normal use, but I can see it being annoying to OTT. |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 01, 2010 - 14:54 |
|
| maysrill wrote: | | Quote: | | - - X X | X X X X X X X | X X - - |
In all seriousness, how hard is it to score against this if you need 2+ pushes? How many teams could pull it off (skaven, WE?) and how many players would they need to set up? It's a total noob setup for normal use, but I can see it being annoying to OTT. |
Well, for a start the wings are open to allow a player round the back for the first push, as well as setting up additional players.
You have also lined up your players in such a way as to assist your opponent for the chain pushes, as there are no gaps.
And slightly off subject, if the chain push did fail (because of Splats), you have just gifted your opponent several free blocks. |
|
|
maysrill
Joined: Dec 29, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 01, 2010 - 15:32 |
|
The free blocks and access around the outside are given. My concerns were whether you'd have the MA to make the initial block back into the line, and be able to move players in for the later pushes. Also (and this is minor), you're nearly certain to have to give up an INT attempt or a pass into 3 TZs. A 1/6 chance to flat-out fail based on a 6 for INT certainly hurts the odds of completion. |
_________________
Author of Firehurler (Twinborn Trilogy Book #1), Aethersmith (Book #2), Sourcethief (Book #3) |
|
Ropetus
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jun 01, 2010 - 16:06 |
|
How about this one then:
- X X - | X X X X X X X | - X X -
Have fun making the initial Blitz if you have no Leap. That's going to be a 4+ dodge with Ag4 or two 3+ dodges if they go from the sideline. If they have Ag5 player with Leap then this will not be that good. Quick Snap will suck here but it does on every OTS.
I often use something like:
- - - - | - - X X X - - | - - - -
- - - - | - X - - - X - | - - - -
- - - X| - - - - - - - | X - - -
- - X- | - - X - - X- - | - X- -
It helps a lot if the LoS players are high ST and the players behind LoS have guard.
However, the easiest solution is still to pick side step or stand firm for at least 3 players. Every team can do this with ease and those skills are great anyway.
-Ropetus |
|
|
|
|
Gnomes are trash
Search
