Talk Fantasy Football

Norse wrote: Good work Balrog, makes for interesting reading..

Thank you!

Norse wrote: I'm toying with going for a "Khornes Horny Boys" team with 1 Minotaur and 10 beastmen, but that is more for flavour than a really intense desire to win..

Yeah, I like Minotaurs too, but I loathe the current Wild Animal skill, so I usually go with an Ogre.

-Balrog

Zombie wrote:Here's how i always start chaos myself:

1 Troll
10 Beastmen
3 RR
9 FF

The troll gives you much needed strength on the line, and puts a lot of fear into the oppposition. It works very well for me.

Yep, that's a good lineup too, but the Troll might come back to bite you on the arse. Although with Chaos I guess that's part of the fun.

But I would prefer a Chaos Warrior to start. he can score both your TDs in the first game and then pick up Piling On for the second.

-Balrog

On the subject of whether to

"Receive, score in 8 turns, kick, let score, receive and score in remaining turns
OR
Kick, let score, receive and tie in remaining turns, receive and score in 8 turns"

This depends completely on your opponent. As a Wood Elf coach I always kicked to the opponent if I was facing a strength team. Defense is easier when you have 11 players, but efficient offense with the woodies can be executed with 5 players
So as a Chaos coach against an elfy team that has the potential of being crippled, I'd kick if I get to choose. Ok, they'll most probably score quickly and in an unstoppable manner, but then I would get a chance to ruin their defense for the next half.
There are risks, naturally, such as the woodies (after scoring) kick to you recover the ball and score again... but that is less likely to happen if you had any time to cause a KO or two or worse.

Ok, the increase from 1% to 2% success is not the same as the increase from 50% to 100%. Yes, the increase in both cases is to double the chance of success. However, if you look at it from the other side, considering your chance of failure, on one case you have a drop from 99% to 98%, and on the other you have a drop from 50% to 0%. One is just over a 1% decrease, and the other is a 100% decrease.

As for the original topic, the Chaos team I started recently (having not known how to play as them... though to be honest I didn't know how to play as any team, other than High Elves. ) Had 2 TRRs, FF8, 8 Beastmen, and 3 CW's. Looking back I would've rather had more TRRs probably, but the team worked out well, going undefeated in it's first... 8 games or so, I can't remember. The first game I lost, the luck was slanted so badly against me, that by the end of the game my opponent was dodging mummies and picking up the ball with them to stop me from scoring, and I was rolling triple-skulls.

The luck was a bit odd too, I averaged over 4 casualties per game, but only had about a 25% ball handing success percentage. At one point my team had failed 12 straight attempts to pick the ball up, not in anyone's TZ.

I find the advantages of a Chaos team to be a bit more subtle than most... the ST4 Chaos warriors are useful, despite being expensive, and is the most obvious advantage against teams that only have Strength 3's. The two similiar teams I'd compare them to, are Lizardmen and Orcs (with BOBs and Saurus' matching up with CW's). Over Lizardmen you face the disadvantage of them having 6 ST4 players instead of 4, all who move 6 instead of 5, but you don't have the liability of the weak and injury-prone Skinks. Over Orcs you have the advantage of Ma5 vs Ma4 on your CW's vs the BOBs, and Ma6 over Ma5 on the linemen. And the AG3 vs AG2 on your CW's, though it generally won't come into play because they'll be busy bashing, if the ball happens to land near one, within scoring range, you'll be thankful for it....

What, you don't score with your chaos warriors? I'm shocked!

I ALWAYS give the ball to a chaos warrior if given the choice. Their AG is just as good as beastmen, and the +1 ST more than compensates for the -1 MA. Chaos warriors actually make great scorers.

With Chaos, I score with whoever picks the ball up first, because if I don't, it'll never be in my possession again during that game.

Why? A hand off isn't a hard thing to do with AG3...

Did you read the part about 12 straight failed pickups? That's 12 straight failed 3+s, the same as a handoff. On the 13th time when I picked it up, I didn't want to push my luck...

Ah, then i understand the apprehension.

But after you've returned to the world of normal dice rolls, you'll understand the benefit of hand offs once again.

Yeah, I did... I was lucky enough to get a CW with RSC for his first skill, so I made sure to get him the ball when he was 3 SPP away from his next skill, and got him Piling On to follow... he later picked up Block, and then Tackle... the guy was nuts, it was like a walking auto-casualty, lol...

And had "kick me" written all over his armour

Yeah, Mestari's right - that player's too much of a target. Never make any player good - he'll just be fouled. You should have taken Safe Throw, Multiple Block, and Shadowing.



Pink Horror

Now that's a damn mean, mean CW!!

Why do people take RSC before Claw?!
Do they not understand Maths at all...

And why do people even consider Piling-On to be more than a joke skill for a real player... if the player doesnt have Jump-Up, Piling-On isnt a sensible option... 1 use every 2 turns.

http://fumbbl.no-ip.org/league/teams/KhaosKrusherZ.html

---Korhil

Korhil wrote:Why do people take RSC before Claw?!
---Korhil

Because they know they can get Piling On or MB for their next skill...

Do not be so dismissive of a S4 Piling On RSF player - their casualty ratio is awesome and even dwarves get worried by the armour penetration.

This is especially true with the current ruling about Piling On after the dice are rolled so you know you are through armour and therefore have a 72% chance of getting a KO or Cas.

Ian