Worst team in blood bowl?

[Heff]

I have a slight issue with Dark and High elves cos of all that AV8 and AG4 feels like cheating to me.

*cough* splutter. High Elves!? I've played them for many years. Was just discussing them yesterday at Chaos Cup. High Elves are very much like Humans, but trading the Ogre for AG4 w/o Dodge and ST3 Catchers. Beginning HElves can't hit, so they are forced to dodge away without the skill, so they burn team rerolls. If they suffer a casualty, they are expensive to replace. There are certainly worse teams; I think they are very middle of the road. Don't see them winning many tournaments in the US.

Pro elves are the same and are av7. They do have those wonderful catchers tho

[dines]

I have a slight issue with Dark and High elves cos of all that AV8 and AG4 feels like cheating to me.

*cough* splutter. High Elves!? I've played them for many years. Was just discussing them yesterday at Chaos Cup. High Elves are very much like Humans, but trading the Ogre for AG4 w/o Dodge and ST3 Catchers. Beginning HElves can't hit, so they are forced to dodge away without the skill, so they burn team rerolls. If they suffer a casualty, they are expensive to replace. There are certainly worse teams; I think they are very middle of the road. Don't see them winning many tournaments in the US.

Pro elves are the same and are av7. They do have those wonderful catchers tho

But they are cheap to replace. Makes a big difference.

[Glowworm]

podfrey
I would like to point out that a bad Goblin coach is still a better player than a good elf coach

I am......and I'm not!!

Worst team IMHO, Vamps, played them in the local league and just wanted the experience to end. Like poor Elves that destroy their even poorer Thralls. Found Hypno gaze very situational.

Played Khemri and really enjoyed them, finished my 1st tournament with them 2/2/2 IIRc so very happy with that.

I'd vote Dwarves ( not a Heff hate vote) just because they always seem so 1 dimensional and playing against them is something I don't enjoy much either....however I do play Gobbo's so maybe that's understandable.

[Rolex]

Pro elves are the same and are av7. They do have those wonderful catchers tho

But they are cheap to replace. Makes a big difference.

And chep to buy. And cheap to foul with.
My elves (We Psyched Farina!) had only 3 catchers and a 14 players rosters (2 DP).
I won the league setting a record of 14 fouls in one game.

[Bakunin]

Pro elves are the same and are av7. They do have those wonderful catchers tho

But they are cheap to replace. Makes a big difference.

And chep to buy. And cheap to foul with.
My elves (We Psyched Farina!) had only 3 catchers and a 14 players rosters (2 DP).
I won the league setting a record of 14 fouls in one game.

YES! Thats the way to play elfs.
Worst team: ogres
worst design: khemri
hate: wood elfs

[daloonieshaman]

hate: wood elfs

I thought we got all of them in a forest fire

[RogueThirteen]

I don't understand why everyone harps on High Elves for having AV8 and AG4. High Elves are, far and away, the least powerful of the elven teams (and I'm pretty sure tournament and league data bears this out).

Their one edge over other elves is their passing game, but Basics to Blood Bowl 101 is that passing is bad and coaches that pass are bad (or least that's how some folks here talk). Passing facilitates quick scores, while agile teams need to delay, and always introduces at least two rolls for failure.


If you want to bash on AG4/AV8 I'm all for harping on Dark Elves, since they have access to four blitzers and two frenzy pieces, while being better designed than high elves at the bash-and-run game, which is what facilitates delaying scores.


Of course, the brute speed of Wood Elves and their skill advantage more than makes up for AV7, even at high TV levels of play (where Claw undoes the AV8 advantage anyways).


High Elves? Seriously? Jeebus...

[icepelt]

I think you have some good points there Rogue.
I think high elves have maybe a few advantages:
1.Armour eight, which can be beaten. If you hear about it on humans most people say, it is ok, but on high elves it is like, whoa! this is armour nine.
2.Safe throw early.
3. St.3 Catchers over the woodies (Even though the pro elf one is better.)

[Talarius]

High Elves? Seriously? Jeebus...

TFF doesn't have the feature, so consider your post "liked", thumbed or +1'd. Good to know I'm not the only one that thinks that way.

[daloonieshaman]

who says you have to pass toward the goal
you can always play "keep away"

[NightDragon 2]

And I don't see why people harp on about Dwarf teams. They are entitled to play the game as much as anyone else and play to their strengths. I have a Dwarf WFB Army, but not a BB team because they are too slow for my liking, but presumably there are plenty of coaches out there who like Dwarves best and so want to coach a Dwarf team.

[RogueThirteen]

And I don't see why people harp on about Dwarf teams. They are entitled to play the game as much as anyone else and play to their strengths. I have a Dwarf WFB Army, but not a BB team because they are too slow for my liking, but presumably there are plenty of coaches out there who like Dwarves best and so want to coach a Dwarf team.

Well, I think the point about Dwarves is that, unlike High Elves and perhaps more-so than any other team, they absolutely ruin quite a few teams--to the level of unplayability--because of mass Tackle. So, if you want to play Goblins, Halflings, Amazons, Underworld, and (to lesser extents) Lizardmen and Ogres, you had better hope there aren't any Dwarf opponents in your league/tournament, because there's a pretty big Rock-Paper-Scissors dynamic that can exist between Dwarf teams and those teams (with Dwarves being the ROCK and those teams being poor ol' SCISSORS).

So, there's one concern that makes Dwarves a somewhat different case. Using the argument of "Team A is as entitled to play the game to their strengths as anyone else" to justify Dwarves is somewhat interesting, because if you flip the shoe around and say "Halflings/Amazons/Goblins/Underworld are entitled to play the game to their strengths," well their ONLY strengths are mass mobility and resiliency via Dodge, which is nullified almost entirely by Dwarves.


Or, at least, that's one reason. I agree Dwarf coaches have a right to take Dwarves to tournaments and leagues, of course, but it's worth realizing that 4-6 teams become completely unplayable in Dwarf-heavy environments (and every tournament I've attended has been Dwarf-heavy with them as one of the most over-represented teams present).


There are also arguments about power level (especially at low TV tournaments), immunity to player removal (which can be important when CAS For vs CAS against is tracked for tourney points), and their boring predictable play style. But, really, I don't think those features apply anymore to Dwarves than they do to Orcs and several other teams.

For me, what's most salient, is that Dwarves neuter somewhere between 17-25% of the available teams (depending on if you count Ogres and Lizards).

[SillySod]

Amazons (and maybe wood elves) have a much bigger impact on the viability of certain teams than Dwarfs do.

e.g. I'm happy to play Halflings vs Dwarfs but I would expect to lose and lose and lose if I was playing Halflings vs Amazons. Dwarfs just ain't that bad.

[Gaixo]

Can you explain what you mean, SillySod? I fail to see how Amazons are especially troublesome for Halflings.

[Dr. Von Richten]

And I don't see why people harp on about Dwarf teams. They are entitled to play the game as much as anyone else and play to their strengths. I have a Dwarf WFB Army, but not a BB team because they are too slow for my liking, but presumably there are plenty of coaches out there who like Dwarves best and so want to coach a Dwarf team.

Well, I think the point about Dwarves is that, unlike High Elves and perhaps more-so than any other team, they absolutely ruin quite a few teams--to the level of unplayability--because of mass Tackle. So, if you want to play Goblins, Halflings, Amazons, Underworld, and (to lesser extents) Lizardmen and Ogres, you had better hope there aren't any Dwarf opponents in your league/tournament, because there's a pretty big Rock-Paper-Scissors dynamic that can exist between Dwarf teams and those teams (with Dwarves being the ROCK and those teams being poor ol' SCISSORS).

So, there's one concern that makes Dwarves a somewhat different case. Using the argument of "Team A is as entitled to play the game to their strengths as anyone else" to justify Dwarves is somewhat interesting, because if you flip the shoe around and say "Halflings/Amazons/Goblins/Underworld are entitled to play the game to their strengths," well their ONLY strengths are mass mobility and resiliency via Dodge, which is nullified almost entirely by Dwarves.


Or, at least, that's one reason. I agree Dwarf coaches have a right to take Dwarves to tournaments and leagues, of course, but it's worth realizing that 4-6 teams become completely unplayable in Dwarf-heavy environments (and every tournament I've attended has been Dwarf-heavy with them as one of the most over-represented teams present).


There are also arguments about power level (especially at low TV tournaments), immunity to player removal (which can be important when CAS For vs CAS against is tracked for tourney points), and their boring predictable play style. But, really, I don't think those features apply anymore to Dwarves than they do to Orcs and several other teams.

For me, what's most salient, is that Dwarves neuter somewhere between 17-25% of the available teams (depending on if you count Ogres and Lizards).

Of the 6 teams you mention, 4 are low tier teams anyway; Halflings, Goblins etc. struggle against pretty much anyone, and if you're going to play them at a Tournament, you're not there to win the Tournament anyway, but to have fun and occasionally pull off something outrageous!

Of the other 2, Lizardmen is good enough that the weakness of the Skinks v.s. Dwarfs is not nearly enough to make them 'unplayable', all that Str 4/5 is a serious problem for Str 3 Dwarfs and a good Lizzie coach protects his Skinks anyway; any Blitzer with Block can ruin their day.

That leaves Amazons, who are indeed screwed against Dwarves, but then Amazons are one of the best low TV (i.e. Tournament) teams anyway, so one nemesis isn't bad.

And in League play, Dwarves are strong in the beginning, but get outclassed by pretty much any other bash team at higher TV's.

All this doesn't mean that I like Dwarves in Bloodbowl; I find them boring and one-dimensional (unless they start with a Deathroller, then they're OK-ish). But they're not really overpowered, and I've rarely seen them win either Leagues or Tournaments.