Wild Animal Redux

grotemuis · Post by **grotemuis** » Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:57 am

I vote for the person helping (i.e. always a friendly player, "I don't need no stinking help!"

Relborn · Post by **Relborn** » Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:10 am

Sorry I voted incorrect. I voted for yes but meant no. To be honest I like the new wild animal version quite well.

Not much need to change it, as it is far better than the old version

Redfang · Post by **Redfang** » Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:13 am

grotemuis wrote:I vote for the person helping (i.e. always a friendly player, "I don't need no stinking help!"

I think you're confused with OFAB

Khar-peth · Post by **Khar-peth** » Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:16 am

better than the new WA but dont like the "free" blitz part.

Joemanji · Post by **Joemanji** » Thu Nov 27, 2003 12:46 pm

No more free blitzes! Please, for the love of Nuffle!

I can't be bothered to repeat my argument, but I think we should give new WA a go. One way to get round it is to toss your WA into the thick of the action. Ooh, wait a minute, that's quite appropriate, isn't it?

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Sun Nov 30, 2003 11:03 pm

I'd like to see the new WA played a bit before we discard it all together. I think it may actually be quite clever - and make WAs used as they are supposed to be (i.e. a bit of muscle on the line).

Chris · Post by **Chris** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:15 pm

The Wild Animal must make a 4+ roll to take an action. If he has a teammate next to him, this becomes a 2+ action. If the Wild Animal gets a 1, then they get a free blitz on the nearest player.

>>>>>>>>>

I take it you are a fan of your Rat Ogres?

The only way I would agree if it was nearest player choosen by your oppenent. But honestly I see nothing wrong with the new rule, appart from maybe that now every Skaven team should have a Rat Ogre instead of a lineman.

Skummy · Post by **Skummy** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:59 pm

The original idea has been fleshed out and presented in a much better fasion in the thread titled "Yet another WA..."

Essentially, the WA coach has to decide whether to put a player next to the WA and have a 1 in 6 chance of getting attacked by the beast, or to live with having him do what he's supposed to 50% of the time.

duff · Post by **duff** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:39 am

Dark Lord wrote:The more I think about it the more I think a total redux of the big guys is needed. Toss all the nega-traits out the window. Make each big guy fill a roll specific to the teams they'll play for and jack their cost up to around 150K or more.

The trouble with using price as a limiting factor but making the player worth the money is that a rich team can place a greater value of player on the field than their opponent, increasing the advantage.

What do you mean by tailering them to niches. At present they are all "crunch", I can't think of an easy way to change that.