On the dwarfen roster replace the ogre with?

Snew · Post by **Snew** » Wed Apr 30, 2003 8:43 pm

rwould wrote:They have the least skill position players of all the races, and other races received compensation skill players in useful positions to make up for it and so I would think it would be fair to increase Dwarf Blitzers to four for each team.

You're kidding right? All the Dwarf players are positional players.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Wed Apr 30, 2003 9:00 pm

Thadrin wrote:I still have problems with the idea that a "Full" roster is always going to have a big guy - even a wood elf roster with 16 players will ALWAYS have the Tree, even if he never actually does anything...because they CAN have him.

I disagree ... if I'm a Wood Elf coach ... I don't think I would take an On-Pitch Take Root treeman. A lineman will probably serve me better and save me 5 points of TR.

I know a lot of folks that won't take Minotaurs because of the Wild Animal turnover risk.

I know coaches who won't take Trolls because Really Stupid sucks in their opinion.

What I'm trying to say is that Ogres get the blast from all these posts because the Ogre is better than the risk presented by Bonehead. So my opinion based on my own experience is that the answer to the question is simply to reduce the access of teams to Ogres. Its the simplest of all the solutions and addresses what I consider the actual problem.

I just strongly disagree that BIG GUYs are the problems ... I think OGRES are the problem. Since I don't believe that BGs are at all a problem, all my posts have focused on the Ogres.

In fact, I have to be honest, I'm 90% sure if I was a Wood Elf coach that I would never purchase an On-Pitch Take Root Treeman .... I think the risk it presents outweighs the benefits it might bring.

Galak

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Wed Apr 30, 2003 11:00 pm

Going slightly off thread here (but hey, it's the thread I started

), but can someone explain to me the thinking behind the CD's having mino's, because, going back to when BB rules/fluff were integrated into WH fluff, I can't remember CD's (big hts) either having access to mino's in their army lists.

Of course, I could be wrong

Dark Lord (retired) · Wed Apr 30, 2003 11:19 pm

Darkson wrote:Going slightly off thread here (but hey, it's the thread I started ), but can someone explain to me the thinking behind the CD's having mino's, because, going back to when BB rules/fluff were integrated into WH fluff, I can't remember CD's (big hts) either having access to mino's in their army lists.

Of course, I could be wrong

I think it's odd that the longbeards with guard are so tough that an ogre is not needed on a dwarf team but the CD's get Longbeards + a CHOICE in big guys + 2 Bull Centaurs!

I still say that removing ogres from dwarves is agood idea as long as you replce it with something. They don't need a big guy but neither do Chaos Dwarves or Orcs or Chaos.

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Wed Apr 30, 2003 11:45 pm

I think it's odd that the longbeards with guard are so tough that an ogre is not needed on a dwarf team but the CD's get Longbeards + a CHOICE in big guys + 2 Bull Centaurs!

The difference is that the dwarves get much better position players. Im sorry but 2 dwarf blitzers+2 slayers+2 runners is much better than the 2 bullcentaurs and whatever hobs u have on a cd team. Dwarf blitzers make better scorers as rookies than anything the cd team has and the runners are as good with the ability to throw decently.

Dark Lord (retired) · Wed Apr 30, 2003 11:59 pm

I thought that stuff was irrelevant?

Didn't your side say that bashing power was all that mattered?

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Thu May 01, 2003 12:22 am

[quote]Didn't your side say that bashing power was all that mattered?/quote]
What i said was that is all ogres are good for. However the dwarven team has better bashers and better ball carriers than the cd's. The dwarves have 2 players that are trained for ball handling the cd's dont. The dwarves have 4 position bashers the cd's have 2. The dwarves have 2 bashers that can with one double become good ball handlers while the cd's merely have players that become less sucky ball handlers on 1 double.

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Thu May 01, 2003 2:26 am

I have to disagree with the whole idea that CDs are worse off than dwarfs, sorry but in my experience the CDs have a much better team. It's much more versitle team than regular dwarfs. I have to agree with Dark Lord that it seems that it's just a case of dwarf bashing if you take away the ogre and don't compensate with either a different BG or more positional players (such as DEs and HEs). Having said that, I realise that the ogre will probably be taken away without anything else added just because the anti-dwarf sentiment runs quite deep.

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Thu May 01, 2003 2:50 am

snotsngrots wrote:That doesn't address the statement that a team should give something up to have a Big Guy, specifically a Blitzer type postitional player. I think that's a very good addition idea. I wouldn't even argue that a Big Guy is a benefit to a team. I just want the decision to put one on a team to be something a coach thinks about, if not agonizes over.

I thinks it's been addressed very well by Galak. It would spawn too many newbie questions and, more importantly, more illegal rosters in leagues because some people wouldn't know better. Because of that, i'm against the idea.

I agree with Galak. Make bonehead more negative and problem solved.

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Thu May 01, 2003 2:51 am

rwould wrote:I do think that the BBRC should change back the Trophy/Leader re-rolls to what the rulebook

DEFINITELY! I've always said that was utter crap!

Snew · Post by **Snew** » Thu May 01, 2003 3:16 am

Well, I'm not going to argue. I don't think it'd be any big deal to publish a list of teams and the position the Big Guy would replace, similar to the Secret Weapon list in BBMag1, at the begining of the Big Guy section of the LRB. Simple and effective, I'd think. Maybe I'm missing something.

duff · Post by **duff** » Thu May 01, 2003 3:37 am

[a deathroller] isn't a very effective tool for anything but scaring a few coaches who don't know how easy it is to take down...

I sort of disagree. I think they are FUN!
Big guys are the same, playing against them, you have to try to do something about them (and you do better if you can find somthing better than setting your own big guy for the clash of the titens in the center of the field!). Part of the appeal is that you need to do somthing DIFFERENT against each team. Both fluff and interest argue that Dwarfs should have somthing other than Ogers. Unless Dwarfs are too strong already (no strong arguments for...) if you take somthing away, you should give somthing back.

Toby · Post by **Toby** » Thu May 01, 2003 5:28 am

Duff I am so glad to see a reasonable person here finally

Redfang · Post by **Redfang** » Thu May 01, 2003 8:44 am

Basically, I like Galak's list (from a little while back), but I think he forgot to mention the normal Chaos team...

It's not listed as not having a BG, and it is not listed for mino's trolls or ogres...

R

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu May 01, 2003 12:31 pm

Redfang wrote:Basically, I like Galak's list (from a little while back), but I think he forgot to mention the normal Chaos team...

It's not listed as not having a BG, and it is not listed for mino's trolls or ogres...

R

Opps ... fixed that.

Galak