Why the necromantic team is unbalanced !!!

Thetian · Post by **Thetian** » Tue Sep 10, 2002 1:06 pm

Norse wrote: 2) Magic Helmets Sorry, but this is one of the worst ways GW have ever found to get round new team requirements by making bad fluff instead. Quite simply it is laughably bad, and smacks heavily of ThunderCats for those who ever watched it.. Snarf-Snarf....

Hehe I just found the name for my Khemri team!

I will infuriate my opponents with the mighty battlecry of "Thundercats! Yo!"

-Mike

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Tue Sep 10, 2002 1:17 pm

Martin, I completely and utterly reject the notion that just because the Orc team has 15 positional players that its "okay". (I also don't agree at all with your Lizardman arguement).

The Necromantic team looks and feels cobbled to me. BADLY cobbled. The Werewolf player is a complete joke based on the official history of the game, and having only 1 of them on the team looks like a pathetic attempt to sell Chaney miniatures.

The only other team I've ever HATED before was the Brettonian team .... come on I normally welcome new teams to the game, but this team just screams poor design (sorry Jervis).

The team doesn't match up with BB design concept or the history of the game's players. .... in other works .... yuck!

Galak

DaFrenchCoach · Post by **DaFrenchCoach** » Tue Sep 10, 2002 1:38 pm

Hey Galak, the less we could say is you're really frank here !!! woaow !!!

BTW, have you got some feedback about the email you've sent to Jervis Jonhson or Andy Hall in order to point this teamm was a little bit unbalanced ? (ie: things you can say

)

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Fri Sep 27, 2002 12:51 pm

Hi Galak,
maybe you didn't read me right.

This thread started with someone saying that the necro team is broken because it has 11 position players.
If that is true, then the orc team must also be broken. Is it?

Secondly, you call the necro team badly cobbled together.
I don't see why - sorry.
The "bad cobbling" must that mummies have been replaced by flesh golems, or the 0-1 werewolf. (Or both).

I'm looking and looking, but I can't see the problem.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Fri Sep 27, 2002 1:06 pm

So who's actually coached one? I'm deferring judgement until I get a few more games in with them.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Fri Sep 27, 2002 1:23 pm

plasmoid wrote: Secondly, you call the necro team badly cobbled together.
I don't see why - sorry.
The "bad cobbling" must that mummies have been replaced by flesh golems, or the 0-1 werewolf. (Or both).
I'm looking and looking, but I can't see the problem.

Cobbled for the following reasons:

1) 11 positional players ... I really don't count the Goblins as positional players on an Orc team so in MY opinion no team currently has more than 10 positional players.

2) It has a 0-1 positional player ... I don't like 0-1 for a positional slot AT all. Disclaimer: the MBBL is testing 0-1 kicker slots on every team and this I'm okay with because every team has one. The Werewolf stands out in a way I don't like.

3) The Werewolf scraped history completely. Were in 1st and 2nd edition were strong beserkers ... now he's some type of fetch doggie.... hear sound of Galak retching in the background.

4) 7 players without Regen including your two big LOS players.

I got permisson to mod the Necromantic team slightly to resolve some of these issues ... now I actually like the roster and it was such a simple fix.
Slight mods to the Weres and Flesh Golem stats and make the Were 0-2 and drop the Wights to 0-2.

And Marcus I have 3 coaches playing this revised Necromantic team for Season 2 of the MBBL. Sean Newboy from TBB is one of them.

Galak

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Sat Sep 28, 2002 1:22 pm

Hi Galak,
for the record, I have absolutely no problem with the alternative version that you posted on this thread.
Looks very nice.

I just think that Jervis didn't do a terrible job with his version, and I certainly don't think that his version is "unbalanced".

But if yours works - hey, great

Martin

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sat Sep 28, 2002 1:41 pm

plasmoid wrote:Hi Galak,
for the record, I have absolutely no problem with the alternative version that you posted on this thread.
Looks very nice.

I just think that Jervis didn't do a terrible job with his version, and I certainly don't think that his version is "unbalanced".

But if yours works - hey, great
Martin

Martin ... seriously here ... you don't find a problem with this roster when 7 players have NO regeneration and the team cannot get an Apoth ESPECIALLY given the following 3 extras:
1) 5 of the 7 players with Regen have AV 7
2) The other 2 are supposed to your Line of Scrimmage players to replace the Mummies.
3) 3 of the 7 cost over 100k

Now I know you and I frequently disagree on what makes a good new BB team ... but COME ON ... I don't see how anyone can actually like or approve the team as listed in BB Mag #3 ... one bad game for casualties will DECIMATE this team. The new cash rules are not going to make it easy to replace those 3 very expensive no Regen players when the dice roll Death .. I KNOW ... I played Halflings this season and started with no Apoth to be risky and get one more reroll. I lost a Treeman to Death on that first match and with the new cash table it took me 3!!! game to replace just ONE 110k player ... this team in my very not so humble opinion is a train wreck waiting to happen for the its coach.

Sorry, I just do not see how you can defend this roster. If you could give me your reasons why the above doesn't concern you I'd love to here it.

Also Martin ... the other thing that really surprises me. You've fought me multiple times on a team matching up to its fluff and history. Given this ... you can look at the fetch doggie Werewolf on this team and not hang your head shaking

? This guy is so far from the Were fluff/history in the game that its not even in the same country. That doesn't bug you even a little? Of all the folks that I thought that Were would bother it, I thought you and Lucien would be the two that would agree with me since you both appreciate the history of the game. ....

Oh well.

Galak

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 9:31 am

Hi Galak,
OK - you've convinced me that it isn't top of the line design, but I still think that it is OK and quite playable. That being said - it could be made better.

>bad game for casualties will DECIMATE this team.
A bad casualty game will decimate any team. Apothecaries only save max. 1 guy, so this is like a lot of the other teams.

>The other 2 are supposed to your Line of Scrimmage players to replace >the Mummies.
The inference is that you shouldn't put them there, because they are not mummies. Put some zombies on the LOS. This is a new team and not the undead team, so the fleshies shouldn't be played like mummies.

As for the werewolf:
I think that a very fast ST3 player with fang and frenzy looks very lethal and werewolf'ey. Sure, catch isn't about 'berserk-death-rage', but 2 out of 3 ain't bad.
But admitted, my judgement may be biased here. I hated the 2nd ed. werewolf team for being completely unbalanced - and besides werewolves are solitary creatures, not BB material. The "wereclans" are from white wolfs gameworld, not GWs.
So precedence hasn't done much for me. I so no particular need for giving them ST4 or AG4.
Frankly, I like the new werewolf better than Chaney, they catch could have been tackle, or something else.

OK,
all that being said, I can see how a few changes would make this roster better.
Why doesn't fleshies have Regen? They're reanimated - in fact, they are homemade zombies. Big nasties with Regen and Thick Skull would be very nice.
Perhaps to bring the number of non-regens back to 4 (like the old team), the team could be 0-2 ghouls, 0-2 weres.
That would be a weakening - but then again, fleshies with regen would make up for it.

Other than that,
whats not to like

So - what does your test version look like?

Martin

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 1:53 pm

plasmoid wrote:Why doesn't fleshies have Regen? They're reanimated - in fact, they are homemade zombies. Big nasties with Regen and Thick Skull would be very nice.
Perhaps to bring the number of non-regens back to 4 (like the old team), the team could be 0-2 ghouls, 0-2 weres.
That would be a weakening - but then again, fleshies with regen would make up for it.

Other than that,
whats not to like

So - what does your test version look like?
Martin

Qty Title Cost MA ST AG AV S&K
0-12 Zombies 30k 4/3/2/8 Regen G
0-4 Ghouls 70k 7/3/3/7 Dodge G/A
0-2 Wights 90k 6/3/3/8 Regen, Block G
0-2 Flesh Golem 110k 4/4/2/9 Regen, Stand Firm G/S
0-2 Werewolf 120k 7/4/2/8 Mighty Blow, Break Tackle, Frenzy G/S
Re-roll counter: 70.000 gold pieces

Galak

christer · Post by **christer** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 3:47 pm

I actually agree with Plasmoid on this..

0-2 ghouls and 0-2 weres plus slap on regen on golems..

And perhaps give the were av8 to make it a little less brittle..

I don't really mind the concept (even if it's way off on the fluff compared to 2nd edition) of having agile wolves. To me, the necros are the "speedy" undeads while khemri are the bashy.. (And yes, I think khemri should be made less bashy.. They're kinda insane at the moment IMHO).

-- Christer

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 4:33 pm

Fortunately we have a year to test.

So in an ideal world the following three proposed rosters would get tested:

BB Mag #3 version:
Qty Title Cost MA ST AG AV S&K
0-12 Zombies 30k 4/3/2/8 Regen G
0-4 Ghouls 70k 7/3/3/7 Dodge G/A
0-4 Wights 90k 6/3/3/8 Regen, Block G
0-1 Werewolf 110k 8/3/3/7 Catch, Frenzy, Razor Sharp Claws G/A
0-2 Flesh Golem 120k 4/4/2/9 Break Tackle, Stand Firm, Thick Skull G/S

MBBL version being tested:
Qty Title Cost MA ST AG AV S&K
0-12 Zombies 30k 4/3/2/8 Regen G
0-4 Ghouls 70k 7/3/3/7 Dodge G/A
0-2 Wights 90k 6/3/3/8 Regen, Block G
0-2 Flesh Golem 110k 4/4/2/9 Regen, Stand Firm G/S
0-2 Werewolf 120k 7/4/2/8 Mighty Blow, Break Tackle, Frenzy G/S

Revised BB Mag #3 roster (fixes the roster/ignores the history):
Qty Title Cost MA ST AG AV S&K
0-12 Zombies 30k 4/3/2/8 Regen G
0-2 Ghouls 70k 7/3/3/7 Dodge G/A
0-4 Wights 90k 6/3/3/8 Regen, Block G
0-2 Werewolf 110k 8/3/3/7 Catch, Frenzy, Razor Sharp Claws G/A
0-2 Flesh Golem 130k 4/4/2/9 Break Tackle, Regen, Stand Firm G/S

Now, I'll admit here that I still hate the fetch-doggie werewolf with every bone in my body ... and I'm not thrilled at all with 480k in high end positional players, but at least I could live with this roster a little better conceptually. You've swapped 2 Ghouls for 2 Weres and since so the AV 7 no Regen on the weres is easier to swallow. On the MBBL team, we swapped out Wights for stronger weres to give the team more of the strength feature the Undead had.

In a perfect world, we'd be able to test all 3 rosters completely and come to agreement. Christer is currently testing the official roster, and the MBBL is testing the 2nd one. Is there any league will to run the revised BB Mag #3 roster through a season of play?

Galak

Balrog · Post by **Balrog** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 4:42 pm

My biggest problem with the necromantic team (besides the silly name) is that it just isn't an interesting roster. I wouldn't want to touch this team with a 11 foot pole.

But that's just me.

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Wed Oct 02, 2002 4:06 am

I'd persomally like to see were taken out of the Undead teams altogether and put back in their rightful place, the Norse. But then I do coach a Norse team.

Relborn · Post by **Relborn** » Wed Oct 02, 2002 6:36 am

sorry Darkson .... but Were definately do NOT belong into a Norse
Team either (maybe when I have seen the first good ally rules).

The team where Werewolves belong is historically (Bloodbowl History
of course) their own Werewolf team and no other Undead/Norse mumbojumbostuff