Looking for good Nurgle resources/advice

[Joemanji]

Most importantly it will be fun to meet coaches from the other side of the world! I'm looking forward to it, and hope my team plays as many non-Europeans as possible.

The tournament scene here has changed a lot since 2002, but the GW BB has always been considered the easiest European tournament (if that isn't too sweeping a statement), as it draws in all the part timers who only play once a year, and the massive field means your draw (in terms of opponent ability) differs wildly even if you win a lot. In smaller tournaments Swiss virtually guarantees a winning coach at least 2 tough games, usually more.

[Hitonagashi]

Jimmy - my own experience is the opposite of this. With stymie Nurgle, I expect to win 5 out of 6 early games, for example. That is about as good as it gets with any race. With killer Nurgle, I accept that it is much more difficult early on.

Quotes like this is why I am going to join Carnis in not getting involved.

Jimmy - I don't get your point. Would you care to elaborate? I am just summarising my several years playing experience for the benefit of readers of this thread. They are entitled to make of it what they will.

All the best.

I think what Jimmy is getting at is that if you can reliably expect to win 5/6 games with rookie/low TV Nurgle, then the standard of the opposition you face is not particularly high.

For example, with even skills at low TV, I'd be quite confident in betting on a Norse, Lizardman, Undead or Amazon team at least. Without the development, a Nurgle team at low TV is just inferior...that's one of the main points about Chaos/Nurgle! They are slow starters, and personally, I find them one of the worst teams out there at low TV, but when they get going, they get good.

[SunDevil]

Jimmy - my own experience is the opposite of this. With stymie Nurgle, I expect to win 5 out of 6 early games, for example. That is about as good as it gets with any race. With killer Nurgle, I accept that it is much more difficult early on.

Quotes like this is why I am going to join Carnis in not getting involved.

Frustrated yourself, did you?

That's because you guys came into this thread making it an argument instead of a discussion. You like bash better? Awesome! So do I most of the time. So why didn't you just advocate for bash and talk about ideas to forward that style? No, instead it was just constant complaining and insulting the stymie style. This is an OPINION thread - you should have spent more time offering your own (and not just "FUMMBL is a perfect microcosm of all things BB in all circumstances and no one can refute that!") instead of just tearing down other ideas that you have no experience with.

I used to be interested in joining FUMMBL but if JimmyF (and to a lesser extent, Carnis) represents the kind of close-minded, one-dimensional coaching philosophy that format incubates, I'll pass.

Back on topic!

Nuffle has smiled on my team and I have 2 5-ST Warriors. One is Block Guard and the other is Block with a third skill coming soon. Is a second Tentacles too much? I have Elves then Halflings before the playoffs (if I make it!), where it will be a mix of Necro, CPact, Ogres, CDs and probably Elves/Flings/Chaos for the 6th team. I'm worried Tentacles will be really good but only against a small percentage to teams I have possibly left.

[Carnis]

That's because you guys came into this thread making it an argument instead of a discussion.

Mirror, Mirror on the wall..

Read the thread from the start please and form an informed opinion.

[Alu-Cinator]

and the other is Block with a third skill coming soon.

What is his second skill?

--

From my perspective, I think a ST 5 Nurgle Warrior with Tentacles is the ultimate dream of all coaches who are moving towards the Nurgle stymie style. It is a near second beast (and without Really Stupid!).

With these two pillars in your team, you can build around them some huge and impenetrable walls with quicksand moats in which your adversaries will bog down and drown.

--

I hope his second skill is Stand Firm, hehe!

[mattgslater]

I really don't like this argument of "mainstream" BB, Jimmy. What happens on Cyanide can stay on Cyanide, for all I care. The same to a lesser extent with FUMBBL: it's more compatible with my Mac and has a better competitive level, but when I think about Blood Bowl, I always have and always will think about painted metal figures on a physical pitch, with real dice.

FUMBBL is different in important ways from TT, some obvious, some subtle. It's even more different from any given TT league, because every environment brings its own culture and its own mix of coaches and teams. Talking about which environment is the "real" one is totally pointless, even if it is frustrating that sometimes the medium influences the message.

I don't see how it's so hard for y'all to just get along. We have some coaches who are respected in their own competitive environments saying some very different things. Okay, so YMMV, as Martin says it. That means that the conversation should really break down to:

1) Stymie and Slayer Philosophies: Is there a third one out there somewhere? What about hybrids? How should format and competition pool influence your decision?

2) Stymie tracks: Guard or Stand Firm? What's the role of Tentacles? More on "reefs and sharks", possibly with diagrams, would be great.

3) Slayer tracks: What skill order is best? Jimmy, you've taken different tracks with each NW; how do you use these players differently on the pitch, if at all?

4) Hybrids: When and where do the styles diverge? Do they converge at all later in development? If you're set on a hybrid, is it best to run a stymie track with a couple "killer" Pests, or a MB/SF track like Orcs (or LRB4 Orcs if you're a Blackboxer)?

4) How do you win early with Nurgle? My experience here has been that early Nurgle are really dicey; you can easily lose to an inferior coach if you keep getting those both-downs, or beat a superior one if Foul Appearance and/or Disturbing Presence rolls make a big difference. I ran a Nurgle team in our D-league last year, and tied against all the schmoes while beating the snot out of some high-roller teams. But others have said they're great, and still others insist they're awful. I don't think "who's right" matters so much as "why do you think that" matters.

[Smeborg]

Most importantly it will be fun to meet coaches from the other side of the world! I'm looking forward to it, and hope my team plays as many non-Europeans as possible.

The tournament scene here has changed a lot since 2002, but the GW BB has always been considered the easiest European tournament (if that isn't too sweeping a statement), as it draws in all the part timers who only play once a year, and the massive field means your draw (in terms of opponent ability) differs wildly even if you win a lot. In smaller tournaments Swiss virtually guarantees a winning coach at least 2 tough games, usually more.

I'm sure you're right in general about the coaching standard at the GW BB. My first 2 opponents in 2003 were longfang and Lucy, among my toughest games of the weekend.

I love playing against coaches from other parts of the world. I've done a bit of sports touring in my time (hockey and cricket). International BB tournaments have something of the same flavour.

All the best. Hope we meet.

[Smeborg]

Nuffle has smiled on my team and I have 2 5-ST Warriors. One is Block Guard and the other is Block with a third skill coming soon. Is a second Tentacles too much? I have Elves then Halflings before the playoffs (if I make it!), where it will be a mix of Necro, CPact, Ogres, CDs and probably Elves/Flings/Chaos for the 6th team. I'm worried Tentacles will be really good but only against a small percentage to teams I have possibly left.

I don't think Tentacles is only good against AG teams, especially if the Tentacled player has Block. I have not had a ST5 Warrior with Tentacles. However, I did have a ST6 Beast with Block, S-Firm. He regularly tied up 4 Orcs or 4 Dwarfs single handedly at least once per game. Very frustrating for the opponent. I would guess that a "second Beast" would work well against the opponents you are likely to face.

All the best.

[Hitonagashi]

1) Stymie and Slayer Philosophies: Is there a third one out there somewhere? How do they differ? I know that last question sounds obvious, but the deeper we go, the more we'll come back to that question.

The thing is Matt, that at the end of the day, Nurgle are a strength based team. Chaos can come pretty darned close to them in the killer stakes, and Dwarves are just as good at Stymie with their mass guard holding up their lack of st, and mass tackle compensating for lack of Tentacles.

There are many graduations, but any argument you can make specifically for Nurgle, you can make more general as a tactical Killer/Positional debate. At the end of the day, when you want to dive deeply in, you need to consider your own playstyle as the first thing you do.

For example, with Lizardmen, I like to carry the ball with skinks. Garion likes to carry the ball with saurii. Is there a clear best approach there? They both have advantages and disadvantages. I can certainly play with carrying it with saurii, and Garion can certainly play with skinks holding the ball...but it comes down to the subtle differences in our styles of play and where we position our players, the point in the game where we make our pushes, the frequency we like to playswitch, the degree of which we engage our saurii with other bashers. None of these things are easy to pick a best option on, and they define you as a coach.

When it comes to tactics, we can only discuss the big picture, because the little picture becomes personal very quickly.

[mattgslater]

Even where it becomes personal, we can still discuss it. We just have to keep it in our heads that there is not necessarily one right way for everybody, and that there may be relative practical value to be had, concealed behind our individual coaching tendencies. I think that's kind of the point.

Never shy away from a topic just because it's complex!

[Smeborg]

I think what Jimmy is getting at is that if you can reliably expect to win 5/6 games with rookie/low TV Nurgle, then the standard of the opposition you face is not particularly high.

For example, with even skills at low TV, I'd be quite confident in betting on a Norse, Lizardman, Undead or Amazon team at least. Without the development, a Nurgle team at low TV is just inferior...that's one of the main points about Chaos/Nurgle! They are slow starters, and personally, I find them one of the worst teams out there at low TV, but when they get going, they get good.

Hi Hitonagashi. When I started playing Nurgle, I got bad results early in leagues. However, as I learned to adapt my playing style to what I think the team do best, I found (to my pleasant surprise) that I got much better results early on in leagues. I did not find it easy to change style, but I persisted, and kept following what worked in practice.

I gave my placings from CanCon (competitive 7-round Swiss system tourney in league format, 70+ coaches) as clear evidence of Nurgle doing well in short leagues. One year I got 5 wins, 1 draw, and 1 loss (to the tourney winner), finishing 4th, the other year I got 4 wins, 2 draws and 1 loss, finishing 9th.

Nurgle take more effort to learn to play well than other teams. If you play them in the style of other teams, I suggest you can expect to perform badly at low TV. But if you find the right way to play them, I suggest they are competitive at low TV. That's my experience, anyway. I acknowledge that this idea may be difficult for you to accept if you have so far only experienced Nurgle performing badly at low TV.

All the best.

[Hitonagashi]

I think what Jimmy is getting at is that if you can reliably expect to win 5/6 games with rookie/low TV Nurgle, then the standard of the opposition you face is not particularly high.

For example, with even skills at low TV, I'd be quite confident in betting on a Norse, Lizardman, Undead or Amazon team at least. Without the development, a Nurgle team at low TV is just inferior...that's one of the main points about Chaos/Nurgle! They are slow starters, and personally, I find them one of the worst teams out there at low TV, but when they get going, they get good.

Hi Hitonagashi. When I started playing Nurgle, I got bad results early in leagues. However, as I learned to adapt my playing style to what I think the team do best, I found (to my pleasant surprise) that I got much better results early on in leagues. I did not find it easy to change style, but I persisted, and kept following what worked in practice.

I gave my placings from CanCon (competitive 7-round Swiss system tourney in league format, 70+ coaches) as clear evidence of Nurgle doing well in short leagues. One year I got 5 wins, 1 draw, and 1 loss (to the tourney winner), finishing 4th, the other year I got 4 wins, 2 draws and 1 loss, finishing 9th.

Nurgle take more effort to learn to play well than other teams. If you play them in the style of other teams, I suggest you can expect to perform badly at low TV. But if you find the right way to play them, I suggest they are competitive at low TV. That's my experience, anyway. I acknowledge that this idea may be difficult for you to accept if you have so far only experienced Nurgle performing badly at low TV.

All the best.

I don't play Nurgle...not extensively . I'm interested in the general subject matter here, as I've played against them so far.

All teams are competitive with the right coaching.

http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=team& ... _id=508307

SillySod here has a halfling team with 23/4/8. He could make the claim that he could expect to win 5/6 low TV games he played with Halfings. What does that say about the strength of the team of Halflings against the factor of a very good coach skill playing a style they are comfortable with against lesser opposition?

I have no doubt that you are far more effective with Stymie than Bash if it suits your playstyle. I don't believe that one coach is sufficient evidence to claim that this style is better than any other.

[mattgslater]

I think Nurgle's "early weakness" is a little overstated.

2RR hurts. So does not having any Block. Certainly against, say, Orcs, who have 4x Block and the same Power Five (or four of them and an extra RR), plus a Thrower, the rookie Nurgle are at a big disadvantage. In games like that, the team that can't safely throw as many blocks is in trouble, and no skills with 2RRs is a bad handicap.

But that Power Five is huge. FA + AV9 + Regen is wicked against an opponent with no Guard, because they can't chance 1d blocks unless "nothing" is acceptable, much as if the player had Block. Often early elf teams can't get into your formations, and OSPT is downright easy. Being able to blitz with MA6 and ST4 is a big deal too. Many early elf teams are built around mobile cages, often involving short chucking or handing off, which doesn't work against Nurgle. Having that early BON makes it much harder for the defense to reform one square away from your attack, and not having any Guard or ST4 makes it much harder to move him off. So the strategies light teams use against Orcs, especially initially, don't work on Nurgle.

[Smeborg]

I have no doubt that you are far more effective with Stymie than Bash if it suits your playstyle. I don't believe that one coach is sufficient evidence to claim that this style is better than any other.

I am inclined to agree with you, Hitonagashi. But at least it is evidence. The problem on this thread of late is that some posters have been making loud counter-claims based apparently on no evidence.

The relative merits of killer and stymie Nurgle will likely not be decided quickly as a matter of general opinion. It will likely take some years, as it takes time, effort and persistence to learn to play well in the stymie style (for me anyway!). Some coaches will not want to make the effort, others will not be attracted to the style, regardless of its practical merits. That's fine. But I know from feedback that plenty of coaches are making the effort, and thoroughly enjoying it.

All the best.

[Carnis]

Hitoganashi, your example's Flings have got 80% of their wins in lrb4 with broken halfling chefs (20k per stolen rr, autosuccess, or was it s 2+).. Essentially playing 0 RR teams while using the old +2 dirty player, which is actually not that hard to do.. Even with flings.. SillySod enjoys that kind of exploitation of BB rules , which is why he is turning to underworld now.

I am inclined to agree with you, Hitonagashi. But at least it is evidence. The problem on this thread of late is that some posters have been making loud counter-claims based apparently on no evidence.

I think Smeborg is mixing up terms. It's his opinion/observation, not evidence to claim his style is better because he plays his later style better than his former style. IF some other coach did the opposite observation it would not be evidence either.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evidence
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/observation

Problem for me with Smeborg is and has always been for 65 pages in this thread is that if he feels he has it right, then no matter what the numbers say, what other coaches say, other formats say, he will say he is right. He will also claim to said coaches that his opinion is the right one, and if it isnt field-tested and disproven then it remains right (could be another argument flaw, demanding negative proof). Eg. it could well be that before when he was playing slayery-nurgle, and now he plays stymie and between the change he has significantly improved as a coach over his peers. Then making the observation that his play results have improved he makes the claim that his new approach is proven better he is making an argument flaw, more exactly proof by example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_example

While when asked direct questions about the style he will use a massive number of adjectives (*edit!) to describe it's awesomeness, which is well, demeaning to the original questioner and also a little silly . Then he will ask others to prove it by example, if they refuse, charge on it as well, conceding the argument .

Edit (see, I could go argue as he does)*:

Anyway, if we were using proof by example as logical evidence, my 128/50/29 nurgle would certainly constitute "evidence" , of Slayer nurgle as an optimal play under B/Fumbbl against some of the top coaches in the world (and many many very average coaches among them). It relies solely on position and numbers, and playing that team in any other way would be suboptimal, as I would not be gaining position and numbers from the use of guard, killstack & tents (to lock up the opponent) and without the killers the number-advantage could not be reasonably reached. To focus on anything but killing would diminish the likelyhood of achieving the optimal winning circumstance, that of playing an empty pitch and winning a 4-0 victory while handing off the touchdowns to AG2 NWs to ensure optimal team-growth.