Naming the common defensive setups

Got a great idea and/or proposal for BloodBowl?

Moderator: TFF Mods

Post Reply
nick_nameless
Emerging Star
Emerging Star
Posts: 364
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by nick_nameless »

Oxynot wrote:
nick_nameless wrote:NOTE 1: I may be displaying a bit of ignorance here...I am just trying to clear up in my mind why the "common defensive set-ups" tend to have one particular thing in common:

And that is that they commonly leave the rank behind the LOS empty.

...

What's the downside of crowding the LOS a little like this, especially if you have the mobility to fall back and cover a play? Maybe Dark Elves could benefit from something similar, Chaos dwarves, maybe a few others.
In short, the 11% chance of Quick Snap.
Can you expand on that a little? Quicksnap gives a few teams the OTTD. Again, speaking with respect to Lizardmen, Quicksnap would not necessarily increase the number of 2D blocks here...although then that makes them unique in that regard and so maybe the discussion belongs somewhere other than "common Defensive Set-ups", but even still, I question the logic of defending against something that happens 11% of the time and accepting as a consequence something that's not advantageous that happens the other 89% of the time.

Reason: ''
dsavillian
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 225
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:01 pm
Location: Calgary

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by dsavillian »

nick_nameless wrote:
Oxynot wrote:
nick_nameless wrote:NOTE 1: I may be displaying a bit of ignorance here...I am just trying to clear up in my mind why the "common defensive set-ups" tend to have one particular thing in common:

And that is that they commonly leave the rank behind the LOS empty.

...

What's the downside of crowding the LOS a little like this, especially if you have the mobility to fall back and cover a play? Maybe Dark Elves could benefit from something similar, Chaos dwarves, maybe a few others.
In short, the 11% chance of Quick Snap.
Can you expand on that a little? Quicksnap gives a few teams the OTTD. Again, speaking with respect to Lizardmen, Quicksnap would not necessarily increase the number of 2D blocks here...although then that makes them unique in that regard and so maybe the discussion belongs somewhere other than "common Defensive Set-ups", but even still, I question the logic of defending against something that happens 11% of the time and accepting as a consequence something that's not advantageous that happens the other 89% of the time.

I would guess that the reason is, if there is a quick snap, you are now potentially facing 7 blocks + a blitz instead of 3 + a blitz.

Reason: ''
Coach of the Fancy Lads
Blood Bowl League of Calgary
http://twitter.com/bloodbowlcgy
@dsavillian on twitter

It's called Blood Bowl, not Fun Bowl
Oxynot
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 4:01 pm
Location: Finland

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by Oxynot »

It boils down to what dsavillian said. Once you've had it happen to you a couple of times, you'll notice how devastating Quick Snap is if you put your players right behind the LOS. That said I could imagine it working against some of the weaker teams without any ST3> and no guard. Then again those teams would probably leave the LOS untouched and run receivers through either or both open WZs.

I'm certain there are plenty of tactically more apt coaches to give a more detailed response though :)

Reason: ''
User avatar
mattgslater
King of Comedy
Posts: 7758
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:18 pm
Location: Far to the west, across the great desert, in the fabled Land of Comedy

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by mattgslater »

It's not just Quick Snap. Yes, there's a 1/9 chance that you'll be sorry for putting guys one square back. This is more than made up for by the 8/9 chance that you'll be able to get one more square of penetration, and that you'll be able to use the d-line in maintaining your net.

With rookies, against a slower opponent who has no Frenzy or Grab, I may move up one square. This is especially true if the guys I'm moving up don't hold out strong points, so I'm not giving up holes in my defense if a QS goes off. Against Frenzy or Grab, it's much riskier. Like a standard Zig vs. Frenzy really needs to be set two squares back, or you'll get stuff like this.

Code: Select all

- - - -|o o - - - - -|- - - -
- - - -|o o o o f o -|- - - -
- - - -|- - x x x - -|- - - -
- - x -|- x - - - x -|- x - -
- x - -|x - - - - - x|- - x -
1
- - - -|o o - - - - -|- - - -
- - - -|o o o • f o -|- - - -
- - - -|- * - x x - -|- - - -
- - x -|- x - - - x -|- x - -
- x - -|x - - - - - x|- - x -
2a
- - - -|o o - - - - -|- - - -
- - - -|o o o • - o -|- - - -
- - - -|- * x f x - -|- - - -
- - x -|- x - - - x -|- x - -
- x - -|x - - - - - x|- - x -
2b
- - - -|o o - - - - -|- - - -
- - - -|o * o • - o -|- - - -
- - - o|- * f - x - -|- - - -
- - x -|- x - - - x -|- x - -
- x - -|x - - - - - x|- - x -
Two blocks on the guy on the line, extra blocks on both the blocked guys if they don't go down, and one hit on the flanker. It's even worse with Grab and Frenzy: you can get two extra hits against you, one on the midfield and one on the safety. Worse, this often sets up a blitz against the safety on the other side, meaning you can't protect any players.

You can also get taken out on the sideline, if you're too shallow. A Frenzy guy can blitz you into position to get knocked out of bounds, especially if he's ST4. In fact, if a Norse or similar Frenzy-heavy team can get the cage going immediately, they can even knock two of your men out of bounds on the first turn of the action, caging up in the vacated WZ and blocking all but one of the defenders on that whole half of the pitch.

Reason: ''
What is Nuffle's view? Through a window, two-by-three. He peers through snake eyes.
What is Nuffle's lawn? Inches, squares, and tackle zones: Reddened blades of grass.
What is Nuffle's tree? Risk its trunk, space the branches. Touchdowns are its fruit.
nick_nameless
Emerging Star
Emerging Star
Posts: 364
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by nick_nameless »

mattgslater wrote:It's not just Quick Snap. Yes, there's a 1/9 chance that you'll be sorry for putting guys one square back. This is somewhat made up for by the 8/9 chance that you'll be able to get one more square of penetration, and that you'll be able to use the d-line in maintaining your net.

With rookies, against a slower opponent who has no Frenzy or Grab, I may move up one square. This is especially true if the guys I'm moving up don't hold out strong points, so I'm not giving up holes in my defense if a QS goes off. Against Frenzy or Grab, it's much riskier. Like a standard Zig vs. Frenzy really needs to be set two squares back, or you'll get stuff like this.

Code: Select all

- - - -|o o - - - - -|- - - -
- - - -|o o o o f o -|- - - -
- - - -|- - x x x - -|- - - -
- - x -|- x - - - x -|- x - -
- x - -|x - - - - - x|- - x -
1
- - - -|o o - - - - -|- - - -
- - - -|o o o • f o -|- - - -
- - - -|- * - x x - -|- - - -
- - x -|- x - - - x -|- x - -
- x - -|x - - - - - x|- - x -
2a
- - - -|o o - - - - -|- - - -
- - - -|o o o • - o -|- - - -
- - - -|- * x f x - -|- - - -
- - x -|- x - - - x -|- x - -
- x - -|x - - - - - x|- - x -
2b
- - - -|o o - - - - -|- - - -
- - - -|o * o • - o -|- - - -
- - - o|- * f - x - -|- - - -
- - x -|- x - - - x -|- x - -
- x - -|x - - - - - x|- - x -
Two blocks on the guy on the line, extra blocks on both the blocked guys if they don't go down, and one hit on the flanker. It's even worse with Grab and Frenzy: you can get two extra hits against you, one on the midfield and one on the safety. Worse, this often sets up a blitz against the safety on the other side, meaning you can't protect any players.

You can also get taken out on the sideline, if you're too shallow. A Frenzy guy can blitz you into position to get knocked out of bounds, especially if he's ST4.
I'm with you. What we are talking about here is situational football. The common defensive set-ups are generally good practice, but they are not a bible that says "don't cheat forward in the right circumstances, etc." That's essentially where I was coming from with this. Do what you can get away with. All over it.

Reason: ''
just1234person
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:46 am

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by just1234person »

It's all about what the other team is likely to do in the situation and what is most useful. I just finished a game versus Lizardmen with my Skaven, and at the last kick-off he only had seven players left (and only four Saurus) while I still had eleven, so you bet I creeped a couple Gutter Runners one step from the line.

Reason: ''
ace_of_jase
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 2:54 pm
Location: Portsmouth, UK

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by ace_of_jase »

Is there a 3d view/setup of the Offset Play as shown earlier in the thread? I dont seem to be able to find one...also what program are those awesome 3d plays produced in.....Sketchup?

Also is there another thread detailing offensive set-ups because some of these do seem to be more offensively orientated?

Reason: ''
nick_nameless
Emerging Star
Emerging Star
Posts: 364
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by nick_nameless »

In the vein of the Ziggurat, has anyone tried to use this formation, and to what success? It seems like it covers a few holes that the Zig leaves in the middle of the field and would force at least a dodge to get through regardless of the number of knockdowns (of course several knock-outs will beat just about any defense)



Edit: Nevermind...I see a hole I didn;t see on the board when I set it up. Carry on.

Reason: ''
User avatar
mattgslater
King of Comedy
Posts: 7758
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:18 pm
Location: Far to the west, across the great desert, in the fabled Land of Comedy

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by mattgslater »

nick_nameless wrote:In the vein of the Ziggurat, has anyone tried to use this formation, and to what success? It seems like it covers a few holes that the Zig leaves in the middle of the field and would force at least a dodge to get through regardless of the number of knockdowns (of course several knock-outs will beat just about any defense)



Edit: Nevermind...I see a hole I didn;t see on the board when I set it up. Carry on.
I cheat up a bit on the interior, but yeah, I use that with my Orcs, who can bring a scary line of scrimmage. I bring the two midfielders (the 2-tech and 3-tech) on each side up a square, so there's not so much of a hole (none, with proper use of Stand Firm), and it usually convinces opponents to go wide.

Reason: ''
What is Nuffle's view? Through a window, two-by-three. He peers through snake eyes.
What is Nuffle's lawn? Inches, squares, and tackle zones: Reddened blades of grass.
What is Nuffle's tree? Risk its trunk, space the branches. Touchdowns are its fruit.
User avatar
besters
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1557
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 7:37 pm
Location: Wandering in East Anglia

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by besters »

I use this a lot with wood elves, the tree looking to hold the centre together.

Reason: ''
swilhelm73
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 750
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:57 pm

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by swilhelm73 »

nick_nameless wrote:In the vein of the Ziggurat, has anyone tried to use this formation, and to what success? It seems like it covers a few holes that the Zig leaves in the middle of the field and would force at least a dodge to get through regardless of the number of knockdowns (of course several knock-outs will beat just about any defense)



Edit: Nevermind...I see a hole I didn;t see on the board when I set it up. Carry on.
The problem with that D, IMO is that you can't protect any players. It is likely the offense will be able to blitz any of them if they choose - but if your concern is coverage not who is getting hit with the blitz it should be fine.

Reason: ''
Taipen
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 10:50 pm

Re: Naming the common defensive setups

Post by Taipen »

play-creator.com is down for some reason and all these setups on page 5 have became of no use. Has somebody collected and compiled all of setups in this topic in one document/topic of sort, in a manner independent of Play Creator utility? I would really appreciated if it had been shared by someone.

Reason: ''
Post Reply