Talk Fantasy Football

Background: I'm perfecting my "options" rules for team construction in my league. Basically, teams with Big Guys lose them (except Undead), as do many teams with Secret Weapons. Teams with none of the above lose two positionals, so that the team's basic roster is similar to its 3rd-ed counterpart, or missing something from its LRB5 version, as appropriate. Then, each team gets an Option, including the removed player(s) to get to the LRB5 roster, or something else that might or might not be tempting. This way, teams can basically build their LRB5 roster, but get a little variety too.

That works nicely with most teams, including High, Wood and Pro Elves: HE and PE lose two Catchers and get them back as options; High Elves can take extra Blitzers instead (yeah, this kind of screws Pro Elves, but I'm the only PE coach here, so c'est la vie). Wood Elves go to 0-2 Catchers and no Tree, and then have 1-2 Catchers or a Tree as options (a very slight nerf, but Woodies are a tad overpowered).

The problem is Dark Elves.

Really, the problem is with the DE roster. The LRB5 solution is that DE have two too many positionals, so two of them suck and the problem is solved. I don't like that.

So here's my proposal:
0-16 Linos
0-2 Runners
0-2 Corsairs (Blitzers)
0-2 Witch Elves
50k RR

Options (pick one)
0-2 Corsairs (Blitzers)
0-2 Assassins: 7/3/4/7 Shadowing, Stab GA 100k*
0-2 Executioners: 5/3/4/9 Block GAS 100k**
Plus Star Players

* I've been toying with the idea of giving 1 SPP for a Stab/SW/DP casualty. If I do, I can nerf Stab (chance of ejection?) or I can let this guy get better (100k is pricey enough to absorb the improvement).

** I could go to 90k on this guy, which would be a good on-paper deal. But I think an S-access AV9 player should come at a premium on an elf team. I could go to 90k more easily if I tie SPP to Stab and don't nerf it, as he would have to compete with an improved Assassin. Or maybe not?

I've done it well if it seems like:

a) A well-balanced team, maybe with a slight improvement, as Big Guys will be better and DE don't get any.

b) At least as much fun as the current DE team.

c) Not broken in any obvious way (no too-good players, for instance).

Advice? Further ideas? Warnings?

Hmmm... no bites. Let me rephrase:

Alternate DE Roster #1
0-16 Linos
0-2 Runners
0-2 WEs
0-2 Blitzers
0-2 Assassins @ MA7, 100k (remember, +MA plays into Shadowing).

Alternate DE Roster #2
0-16 Linos
0-2 Runners
0-2 WEs
0-2 Blitzers
0-2 Executioners @ 5/3/4/9 Block, 100k, GAS access.

Are both of these slightly better than the current roster? If not, are they way better, equal, or worse? Are any of those new/mod players broken? Did I really need to up-cost the Executioner for S access? If not, then does it make more sense at 90k? Or do you look at this all and shake your head?

Part of my problem is that the LRB5 Assassin is very second-rate and DE are the only elf team with 10 positionals. To combine those Assassins in with Blitzers means bumping their MA up, which would seriously enhance their value as well because of its synergy with the Shadowing skill. That's what I'm really trying to get to.

I like it, although WFB names make me squirm.

I'd offer the options as 0-1 for some, 0-2 others. 0-2 WEs is a no-brainer compared to 0-2 Runners.

I'd offer a kicker option for all teams (Lino with Kick & HMP).

Oops. Let me clarify, Joe. I'm not trying to do anything as radical as what I think you're thinking.

Every DE team gets 0-2 Runners, 0-2 Witches and 0-2 Blitzers. You then get to pick one extra positional: 0-2 more Blitzers, 0-2 buffed Assassins, or 0-2 Executioners. So you don't have to decide whether to be able to have Runners or Witches; rather, you get the underpinnings of a DE team and a few choices on where exactly to go with it.

Maybe I should make it 0-2 players from that list, so you can mix-and-match? I don't like that, as it requires team-specific rules. Not sure what to do. It looks a touch weak, perhaps.

mattgslater wrote:Every DE team gets 0-2 Runners, 0-2 Witches and 0-2 Blitzers. You then get to pick one extra positional: 0-2 more Blitzers, 0-2 buffed Assassins, or 0-2 Executioners. So you don't have to decide whether to be able to have Runners or Witches; rather, you get the underpinnings of a DE team and a few choices on where exactly to go with it.

Yeah, I get it. But who wants 4 Runners? Most coaches barely want one! I've not seen many DE even use the allowance for 2. On the other hand, 4 WEs would be very nice thankyou. etc.

You seem still to be missing it actually. That or you're yanking my chain. Or you're providing another explanation for why I didn't leave those players available as options. I'll try to rephrase in case it's the first one.

Runners and Witches are not available as options. Every Dark Elf team gets 0-2 of each, just like in LRB5, plus 0-16 linos and 0-2 Blitzers. It's only the 3rd and 4th Blitzers you can swap out, and only for the improved Assassins or the Executioners/elvish blockers. Runners and Witches are absolutely unchanged in number: 0-2 if you please, 0-2 if you don't please. Options don't come into play for those guys, for exactly the reasons you're mentioning.

The real questions are:

A) If the Assassin position vanished into thin air, would any reasonable coach simply shrug his shoulders and go on playing without them?

B) If you added +MA and +10k to the Assassin's profile and made Blitzers 0-2, would it buff the team, nerf the team, or leave it where it is? What if you made Stab casualties worth 1SPP?

C) If you made Blitzers 0-2, but added in 0-2 5/3/4/9 Block GAS 100k players, would it buff the team, nerf the team, or leave it where it is?

If some people are totally down on one of those but others like it, then unless it's a major balance issue I've done a good job with it.

Matt,

Given your system, I think this is the right way to go, drop the assassins and keep them as an option. I don't necessarily agree the +MA is that great, but it certainly improves the piece. If it were me, I'd probably make the runners the optional piece...

The only problem I have is the Executioner and the Assassin. Is this a Blood Bowl team? Why not use the name "Blocker" for the Executioner? It's not like any part of his stat profile (Which I like, by the way) invokes images of an executioner.

If these options were available in my league, I'd choose the Executioners option, by the way.

I could use "Blocker," I guess, in lieu of "Executioner." Is the concept broken?

The major reason behind MA7 on the Assassin is that I want the team to be able to have two Assassins and six MA7 players. If it would be wiser, I could drop it to 6 in favor of Leap, like Horkon Heartripper. Opinions on Leap vs. MA7 on this player?

mattgslater wrote:I could use "Blocker," I guess, in lieu of "Executioner." Is the concept broken?

The major reason behind MA7 on the Assassin is that I want the team to be able to have two Assassins and six MA7 players. If it would be wiser, I could drop it to 6 in favor of Leap, like Horkon Heartripper. Opinions on Leap vs. MA7 on this player?

I like Leap over MA7. Also, the Blocker or Executioner is surely not broken if Strength Access is removed, and I think with Strength access, they are still OK. STR 4 would be a no no, but 0-2 strength access players is no big deal, in my mind. Especially at the cost of 2 blitzers and both assassins from the current LRB...

OK. I can go Leap: Leap combos very well. That sounds like a fun profile, but it also kind of feels like something you want to earn. I would say something about it being dangerous to have Leap and Frenzy starting on the same roster, but at these prices and at the cost of an Option I don't think it's such a huge issue.

6/3/4/7 Leap, Shadowing, Stab GA 100k vs. 7/3/4/7 Shadowing, Stab GA 100k. I like both. Other opinions? Remember, they now come at the expense of two MA7 players, leaving you with up to 6 more (2 Witches, 2 Blitzers, 2 Runners).

Now, is the Executioner/Blocker concept done right? I think for the player designed, "Blocker" sounds better, as he's not any better at executing people than is a Longbeard. Maybe some kind of fix to make him nastier would be good: MB is too much....

S access is the whole reason for the player: otherwise I'd be looking at a different kind of reworking. Somebody was saying they like the concept of armored, S-access elves, but didn't know how to apply it, and I think this would be a good place. Am I right to add 10k to the effective pricetag (as I have, so they're 100k instead of 90k) to give them S access, or should I give them a weak-but-fluffy skill as well?

Oooh... Here's an "Executioner" for you:

5/3/4/9 Block, Piling On GAS 110k

110k and Piling On? Yeah, that's living on the edge. It's also very Dark Elf. OTOH, he is AV9 and can take Guard on a normal roll.

Here's an alternative that's cheaper, but starts out set back a top-pick skill and reduces the team's overall Block access as well as move.

5/3/4/9 Piling On GAS 90k

Piling On instead of Block means I can absolutely price them at 90k without fear. Piling On with Block makes me very comfortable about 110k. Either way, I like it in theory. This guy is definitely an Executioner. Thumbs up or down?

If I can bring myself to go mix/match, I think this would produce good balance: 0-16 linos, 0-2 Runners, 0-2 Blitzers, 0-2 Witches, 0-2 (choice of Assassins, Blitzers, Executioners, or one each of two). I'm hesitant to do this, but I'm beginning to see in my head how to make it concise.

5 3 4 9 Piling On is very good and very Dark Elf I'd still make him 100k.

Or give him Dirty Player. At 100k, Dirty Player is still a tax more than a benefit. Considering the easy Access to Sneaky Git, maybe it's too good. Jump-Up really combos well with Piling On, so either way there is good synergy with the skill choices.

Dirty Player and Piling On is probably too much though. It's interesting though, as it makes Mighty Blow, Sneaky Git, and Jump so interesting... and all on a pirce without Block or Dodge or Wrestle.

I like the Leap Assasin best. That's an interesting piece.

With your recent change, I'd probably take two of each player and leave out the runner. Maybe that's the best way to solve the Dark Elf issue anyway (too many positionals) eliminate the runner.

Jural wrote:5 3 4 9 Piling On is very good and very Dark Elf I'd still make him 100k.

If others agree, I'll keep Block on him and go the 110k route, as he does cancel out two of your Blitzers.

Or give him Dirty Player. At 100k, Dirty Player is still a tax more than a benefit. Considering the easy Access to Sneaky Git, maybe it's too good. Jump-Up really combos well with Piling On, so either way there is good synergy with the skill choices.

Dirty Player and Piling On is probably too much though. It's interesting though, as it makes Mighty Blow, Sneaky Git, and Jump so interesting... and all on a pirce without Block or Dodge or Wrestle.

I completely agree with this analysis, which is why I'm not doing it.

I like the Leap Assasin best. That's an interesting piece.

It does look like it'll be fun.

With your recent change, I'd probably take two of each player and leave out the runner.[/quote]
Not on the table. Your Runners, Witches and the first two Blitzers are on the base roster and can't be traded out. The only thing you can give up is the last 2 Blitzers, for Assassins or Executioners, so you'd be capped at one of each (or either plus a third Blitzer) or two of any one under the mix-and-match rules.

Maybe that's the best way to solve the Dark Elf issue anyway (too many positionals) eliminate the runner.

That's another option. 0-4 Blitzers, 0-2 Witches, and your choice of 2 from improved Runners (say, 100k with NoS or 90k with Sneaky Git), Executioners or Assassins. I think I like the 0-2s across the board.

I think the original concept is pretty good. 0-2 Executioneers 5 3 4 9 GAS in a league where other teams are also getting similiar options could work. I don't think 2 players with S access makes it broken. I wouldn't give him DP or PO. Leave it at block. I think 100k is a decent price for him. I'd even pay 110K for him. And if you're giving up 2 blitzers in order to take 2 Executioners, its a good deal. (And please, please, talk to Galak, I really, really want one on my team. )

As for the Assassin. I think the 7 movement unbreaks the Assassin. Shadowing is kind of useless at six. And for stab, why not make the casualties caused just regular casualties, but if he rolls doubles, he's ejected (nerfs it toward Dirty Player, as it should be). If Assassins get Cas points for stab and the 7 MA, I'd leave them at 100K. I'd leave off the Leap, though. Improved MA for Shadowing and CAS points for Stab is enough. That would be a pretty good player, even with the chance of ejection for using stab.

whitetiger wrote: That would be a pretty good player, even with the chance of ejection for using stab.

If you were ejected on doubles, here would be the breakdown for stab

Chance of ejection: 1/6= 16.7%

Chance of KOing or better AV 7: 17.4%

Chance of KOing or better AV 8: 11.5%

Chance of KOing or better AV 9: 6.9%

So if you stabbed an AV 9 player, you'd leave the pitch 2.4X as often as he would!

It's the same for fouling, but of course you can get enough assists to really push the odds to your favor.

I was thinking about just having ejections on doubles on injury rolls for that reason (that is, not on armor rolls). That way, if you get Cas points for Stab casualties, your chance of ejection always = your chance of SPP.

I'm also one of those guys who misses Argue the Call, so I'm thinking about mechanics that make ejection not the last word. Right now, I'm experimenting with making Bribes into a card deck (26 cards; 20 function in Bribe-like manner and 6 do other things to represent failed checks with compensation), so you can take essentially a less-reliable Bribe with your one free card draw if you're the overdog. That would balance out the risk of Stab ejection nicely, so Stab becomes an effective SPP-draw mechanism with a reasonable drawback.