Necros and the definition of cheese

[Smeborg]

The following is intended as light-hearted riposte to Digger's signature, which says something to do with the Necromantic team being the most cheese-less in the game. I have no dog in the fight, and wish Digger, and all coaches who play with or against the Necro team, well.

Every team has a set of unique characteristics, advantages and disadvantages. Superficially, the Necros have merely average ST, MA and AV, and below average AG. Skill access is decent (all players have GEN access, 4 have AG, 4 have ST), without being exceptional. But they have the following unique advantages:

- Mini-maxed MA (better than any other team). Perhaps their biggest advantage.

- 2 player types each with an unmatched starting set of 3 skills (Wolves and Golems). These skills match the stats of the players very well, and compound their advantage in mini-maxed MA.

- Great resilience (better than any other team) from having average AV of 8 and Regen on all but 2 of the players.

The Necros are a highly popular team in all forms of the game, and rightly so. They play in an exciting and sporting way, and their games are rarely dull. I do not pretend to know a non-subjective definition of cheese. But if we compare a Wolf with a Wardancer (same cost, same aggregate stats, same number of skills), I think we may state with some confidence:

"A neutral observer might well conclude that if a Wardancer represents cheese, so does a Wolf".

All the best. Be nice.

[Digger Goreman]

*Yawn*... spurious at best....

Thanks for playing the game...

Pity I changed my sig before you posted this.... Oh, well....

[Smeborg]

That was a long debate, Digger. All the best.

[JaM]

Even _if_ the wardancer and the wolf are compareable (sp?), there are a 'few' major differences:

WD are better protected from the start (blodge), and the supporting cast of the Elves is way better. All that ag4 makes moving the ball or your players far more easily than the Necro team.
Elves have build-in ball handling and movement. Any elf (dodging away on a 2+ to make sure you dont get hit is quite easy), not just the woodies.

Of course 'we' know all that, but fwiw, Necros are quite challenging to play and need to have skills to be succesfull. Woodies are good-to-go right out of the box. Lower cost rerolls, more movement across the board,... And catchers that move 8+3 if needed.

If however the Necros would also be allowed 4 ghouls instead of 2, that would make a difference. The lack of movement in the Necro team is what makes them playing good, hard. At least for me. Most of the time you only have 4-5 players on the board with movement 6-8, where the elves have 6+ and easy access to difficult places when they make a 2+ dodge to cut corners.

I know it's light-hearted but digger has some points. Making the fleshgolems 110K again for instance is still something I cant understand. At 100K they are not gamebreakers when you look at the rest of the team. it just makes them a tad more easily to replace if needed, adn your starting team is a tad better. Wich should be the case with them.

All the best

JaM

p.s. I dont mind playing Elves with or against.

[JaM]

And another thing: the lack of an apo/Igor can be quite frustrating to undead in general but espescially necro. Why ? Because your 'good' players are 2 max. So losing one of them (whight, wolf, ghoul or golem) will hurt the team quite bad.

[Lunchab1es]

I've heard that Claw is OP, and the wolves have claw. Therefor, Necro are OP.

[MKL]

(...)
I know it's light-hearted but digger has some points. Making the fleshgolems 110K again for instance is still something I cant understand.
(...)

I think even Galak said he was for 100k Golems. Still, the playtesting data for LRB5+exp showed the Necros performing too well (to everyone surprise)

All I can say is that we went with the data we had available to us. The data said it was too good over multiple leagues. We addressed it based on that.

If we had ignored it and they proved to be that good ... I think the same people would be asking why we ignored the data that we had requested.

(citation taken from: viewtopic.php?f=25&t=30370&hilit=gut+feeling&start=15)

The BBRC established to rely on statistical data to not rely on simple "gut feeling". Once set these rules, they had to abide to them, even if they were feeling the data were somewhat “wrong” (I think the same happened to the experimental Khemri with their AV8/Break-Tackle Tomb Guardians ).

I don't like the result, but I understand their (lack of) choice

(Full disclosure: I coach mostly Khemri and Necro )

[spubbbba]

Well I think the change in Necros performance highlights better than anything the danger of making decisions based on a pitifully small and unquantified data sample.

It’s really quite laughable that dropping the cost of golems by 10K changes them from one of the worst to one of the best tier 1 teams. Only topped by Khemri being nerfed into the stone age for being “too good at winning”.

I’d put Necros firmly in the tier 1 also rans along with Humans. They are reasonably competitive at mid-TV (or low TV with a lot of luck or min-maxing) but really struggle at higher TV.

[Digger Goreman]

The data was collected, used and acted on without any qualifications and/or assumptions being acknowledged or posted.... So people, including myself, blindly handed over "data".... No control groups... small data samples cobbled together... lack of rigorous statistical treatment.... Garbage in = garbage out....

Now, that's not slapping criticism or anger..., disappointment and sadness... yes.... Given who/what the controll(ers) of BB fate is/was... the current situation is what we live with....
*****************

JaM made an accurate and succinct analysis of Weres vs Dancers... with the Ag 4 synergies being spot on.... I can only add an analogy that, if a wardancer is a fully loaded cannon, then a Werewolf is a double-open-ended bore replica with an ambiguous trigger in the middle.... Without a lot of help and/or familiarity, I hope you've got the business end of the barrell pointed in the right direction....

Out of the box, a blodger with Ag 4 is nutso superior at the same cost.... Just as a theory bowl exercise, we could do side-by-side comparison:

Dodge to open field: WD twice as well as WW
Offensive Block/Blitz Failure: WD twice as good as WW
Defensive Block/Blitz Failure: WD twice as good as WW
No TZ pickup failure: WD twice as good as WW
Catching Accurate Pass/Handoff: WD twice as good as WW

And those are all immediate and very important aspects of the game.... Backup the receiving wd/ww with the best assistant for passing and handoffs... and you have the immediate and clear reason why Necros don't normally cater to a passing game... and elves do and/or stall around gathering points by unopposed passing in the backfield....

"Twink", according to the WoW dictionary/wiktionary(?) is someone who takes possession of unfair advantages at the start of the game (paraphrased).... Solely for the sake of argument> I suppose that in its purest form of rhetoric, any skill/stat over a baseline of a thrall: 6337, is some form of advantage....

Given the BB rules/environment, a wardancer is magnitudes better than a Werewolf... and my analogy is quite appropo....

Thanks, coaches, for your time and patience....

[Drool_bucket]

I don't often accept the out-of-the-box argument between two players, mostly cause I play League BB and not Tourny BB, and even in tourny BB you often can assign out skills.

So, when comparing WW to WD, which I think is far because they are a few of the 120K players, I take a look at them with 2 or 3 skills attached. I'll even consider a double skill in the mix when comparing player types.

and in the end, the WW is at best, a slightly better player than a WD for only one reason. Claw. The Wardancer is a wonderful tactical player, with Leap and Strip Ball it's options make it a threat and a game changer. But a Frenzy-ing, Block, Claw player also changes the game, but smashing the other team apart.

My standpoint is simple, the WD, the WW, the Bull Centaur and the DE Witch Elf are the three best players in game. And they all do things a little differently and it's hard to compare them to say which is best. I just group them into my Tier One players...

[mattgslater]

Werewolves are awesome. Wardancers are better out of the box, but their ceiling is a lot lower, and they die a lot younger on average.

Wood Elves are a little bit over-powered. The most powerful team in the game, in fact. The margin isn't huge, but it's clear. Necro are just fine, very much on par with the other elves and with Dwarfs (who are a paper-scissors-rock team).

[Daht]

Necros are also much better in sustained leagues than most 1 to 1.1 mil ressurection tourneys. Out of the box necros are mediocre, but once you get block on the weres and golems you get a LOT more than 80k worth of overall team value.. It's also about key use of key players, as the linemen are only good for (tho very good at) clogging up the middle of the field.

[EastCoast]

Necros are popular for a reason, and it isn't because their coaches are gluttons for punishment. It's a fast, versatile roster that performs well in a variety of settings.

Tournament records put them at a top 10 ranking http://naf.doubleskulls.net/lrb6.html

BBManager with over 8,300 matches for the Necros have them at a solid 53% which is right where Wood Elves are, and good enough for 6th overall.

As a neutral observer, I would say that the decision the BBRC made on the Flesh Golems looks like the correct one. Most of what is presented as evidence of a Necromantic team problem is anecdotal at best.

As a side note based on tourneys and BBManager, the cheesiest team would be the Undead. .562 in tourneys, .57 in BBManager.
I'm not really sure why they are always given a free pass, especially when Wood Elves and Dwarves catch so much flak. It's just one of those things I suppose.

[Smeborg]

Debating the relative worth of 2 different players is like debating the length of a piece of string. I think it's the more subtle advantages that make for the Necro's good performance:

- Mini-maxed MA (from 4-8 compared to most sides which are e.g. 4-6 or 6-8).

- Mini-maxed player cost (from 40,000 to 120,000). Cheap Linos are normally better than expensive ones (from a team perspective).

- All that Regen (especially in a league setting).

[mattgslater]

I'm not really sure why [Undead] are always given a free pass

They're not. Remember 100k Mummies with G access, 30k Zombies, and 30k Skels? Lot more nerfin' than any other "basic" team has undergone.