BBMag #6 and 2003 Annual...

Malthor · Post by **Malthor** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 9:27 pm

Christer, I take it they have also increased the cost of Werewolves to 120K?

Any other changes to the Allied teams? Can Chaos Pact still take 3 Big Guys?

Thanks

christer · Post by **christer** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 10:11 pm

Yes, wolves cost 120k now, just like the golems.

And I couldn't find any other changes to the allied teams. Just the 0-2 instead of 0-4 thing and the lack of elves.

-- Christer

Redfang · Post by **Redfang** » Tue Apr 08, 2003 11:27 am

I just got my BBMag6, a few remarks:

- The paintjob on those Ogres: WOW, the damaged armour, the blood, the mud, really fantastic. One of the best paint jobs I've seen up til now.
- About the match report: Good idea, I like that kind of stuff, but did they tell the Norse guy to loose or what? Playing against OGRES, you set up first and then he sets up 5 players on the front line ready to get smashed instead of 3????????? Why would he ever do that???
- I like the strategy article. It's not an orignal idea, but it's a good one.

R

darthnoir · Post by **darthnoir** » Tue Apr 08, 2003 8:34 pm

Did the Secret Weapons article make it into the 2003 Annual? If so, were there any changes or additions?

Post by **Dave** » Tue Apr 08, 2003 10:00 pm

Redfang.

The tactics article is a nice idea but kinda crap. I'd never play my flings this way.

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 12:08 am

They admitted the tactics article was written for 3rd ed, and shouldn't have been printed. Galak and some others should be/are writing an upto date one I believe.

And I think the Norse coach was either told to lose, or been smoking something.

christer · Post by **christer** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 1:11 am

Yes, secret weapon article is in there. I have _no_ clue if they have changed or not as I haven't read the original article. Also, I haven't read the article all that closely in the Annual either. Just scanned it very briefly.

-- Christer

Redfang · Post by **Redfang** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 7:44 am

Dave wrote:Redfang.

The tactics article is a nice idea but kinda crap. I'd never play my flings this way.

I meant that I liked the idea, I never really considered what was written in it, though

R

Post by **Dave** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 5:29 pm

Post by **Dave** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 5:30 pm

Milo · Post by **Milo** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 8:21 pm

Dave wrote:Redfang.

The tactics article is a nice idea but kinda crap. I'd never play my flings this way.

We actually have quite a quality Halfling coach in our league. I think his team is currently 5-7-4 overall, and ended the last season 5-4-3 -- a winning record and good enough to earn the sixth seed in their conference tourney. They don't have a dirty player, yet still manage to be one of the most lethal teams in the league. They've managed to cause 12 casualties in the first two games of the season (while only suffering 7.)

You can check out his team here: http://www.chubbleague.com/chubb/default.asp?p=tm&t=rev

veron · Post by **veron** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 9:15 pm

Milo wrote:They don't have a dirty player, yet still manage to be one of the most lethal teams in the league.

Umm, what? Are all the other teams completely clueless what they are doing or does the Fling coach roll only 6s? What the heck is going on in your league?!

Milo · Post by **Milo** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 11:16 pm

It may simply be that he's preternaturally lucky. It may also have something to do with the fact that he happily throws his Halflings willy-nilly in the face of danger. Hard to say. Whatever the cause, I think it's safe to say he's the closest to mastering the Halflings of any coach I've met.

We played recently, and despite me giving him about 40 points of TR, he still caused five casualties to me, only two of which were by the Tree, I think. I don't consider myself an inexperienced coach.

Milo