Re: DM: New warriors, help!

From: johnjohn@cco.caltech.edu (John White)

Date: Wed, 27 May 1992 00:39:21 +0000

In article <1992May26.174405.1907@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
umsister@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Sisterson) writes:

>When I last posted, I asked advice about my team (Odin's Guards,
>Stormcrow), and I received a lot of good advice, so I hope all of
>you have your DM'ng caps on.

I seem to have it on a bit too often these days...  :-)

>I was given the following two roll-ups:
>
>#1 :  11-13-11-9-4-12-10

My rule of thumb for designing a warrior for long-term winning is to have a
15 wit and a 13 will, and usually not both.  With this warrior I would make
a "disposable" or DA outright, in hopes of something better.  Making a
disposable is usually something I'd do, only if I'm feeling particularly
worried about my team record.  I probably would DA right away.

If you don't want to, I would look at his strengths: pretty good
con/speed/size.  The weakness is severe lack of will.  I would go striker.
The style emphasizes speed, quickness, and overwhelming your opponent.  It
somewhat deemphasizes attacking ability, instead, trying to overwhelm the
opponent with blows.  Something  like.

16-13-11-9-5-15-15

You'd have the decisiveness, and initiative from speed and deftness, while
getting good-great damage.  You could put down a couple guys...
Use WH-WH and go 10-10-7-Decise in the first minute, backing off slowly.

>#2 :  8-13-18-13-4-6-8.

A size 18 Monster!  I hate big guys!  :-)
This wit on this warrior is better, which speaks well.  Low will again.  How
about a "monster striker?"  Rumor has is that a high size increases decise
and/or init.
9-13-18-17-5-9-13
Use a BS (even though you need 11 st), and run similarly to the other guy.

These are both disposable designs...

>Both have only 4 will!  Strangely enough, everyone in our arena
>has been whinning about bad roll-up's.  Has anybody noticed this
>in any of the other arenas?

This happens EVERYWHERE!  Since you are playing pretty regulary, all I have
to say is:  Get used to crappy rollups!  You have to dig through the rough
to find a gem...

>Anyways, the best I can come up with is
>
>#1 : 11-13-11-15-7-12-15
>#2 : 13-13-18-13-10-6-11
>
>Now, the second one will make a very average basher.  I might
>keep him around for a turn or two, bash a few TP's, and then send
>him to the DA in hopes for a better roll-up.

Something like that.  You're right, he his average.   Too average, I might
venture to say.  You're trying to add points to his bad parts to make him
slightly blah in everything, instead of adding points to his strengths to
make him great in a few things...

I actually like the PR design better.  That guy will learn pretty well,
might start with Ex Riposte (a lot of good that will do), and might do ok.
The problem is that the size is a bit high, I would prefer wit and deftness
to be a bit higher (like 17's).  You might want to try it as a first
excursion into the world of the parry-rip.  Parry for 1-2 minutes (like
2-3-3-P, or something similar) then open up a bit (I like
4-3-3-x(unmodified)).

>On a higher note, my other warriors have been doing ok.  I went
>3-2-2 last turn.  Unfortunatly, the two warriors I killed were
>just greenhorns (a little greener than me), but I geuss I'll take
>what I can get.  My AB (Brother Ryu:11-13-8-15-14-10-13) won his
>fight rather quickly (One hit, the guys was off his feet, another
>and the guy quit).  I'll have to keep an eye or two on my AB.  I
>do not think this other warrior was exaclty high caliber, and
>have a feeling that my AB will not do well in the future turns. I
>geuss I'll have to see.

AB's tend to have trouble whether or not they are good.  With this rollup, I
might have tried something a bit more offensive, like a slasher or
parry-lunge.  As he stands, I would see if you can get as many challenges
against defensive warriors as you can.  He won't have the skills to take on
offensives for a while...   You might get fed up with him.  When you do, DA.
There are better warriors (even better AB's) to be had!  :-)

>My Luger (Demonspawn) went 2-3 in the
>tourney.  Nothing spectacular, and he only picked up 2 skills!

Tourney's are at half learns, experience, and death.  Actually I think they
round down the first two, and round up the last!  My warriors average a
little over 1 skill a turn in tournaments.  You just got unlucky!

>Finally, two things:
>1) I noticed that for a warrior to have normal coordination, you
>   have to have a total of 32 points between your WIT, SPEED, and
>   DEFTNESS.  Has anybody else noticed this?  Has anybody noticed
>   another interesting combinations like the above.  (ie: to get
>   normal strength, you need ....)

Actually, a lot of that kind of thing has been mapped out already.  I seem
to remember that coordination is dependent only on speed and deftness,
though.  I'll try to dig up my old charts...

>2) Have you ever noticed that in fights where the other guy has
>   fallen down, and is still down, but then kneels, conceding
>   defeat?  Does this make sense?  I think not!  How can a
>   warrior who is laying on his back, all of the sudden get up on
>   his knees to surrender?  I think RSI should change this saying
>   to something else when the warrior has already fallen, or is
>   already  kneeling.

Maybe.  I think I would prefer to see some innovative changes first.  I
mean, that is annoying and kind of funny (even better is when you make a
bare-handed upper-cut, and hit someone on the hamstring...), but that's
about it.  If they introduced new weapons, new styles, new kinds of
arenas... now that would be _cool._

>I must apoligize if I do not get avidely involved with the
>discutions.  One reason is that I am still seeking enough
>knowledge so that I do not look like a complete idiot, and
>another is that it takes 2 days for any postings to get to my
>university (University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, CANADA).

Why don't you post more questions, and get more knowledge that way?
:-)

>Thanks for you help in advance...
>Casey Sisterson (umsister@ccu.umanitoba.ca)
>Odin's Guards (Stormcrowe 45)

No prob.
--
John White
johnjohn@cco.caltech.edu
|===============================================================|
|                    Reasons to go to Caltech:                  |
|000)  Food?  Sleep?  Reading?  What?  Huh?                     |
|001)  I saw a woman.  Once.  I think.                          |
--
John White
johnjohn@cco.caltech.edu
|===============================================================|
|                    Reasons to go to Caltech:                  |

References

DM: New warriors, help!
umsister@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Sisterson)
Tue, 26 May 1992 17:44:05 +0000