gdnerd
Junior Strategist
Posts: 656 
|
Post by gdnerd on Feb 15, 2018 9:00:38 GMT
Dominate For Two is proud to present an hour on playing for the long game, the 7 turn grind, by comparing and contrasting Chris Dancock's and my takes on Madrak1 and our experience at LVO. Even if you aren't playing Madrak specifically, I think it provides some very interesting insights into how you can play Band of Heroes and Storm of the North. museonminis.com/dominate-for-two-playing-for-the-long-game/ |
|
|
|
Post by danks on Feb 15, 2018 17:01:04 GMT
Really enjoyed being on the cast with you and having the opportunity to go over our very different thoughts on Madrak and the long game. I hope others can glean at least something from our ramblings  |
|
gdnerd
Junior Strategist
Posts: 656
|
Post by gdnerd on Feb 15, 2018 17:29:18 GMT
When I was wrapping editing last night I had a brilliant follow-up question I wanted to ask but now that I've slept on it, I forgot totally haha. Thanks for coming on!
|
|
mattmcd
Junior Strategist
Posts: 521
|
Post by mattmcd on Feb 15, 2018 17:29:20 GMT
I’ve listened to the first half already. This week’s combined with last week’s episode (as well as your LVO overview thread you posted) really has me considering my play style. I’m in that “year one” timeframe and gotta get faster while figuring out what I am good at (which with my quick math understanding and year of playing POD has thus far been attrition).
I’m definitely interested to see if I can play into scenario better while playing faster as I prep for my first tournaments.
|
|
gdnerd
Junior Strategist
Posts: 656
|
Post by gdnerd on Feb 15, 2018 18:12:26 GMT
I'm glad to hear that you're getting value out of the podcast! My #1 goal in making content on Dominate For Two is to help people think about and frame the game to make for better play.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trollock on Feb 15, 2018 19:29:25 GMT
Interesting stuff. I find myself firmly in the same camp as danks. I always play for the long game and i will not go for assassinations unless i have to. As an example, back in mk2 i had a game where morvahna 2 was on 1 HP and knocked down (he had triggered heroes tragedy, the fool!) and camping 1. The only thing i had that could get to him was Grissel 2 with shooting (3 shots at POW 14) and i seriously debated NOT going for the kill. That is WAY too conservative. Now im not quite as hesitant, but i never wanna go for an assassination unless im losing. Im counting on being the better player and making better decisions on average. The more decisions we both make, the more my advantage should grow, right? When up against a player i know is better than me, i tend to be WAY more bold. Most wins i have against WTC players have come from assassinations. I do not dare go for the long game against those guys lol. Anyway, my games seem to be at least 1.5 hours long no matter what caster/list i play. I guess that is an example of play style. If im ahead i just focus on getting more ahead rather than ending it quickly |
|
gdnerd
Junior Strategist
Posts: 656
|
Post by gdnerd on Feb 15, 2018 22:11:13 GMT
I think for any troll player who is playing a grindier shell there's always a struggle to strike the right balance. I feel at the moment a need to flex my more conservative slow play muscles but I still have kept a bit of my alpha strike flavor in my Madrak list.
In my opinion, feeling comfortable with what your playing is one of the most important factors for success. My opponents at LVO had insights and angles into the matchup that emphasized things I wasn't good at and leveraged that to close victories in the two matches I lost. Now that I've recognized that, it's really galvanized me to practice different elements of what I can do and hopefully grow as a player to keep up with what Trolls now do.
|
|
|
|
Post by zwergenkrieger on Feb 16, 2018 10:43:15 GMT
Great podcast. Though I´m not a Troll player I think I could get some new ideas on how to run my Posse Spam lists more successfully. Like it!
|
|
|
|
Post by allinontrolls on Feb 16, 2018 15:49:42 GMT
I really like ur podcast and the analyze of the list. A part I was missing would be which good and bad matchups this gamestyle presents.
|
|
gdnerd
Junior Strategist
Posts: 656
|
Post by gdnerd on Feb 16, 2018 18:25:22 GMT
I really like ur podcast and the analyze of the list. A part I was missing would be which good and bad matchups this gamestyle presents. IMO it depends on the lists / rules interactions. Does your opponent out threat you in melee? Do they have a significant ranged presence? Can they dismantle your offensive tech / threaten to assassinate your warlock/warcaster? A lot of those come down to what your list is and what their list is. |
|
|
|
Post by allinontrolls on Feb 16, 2018 18:29:19 GMT
let's assume we are going to play the Madrak1 BOH version with Kriel Warriors. I think almost every list is going to out threat you in melee. But like said in the podcast this list is build to get alphaed. So which lists does this madrak1 list do not wanna play against.
|
|
gdnerd
Junior Strategist
Posts: 656
|
Post by gdnerd on Feb 16, 2018 19:37:58 GMT
I'll let danks go into more detail with this as I really don't like playing matchups where I have to take it on the chin. I think his flavor doesn't particularly like Bret's Maelok list - he played it really well but if Maelok gets to define the line of scrimmage it's a long and painful slog. Anything that can reliably chew through 16/18 in melee would also be a problem. Cephalyx can rip apart the champs with ET feat and TK. Nemo would be a nightmare, especially because Sanguine Bond doesn't work on the bounces. Synergy casters could be a problem if you're slow enough to let them set up a big turn where they crank to the point where stone + even ground doesn't matter. Cloud Wall lists that have the capacity to triage down your stuff could also be a problem. Again, I can't speak definitively on any of these without playing the matchup but that would be at first look. |
|
