Yep a new to me subject probably old to you all

Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 1:32 pm

I got a roll up for a team and was playing with the numbers. It would have made an excellent certain style but I chose to take the same numbers down a different path and style. So my question, that I hope gets a lot of response, is: Have any seen a good roll up that you knew should have been a particular style but decided to roll it as something else due to things like, to many of a particular style in the arena or because that style would have an advantage against styles at the time of roll up or any other reason that comes to mind.
If you have what were your reasons and how did that particular warrior fare?

I'm really curious to the types of warriors you thought a roll up should have been v.s. what you decided to make them and how successful that decision was.

Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 5:06 pm

I can't post any specific warriors at the moment, but over the years there have been many that have fit the description you gave. Reasons I have used to legitimize making a rollup something other than what it begs to be may be, in no particular order:

current climate of the low end of the arena. If there's a glut of young aimers loitering about, I ain't makin' it a TP most likely...

a "need" for another style to be made, usually this is for those of us obsessed with graduating our round-robins of all styles from a particular team or arena, whether it be 1st, 2nd, or 3rd rounds.

Sometimes I just have fallen out of love with a certain style, like I was with strikers and lungers for several years, and I refuse to make any more, even if it means fitting the square peg in the round hole and making something less successful but more fun and interesting in my book.

Gradually though I've come back around to the old "Make it what it wants to be" philosophy, and enjoy the successes, because more often than not the warrior that doesn't quite fit the style, doesn't win and/or eventually gets killed or DA'd.

Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:01 pm

I have always wanted to make a quad 17, but had never gotten the rollup. Finally I got it and asked my DM friends what they would do. The obvious options were 17-3-7-17-17-6-17 or 17-3-7-21-17-6-13. All my friends said to go with the 21 WT and forget the quad 17. I went against my heart and went with my friends and made the 21 WT design and the warrior is in ADM. He is nothing special, pretty much mode across the board. to this day I wish I had stuck with my heart and made the quad 17.

Also their have been many times I have received a rollup that would make another good warrior of a style I already have and made it something else.

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:12 am

We have made -
21DF rolls that could/should be aimers into ST.BA, TP
obviously TP scum rolls into PS, WS
big CN, low WL rolls into BA, PL, PR, PS, ST, TP

We do this because:
the unusual choice looks interesting and fun
we already have the more common style on the arena team
we think this odd-ball will confuse and win
who says the conventional is always best

There is a lot to learn, and much fun to be had, by sometimes being "different".

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:02 am

Guilty!

Reasoning: I don't have enough bashers.

Results: Mixed, all over the board.

...
In addition to rolling all sorts of things as bashers (often things that really (REALLY REALLY) weren't intended to be bashers), I regularly make odd style choices. There is nothing wrong with it and it can work just fine. My best example that I can pull up without thinking:
12-13-10-6-16-4-9 -> 17-15-10-6-21-4-11 PR

Most people wouldn't think PR on a setup like this, regardless of how it gets designed. I needed a PR for a round robin, and nothing wrong with using a pure scum setup on a Ripper. It worked out well for me, as it turned out fave learn parry, and is currently 24-10.

This is just one example. I find it a lot of fun to run other styles and have no issues using good (sometimes even great) setups on styles that are not 'optimum.'

- Assur

edit: also recently made 7-3-14-10-17-3-16 -> 7-3-14-15-21-3-21 PR. He hasn't fought yet (I haven't been ready to see him die miserably yet). I'll let you decide for yourself what madness caused me to choose PR with that design. (At the end, it was a close call between L and PR, with PL and AB eliminated earlier)

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:04 am

Quote:

There is a lot to learn, and much fun to be had, by sometimes being "different".

I agree with this statement completely as well as with the "confuse" part. My reasons personally are. I try not to have 2 of the same style on my team at the same point in time unless one is graduating as another comes in and even then by the time I get one to graduation I'm tired of that style for a bit. Or at least until the next available roll up. I also have chose to make something else due to what is in the initiates when my new RU comes into play. It's interesting to hear others opinions and would love to hear more on this.

Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 7:58 pm

Yes, I do sometimes make a good rollup into something it shouldn't be. It's the only way to push the envelope -- you have to buck the conventional wisdom sometimes. For example, I had this guy -- 9-10-8-21-9-14-13, which most everyone would make into a striker, but I made it a WS just to see what would happen. I already got a million 21-9-x-13 strikers anyway. Thought I'd try to make a speed waste. Well, it didn't work. He lost a lot and then died.

Another one: 13-4-5-13-15-13-21. Everyone and his brother makes this an AB, but I made it a WS, caving to my inner skill-whore. It got the highest skill base of any non-DYO I've ever had.....and died on its 3rd fight.

I've got some other oddballs that the jury is still out on.

Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:09 am

Here are some of my oddball examples:

9-10-9-17-17-5-17 TP, still going strong in ADM
9-3-9-17-13-12-21 SL retired in Primus, lots of TVs
12-4-6-17-15-9-21 PR dead of course
17-5-3-21-15-10-13 BA in Primus

Advanced Master Poster Joined: Apr 11, 2011 Posts: 309

One of my favorite warriors to play should have been rolled a tank lunger, but made it a TP.

11-15-8-17-17-5-11 nothing great, but I love it.

Khorvinus

Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 2:50 pm

I can give an actual example that just came to me today. My team consists of 2 STs and a WS; I have a 3-13-13-6-10-12-13 replacement from last turn that will probably become a 17 DF 11 WT AB. So when Two-Buck Chuck, the mongrel, slain my 15-15-x-21 AB (Black Widow) I got this RU: 4-13-13-15-10-9-6 . I don't want a third ST, as this is my only active team, so I am likely to make it a 7-13-13-21-10-9-11 PS. Since I've only graduated one PS (1 PL and NO PRs) it's time to bite the bullet and use a fairly well set up, for the style(s), P-something. I don't like the likely lower damage rating so PR is probably out, though it would complete my first "All 10 styles Round Robin" graduated if it did, the endurance isn't what I'd like for a PL without bumping WL to 15 and sacrificing the 11 DF. So PS it likely is, unless someone wants to PM me and talk me into another non-ST style Laughing

All this said and done, this guy is a much better ST than any other style but I'm not going to make it such. What better way to play with one of your "off-styles" than with a 21 WT!

Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 2:55 pm

Visionst01 wrote:

I have always wanted to make a quad 17, but had never gotten the rollup. Finally I got it and asked my DM friends what they would do. The obvious options were 17-3-7-17-17-6-17 or 17-3-7-21-17-6-13. All my friends said to go with the 21 WT and forget the quad 17. I went against my heart and went with my friends and made the 21 WT design and the warrior is in ADM. He is nothing special, pretty much mode across the board. to this day I wish I had stuck with my heart and made the quad 17.

Also their have been many times I have received a rollup that would make another good warrior of a style I already have and made it something else.

And you still call them "friends" after steering you down the long-and-winding-road? You are truly a fair and forgiving man Laughing

Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 2:58 pm

Assurnasirbanipal wrote:

Guilty!

Reasoning: I don't have enough bashers.

Results: Mixed, all over the board.

...
In addition to rolling all sorts of things as bashers (often things that really (REALLY REALLY) weren't intended to be bashers), I regularly make odd style choices. There is nothing wrong with it and it can work just fine. My best example that I can pull up without thinking:
12-13-10-6-16-4-9 -> 17-15-10-6-21-4-11 PR

Most people wouldn't think PR on a setup like this, regardless of how it gets designed. I needed a PR for a round robin, and nothing wrong with using a pure scum setup on a Ripper. It worked out well for me, as it turned out fave learn parry, and is currently 24-10.

This is just one example. I find it a lot of fun to run other styles and have no issues using good (sometimes even great) setups on styles that are not 'optimum.'

- Assur

edit: also recently made 7-3-14-10-17-3-16 -> 7-3-14-15-21-3-21 PR. He hasn't fought yet (I haven't been ready to see him die miserably yet). I'll let you decide for yourself what madness caused me to choose PR with that design. (At the end, it was a close call between L and PR, with PL and AB eliminated earlier)

You are truly our community's "Mad Scientist" Assur!