NAF World Headquarters

Rules Questions - Overtime Rules

GriffOberwald69 - Nov 11, 2003 - 08:48 AM
Post subject: Overtime Rules

Please someone can tell me the rules for overtime in semifinal league match ?

Cheers

Griff

jmccubbin - Nov 11, 2003 - 10:01 AM
Post subject:

To my knowledge they are the same as regular season overtime rules.

Random team chosen to recieve

No refresh of re-rolls, but if you had some re-rolls unused from 2nd half, they are still good in OT.

Sudden death, first to score wins.

If no score for 8 turns it's a tie.

Semi-final note: Since you "can't have a tie" in semi-finals
After that it's up to commisioner to determine what to do if score is tied after 8 OT turns. Should have been determined before game started, but since it probably has not, best idea is to continue until someone scores.

Martin - Nov 11, 2003 - 12:24 PM
Post subject:

It's the semi-finals, you play until someone wins. Cool

Could be interesting without any rerolls.

Martin

Dave - Nov 11, 2003 - 03:03 PM
Post subject:

we do:

2x 4 turns overtime, toss for first reciever.
If still a draw, keep on playing till there is a winner.
Any coach may concede the game without penalties. (cuz a dwarf, orc, chaos, etc team may keep his opponent from scoring and then just kill all and score without opposition)

Zombie - Nov 11, 2003 - 03:07 PM
Post subject:

The actual rule for playoffs is 8-turn OTs, roll for receiving team every odd OT and alternate every even OT. First TD wins.

However, an interesting twist that i've added in my league, and that makes OT fairer, is that every kickoff event is automatically a blitz in OT. That way, it's not an obvious advantage for either the receiving or the kicking team.

Puckohue - Nov 11, 2003 - 11:02 PM
Post subject:

The LRB rule is if it's still a draw after 8 turns of OT, the end result is a draw. You'd have to toss a coin or something to decide the winner.

I think most people would rather use one of the suggestions above or something similar though, but those are house rules.

Mordredd - Nov 12, 2003 - 09:13 AM
Post subject:

I just looked this one up.

Quote:

The first team to score wins the match. If neither team scores, then the match is a draw or can be decided by a penalty shoot-out: each coach rolls a D6, high score wins, re-roll ties! Any unused re-rolls add +1 to the D6 score.

Tutenkharnage - Nov 12, 2003 - 10:13 AM
Post subject:

Mordredd has the "official" call. We play standard overtime in my league, with no draws allowed. We've had a good number of games go to OT, and most of them have been very tight affairs!

Zombie - That's an interesting twist! Just out of curiosity, what percentages of coaches have won the coin toss and chosen to kick?

-Chet

Zombie - Nov 12, 2003 - 05:49 PM
Post subject:

I'd like to answer that, but as we only have OT in the playoffs over here, there's not enough data to make statistics.

Actually, i think there's only been one OT since i introduced the rule less than a year ago, and i wasn't there to witness what happened.

I'll tell you one thing though. If i won the toss, i really don't know which way i'd go. It would probably depend on the races and the skills present.

Tutenkharnage - Nov 13, 2003 - 12:04 PM
Post subject:

Zombie69 wrote:

I'd like to answer that, but as we only have OT in the playoffs over here, there's not enough data to make statistics.

I'll tell you one thing though. If i won the toss, i really don't know which way i'd go. It would probably depend on the races and the skills present.

That's what I was thinking. I'm not sure which way I'd go, either. In that sense, it's a good idea.

-Chet

Martin - Nov 13, 2003 - 02:16 PM
Post subject:

I can see using the offical coin toss to decide a regular season tie but it's just wrong to do in the playoffs. It would be like deciding the World Cup on a shoot out (opps they do that don't they). Very Happy

Tutenkharnage - Nov 13, 2003 - 03:08 PM
Post subject:

Martin wrote:

If I'm still tied after 50 turns, I probably want the game to end immediately Wink

Seriously:

* If you had the advantage but couldn't finish off your opponent, you deserve to be at the mercy of the dice.
* Conversely, if you held off your opponent long enough at less than 50/50 odds, you deserve a 50/50 shot to win the game.
* Finally, if the game has basically been a toss-up...well, the coin toss settles the issue much more quickly!

Cheers Smile

-Chet

Zombie - Nov 13, 2003 - 07:29 PM
Post subject:

I still disagree with that. In playoffs, you don't want a hard fought game to be decided by a coin toss! Winning that way would suck more than losing in 3rd OT!

In playoffs, the stakes are too high not to fight 'til the bitter end!

dwarfcoach - Nov 13, 2003 - 07:40 PM
Post subject:

Zombie69 wrote:

I totally agree Twisted Evil

.

I think what Chet was refering to was when it gets 'silly'. You know, if the final game breaks the 3 hour boundry and still no definative answer then you really do have to start thinking
"If it hasn't happened after three hours, if and when it does happend is it really a respectable result as in normal game/ to win the league?

Or, to phrase it in a different way, if I heard that the winner of the entire league took 4 hours to win the final, and he was using Khemri, I would not be impressed with his skill level at all...

Xtreme - Nov 13, 2003 - 11:13 PM
Post subject:

All of our OT games use the auto blitz zombie mentioned and have for several seasons. We all love them games rarely go to a 2nd OT but at the same time it doesnt favor either team.

Quote:

Zombie - That's an interesting twist! Just out of curiosity, what percentages of coaches have won the coin toss and chosen to kick?

In our league about 40% of the time the team that wins the toss chooses to kickoff.

Darkson - Nov 14, 2003 - 08:25 AM
Post subject:

We had a coin toss at the end of normal time, but only because we didn't have time to play any OT. Luckily, none of the play-off games needed to be decided by that method.

If we had the time, I'd keep playing 8 OT turns until someone won, though I like the Blitz idea Zombie mentioned.

Mordredd - Nov 14, 2003 - 10:41 AM
Post subject:

We don't play OT for time reasons as well. So far our knock out stages have been draw free. Chances are we would opt for a replay rather than OT.

With regard to Zombie's blitz thing. I can't really see much advantage to receiving there. I personally would always opt to kick, especially if I had a player with the kick skill available. Balls in the opposition half and I get the first chance to grab it. I reckon my opponent would be on the back foot straight off, defending from the start. I doubt we will be adopting this in our league.

Zombie - Nov 14, 2003 - 08:16 PM
Post subject:

Don't forget, the "receiving" team gets to set up last. Whatever "offense" the kicking team can show, the "receiving" team can react to with its own set up. That's still a big advantage. The chance of you getting through his line, when he knows that the blitz is coming, are very slim. Other than getting the first hits in, there isn't that much of an advantage in kicking. Don't get your hopes up too much on getting your hands on the ball right away.

Puckohue - Nov 15, 2003 - 02:24 AM
Post subject:

Quote:

there isn't that much of an advantage

With my Skaven Gutter Runner turned one-turn-scorer and a player with the kick skill on field there is.

Zombie - Nov 15, 2003 - 02:45 AM
Post subject:

And how is he gonna get through when after seeing you put him on the line, the opponent sets up 3 ST4 guys in front of him? And one of them has tackle and the other one has diving tackle?

I'm telling you, it's a big advantage being able to set up last.

Also, remember that you ain't gonna score in one turn, because the ball hasn't even touched the ground yet by the time you're done playing your turn. Even if your gutter runner does go through my line, he'll be in pretty big trouble all alone out there!

Xtreme - Nov 15, 2003 - 07:12 PM
Post subject:

It doesn't always give you the quick score oppurtunity but puts your team in a much better defensive situation. Getting the jump on the recieving team is a big advantage but not an overwhelming one. I still think even with these rules it is the recieving teams game to lose. With careful coaching and a lil luck you can't fail, but that goes for all things in bloodbowl I supose.

Puckohue - Nov 17, 2003 - 02:24 AM
Post subject:

Zombie69: touché! Wink

Mordredd - Nov 17, 2003 - 07:53 AM
Post subject:

I had not forgotten that the receiving team sets up last. How dumb do you think I am? Wink

I play hitting teams mostly, so my opponent contesting the line usually plays to my strength. Provided that the ball does not end up deep in the oppositions half chances are that I will be sitting on it, or next to it, from turn one. If I were using an agility team then I would have speed and the ability to choose where to punch through to surround the ball.

The fact that I know it will be a blitz means that I can set up to attack anywhere along the line, meaning that my opponent must defend the entire line. So no setting up deep to get the ball because you will be vital players down on the line.

In my league whenever I got a blitz, provided the ball was in reach, I always ended up with the ball, or at least contesting for it. IMO the only advantage in receiving is if there is a touchback.

Zombie - Nov 17, 2003 - 10:45 AM
Post subject:

You still don't grasp the extent of the advantage the receiving team has. Not only do they set up last, but they know it will be a blitz, which is a huge advantage compared to a normal blitz. It means that they usually won't set up offensively at all. Rather, they'll look at your setup, figure out where it is you seem to want to attack, probably put only 3 guys on the line (unless you put only 3 yourself, in which case place 5 guys in front of them to overwhelm them), and generally have a defensive position.

The goal is to make sure that you don't get through the line. Once that is accomplished, they can start thinking about picking up the ball and setting up some kind of offense.

The only real advantage the kicking team gets from an ANNOUNCED blitz, is that it makes it so the receiving team takes longer to set up a decent attack. It doesn't in any way give the ball to the kicking team, unlike what an UNANNOUNCED blitz often does.

Mordredd - Nov 18, 2003 - 07:28 AM
Post subject:

I totally grasp the extent of the advantage that you think the receiving team has. I just don't agree that it is.

As the kicker I know that I will go first. I also decide more or less where the ball goes.

I don't know where the opposition will set up, so I need to set up to attack anywhere along the front line. This means only 3 on the line of scrimmage, and everyone else 1 square back. Whole team nice and central. There is, after all, no need to defend the sidelines quite yet.

The receiver cannot commit himself to left, right, or centre because I am not committed either. If he concentrates his team in the centre, for example, and the ball ends up kicked to the left or right then it's mine for the taking. If he wants to put up 5 guys on the line of scrimmage then he has pretty much set up a flat line defence. Most strength teams can punch through that and most agility teams can dodge through.

Overall it is still going to be a big brawl for control of the football. IMO the important part is whose half the brawl is in. All things being equal, you are much more likely to win if the ball is closer to the endzone that you score in than the one your opponent scores in.

This is almost the same as an automatic perfect defence, except for which half the ball ends up in. So would you rather kick and blitz, or receive against a perfect defence?

Indigo - Nov 18, 2003 - 08:26 AM
Post subject:

Mordredd wrote:

As the kicker I know that I will go first.

Er, the kicker goes second matey Wink

So THAT'S how you beat me Razz

I agree with Zombie on this one. Even with PerfectD, the receiver dictates play and it's only bad luck or coaching that hands that over to the kicker.

Blitz is bad, no doubts about it, but a well planned attack should still not be utterly ruined by a blitz unless the receiving team has already taken a pasting. Just as much as you say "I have not committed myself", when you blitz you DO commit yourself and that can work to the receivers advantage.

Doubleskulls - Nov 18, 2003 - 09:14 AM
Post subject:

Pay attention Indy - they are talking about a free blitz at the start of OT.

Babs - Nov 19, 2003 - 10:55 PM
Post subject:

I have another solution which is fun instead of the 'dice off' which the official rulebook proposed for overtime.

I think it should be faster than _yet_ another (the 4th) half.

So istead we run with the Sudden Death Throw Off.

http://www.geocities.com/blood-bowl/throw-in

I've had some fun with it such as a troll throwing to a goblin (goblin range reductions make trolls the more logical thrower) against a dark elf team and winning.

I reckon that the agility team should have the (slight) advantage after coping with 3 halves against the opposition!

Zombie - Nov 20, 2003 - 02:24 AM
Post subject:

If you do that, it's not fair at all for 2 reasons.

1. One team got to receive in the first OT. You should give the other team the same chance in the second OT.

2. It's way too slanted towards agility teams.

Also, multiple OTs can be fun! They sure are nerve wrecking!

Doubleskulls - Nov 20, 2003 - 02:36 AM
Post subject:

This is just too favourable to AG teams. Reasonable HE teams wont even break sweat.

Tutenkharnage - Nov 20, 2003 - 11:27 AM
Post subject:

I don't particularly care for the rules Babs posted, but to answer that last point: "Reasonable HE teams will never reach a second OT!" Wink

OT is certainly nerve-wracking, but at a certain point, I'd want to call it quits. I've played in only 2 roll-offs ever. The overwhelming majority of games never go that long.

-Chet

AnthonyTBBF - Nov 20, 2003 - 11:45 AM
Post subject:

We use sudden death OT, the game almost always ends in the first OT half.