NAF World Headquarters :: View topic - Passing Sequence Poll - Please read and vote for me

NAF World Headquarters

Rules Questions - Passing Sequence Poll - Please read and vote for me - thanks

BloodBowlCommish - Feb 05, 2004 - 09:02 AM
Post subject: Passing Sequence Poll - Please read and vote for me - thanks

Ok, on the topic of the throw sequence, taking emotions out of this, tell me this, either yes or no, not a long winded answer, but a simple yes or no...do you agree with the way the throw sequence currently is:

(1) Declare Pass Action
(2) Measure to Target
(3) Roll to Intercept
(4) Roll to Pass
(5) Roll to Catch

or should it be the following:

(1) Declare Pass Action
(2) Measure to Target
(4) Roll to Pass
(3) Roll to Intercept
(5) Roll to Catch

YES
Although the throw sequence is a game mechanic, it is broken and should be changed as a whoel instead of written off as simply 'house rule it'. By answering yes I admit that the sequence is a game mechanic but does need to be changed instead of house ruled.

NO
The throw sequence is a game mechanice. As such it is broken and you shoudl just deal with it. By answering no I admit that the sequence is broken but I do not care enough to change it. If you want to change it, house rule it and be doen with it.

Neither answer is based on statistics. There is a posibility of -23 modifer to a single pass attempt. This was worked out by someone else, not me, but is based on a single situtation. Situations change. Each roll of the die is a new situation based on luck, not statistics. Dice are never goign to be statistical devices unless you can guarantee that each time they are rolled the hand applies the same force, in teh same direction, and tehy bounce the same way. Just please look at the question and answer based on your individual knowledge. If you want to comemnt further, I am all about listeing to opinions.

Thanks
BloodBowlCommish
aka The Rob Reiner in Diego

mikeyc222 - Feb 05, 2004 - 09:17 AM
Post subject:

yes, i agree with it. leave it the way it is. there is absolutely NOTHING "broken" with it.

Mordredd - Feb 05, 2004 - 11:36 AM
Post subject:

1) Keep it the way it is.

2) Your paragraph starting "Neither answer is based on statistics" is total rubbish.

3) The way you have phrased the question is misleading. The first question you ask, "do you agree with the way the throw sequence currently is", demands a different answer to your poll answers as defined later in the text. Most people wanting to keep things the way they are will instinctively answer yes, thus voting for the wrong answer Florida style.

4) It's not broken.

mikeyc222 - Feb 05, 2004 - 11:56 AM
Post subject:

ok, once again i find that i need to read an entire post before i vote in a poll.

as mordredd pointed out, your openeing question is VERY misleading. and your answers to your question are not only wrong but present the situation as YOU AND YOU ALONE see it. not one person who thinks it's fine the way it is will "admit that the sequence is broken" because it isn't. your perspective comes across as one who didn't get their way and is now going to throw a tantrem and insult the intelligence of those who don't agree with them.

grow up and change one vote from yes to no.

Old_Man_Monkey - Feb 05, 2004 - 11:58 AM
Post subject:

Hey, hey, Mordredd, take it easy on the Florida reference! Smile

First most of us got it right, only a couple of precincts in South Florida blew it! And if the Scrub Prez hadn't had his little brother in the Guv's seat... oh never mind, I don't want to get started!

And I agree - it's not broken!

mikeyc222 - Feb 05, 2004 - 12:16 PM
Post subject:

Old_Man_Monkey wrote:

And I agree - it's not broken!

well then make sure you disagree on the poll...

Rolling Eyes

Tojurub - Feb 05, 2004 - 12:21 PM
Post subject:

I didn't vote just because the way the answers are set I can't agree with any of them.

I don't think it's broken, but I think it just doesn't make sense (see different post). I like the fact that it allows you to get more Interceptions, but that's about it. I can live with the way it is right now, but wouldn't mind if they change it in sequence, but I'm against making it even more difficult if they cahnge it to something where they differentiate accurate and inaccurate passes to be intercepted or not.

Therefore: I sustain!

On a side note:
Taking about Florida...I lived there when it happened...and I had a blast laughing about it......and this year will be the same way with the only difference that they use electronic machines, which don't work 100%

mikeyc222 - Feb 05, 2004 - 12:27 PM
Post subject:

Tojurub wrote:

Therefore: I sustain!

i think you mean abstain...but i digress Mr. Green

i understand that you don't think it makes sense but it doesn't have to. does it actually make sense that orcs and trolls and goblins play football? does it actually make sense that the skill safe throw makes you go, "oh guess what, you didn't actually intercept that pass after all?"
it's a game, not reality. there are lots of things about this game that "don't make sense" but that doesn't stop those things from being fun parts of the game.

Tutenkharnage - Feb 05, 2004 - 01:16 PM
Post subject:

Am I the only one who understood this to be a joke? (A slightly nasty joke, but a joke nonetheless.)

Anyway, I wish to register a complaint! I want an option for "receiver rolls first," since it's obvious that the receiver is always open before you throw the pass Smile

-Chet

mikeyc222 - Feb 05, 2004 - 01:49 PM
Post subject:

how about we just forgo any rolls and passes are automatically accurate, caught, and ran in for a touchdown. Cool

BloodBowlCommish - Feb 05, 2004 - 02:11 PM
Post subject:

yep, chet, it was meant as a joke...see, I have been playign this game for over 10 years, ask a question, and then get told deal with it. Ok, so is that the way change happens? We shoudl all read an entire question before votign on a poll, or is it jsut that the opinions of a few will never be heard, I house rule it myself, jsut curious as to why you all seem to say in one post it is a game mechanic, don't touch it, when if you get down to it, everything in teh LRB is a game mechanic. You need to know it all and use it all to play the game, hence, game mechanic. Rule = mechanic = this = that...

Sorry if this has offended anyone, it isnt a tenper tantrum either...just remember, this is a game, changes will occur, jsut not the one propesed here...

Tutenkharnage - Feb 05, 2004 - 03:14 PM
Post subject:

If this changed, next year's poll would say, "This is silly, everything was fine the way it was before. Do you AGREE with this statement or DISAGREE that this statement is false?" Smile

Zombie - Feb 05, 2004 - 03:54 PM
Post subject:

I refuse to answer this poll because it is too slanted towards one opinion. Write one that's unbiased and i'll put my vote in.

crazylegs - Feb 05, 2004 - 04:08 PM
Post subject:

I'm against changing it, I think it's fine the way it is now... and it's not just a game mechanic. Maybe it's just because I'm from Chicago, but a person throwing a football doesn't have to throw it accurately (or, in the case of certain Chicago QBs, anuwhere near) to the receiver for a defender to make a play on it... The defender makes a play on the passing lane, and goes to where the ball is... if you picture it that way (which is how I always have) then the order is fine:

1) say where your thrower is trying to throw.
2) see if a defender makes a play on the ball
3) if it gets past the defender, see if the throw is accurate enough
to be caught by your WR
4) see if the receiver can hold onto the ball (this only occurs on
a 6+ in Chicago)

Aramil - Feb 05, 2004 - 06:33 PM
Post subject:

In Italy we normally throw the ball and, after seeing if it's a fumble or not, we throw for the interception...

Honestly I was surprised when I saw in Amsterdam that it was different... and it seems a bit silly to me... but these are the rules and I accept it... and in fact in my league we play now follwing the rule.
But I personally prefer th sequence

Just my personal opinion... Smile

MasterOfChaos - Feb 11, 2004 - 02:11 AM
Post subject:

I say it IS broken.

It's more intense to roll your pass and see it as accurate then have it whipped away at the last minute by an un noticed player on the field. Happened to me in the weekend, I rolled a six to complete long pass after an impossible set of manouvres and his intercept roll seemed to go inslow motion.

It won me the game and broke every statistic principle int he book.

Mestari - Feb 12, 2004 - 10:25 AM
Post subject:

Have you already stopped beating your wife?

pfooti - Feb 12, 2004 - 10:55 AM
Post subject:

Umm, first of all, the YES/NO logic reverses itself in your poll question and the description. Specifically you ask

Quote:

do you agree with the way the throw sequence currently is

and list the LRB pass sequence.

But later you say:

Quote:

YES
Although the throw sequence is a game mechanic, it is broken and should be changed as a whoel instead of written off as simply 'house rule it'. By answering yes I admit that the sequence is a game mechanic but does need to be changed instead of house ruled.

Which is sdrawkcaB. Get it straight.

Furthermore, I vote for the excluded middle. The pass sequence is fine as is. It isn't broken, and houseruling it is foolish.

Why? Chet has already addressed this. If you want to change that one bit, you're going the slide down a slippery slope to rewriting passing in general. Why is a bomb more likely to fumble than a quick pass (not counting enemy TZs which make sense)? Shouldn't you wait to determine intercept validity until after you've determined the actual target of an inaccurate pass (it might not pass overhead anymore)? Could the original target now intercept it if it is overthrown? How does that interact with Pass Block? Can you decline to pass block move and wait until you see where the ball goes?

So chill out. Leave it alone. Deal with the real issues, like how WA sucks now, or how there are 4 elf teams and only 1.5 dwarf ones, and 1 skaven. Or how the fumble rules are written to discourage Long Bombs for gameplay reasons, and not fluffy/realism ones.

So I too, abstain. The current pass sequence is not broken. Broken is four position players that start with catch and nerves of steel.

Darkson - Feb 12, 2004 - 02:23 PM
Post subject:

Tutenkharnage wrote:

Am I the only one who understood this to be a joke? (A slightly nasty joke, but a joke nonetheless.)

Personally, after playing a season or so with an AG 2 Fimir team, I think everyone's had it wrong so far.

Passing should always end in an interception for my team unless I decide you've fumbled!

SBG - Feb 13, 2004 - 09:25 AM
Post subject:

Hmmmm... Actually, I didn't get the joke until I saw Chet's comments. Sorry ! But the point is, although I understand game mechanic and all, I think you should:
a) roll for pass;
b) if no fumble, roll for interception;
c) roll for catch.

It's just logic to me: how can you try to catch a ball that isn't in mid-air yet?

Just my 1.5 US cents, or 2 CAN...

Fred

BloodBowlCommish - Feb 13, 2004 - 12:10 PM
Post subject:

i love it when people still see it is a joke, but continue on. I am not sayign that they are wrong to voice their opions. Mine is jsut liek what you said SBG....pass...intercept...catch...but after 10+ years of GW games, logic never plays a role when you open up the game mechanics. Ok, sure, it looks liek it, but unless we all dawn our armor and get out on the pitch it will simply be a game.

House Rules here I come!!!

smeborg - Feb 23, 2004 - 05:14 PM
Post subject:

I have a suggestion, which is:

- Pass and scatter roll(s) should be made BEFORE the intercept attempt. Measure from the passer's square to the landing square.

I feel this would be more realistic, as well as more fun. At the moment it's easy to cover a throw from a low AG player. In a situation where anything but a 6 is a fumble or a scatter, shouldn't the intercept be quite hard to read?

Well, that's just my tuppence worth.

Cheers

Smeborg the Fleshless

garth - Nov 05, 2004 - 09:18 PM
Post subject:

Doens't an accurate pass somehow mean the ball is being thrown to AVOID the other team? I use the rules as written (right now) but I am leaning towards the thinking that only an INACCURATE pass can be intercepted... Previous editions only allowed interceptions, fumbles, or misthrows if the pass was not accuate and complete.

1) state intention to pass, and measure distance
2) roll of pass -- check for fumble
3) if pass is accurate, check for a catch; if pass is NOT accurate, check for interception (or missthrow)

In a REAL football game, the two teams make around 30 complete passes, and at least that number of incomplete passes. There is normally less than three interceptions out of more than 60 pass attempts -- 5% or less. Do we really NEED to have so many interceptions???

Darkson - Nov 06, 2004 - 02:45 AM
Post subject:

garth wrote:

Do we really NEED to have so many interceptions???

How many do you see? I don't see that many. Iirc, in our last season (about 50 games or so) we had 3 interceptions, and no-one had taken Safe Throw.

Melifaxis - Nov 06, 2004 - 02:57 AM
Post subject:

garth wrote:

If you want to talk REAL football, then tell me again why an accurately thrown ball cant be intercepted by a good corner who anticipates where the ball is going?

The rule as it is now does not cause very many interceptions. We have had 2 this entire season in our league and 0 in the preceeding season. Are you putting the -2 modifier on the interception attempts? If you aren't, there's your problem. If you are then I would say you need to be more selective in your pass attempts.

Zombie - Nov 06, 2004 - 10:39 AM
Post subject:

garth wrote:

In a REAL football game, the two teams make around 30 complete passes, and at least that number of incomplete passes. There is normally less than three interceptions out of more than 60 pass attempts -- 5% or less. Do we really NEED to have so many interceptions???

You must be an Argos fan (Michael Bishops anyone?) or maybe a Stampeders fan (they think that Khari Jones is a solution?) if you think that a quarterback normally throws more incomplete than complete passes. Anyone with an average below 50% should be replaced by someone more competent.

If indeed you are an Argos fan, you must be used to a lot of interceptions! Bishops has about twice as many interceptions as TD passes.

garth - Nov 06, 2004 - 11:31 AM
Post subject:

Zombie wrote:

garth wrote:

Ha, ha! No an Ottawa fan. (Remember: Ottawaorc Renegades!)

How ever you slice it, the number of interceptions is BB is too high -- in my very humble opinion!

garth - Nov 06, 2004 - 11:57 AM
Post subject:

Melifaxis wrote:

garth wrote:

If you want to talk REAL football, then tell me again why an accurately thrown ball cant be intercepted by a good corner who anticipates where the ball is going?

Good point. OK, OK, it's fine the way it is. Smile

I am still remember the method for interceptions from previous editions... Rolling Eyes