NAF World Headquarters
Rules Questions - Blitzing
unholyjeti - Jan 30, 2006 - 09:40 PM
Post subject: Blitzing
Have a question about blitzing for the newest rule updates. I've always played that when you blitz, and you start off next to the person and let's say that you roll block and you both have block then you would have to dodge then as a blitz needs movement to be a Blitz? However in the new group i play in, they say that you can declare it a blitz, but if that situation happens, you don't have to move, you just end your turn?
Paul - Jan 30, 2006 - 10:06 PM
Post subject: Re: Blitzing
Yea, you don't have to move after a biltz. So, if you roll a both-down after you declared the blitz, and don't feel that its worth risking the dodge roll, you don't have to move. It does use your blitz for the turn though, since you called a blitz.
AK_Dave - Feb 08, 2006 - 04:52 PM
Post subject:
You don't have to move even if you declare a Blitz, but it does burn your one Blitz. So you declare the blitz, always done before moving the model or rolling dice, and you get a "bounce" (both have block). Nothing happens. It isn't a turnover. You can, at that point, stop moving that model and go onto a different model. That ends that model's turn. You don't HAVE to try to keep moving, dodge out, trip, break armor, kill yourself, drop the ball, and cause a turnover (don't look at me like that!). Thats purely optional.
antipixi - Feb 09, 2006 - 03:05 AM
Post subject:
Likewise you don't HAVE to do a block as part of a Blitz action. Many people use movement blitzes to keep wild animals moving. Especially if by some accident they have ended up with the ball.
So on a blitz action you can move AND/OR block as opposed to only haviing the option of one of the two, but you do not have to de both. (Or in fact either, but that would be dumb!)
Spazzfist - Feb 09, 2006 - 07:17 AM
Post subject:
antipixi wrote:
Likewise you don't HAVE to do a block as part of a Blitz action. Many people use movement blitzes to keep wild animals moving. Especially if by some accident they have ended up with the ball.
So on a blitz action you can move AND/OR block as opposed to only haviing the option of one of the two, but you do not have to de both. (Or in fact either, but that would be dumb!)
I don't have the rulebook in front of me, but if this is in fact legal it is a serious bending of the rules in my opinion. Especially if you are doing it to keep a ball-carrying wild animal moving. 
Igor_Tahavanale - Feb 09, 2006 - 11:32 AM
Post subject:
It is a massive bending of the rules... but Blitz says may make a block during the move, doesn't say must. 'Tis a rules fudge 
, but technically its legal unless someone shoves it in a FAQ that it isn't.
Obviously I'd never stoop so low as to have ever used this one... well, more than once anyway 
look the guy was a rules lawyer, 'twas a joy to see him beaten at his own game! 
should also point out that I was not scoring with the wild animal, just moving a block/claw minotaur in to position on his best player.....
Spazzfist - Feb 09, 2006 - 12:00 PM
Post subject:
Igor_Tahavanale wrote:
It is a massive bending of the rules... but Blitz says may make a block during the move, doesn't say must.
Then this is probably a misreading of grammar. I would have to re-read the rules to be sure. But when it says may it is not always a choice. It simply means that you can, when circumstances would sometimes say that you cannot.
Spazz
Paul - Feb 09, 2006 - 12:11 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
Blitz: The player may move a number of squares equal to their
Movement Allowance. He may make one block during the move.
The block may be made at any point during the move, and
???costs??? one square of movement.
right below it is the rules on passing...
Quote:
Pass: The player may move a number of squares equal to his
MA. At the end of the move the player may pass the ball.
We all know that you do not have to actually pass the ball when you declare a pass action, so, by that logic, you do not have to throw a block when you declare a blitz action.
AnthonyTBBF - Feb 09, 2006 - 12:13 PM
Post subject:
You don't have to move at all during a Blitz. It's been that way since the dawn of time.
Spazzfist - Feb 09, 2006 - 01:04 PM
Post subject:
AnthonyTBBF wrote:
You don't have to move at all during a Blitz. It's been that way since the dawn of time.
That point is not in question, it is whether or not you actually have to hit. Especially as it pertains to declaring a blitz with a wild animal just so you can move it (but have no intention of hitting).
Spazzfist - Feb 09, 2006 - 01:09 PM
Post subject:
Paul wrote:
We all know that you do not have to actually pass the ball when you declare a pass action, so, by that logic, you do not have to throw a block when you declare a blitz action.
I disagree. If you refer back to what I had said before, "may" can be used to say that is now allowable, whereas in some circumstances it may not be.
A pass is a pass hether you move or not. A block can only be a block if you do not move, if you move it is a blitz. The point of calling the blitz is stating your intention to move and hit or hit and move (or any combination of moving and hitting). Therefore in a blitz you "may" lay a block at any point in your move, because in normal block or move circumstances you could not.
I would think that anyone trying to get around this rule by highlighting the "may" in their rulebook, deserves a serious smack in the head.
AK_Dave - Feb 09, 2006 - 01:30 PM
Post subject:
Summarized: You may Blitz without moving, but you shouldn't Blitz without hitting.
AnthonyTBBF - Feb 09, 2006 - 02:00 PM
Post subject:
Spazzfist wrote:
I would think that anyone trying to get around this rule by highlighting the "may" in their rulebook, deserves a serious smack in the head.
I think anyone who would argue over the semantics of the rule's description when the intent is so obvious deserves a smack too
antipixi - Feb 09, 2006 - 02:12 PM
Post subject:
Hey guys, I said many people do, not that I do! I wouldn't want to waste the opportunity to hit something with my minotaur!
Having said this I personally don't have a problem with people who do just use it to move wild animals. It stops them hitting me somewhere else! 
There was a discussion about this a while ago in the vault pages and from what I remember most people seemed to think that it was a reasonable use of the action. Anyway, like I said I do use it to hit things!
Paul - Feb 09, 2006 - 02:46 PM
Post subject:
I don't think we're trying to slam you for being a cheesy rule manipulator, I think its a pretty cheese thing to do and I'm like you.
My Rat Ogre gets the ball, he once ran down the sideline his full move, did a go for it to hit a guy and then went for it to score. (it worked out too, Cas and a TD on the same move 
)
Darkson - Feb 09, 2006 - 06:49 PM
Post subject:
Igor has it correct, and it's not even a bending of the rules. It might not be 100% within the spirit of the rules, but it's definetly not a bending.
As Galak said on the SG forum, if a coach wastesa WA Blitz to move the player, then it's one less player getting hit by a ST5/6 Mighty Blow block.
Doubleskulls - Feb 09, 2006 - 11:36 PM
Post subject:
I'm personnally of the opinon that it isn't even cheesy. Losing your one blitz a turn just to get a 2+ roll instead of a 4+ roll doesn't strike me as problematic in the slightest. How really can you abuse it? There are so few turns that you don't desperately need your blitz I can't see it be a significant unbalancing factor.
It might be against the spirit of a blitz but its certainly not abusive. Anyway the rules have changed so all the special actions are now optiona (you don't have to hand off, or foul or pass).
Spazzfist - Feb 10, 2006 - 07:12 AM
Post subject:
What about the mentioned situation where the ball carrier has the ball and is able to go in for a TD, but there is nobody around for him to hit? By using this rule, they could abuse that ruling.
KarlLagerbottom - Feb 10, 2006 - 08:25 AM
Post subject:
Same this goes...they lose the blitz by using it this way. I think this is perfectly acceptable...
Do you think that an Elf player will mind about possibly not being the target of any hits in a given turn? I don't think so. All that AG4....there will be plenty of turns where no one is engaged...using your blitz to move the WA won't bother them in the least.
Igor_Tahavanale - Feb 10, 2006 - 10:04 AM
Post subject:
Cor lummey guv'ner, its not often that something gets this place excited, its like a graveyard around here most of the time Quick, someone mention ball stalling being totally acceptable and in the spirit of the game, that's always a good one
Doubleskulls - Feb 10, 2006 - 05:42 PM
Post subject:
Spazzfist wrote:
What about the mentioned situation where the ball carrier has the ball and is able to go in for a TD, but there is nobody around for him to hit? By using this rule, they could abuse that ruling.
You've completely lost me there. Can you explain what you mean in more detail? Do you use Balrog's glory rule or something?
Igor_Tahavanale - Feb 11, 2006 - 10:46 AM
Post subject:
Quote:
What about the mentioned situation where the ball carrier has the ball and is able to go in for a TD, but there is nobody around for him to hit? By using this rule, they could abuse that ruling.
Its not abuse, its treating the rules as its written. I tend to to play wild animals 'in the spirit of the game' and have only used the wording once to 'abuse' the rule, but that doesn't make it any less legal.
A blitz action may contain block, it doesn't have to. The word is may, not must.
Therefore it is still totally legal if your Rat Ogre has the ball six squares from the endzone to decalre a blitz, not hit anyone, and just run over the line. The benefit being you can now take that action on a 2 rather than a 4. The penalty being you have no 'propper' blitz action this turn.
The problem seems to be that you aren't letting go of the fact that you have to hit someone after declaring a blitz action. You don't. The same way you don't have to throw the ball after declaring a pass action. Yeah its a bit of a fudge (well actually it isn't, but it feels like one to the roleplayer in me), but you pay the price by not getting a 'hitting' blitz (lets be honest, how often do you give your WA the ball in a scoring position anyhow?)
antipixi - Feb 12, 2006 - 10:26 AM
Post subject:
Boy did I open a can of worms!! 
As I said before I thnk that it is perfectly acceptable, but would not usually use it since a wild animal is usually not a ball carrying sprinter, but more of a stave your opponents head in kinda of player.
But to really put the cat amongst the pidgeons.... what's wrong with stalling? (Again I don't tend to do it, although I would wait rather than GFI if I didn't have a reroll. I know my luck well!) But a bit of show boating when out of reach and rubbing your adversary's nose in his defeat. What's not in the spirit of the game? It not cricket you know!
Besides, if an Elf team who can easily score in 2 turns is your opponent and your score would take you to 2-1 with 2 or 3 turns left, then if you don't pause you're likely giving away a victory! If the Elf can't threaten your ball carrier then his defence is lacking. (Admittedly probably due to the damage recieved through out the match) Personally I don't see the difference between charging forward qucikly and then sitting near the line and an 8 turn 1 or 2 squares a turn rolling cage. Both have to be broken in pretty much the same way and can take just as many turns!
NOTE: As I have said, I don't do it, but if it done against me I try to work out how to make them pay for stoping! And if I can't I look at my defencive set up and look to how can I avoid it happening again.
Igor_Tahavanale - Feb 13, 2006 - 12:43 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
But to really put the cat amongst the pidgeons.... what's wrong with stalling?
Nah, I already tried that one, it just doesn't seem to work anymore
I love ball stalling!!Bleedin' Elf pansies, you want it?Come and get it!!
El_Tim - Mar 07, 2006 - 12:35 PM
Post subject: Ball Stalling
Ball stalling is a frowned on tactic, but in my opinion a perfectly viable one. Some teams need to stall in order to cut down on the number of turns their opponent gets to try and score back. It's not fun to play against but when winning is important (like in a tourney or cup game) then why not? It's not illegal or abusive, so I dont see any problem.
As for the wild animal using the blitz action to move on a 2+, whats the problem there? They're giving up their one blitz action for the turn to move, rather than smack someone. Also, how often do wild animals get the ball? Not very. Anyone that builds their attack around a wild animal either is optimistic or just mad. It kinda fits in with the stalling tactic, use only when winning is important to you.
Spazzfist - Mar 07, 2006 - 12:40 PM
Post subject:
Actually there was an interesting development at the Canadian Open where I stalled the ball, but at my own end zone!
I was playing my goblins vs. vampires, and managed to stop a breakaway vampire by knocking him on his butt,and then fouling him into oblivion. The accompanying thrall was disposed of by the fans with a tidy push.
As I was up 1-0 at this point, I did not see the point of picking up the ball and walking past the centre of the field where the rest of my team was being beaten to a pulp by the remainder of the vampire team. Apparently my opponent was having too much fun kick the crap out of me to notice that he was losing.
Evetually he did make a rush for the ball, but I had manageed to free a couple of my players from the middle and held him off.
But I figured if he was not going to come and get it, why should I hand deliver it to him?
Paul - Mar 07, 2006 - 12:43 PM
Post subject:
I did the same thing with my Skaven against Chaos Dwarfs. I was up 2-0, my Thrower just stood in my end zone for a couple turns while my linerats and stormvirmine just held up his fast players. Eventually a bull centaur made his way towards my thrower so I decided to move the ball abit and tossed it to a Gutter Runner to score again.
Kinda fun moving the ball from one end of the field to the other in 1 turn really.