| Author |
Message |
Gattolardo |
|
Post subject: Conceding the match
 Posted: Jul 29, 2003 - 03:38 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 10, 2003
Posts: 169
Status: Offline
|
|
Just a quick one, just to be sure of the ruling.
Does conceding the game affect the result in any way?
The LRB does mention all the penalities involved, but says nothing about the score, so I suppose the field score stays the same.
Let me say that I cannnot access the LRB at the moment, so any help is welcome.
Thanks
Rob |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Indigo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 29, 2003 - 06:07 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
yes, conceding keeps the score the same
technically you can't concede before a match (you need to be playing to concede) but we typically use the rule that if a match is cancelled by one of the players it is a 2-0 win to the other player, with all the benefits of a conceded match. If neither can play, it's a 0-0 draw with no perks awarded to either team. Repeated cancellations incur fines as well as the concession penalty. |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 29, 2003 - 06:16 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
| We brought in (an un-needed) rule, that if the game had started, the coach who didn't concede would get enough TD's to give a 1 TD win (no SPP's though). However, this was cos we were using a league table rather than a challenge league, and we didn't want anyone conceding in the last few games if they had the score they needed. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Gattolardo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 29, 2003 - 07:16 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 10, 2003
Posts: 169
Status: Offline
|
|
Thank you guys, so, that's exactly how I rememebered it. We too apply the 2-0 but only if someone completeley desert the match.
Again, thanks !!  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Indigo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 29, 2003 - 07:55 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
good point from darkson though, the conceder should lose the match, otherwise I can score in the first turn of the BB final then concede! true, I'd get no winnings, but if I'm only after the trophy...  |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 29, 2003 - 08:34 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
'Conceding the match' means admitting defeat, handing victory to the opposition. The score would remain the same, but the game would be recorded as a loss for the coach that conceded.
I.e. Skaven 2 - Orcs 0 when game brought to an untimely end due to excessive furry fatalities. Orcs win by default, and gain the league points, but should they then be credited with extra TDs they did not score?. IMO they should not, it is enough that they have won. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 29, 2003 - 09:20 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
Ah, in the case you state, Mordredd, if you mean the Skaven had no players left on the field, then the Orcs keep on playing, and if they can't score the 2 or 3 TD, tough luck.
If you mean the Skaven coach concedes to save his team, then yes, I would apply the extra TD's to the Orc team, and it would have been recorded as a 3-2 victory (note I said we didn't give the SPP's though). |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
skummy |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 29, 2003 - 09:47 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 506
Status: Offline
|
|
| I think that the 2-0 score you're talking about comes from a section of the LRB that talks about the challenge system. (p. 47) If a challenge is refused, the player that refused the game loses, 2-0. |
_________________
The only thing to do with good advice is pass it on. It is never any use to oneself.
-Oscar Wilde
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Ratin_Mutants |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 30, 2003 - 12:25 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 57
Status: Offline
|
|
| In our league, all game that are conceded, are minimum lost 3-0, even if you were ahead 7-0 in the end it is still a 0-3 defeat. Of course should the tema that is ahead force the opposition to lose, and is ahead by more that 3-0 that team wins by the actual score. But the fun part is that the conceding in our league is called a Krau, because this player has conceded 3 out of the 6 matches against my skavens. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 30, 2003 - 04:21 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
My point was on conceding the game, not on running out of players. (I'd agree with carry on playing unopposed, and if you can't score enough to win then tough.)
The LRB says nothing about changing the scores, just declares one team the loser, so this is really house rule territory here.
TDs for, or TD difference, are often tie breakers. In my example the Orcs would have had their TDs for/TD difference artificially increased, and I don't think that is right. I believe it is enough that they have got all the league points available for that match without scoring the required number of TDs to earn them. The penalties for conceding are already damned harsh without adjusting the score line. I think it's a punishment too far, and just a little petty.
I will emphasise that this is just my opinion, and people should do what suits the people in their own league. As I said earlier, this does appear to be a house rule thing, left to the league commissioner to decide on. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
kalten |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 30, 2003 - 05:41 AM
|
|
Joined: Apr 13, 2003
Posts: 81
Status: Offline
|
|
Mordred - how about the fact that the orcs have done enough to force a concede out of the oponant? An orc team is not noted for it's speed and large number of touchdowns, but on the same note, a skaven team is not known for it's high armour value, so if an orc team destroys a skaven team physicaly should that not be reflected in their win?
In my leage we have stats a stats section for both touchdowns and casulties and the average of those two scores is put forward for any points tie at the end of the season. see http://www.warnet.co.uk/wargames/bloodbowl/league/league.htm for my league table.
with this set of rules for the points you could argue both ways about the need to actually score more TDs than your opponant to win a conceded game. we use the 2-0 win, unless the score is already over that. But do we need to? personal choice again I think.
Oh yeah, plesae have a look at my legue and let me know what you think - I'm intrested to know...maybe I should start a new thread for this... Feedback is always good! |
_________________
Anyone for a Monkey?
Download the SWARMM BloodBowl League Spreadsheet!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 30, 2003 - 09:33 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
True, Skaven are not known for their armour, but think how destroyed they would have to be to quit whilst winning. I know Orcs are not renowned for scoring, but in the first game of our new league my Orcs vs WElfs were 2-2 after 5 turns each, and 3-2 up after the first half. I could have won 4-2 if my Ogre hadn't triple skulled in the last turn. 
My point being Orcs can score big if they want to, and I don't want to encourage them to win by annihilation. It's not nice having your team killed by an opponent who knows he doesn't have to even try to score to win.
Using a combined TD - Cas tie breaker is a good idea. I might use that next time we get a similarly 'structured' league going. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 30, 2003 - 11:48 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
Mordredd wrote: My point was on conceding the game, not on running out of players. (I'd agree with carry on playing unopposed, and if you can't score enough to win then tough.)
The LRB says nothing about changing the scores, just declares one team the loser, so this is really house rule territory here.
TDs for, or TD difference, are often tie breakers. In my example the Orcs would have had their TDs for/TD difference artificially increased, and I don't think that is right. I believe it is enough that they have got all the league points available for that match without scoring the required number of TDs to earn them. The penalties for conceding are already damned harsh without adjusting the score line. I think it's a punishment too far, and just a little petty.
I will emphasise that this is just my opinion, and people should do what suits the people in their own league. As I said earlier, this does appear to be a house rule thing, left to the league commissioner to decide on.
But the other side of this is say the skaven just need a 2 TD difference to progress, regardless of if it's a win or loss. They get the quick 2 TD and concede, denying the orcs of a chance to score even one back. My adding the TD's to the orcs score you force the skaven coach to be honest.
P.S. Please note I've nothing against skaven coaches, it's just an example |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
