| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Nov 06, 2003 - 03:14 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Doubleskulls wrote: Say what you like but a over a dozen experienced coaches tried it over a couple of seasons and didn't like it.
I tried all 3 methods for at least a few years each. I think i'm qualified to give an informed opinion here. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 06, 2003 - 03:17 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Mordredd wrote: Also only fumbling on a 1 makes a mockery of putting pressure on the thrower.
Which is why we apply modifiers from tackle zones. But modifiers from range shouldn't make you fumble more often. Just because you're throwing the ball a bit further than usual doesn't mean you'll fumble half the time! And orc breathing down your neck, i understand. But fumbling because you're throwing far, no way! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 06, 2003 - 03:21 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Mestari wrote: But anyhow, I've done this discussion quite a few times and the entrenchment lines are not likely to move. I just consider that for this play to be succesful, the other coach must've overcommitted his team to certain direction, and should be frustrated - not because of the opponent, but because he went into a trap.
Well said. Not counting range modifiers for fumbles actually increases the strategic element of the game. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 07, 2003 - 06:49 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote: Besides, how is it that you allowed that one player to get away and move his full MA before throwing the ball?
Well, I imagine the most likely 'offender' in these situations are Elf teams. You'd probably have to use your entire team to pin the bugger down anyway.
Equally common is blitzing a hole in the line to run through.
Combined, and it could take as little as 2 players to put the ball beyond reach.
Yes, Dwarf runners can be built up as throwers, but it will be a long time until they're any good at it. In any case the punting player only needs to not fumble. The return pass to get the ball back down the pitch has to be accurate, i.e. the chance of success is most probably reversed.
And the teams most likely to suffer from this 'trap' are those least likely to be able to deal with it. Dwarf, Undead, Khemri (whose so-called thrower is MA5 AG2), Goblins, 'flings. Leaving players back isn't going to do them much good. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 07, 2003 - 12:30 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Mordredd wrote: Yes, Dwarf runners can be built up as throwers, but it will be a long time until they're any good at it.
Not true. All they need is two skills: pass and accurate. At the rate dwarf runners earn SPPs, it should only take a few games. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2003 - 05:11 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
A few games? I think not. That requires 16 SPP, or 6 TDs (assuming no MVP). It's quite a successful Dwarf team that notches up 6 TDs on one player in a few games. I've never seen it happen.
It also assumes that the Dwarf player wants a thrower, rather than a runner. All the Dwarf teams I have been in leagues with have always gone for the runners, taking skills that make them less likely to get knocked down. Usually starting with block. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
cataphract |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2003 - 05:57 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
Posts: 12
Status: Offline
|
|
The big problem i see with only fumbling on a 1 is not with throwing the ball but with throwing a team mate!
If you only fumbbl on a 1 an ogre can do a long pass (counts as long bomb) and be inaccurate on a 2+ accurate on a 6... this makes those one turn flying gobbo plays a helluva lot easier! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Deathwing |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2003 - 10:57 AM
|
|
Former President
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
England
Posts: 1289
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
This is an old old chestnut. IIRC, the ECBBL weren't using range mods for fumbles when we discussed this ages back on TBB. Ian's point that it devalued passing skills and specialist throwers is entirely right IMO, and I believe was my argument at the time.
I believe that a team should need a specialist thrower to throw the ball a long distance with minimal inherent risk. Skaven/Elf etc arguments are less relevent IMO than teams who don't have normal access to skills. Lizards in particular would play differently if skinks could hurl the ball up to Long Pass range relatively easily, also Hobbos or indeed CD Blockers.
To reiterate, it does devalue specialist Passing Skills, and as a consequence of that has greater impact on teams without access to said skills than those with access.
Of course this comes down to preference really, but it's definately one to 'house rule' IMO. I think that the fact that it doesn't make sense to some is a natural consequence of using AG as the base for many things rather than having seperate stat lines for throwing and catching etc a la 2e. |
_________________
 Ex-UK NTO,ex- Senior Tourney Co-Ordinator, ex-VP and ex-President....because Lycos says that new members don't know who I was..
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2003 - 02:38 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Deathwing wrote: This is an old old chestnut. IIRC, the ECBBL weren't using range mods for fumbles when we discussed this ages back on TBB.
Ages back on TBB? This was discussed years before TBB was even a concept in someone's mind. Heck, it was probably discussed before BBC was born in what, 1994? It must have appeared at least once or twice on the mailing list before that time.
But then, this is true of almost any subject in Blood Bowl. Or at least, any subject that applied to 3rd ed.
In any case, the fact that this particular rule has been a subject of discussion for about 10 years now, even though it was never officially changed, should tell you how contentious it is... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Deathwing |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2003 - 04:32 PM
|
|
Former President
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
England
Posts: 1289
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
Heh. Maybe I wasn't clear. Everything you said I agree completely with, hence my point about this being an old old chestnut. I wasn't intentionally trying to link the age of this of the discussion on this with a thread on TBB. And 'ages' was a throwaway word, and was intended as a relative term.
Try this:
'This is an old old chestnut.*
IIRC, the ECBBL weren't using range mods for fumbles when we discussed this a year or two back on TBB.'
The intended point was that doubleskulls' League were playing it house ruled at the time of that discussion, not that this is an old subject because of that particular discussion on TBB.
*Meaning many years, see Zombie's points above. |
_________________
Ex-UK NTO,ex- Senior Tourney Co-Ordinator, ex-VP and ex-President....because Lycos says that new members don't know who I was..
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2003 - 08:11 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie69 wrote: even though it was never officially changed, should tell you how contentious it is...
Contentious<>Correct
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2003 - 09:03 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
| Maybe, but it also points to the original version being incorrect as well. |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 11, 2003 - 07:23 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie69 wrote: Maybe, but it also points to the original version being incorrect as well.
Bumblebees cannot fly also ... but they do it anyway and it works correctly. Does mean that the fact that folks keep saying they cannot fly makes it true. ie your comment is that commentary indicates error ... not necessarily true.
The Fumble mod works as a game mechanic and removing it screws up a lot of stuff (I know you disagree but the "get rid of the range mod Fumbles" is a minority group (an old minority group ... but a minority group no matter how you slice it). The reason it keeps coming up is that its a game mechanic that isn't intuitive as "real life" does work that way, but once most players understand the effects of removing it they understand (again you aren't in the group ... got that).
So like the bumblebee flying ... the range mod fumble rule just works regardless of certain folks looking at it from time to time and saying "that doesn't make sense"
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 11, 2003 - 09:15 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
| Notice i said "points to", not "proves that". There's more chance for the rule being bad if people complain about it than if they don't. That's all i'm saying. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 11, 2003 - 11:29 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
Zombie69 wrote: There's more chance for the rule being bad if people complain about it than if they don't. That's all i'm saying.
Hope that's true. I'm going to start a "Norse should have AV9 thread"  |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
