| Author |
Message |
coachblacknife |
|
Post subject: Modifying the Hand Off action
 Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 03:10 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 16, 2003
Posts: 55
Status: Offline
|
|
Our Wood Elf coach showed me in painful detail why the original Hand Off rule should be changed, but has it gone too far? I would like to suggest that the Hand Off is treated like a Blitz action, rather than a Pass, so that the Hand Off occurs *anywhere* in the move, rather rthan at the end of the move.
This allows for better potential for placement of Tackle Zones to help the new ball carrier (assuming the recipient still has the ability to move that is). but what are the disadvantages? Would this be so bad?
Andy |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Grumbledook |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 03:45 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 922
Status: Offline
|
|
| Thats how it used to work, it was changed to the current way becuase it was over powered. Its not exactly hard for elf teams to run up and pass to someone near the middle of the pitch, who then runs off and hands off to someone further down who can then run it in. Wood elf teams were practically unstoppable in 3rd edition, changing the hand off rules resolved this somewhat. |
_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'
Jon
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
coachblacknife |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 04:17 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 16, 2003
Posts: 55
Status: Offline
|
|
Not quite, the Hand Off could be *taken* from someone under the original rules. I'm not suggesting that, just that the player is allowed to continue moving *after* the Hand Off is complete (if the receiving player doesn't drop it that is - in which case: Turnover!).
The example you give can still be executed under the current rules: player#1 uses a Pass action (after moving), player#2 uses the Hand Off (after moving), and player #3 uses the Move to score a TD.
The example my Wood Elf coach gave was of two catchers, each in, say 2 TZ's. One dodges out into a non TZ part of the pitch, the ball is passed to this guy. The second dodges out, takes the Hand Off from the first guy and runs in a TD. The problem there was nobody had to make the catch while under TZ's and it was A Wee Bit Too Easy to pull off. With my slight modification you still couldn't pull this off as the Hand Off remains a one-way Action, rather than the two-way it was before.
Cheers,
Andy |
_________________
-Andy-
______
"Changes made for changes' sake, does not make the changes great."
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Cervidal |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 05:37 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 75
Status: Offline
|
|
I do see your point, coachblacknife, but, in the fifty or so games I've played in the current rule set, the updated version of the Hand Off still allows you to do some pretty decent positioning for Hand Offs.
Example:
I almost always use my handoffs to form up whatever kind of cage I set up. The player handing the ball off often forms up the weak-side rear or front corners of my cage, in the below example, the left two spots, assuming I'm the X's and 0 is my ball carrier:
X____X__Z
__0_____Z
X____X__Z
This is just one example. You're right, it would be nice to be able to hand off the ball then use that player to screen off further downfield, but I don't think it is a necessary rule change. |
_________________
bloodbowl.40kfightclub.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Marcus |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 07:54 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 31
Status: Offline
|
|
The main reason for keeping it unchanged is that the current handoff rules mean you generally require one extra player to consolidate a play. This requires a lot more planning and forethought than if you could do a "drive by" handoff. It helps maintain the balance between fast and slow teams.
I'm generally a finesse coach and I think the current rule is the best way to go about it. |
_________________
Marcus
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 08:23 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
Marcus wrote: The main reason for keeping it unchanged is that the current handoff rules mean you generally require one extra player to consolidate a play. This requires a lot more planning and forethought than if you could do a "drive by" handoff. It helps maintain the balance between fast and slow teams.
I'm generally a finesse coach and I think the current rule is the best way to go about it.
I'd agree with Marcus here. I've been very happy with the LRB rules for handoffs and agree that they are the best way to handle handoffs.
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dave |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 12:53 PM
|
|
da Veiz-Prez
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Netherlands
Posts: 895
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
|
|
| As a Welf coach I loved the old rules but the new ones are waaay better |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
coachblacknife |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 05, 2003 - 02:37 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 16, 2003
Posts: 55
Status: Offline
|
|
So to summarise: the suggested modification wouldn't be so bad, it's just perhaps unnecessary.
Fair comment, I was just under the impression that the change went too far and that the move after handoff would be a better medium.
Cheers |
_________________
-Andy-
______
"Changes made for changes' sake, does not make the changes great."
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
