| Author |
Message |
jarkko |
|
Post subject: Home rule: Diagonal movement
 Posted: May 21, 2003 - 08:34 AM
|
|
Joined: May 21, 2003
Posts: 4
Status: Offline
|
|
Greetings all!
This is my first post to the board, so please be gentle 
Thought I would present a home-rule on movement that we've been using in BB for a decade now.
Every other (2nd, 4th, 6th etc) square of diagonal movement costs one extra movement. So if a player moves five squares entirely diagonally the "cost" would be 1-3-4-6-7. Sounds perhaps complicating, but it really isn't.
Why did we go for such a complication? First of all, it makes sense (in reality a diagonal movement should cost around 1.4 times compared that with a straight movement). It also helps to understand the situation much more easily, with a glance you can see which players could reach the ball-carrier for example (because there is a natural circle beyond which there is no chance to reach).
It also results in more options both on defense and offense, because you can't take a 45 degree swing and reach the same place as you would if you were running straight forward.
So far all that have seen the movement system in action have liked it. It does sound a bit complicated (I know) but it really is a simple add-on that gives a flavour of "realism" and new options to playing.
The downside is, that afteer playing for a decade like this it was very hard to play with "vanilla" movement, as I found out in the DoubleSkulls tourney last weekend 
-Jarkko |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
SBG |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 21, 2003 - 10:17 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Canada
Posts: 771
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Welcome Jarkko!
I know that it may be more logic the way you play it, but we have to remember that it is a board game, and that 1 square is 1 square.
Using you logic, a player with MA 7 that went 5 squares in a straight can't go for two diagonnally, right? That would bug me a lot!
But hey! This is called house rules for a reason! If it lets you hang around with friends and have fun, no problem! I just wouldn't like my league to adopt such a rule!
Hope I haven't been too tough on you!
Fred |
_________________
Winner of Soup Bowls I, II, III (Chaos Dwarves); IV, V (Dwarves); XIII (Orcs); XIV (Dark Elves) & XVII (Chaos).
Forget the Yankees, forget the Habs: THAT'S a Dynasty!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
jarkko |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 21, 2003 - 11:21 AM
|
|
Joined: May 21, 2003
Posts: 4
Status: Offline
|
|
Concordia wrote: Using you logic, a player with MA 7 that went 5 squares in a straight can't go for two diagonnally, right? That would bug me a lot!
Like I said, it sounds much more complicated than what it is in action And you are quite right, a player with MA 7 couldn't that, unless it GFI of course  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Agentrock |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 21, 2003 - 11:39 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 21, 2003
Posts: 182
Status: Offline
|
|
| Do you have to make two GFI rolls to move one more square in this instance...or only one roll? If not, then skills like Sprint and Sure Feet have a greatly added advantage correct? |
_________________
The end-zone ???line of death??? does not discriminate when one tempts fate by using a ???go for it??? to pass over it.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dave |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 21, 2003 - 03:32 PM
|
|
da Veiz-Prez
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Netherlands
Posts: 895
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
|
|
| make apitch with hexes. problem solved. |
_________________
First ever poster on the NAF site, Former Prez' proverbial pain in the bum and NTO-Netherlands
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Gertwise |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 21, 2003 - 03:37 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 14, 2003
Posts: 46
Status: Offline
|
|
| That would make push backs and the sidelines interesting. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
jarkko |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 21, 2003 - 11:42 PM
|
|
Joined: May 21, 2003
Posts: 4
Status: Offline
|
|
Agentrock wrote: Do you have to make two GFI rolls to move one more square in this instance...or only one roll? If not, then skills like Sprint and Sure Feet have a greatly added advantage correct?
5+1+2=8, so just one GFI.
For some reason Sprint or Surefeet haven't been very popular skills. As the rule is same for everyone, it doesn't benefit enyone in particular.
It does give more room on the pitch, so positioning the players is much more important. But on the other hand, as the 45-degree running is not possible, it is also easier to keep defensive offensive backs who actually have a role on the field.
IMO it leads to a mch more tactical game. But like I said, it sounds much more complicated than what it is in action
-Jarkko |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mestari |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 22, 2003 - 12:43 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 407
Status: Offline
|
|
My kneejerk reaction would be that this rule benefits the teams that do not have problems maneuvering and would make it harder for the slow teams such as dwarves: inability to regroup or change the emphasis spot of their offence is their main problem. By making diagonal movement more expensive, their ability to regroup is made even smaller.
I don't like it, but for each their own I guess. |
_________________
Teemu Tokola aka Mestari
Member #52
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Indigo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 22, 2003 - 05:06 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
| I think that the current movement system is fine - if it aint broke don't fix it - but I might try this out in a match to see how it works out... |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
