Conceding 1 Touchdown

D'Arquebus · Post by **D'Arquebus** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 4:28 am

I have to say I agree with Marcus

I like the fact you've included a risk/reward ratio for the play.

As house rules go it is one of the best balanced and "legitimate" additions to the game I have seen. Particularily if they must field 11 if they can. This would mean only if the weaker team would really require the extra attempt to score would they get it.

However, as Shasta says it come down to a matter of controlling the clock. Slow, strong teams need 3-4 turns at least to score a running TD.

At the end of the day I think it comes down to the speedy team thinking outside the box. Make it as difficult to get the cage formed as you can, and don't always score in 2 turns. If you are facing an 8 turn cage and cannot get inside then play off the opponents team. By that I mean keep dropping back 1 square to hold him up and not get hurt yourself. He may get in anyway but this may also force him to make a last minute open field dash where you can get him.

Regardless, in your receiving half take 3 or 4 turns to score. Easy enough if you just keep running your catchers and advance with the throwers pocket. Now instead of 7 or 6 turns they only have 6 or 5. Again play a drop back game and this will force them to expose the ball to score quickly enough. Thats when you sink him.

Sorry to get into a tactics article fellas, but I think the above still makes for fun BB, without enforcing changes on the game that limits the best advantage the slow teams have. Instead of imposing restrictions on the hitter teams, I think the speed teams should change-up their tactics to control the clock themselves.

D'Arquebus · Post by **D'Arquebus** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 4:37 am

Oh yeah, I may still run a league or two with this rule though to play test it (feed back may be pending). I know you have played a lot of games with it but they were all in the same league, which can lead to "group think". That is noone really tries to maximise in a extreme way the possible effects of the rules.

As an example, I have never, in all the leagues I have played in, suffered unduly from foulers being out of control. This is because I was the first coach and introduced everyone else to the game. To me fouling was only ever for tactical advantage, ie remove a key opponent from the game. Everyone adopted this view and noone ever maxed out on dirty players to kill the opponents with. To me at least I never saw a need to change the fouling rules to IGMEOY or no SPPs. However, from this forum I can easily see that the old rules did at least need some toning down.

I think any case of play testing should be conducted with several different styles of league and with all coaches being fully briefed before they start, preferably also with new teams.

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 6:15 am

Mestari wrote:Ok, plasmoid. I'd be happy with the 4 player difference instead of 3 player difference.

I wouldn't be happy with it even if it required an 11-man advantage. I don't want to decimate the whole opposite team and wait for a score to win 1-0 only to find out that i have to score now, even though strategically unsound, then see 4 elves come back from knock out, score on me, bring the game to OT, get a few more players out and score on me again.

I decimated the team for crying out loud, i should be able to collect the reward.

That rule just plain sucks and i'd never accept it in any way, shape or form.

Piepgrass · Post by **Piepgrass** » Sun Feb 02, 2003 7:34 am

Concider this Zombie.

Not so long ago i played a match.
In my first turn i send the 3 opponents on the LOS into ko/D&I.
Then my multiblocker blitzed and send 1 into D&I and the other on the ground which my Dirty player fouled into the Ko.
So after my first turn i outnumber him 11-6.
Think really hard about it, wouldnt you prefer the option to concede rather than seeing your team get smahed further.
For the record my opponent concede and i then send 2 more to the D&I box and then took the TD.

Poul

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Mon Feb 03, 2003 4:09 am

Consider this. I once played in a 3rd ed league without IGMEOY and where the rule was that if the other coach couldn't field 3 players on the line, regardless if you were trailing 5-0 at that time, you won. Most of the coaches in that league would try to decimate the entire team rather than score. The league was made up of chaos, orc, undead and the like.

I played skaven in that league. Once, i was down to one player (a gutter runner) against 11. He picked up the ball deep in his half, and made his advance. They blitzed him with 3 dice (plus 3 more with the reroll) but failed to bring him down. The next turn, he scored.

I don't like rules that encourage killing instead of scoring. But neither do i like rules that discourage wiping the field for strategic advantage. This i an inherent part of the game that makes it great, don't destroy it!

Edit: typos and half a sentence that was missing.

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Tue Feb 04, 2003 5:03 am

Yesterday I managed to clear the pitch of a another dwarven team in the second half of a match - it would've really sucked to get a pitch invasion after those few lucky KO's.

Still I must say that the rule seems pretty balanced and certainly some leagues will want to use it.

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Mon Mar 31, 2003 11:01 pm

Hi all,
despite what some seem to think, this house rule does not lead to speed teams dancing all over the opposition. There are several tactical choices for both coaches involved, making it far from a sure-fire tactic for either side.
As mentioned, we've used it for a long time now and are happy with it.

The most recent example from my league.
We recently held the annual Spike! tournament, with around 26 teams attending. The top 4 teams were:
1. Orcs
2. (houserule) Bretonnians. (not unlike human team).
3. Chaos
4. Orcs

And yes, we do have plenty of good coaches with speed teams.
Martin

Shadow_Dragon · Post by **Shadow_Dragon** » Thu Apr 03, 2003 11:34 am

Why do you all want to punish people for being good!

Pitch invasion? No armour rolls? You realise if the difference in players is only 3, you could roll a 6 on the invasion and have more people seriously injured then outnumber the opponent thus you could be 3 players short!

Usually when i've played it's actually the speed teams that try and waist time, they usually fear the kick offs, so i think the speed teams are being disadvantaged personally! My skaven nearly always outnumber their opponent!

If you want to concede the match, concede the match, you can't concede a single drive, it's just not the done thing! If i were a bloodbowl fan i'd kick yer ass for cowardice!

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Thu Apr 03, 2003 11:21 pm

i'm totally against this idea, and I generally play the type of team that would use it most (elves). If you are unfortunate or untalented enough to get your team beat up that bad, then your opponent SHOULD be able to have his way with your team. That's how you reward smart play. If he wants to score, great, if it's better for them to pound the crap out of you, then he should be able to do that too.

I know you said that the speed teams aren't dominating the league this way, but I can bet they're doing a lot better than they would otherwise.

It's a crap rule designed to protect/encourage poor play, and I don't like it. But whatever makes your little league happy!

Taffsadar · Post by **Taffsadar** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 4:59 pm

I doesn't like it much, it can be exploited and a smart coach would just not put his models back up once downed. That way you can max loose 8 guys and every second foul would mean one guy sent out.

D'Arquebus · Post by **D'Arquebus** » Mon Apr 07, 2003 2:11 pm

I've already covered abit at the top of this page but as it seems this thread has been renewed I figured to update my thoughts.

plasmoid said

Hi all,
despite what some seem to think, this house rule does not lead to speed teams dancing all over the opposition

And I would reiterate that I would be equally against it as a speed team versus strength. My Dark Elves once had my opponents Dwarves down to 6 players vs 11 in the Final. I held the ball and knocked him around abit to waste the clock. When I scored on my turn 7, it was 2-1 in the second half. With only two turns to equalise he had to try a risky play which I easily stopped. Under your rule he could have conceded and then returned the majority of his KOd players to drive the field in the 6 turns he would have had. No thank you!

Now it isn't pleasant when you get into a compromising position under the boots of the opposition. But you deal. I've been on both sides. Just the other day my Chaos team (the recognised strongest team in my current league) was down to 3 players against a comparably weak Norse team, mostly (read totally) due to attentions of a PO, Razor Sharp Fangs Minotaur (ouch

). Now I could have conceeded and brought on the KOd players or the guys who were in reserves (pushed off field by said Mino). And I would've had time to easily go 1 up again and win. Instead he held the ball and I managed to get the Mino to fail a 1 dice hit against my ST5 Chaos Warrior on last turn before he could stroll in

. Now that is an amusing finish to a bad situation and one that will stay with me for some time.

My point, stick in there and simply do whatever you can to minimise casualities. Not everyone (even me in future) will be that lucky, but to have conceeded and then won would not have been fair to the other coach who worked his Mino well to gain his advantage. I would also not have an amusing anecdote to tell.

Speed teams, and to a lesser extent some strength ones, can be prone to losing players each drive. That is the price the speed teams in particular pay for being, well speedy. The answer I think should remain in being careful if you are fragile rather then handicapping the style of play of strength teams.

DG_Slider · Post by **DG_Slider** » Thu Nov 13, 2003 1:32 am

I think it is an interesting idea and will probably playtest it in one-off games for a bit. A problem I do see it fixing is that when we run a league at a store or similar gaming group, those players that are new or aren't real good do loose a lot of players. Although I agree a team playing good shouldn't be punished, a little mercy in the game (NOT FROM THE STORY PERSPECTIVE) would be nice to keep new players from getting discouraged. Otherwise, halfway through the season they have lost interest and on more then one occassion, stopped showing up altogether.

Now I know many are going to say "good ridden" to any that won't finish what they start but the fact remains these people are out there and it is a huge disappointment and very disrupting to loose players after the schedule has been set. This rule will allow those players to prolong the life of their team and keep them involved. It's been my expeience that a lot of new players get discouraged after a season of getting their booty kicked by all the veterans and don't follow up in the next season. I bet Plaz has a good return of players from season to season which is another statistic to look at. Ahh, just food for thought.