Talk Fantasy Football

It benefits the conceder using your rules, if you concede using your proposal then both teams still gain MVPs etc.

If you don't have friends then make some, if you want to, I played all my Blood Bowl on FUMBBL when i first got back into gaming as I also didn't know anyone in my area who played and i still rarely play outside tournaments, I would recommend coming to some if you can.
You could easily start a league on FUMBBL and use house rules, that's totally what League is for.

If your consistently loosing then try a league like 145 on FUMBBL, learn the basics, become a "better" player, if winning is all you care about. Or if bashing is your priority then do that.


I think a better option than conceding would be this, you call the game at the point when you think its done. Tell your opponent that you are conceding the game but would like to play on anyway to see what would happen. You might be surprised what can happen.

At this point though I think it would be rude to carry on arguing the same point over and over, someone else has properly got better ideas anyway.

frogboy wrote:It benefits the conceder using your rules, if you concede using your proposal then both teams still gain MVPs etc.

Again, how it's different from this: "I'll just sit through it without standing my players whenever possible, to minimize my opponent's SPP gain, just hitting "End turn" all the time"? I'll get MVPs this way as well, while speeding up resolution of game significantly (what I actually need) - though it will [supposedly] take more time than auto-resolution process. But what is the reason in it, why it's that much better than following auto-resolution procedure from before?

frogboy wrote: If you don't have friends then make some, if you want to, I played all my Blood Bowl on FUMBBL when i first got back into gaming as I also didn't know anyone in my area who played and i still rarely play outside tournaments, I would recommend coming to some if you can.
You could easily start a league on FUMBBL and use house rules, that's totally what League is for.

Me having or not having friends is completely irrelevant to this discussion, and was intended as a [sad] joke. This is a "New concepts" board, and were are discussing a new concept here, that may (or may not) benefit coaches/make the game better. That's what matters.

frogboy wrote: I think a better option than conceding would be this, you call the game at the point when you think its done. Tell your opponent that you are conceding the game but would like to play on anyway to see what would happen. You might be surprised what can happen.

That defeats the very idea of the whole thing, as my only concern is waste of time and efforts on a game that is [most likely] already decided (and, as I said, I find no interest in continuing it even if I'm on the winning side in such situation, as I don't see any interest in absence of real challenge, so I assumed a lot of other coaches finding themselves at both sides of this stick from time to time may agree with me that it's sort of an issue, and there should be a legitimate way to speed up such matches)

frogboy wrote: At this point though I think it would be rude to carry on arguing the same point over and over, someone else has properly got better ideas anyway.

I also don't see any reason to argue over it any longer, I believe all sides have stated their opinions, and there hardly will be a compromise anyway.

Mori-mori wrote:

frogboy wrote:It benefits the conceder using your rules, if you concede using your proposal then both teams still gain MVPs etc.

Again, how it's different from this: "I'll just sit through it without standing my players whenever possible, to minimize my opponent's SPP gain, just hitting "End turn" all the time"? I'll get MVPs this way as well, while speeding up resolution of game significantly (what I actually need) - though it will [supposedly] take more time than auto-resolution process. But what is the reason in it, why it's that much better than following auto-resolution procedure from before?

Because you asked...
Refuse to stand players then opponent can pass action and score. Forcing you to to LOS again.

It's better because "auto-resolution procedure" is boring and not a game.

No wonder you dislike it, moral victory's in minimizing opponents chance of having fun whilst not playing the game you agreed too?

frogboy wrote: Because you asked...
Refuse to stand players then opponent can pass action and score. Forcing you to to LOS again.

If he'll score, that will be me forcing him to LOS, I'll be the the one hitting there. But as he outnumbers me greatly, unless I'm playing rats or elves, this will quickly again come down to me surrounded and covered completely in tackle zones. Then I'll have to resort to those tactics once more, until he'll score again.

frogboy wrote: It's better because "auto-resolution procedure" is boring and not a game.

Neither of those alternatives is an interesting game, to me. It's a boring game with no real challenge for a winner, or with no real gameplay for a loser.

frogboy wrote: No wonder you dislike it, moral victory's in minimizing opponents chance of having fun whilst not playing the game you agreed too?

I'm doing this because of two things perfectly reasonable in competitive environment: a) to reduce my opponent's SPPs gain from this (thus he'll be weaker next time we'll meet) b) to decrease my attrition, as whatever I'll try to do won't change outcome of the match, but will allow him to inflict me more casualties if I'll try to stand up players, dodge through tackle zones etc. At this point I'll better conserve my resources for future battles. If it results in less fun for my opponent, that's not my problem I'm following the most efficient strategy, in a long run (well, as a side effect it also helps me to get over this boring part faster, but it's of course is not my main goal ) Yet, it doesn't seem to me like fun or interesting gameplay. That's why I brought up this topic in the first place - just out of curiosity, whether or not there may be a more optimal solution to such situations, theoretically.

Dude.
Man up.

BillyDee wrote:Dude.
Man up.

What he said.

Might take this in a different direction, but I'd like to see something in tournament rules that addresses conceding. A few of the two-day tournaments I've been to recently have seen coaches drop-out on day two if they've had a bad day one.

That must be a nightmare for tournament organisers as, best case scenario, there's a re-draw and a spare player (potentially the organiser) has to play or, worst case scenario, there's no coach available and a player has to sit a round out that s/he's paid for, but can't play in (due to having no opponent).

I'm not talking about those with a genuine reason (family emergency, illness etc.), though that's probably an incredibly small amount anyway, but those who just can't be arsed shouldn't just get to pack up their toys and leave everyone else to pick up the pieces.

With that said, I've not been playing long enough to have any suggestions or knowledge of what sanctions should be in place, but it's just something I'm seeing more and more, and I've only been playing for about a year or so.

As for the original direction of this thread, getting diced is just part of the game. Maybe it's luck, maybe it's ability, maybe it's Nuffle, but I'm sure it still happens to the greatest coaches now and again. It's hard when starting out because it's likely to happen more often (due to inexperience) and so feels like it's a regular occurrence. Like Frogboy mentioned, the 145 League on FUMBBL is a great way to have a more supportive introduction to that version of the game. I played a few games on ranked before discovering that and I'm not sure I would've stuck with FUMBBL if I hadn't joined the 145 League.

Jip wrote:or, worst case scenario, there's no coach available and a player has to sit a round out that s/he's paid for, but can't play in (due to having no opponent).

That shouldn't happen, as either, as you said, the organiser drops in as a spare player, or if the TO is already playing, they should drop out (after all, most don't pay to play in their own events!). I know I've dropped in and out most years I've run the ARBBL (a couple of years we had a players that popped in and played a game or two so I've said out).

I've honestly not seen that many people "pack up and take their toys home". I think in 10 years of ARBBL I've had one player that disappeared after round 5 (without saying anything), but the guy he should have been playing had had such a miserable tournament he was happy with the concession win! I used to see it more at the BB GTs (though to be fair, may dropouts were due to hangovers ) but don't see it much at other events - maybe it happens at ones I don't get to?

@mori-mori - I don't think you're going to find much sympathy for conceding here on this forum - it's already too easy, and too forgiving on the PC version, so wanting to make it easier isn't going to fly here. You'd probably be better off looking for a digital-only forum, like the Focus one.

Three rules to reduce the likelihood of coaches conceding matches when their players are significantly outnumbered:

1. If a coach does not have at least 11 players available to set up for a kickoff, that coach is no longer obligated to place three players on the line of scrimmage, and may set up his players anywhere on his half of the field between the wide zones. This is intended to at least slow the attrition rate, if not necessarily stopping it.

2. If a team with fewer than 11 players available to set up for one or more kickoffs finishes the match without conceding, their coach may roll 3D6 when rolling to update the teams Fan Factor after the match, regardless of whether they won or lost, because BB fans are impressed with the team's bravery and fighting spirit for continuing to play short handed, and want to follow them in subsequent matches.

3. If a team with fewer than 11 players available to set up for one or more kickoffs finishes the match without conceding, their coach may receive an additional 1D6 times 10,000 gold pieces after the match because BB fans are so impressed with the team's bravery and fighting spirit that they go overboard buying up team jerseys and other assorted memorabilia.

Totally favours elves.

lunchmoney wrote:Totally favours elves.

1. How so?

2. If so, so what?

3. I have played in several BB leagues over the years, and at least two or three coaches drop out every season because their teams are destroyed immediately, and become doormats for the rest of the league. BB is supposed to be fun, not a humiliating chore, so I am all for anything that gives coaches even a glimmer of hope when things go horribly wrong, if for no other reason than to keep them motivated enough to continue through to the end of the season.

Bludbowler wrote:

lunchmoney wrote:Totally favours elves.

1. How so?

2. If so, so what?

3. I have played in several BB leagues over the years, and at least two or three coaches drop out every season because their teams are destroyed immediately, and become doormats for the rest of the league. BB is supposed to be fun, not a humiliating chore, so I am all for anything that gives coaches even a glimmer of hope when things go horribly wrong, if for no other reason than to keep them motivated enough to continue through to the end of the season.

Elves are by far the most likely team to go down to 11 players. Honestly I would figure most teams end up with a drive or two of less than 11 at some point.

Less than 11 for a drive is not a decimated team. That is just how the team is. Elves and Skaven nearly expect to go a man or two down and can still function well at that point.

How big are your leagues that 2-3 get destroyed to the point of no return in the first few games? Most teams are perfectly fine with a journeyman or two on the line of scrimmage.

I guess if they each lost key positionals with permanent injuries. I don't really think it is all that common to lose enough key players after a single game or two. If you want to help them then give extra cash to people who lose positionals or a load of rating after a game.

Or as an alternative have a "hospital". Functions as an apothecary that can be used even after an apothecary has been used on a player. May not be used on KOs and players that end up just badly hurt miss the rest of the game due to travel time.

Gives them back their team for future matches. Does not muck with the in game rules.

Christy42 wrote:Or as an alternative have a "hospital". Functions as an apothecary that can be used even after an apothecary has been used on a player. May not be used on KOs and players that end up just badly hurt miss the rest of the game due to travel time.

Gives them back their team for future matches. Does not muck with the in game rules.

I've suggested something similar before:

• Medical Team - Any non-BH injuries remaining after the match can be rerolled unless they have already used an Apo during the match.

The effect would be to reduce long-term injuries by ~50% across the board.

Moraiwe wrote:If you're incapable of enjoying a game when you've been comprehensively beaten, you're playing the wrong game.

Awesome!
Agree!