A Word on Fouling...

Post by **Dave** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:12 pm

I have just one thing to say.

IMHO having a free AV roll is advantage enough not to also get SPP's out of it

That's all!!

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:14 pm

well it's hardly free...you might get kicked out, you invite retaliation, etc etc

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:16 pm

wesleytj wrote:well it's hardly free.../ / ...you invite retaliation, etc etc

But adding SPP's back will not cause Dirty Player arms races or fouling wars? Oh no...surely not.

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:19 pm

Pariah wrote:
wesleytj wrote:well it's hardly free.../ / ...you invite retaliation, etc etc
But adding SPP's back will not cause Dirty Player arms races or fouling wars? Oh no...surely not.

no, it gives you a choice. do i foul back and start a war? or do i take it and let him get caught a lot more often?

choices are good...almost reminds me of...STRATEGY!

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:19 pm

And yet there is still no reason given for introducing SPPs for fouling

How about the fact that there is an exception to the casualty rules? I think if a version of the experimental sw weapon rules are enacted then spp's could be given for both fouls and sw attacks, if playtesting agrees. Imo if u hit someone and get an injury, u should get spp's.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:35 pm

a foul and a chainsaw aren't hitting imho and shouldn't

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:37 pm

If thats true, then using a chainsaw/poison dagger should not take up your blitz if u move any more than fouls do.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:39 pm

yer but its using a secret weapon so they should have their own rules anyway

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:41 pm

Why, why not make the rules, say its a hit or its a foul and only end up with 1-2 sets of rules rather than 3?

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:42 pm

why not merge all the rules so everything is decided on the flip of a coin?

its not like the rules are complicated id rather have them balenced then overly stupified

Mirascael · Post by **Mirascael** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:44 pm

wesleytj wrote:What i'm getting at is this argument will never cease I don't think. I will never want to play in a league where fouling is dead or even screwed so badly it's never/rarely worth it.

Beg your pardon?

That sounds as though fouling wasn't more than powerful enough under the current rules.

I'm just trying to help.

The Dirty Players will appreciate that. As will the Dirty Coaches.
C'mon, the Undead Team in your "research-league" has not even one Dirty Player, the other 3 available roosters include only one Dirty Player each, who, by your account, start on the bench! Actually, you live on an island of blissfulness. The real world (without foul-spps) sees probably more than twice as many fouls as your league (with foul-spps) does. And real teams out there include and use Dirty Players. Perhaps you should really consider realising that.

It is somewhat similar to penalties in sports: Only as long as you are playing casually with friends, might it work without them. As soon as you participate in leagues, even on a layman level, you need a ref and penalties.

It's a great thing that you and your friends play in such a friendly environment!
My suggestion: Abandon your quest and enjoy your amicable league instead!

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:48 pm

Khrage wrote:As far as Dirty Player becoming a key feature of our leagues, in the 20+ teams that we have, only about 4 or 5 teams have dirty players (two teams are mine). The main use of fouling has been to counter PO players. And currently it is not effective enough.

This paragraph says basically "our data is totally worthless because we're not a violent league. Of course fouling isn't effective enough if you don't use dirty players!

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:48 pm

Grumble, i dont think combining the fouls and secret weapons rules into one Dirty Play section is over simplifying. Perhaps if we come up with a good enough ruleset spp's can be added without unbalancing things.

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:58 pm

wesleytj wrote:Anyway the point is, you could pick and choose for your own league's tastes just exactly how violent you want your league to be. You could
apply as many or as few of them as you want, and maybe between seasons, make little tweaks if you feel things are too tight or too loose.

That will never happen because we need a basic ruleset that works. The optional rules should be just that, optional. What you're proposing would provide people with broken rules and give them tools to fix them if they want. Very bad idea. The current ruleset (except for piling on, but i'm working on that) has the huge advantage that it works.

Mirascael · Post by **Mirascael** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:59 pm

Zombie wrote:
Khrage wrote:As far as Dirty Player becoming a key feature of our leagues, in the 20+ teams that we have, only about 4 or 5 teams have dirty players (two teams are mine). The main use of fouling has been to counter PO players. And currently it is not effective enough.
This paragraph says basically "our data is totally worthless because we're not a violent league. Of course fouling isn't effective enough if you don't use dirty players!

The same seems to be true for Icedman's league. They just removed the Dirty Player Skill basically. So maybe Icedman is suggesting that "Dirty Player" should be removed from the Skill List and therefore foul-SPPs should be reintroduced?