Suggestion for a "shorter game" variant

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 7:32 am

It works for Rugby, why not Bloodbowl...

Eight a side Bloodbowl:

- Halve the allowed players per team list (humans can have 2 blitzers, 1 thrower....)
- 750,000 GC to buy a team
- Game is played in 4x4 turn quarters, not 2x8 turn halves.
- Recommend using kicking rules to keep it spicy.

Thoughts?

Zy-Nox · Post by **Zy-Nox** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 11:07 am

I played a 'sevens' version from the paradigm website but this looks like it could work, especially with the kicking rules.
I may even try and squeeze in a game of it tonight.

Longshot · Post by **Longshot** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 3:13 pm

i ve seen a lot of fun variant like the 7 a side or the BeachBloodbowl and 5 against 5....
This is fun, quicker but this is not the true Bloodbowl.

Lucien Swift · Post by **Lucien Swift** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 3:28 pm

the leading culprit in game time is skills.... those annoying players who cause ten-minute turns as the other guy tries to assemble some sort of guard/diving tackle flying wedge play and the skill players who never get turnovers because they can reroll everything... taking down the ability to get highly skilled teams and player rerolls will reduce the complexity of formation play as well as encourage turnovers... long-term player rollover a la aging doesn't really help this... if you want faster games, kill more players... consider making armor rolls succeed when they are _equal to_ the av, remove the ref, or some other variation to up the body count.... players won't live long enough to aquire stacks of skills and the second half will be quicker without as many players to move, though you'll need to up the winnings table a little...

or, leave the mechanics alone and rais the skill thresholds... if there aren't players out there with more than 2 or 3 skills, and the average lineman needs to srerve a carreer to get that second one, you'll get slightly faster games...

in the end, you're not going to be happy with the results of any speeding up proposal, it won't be 'the same game' so you have to decide if you want a different game or if you're fine with the time...

i tried a sevens league once, we played about 10 games each and while the games were about 1.5 hours, we all felt like weren't playing bloodbowl...

you get to where you decide; yeah, i'd love it if i could play the game in an hour, but i'm willing to suffer the 3 hour marathons to keep what i like about the game intact...

longfang · Post by **longfang** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 3:33 pm

Rookie teams in a tourny arn't a problem to play so I say leave it alone. As for developed teams in existing leagues then leave it up to the coaches to fight it out or use a flexible and friendly time limit.

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 7:51 pm

Marcus, are you psyhic? I was only thinking a similar thing this morning while driving to work though I would have gone for 7-a-side.

I'd also argue for only having o put 2 players on the LOS.

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 6:38 am

Or just keep everything as is and make halves have 6 turns each. Cuts game time by 25%.

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 11:21 am

Additionally, slow-moving teams would be forced to take more risks on offense, as it can get hard to get the ball to the EZ in six turns. This would certainly result in faster turns as the chances of failure grow for those teams.

CeleTheRef · Post by **CeleTheRef** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 5:15 pm

once I wrote down some notes about a "resized" BloodBowl, with pitch, number of players, MA and throwing range reduced by about 1/3.

Actually looks like a "zoomed in" BB. If only I could find the notes...

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 6:03 pm

A special mid season fun tournament exists in the south bend indiana league. 4 guys from a team start in each corner (4 teams), ball starts out in one of the 4 center squares. Ball does not scatter. Touchdowns are scored only in the opposites corners endzone (half of the endzone). Tournament was best 2 out of 3, no large prizes. It was a just for fun tournament.

Deathwing · Post by **Deathwing** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 12:41 pm

Spyke and BigD were working on a 7's variant. I suggested limiting position players to 1.
2 Gutter Runners is just too scary with a full sized pitch, same can be said of Welf catchers.

Zy-Nox · Post by **Zy-Nox** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 2:01 pm

Deathwing wrote:Spyke and BigD were working on a 7's variant. I suggested limiting position players to 1.
2 Gutter Runners is just too scary with a full sized pitch, same can be said of Welf catchers.

You could set up games with these rules as a side attraction at The Bloodowl tourny,or some other event,
It would get more feedback that way I think.

Bevan · Post by **Bevan** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 9:38 pm

We needed to run a tounament where we only had 1 hour per game so we used these rules:

Use the full length of the pitch, but only half width. This means you only have one wide zone.

Teams are 6 per side with all position limits halved. 600k for teams. Minimim 2 players on LOS. 6 turns per half. No freebooting.

We tried a range of different teams and it did not seem to favour any specific team type. The game feels a lot like normal Blood Bowl. Jjust assume the other 5 players are on the missing side of the field blocking each other.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Mon Oct 28, 2002 3:43 pm

Darkson wrote:Marcus, are you psyhic?

There's something frightening about someone with a Judge Death avatar asking that question....

Trambi · Post by **Trambi** » Mon Oct 28, 2002 11:49 pm

If the pitch dimension are the same, it will be pretty difficult for dwarfs or orcs to score in four turns.

Talk Fantasy Football

Suggestion for a "shorter game" variant

Suggestion for a "shorter game" variant

Half Blood Bowl