2 Quickies

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 9:52 am

Its more of a game mechanic, it makes it harder to throw the ball down field and run after it. Very useful for fast teams vs slow teams. They can still do it but they risk a fumble more if they throw it further.

Korhil · Post by **Korhil** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 11:30 am

Without going into since its been covered...

The idea of Fumbling it more often is to stop people just dumping the ball downfield, like Grumb said, and so Stunty teams cant Throw players everywhere and score 1 Turners almost consistantly.

---Korhil

Xynok · Post by **Xynok** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 5:06 pm

Our store League rules that the Range modifier ONLY affects the target Number for an Accurate throw, not the dice. Only TZs modify the dice, and thus the chance for fumble.

However, we also rule that you cannot throw the ball to an empty square. In American Footbal, this is the same as intentional grounding, and that rules exists in the NFL for a reason. The tactic of throwing to an empty square is ridiculous regardless of how you rule dice modification, and allowing it as a legal tactic is a mistake as we see it.

Therefore, the ruling on this was very simple for us.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 5:08 pm

Throwing to an empty square is a valid tactic as i see it.

Xynok · Post by **Xynok** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 5:43 pm

I'm interested in knowing why you consider it valid. Is it so you can throw the ball down out of reach, and hope your opponent can't get to it before you do? That doesn't seem ridiculous to you? Or what about if you're already ahead and get a play on the ball...you simply throw it downfield to waste a few turns...you don't consider this ridiculous?

I mean come on man, who are you throwing to? At least make it a valid play.

I'm simply not understanding how anyone can consider this a valid tactic. It doesn't mean my way is right, but playing like that is as unsporting as it gets in my opinion. Indeed, it is on par with not requiring a player who enters a square containing the ball to not have to attempt the pick up, so they can just kick it around a bit, hopefully to another player who can pick up better, or in whose hands it would be safer. Sure, there is risk involved, but it can also be exploited...but primarily, it is incredibly unsporting.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 5:52 pm

Obviously not seen much Rugby then. Kick the ball past the defensive line - charge it down with the backs.

Nothing wrong with it IMO. If someone overcommits their defence that far forward then punish them with a chip over the top.

Xynok · Post by **Xynok** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 6:03 pm

Then make rules for kicking.

Skummy · Post by **Skummy** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 6:07 pm

Throwing the ball into an empty square is unfair and unsporting in a game with rules for illegal fouls?

Of course it's a valid tactic. With movement teams you sometimes have to play keep-away. If only one opposing player could reach my two downfield players, I'd rather throw it over everyone's head and take my chances on the pickup. It is a rare situation, but it crops up a fair bit against teams that overcommit to the line. If a coach can't or won't cover the whole field, I'm going to use it against them.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 6:08 pm

Exactly!

Xynok · Post by **Xynok** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 9:12 pm

Well, since we are insisting on being so logical, explain why RANGE has anything to do with the chance to fumble? It doesn't. No matter what you feel about the tactic of throwing to an empty square, range should NOT modify the dice, only TZs should. Since it has been explained (more than once) that the reason for this so-called "mechanic" working this way is so people won't simply throw the ball downfield to an empty square, my obvious question is "what difference does it make?"

If it is such a valid tactic, why does increasing the odds of a fumble due to Range somehow "balance" it. All it does it make Long Pass and Bomb more likely to result in a fumble...not only does this make zero sense, it begs the question of WHY the tactic of throwing to an empty square should be so likely to result in a fumble...is it because it is too powerful? Too beardy? What?

If the tactic is sound and valid, why place some contrived rule like range resulting in more fumbles on it? Just make throwing make SENSE, and let the people who want to use the tactic do so at their own risk.

Likewise, if it is too powerful and/or beardy, why place some contrived rule like range resulting in more fumbles on it? Why not just rule it out period?

The only remotely valid reason I have heard for range affecting the dice is to dissuade people from using the tactic of throwing deep to an empty square. If this is such a valid tactic, why does there need to be some contrived mechanic to make it more difficult? If it is a power/beardy tactic, why allow it all?

Range affects how difficult it is to throw an accurate pass.

TZs affect how much more likely it is to fumble a pass, AND how difficult it is to throw an accurate pass.

If you feel throwing to an empty square is so unsporting that you must place a completely contrived rule on it, then all you've done is made a ridiculous tactic that much more ridiculous, and more importantly, made truly VALID plays (ie a player in position downfield) more likely to result in a fumble for absolutely no logical reason.

If you do NOT feel it is an unsporting tactic, then please explain how you can possibly rule that Range should increase the odds of fumbling?

Our method rewards Coaches for making sound tactical positioning, and for being able to make a huge play on the ball and heave it downfield, providing they took the chance of keeping someone in position...and while fumbles still happen frequently, at least there is no contrived rule about range making the odds of doing so greater. If you don't have anyone in position, you STILL made a play on the ball, but you aren't going to make some ridiculous throw downfield to abuse a flaw in the game BLOOD BOWL.

If you don't agree that it is a ridiculous tactic, fine. However, if you don't agree that Range should NOT affect the dice, please explain why...and it better not have anything to do with throwing to empty squares, or we are simply going in circles.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 9:21 pm

I though i explained this to you in the fumbbl chatroom :p

Throwing it further requires you to put more power on the ball. Also you have to change the angle you throw out to result in the changed flight path. Now this can affect your throw and it can increase the chance you have to fumble it. You may disagree but like i said, it depends on the thrower.

The bottom line is that its a game mechanic. Throwing to an empty square makes perfect sense to a lot of people. The fact that it favours the faster teams, making it more dangerous by increasing the chance to fumble, makes it more attractive to them to pass to a teammate or run with it.

You obv don't like the whole throwing to an empty square thing and thats fine, you have house rules for that just like loads of other people house rule stuff they don't like. I honestly can't see this changing in the offical rules and i also can't see what the problem is with it.

Xynok · Post by **Xynok** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 9:36 pm

Throwing it further requires you to put more power on the ball. Also you have to change the angle you throw out to result in the changed flight path. Now this can affect your throw and it can increase the chance you have to fumble it. You may disagree but like i said, it depends on the thrower.

I do indeed disagree this can make the chances of fumbling greater.

It isn't even that I am personally against throwing to empty squares, but the majority of our league is. That said, I don't feel the tactic of doing so should be penalized by some contrived mechanic; either allow it or don't. I especially take exception with range affecting the chances to fumble, if throwing to empty squares is allowed or not.

Attributing this tactic to why range should affect fumbling simply gives me pause, and I completely disagree...primarily because I just don't feel it should, regardless of the empty square tactic.

Fumbbl seems to be down atm.

Skummy · Post by **Skummy** » Mon Dec 09, 2002 4:03 pm

If you want to get technical, the act of throwing the ball is very unlikely to cause a fumble in professional football. Usually fumbles are caused by violent contact with the ball carrier or a defensive player stripping the ball away. I can only think of three instances in this NFL this season in which throwing alone has casued a fumble, and sub-zero weather was a factor in two of them.

Xynok: If you do NOT feel it is an unsporting tactic, then please explain how you can possibly rule that Range should increase the odds of fumbling?

Our league does not have range increments increase the odds of a fumble - for much the same reasons you listed. I am actively lobbying for this to change, mostly just to align with the "official" rules.

I should note that Dirty Player and Mighty Blow were thought to be a little too powerful, and "contrived mechanics" changed the way they are implemented in the current rules system. Options were not limited to merely outlawing or allowing fouls, why would they be so limited in this case?

Korhil · Post by **Korhil** » Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:53 am

You ask why Range needs to effect the chance of fumbles... TTM.

---Korhil

Deathwing · Post by **Deathwing** » Wed Dec 11, 2002 12:57 pm

Ignoring the throwing modifiers for range bands places a greater emphasis on Agility and less on throwing skills and the Thrower position.
Any Elf, Gutter Runner etc that gets an AG increase would be throwing Long Bombs on a 2+, making the Thrower position redundant. 3+ Long Bombs for any Elf? No thanks.
Throwing the ball should not be purely agility based.
I've said this before, the average wide reciever in the NFL is probably a good deal more agile than the average quarterback. To throw the ball effectively it's only right that you need specialist Throwers with specialist skills. The range band modifiers bring this into the game quite effectively. You wanna throw Long Bombs? You want Strong Arm, you want Accurate, you want an Elway and not a Jerry Rice.