Hanging back as bash

[swilhelm73]

I've noticed that when I play against bash teams (as bash or hybrid) that I will often see them leave the ball carrier way back and alone, waiting to decisively win the bash fight at the line.

This seems poor strategy to me - and I see two specific issues;

1) You are playing 10 on 11 and giving the defense the same opportunity you have to choose where and how the battle will be fought, since the defense doesn't have to worry about stopping the ball carrier - you are already doing it for them.

2) You only have so much time to score. Certainly some other coaches rush things, but with this strategy unless you win the attrition war quickly you are going to have to make a riskier move to score, a hand off at least or potentially a pass.

My strategy as bash, or hybrid for that matter, is to move the ball forward if I can keep the ball carrier safe. I don't want to have to rush the ball forward as time is expiring, but ideally to slowly, and safely move to the the goal line.

This forces the defense to more actively engage me, and allows me to constrain where the fight will occur. So, for example, my scary Mino (Block/Claw/Tents/SF/Guard) is much harder to avoid if the cage is around him. And if a ball has to be spilled there is no where I would rather have it then near his tentacles...

What do other coaches think?

[BarmiArmi]

I agree
There is nothing more my Necro side loves to see when facing bash than a player with the ball stood all on his lonesome in the back field. The usual result is that said ball carrier finds himself on the run from a couple of werewolves. If he gets away at least the bashers plan has been upset for a couple of turns, if he doesn't well that's usually a defensive td which wrecks a bashers gameplan.
A bashy ball carrier should be inside a cage, anything else is asking for trouble.

[mattgslater]

I think it depends on the team, the carrier, the opposition and the pitch. I'm a pretty intensive line-blocker (to put it mildly) and I usually run 7-8 on the LOS. Sometimes I'll pick up in space, but usually it's worthwhile to put a guy in front of the ball before you pick up, or a screen of 2 guys if it goes somewhere you don't like.

A few cases:

1) If I can lock out an entire flank, but I need to draw the back-side of the play out of position to get forward progress, and if I have a Thrower who can get the ball to safety with 35/36 odds, then deliver the ball to the cage with 35/36 odds, with no TRR use, I will often commit all of my backfielders but the Thrower to forward duty. Usually I only do this with a bash team where my ten men are just gonna swallow the seven guys they're directly on (line plus one flank) and the other four are going to either pass up on the supposed opportunity, or get locked out of the play when the pass probably doesn't snake out. Once in a great while quadskulls or snake-eyes throw me, but when that doesn't happen it's a good play with some teams against some teams.

2) I've got 10 men to the line, but depending on how the ball bounces (and how the opening blocks go), I'm going to drop up to four of them back to protect the ball or deny the rush, or I can generate line action that also screens the ball. Often I have a guy in position just to force a chainpush, and when his job on the line is done, he can move to cover the pickup. Still, I'm more likely to do this with 8 men.

3) My opponent is slow, deep-set, or seriously down men. If he can't pressure, no use in scheming vs. pressure.

4) It's the last couple turns, and I need to run multiple covered routes more than I need to not fear scrambling. Still, unless both sides are badly damaged I'm probably dedicating more than one guy to the ball. Maybe 2 instead of 3....

5) I'm down to 4 men, duh. I don't know if I've ever started a drive with that few men, but obviously you'd have no choice but to put 3 on the LOS.

[Smeborg]

Hanging back (at least for a turn or two) can be the correct strategy if the opposing team has the ability to assault the caged ball directly. Thus the bash player is hoping to get an advantage in numbers (and perhaps also to get one or more of the most threatening players into the dugout) before he moves the ball upfield and exposes it to attack. It may be worth taking a risk to do this.

On the other hand, if the opposing team does not have the means to mount a credible assault on the caged ball (for example another bash team), then it is normally prudent to move the ball upfield without delay.

Hope that helps.

[Hitonagashi]

There's two types of coaches that I usually see do this; really poor ones and really good ones.

The poor coaches want to polish you off, because if the ball is in their cage, they have to devote precious clawbombers to standing up to protect the cage corners instead of piling on. Besides, they can let you turn over right, you'll only stall, and if they can remove enough players, they can probably turn you over second half for a 1-1 draw!

There are however some very good coaches I've seen also do it. Usually, when they have a stat boosted runner...RandomOracle did it to me, with his MV8 beastman. He held back for a turn, so I swarmed his backfield with skinks, hunting the ball, and then with MV8 and 2 gfi's, he completely walled most of my skinks off from the action, making it a real pain to get back.

It's one of those things that is almost always a tactical mistake, so if someone you aren't expecting to make a mistake tactically does it, you should check you aren't overcommitting first...

[spubbbba]

I think it entirely depends on the opposition you face and how the game is going. If you have the full 8 turns to score then it may be more beneficial to leave the ball carrier deep than cage him up straight away. Far too many player commit their entire team to moving the ball forward down 1 path then get stuck. When they may be better off making some probing attack to draw their opponent to commit themselves and then exploit errors.

If you are playing a slow unagile team like Khemri or dwarfs (to a lesser extent Orcs and Nurgle) then it is a great way to help you win the blocking war since you can use those 4 players who would be cage corners to give assists or make hits. Since the opposition is slow and bad at dodging it will take them 2 or even 3 turns to get into a position to threaten your ball carrier. Those players chasing the ball carrier won’t be able to help in the blocking scrum so that gives you a higher man advantage. Against some teams it can be a good way to persuade ghouls, catchers, skinks, wolves etc to come out of hiding so you can hit them with a MB tackler too.

Plus if you push them towards 1 flank then you can run the ball down the other, or threaten to. If you outstrength your opponent but have less guard then this will help spread out the defence, ideal against teams like dwarfs.

[crimsonsun]

Being as I play predominately Khemri, I always try to have five players in my back field shielding the ball and pick ups, and forming a defensive screen, failure to do so will cost matches. The only time I have less players in my back field is if I am down multiple players or up multiple players, as you can either not field a valid offence holding players back or you have the players to pin there entire team down and lock them into unfavourable positions.

Even using a slow and poor ag team like khemri I always send 2 players to chase any ball handler that is likely to try to hang in the back field stalling the game. This will often force the ball forwards before the opposing coach is fully ready leading to either a quick turn 2 touch down or a mistake which leaves the ball exposed.

Crimsonsun

[mattgslater]

Okay, so when talking about offense in terms of starting placement, we've got blockers, forwards, backs, and fullbacks.

Blocker: player in enemy TZ
Forward: non-blocking player on halfway line, or one behind scrimmage
Back: player more than one behind scrimmage, who can cross the LOS without GFI, no more than 5 squares deep
Fullback: player who cannot cross the LOS without GFI, or who is 6 or more squares behind scrimmage.

Linemen and Forwards can be combined into a single number, as can backs and fullbacks, or they can be broken out.

Example (and opportunity to get back to the practice of putting the offense at the top, so downfield = down)
– – – –|e n d z o n e|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – o – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – o – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|o – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|o – – –
– – – –|o o o o o o –|– o – –
– – – –|– – x x x – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – x|– – x – x – –|x – – –
– – – –|– x x – x x –|– – – –
etc

So, this offense (the O guys) faces an interior defense (the X guys at the bottom) with a 101 line and a 4-man midfield screen in the 1 and 4 columns, two squares back, with four safeties in the 1 and 2 columns, three squares back. In response, the offense has set up 5 blockers and 3 forwards, an eight-man front, with one halfback and two fullbacks: 5-3-1-2, or 8-3 if you prefer.

Note that those forwards aren't all the same. The one on the left, for example, is a blocking forward. He's there to drop the hammer if the kickout block results in a push.

A Khemri offense is not going to be 5-3-1-2. That's for mobile teams. Khemri will probably do something more in the 5-1-3-2 (6-5) or 5-0-4-2 (5-6) range. By contrast, an elf team probably has no one set option. 5-5-0-1? 4-3-2-2? 1-6-3-1? 1-2-5-3? Obviously, the first two numbers must add up to 3+....

Khemri 4-1-4-2, schemed to diagonally block into the blocking forward (3 column) on the left-hand side of the offense (right side of the pitch)
– – – –|– – – o – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – o – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – o –|– o – – – o –|– o – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– – – – – – –|– – – –
– – – –|– o o o o – o|– – – –

[Bathoz]

Look, leaving the ball carrier out to dry off the kick is probably not really up for discussion. It's a bad idea.

I find the idea of leaving them disconnected from the weight of the team much after that interesting. And by much after that, I mean more than the time it takes to pick up the ball and run back to the big lads - active time spent waiting away from the press deciding where to go.

It's something I do with dark elves a bit - because a committed defense is usually easier to get around and stall on. But as bash versus bash (assuming reasonably similar speeds), it seems... I guess it's a way of making sure a couple of failed blocks don't expose the ball carrier, but it does seem to create unnecessary pressure if things don't go well. And I certainly wouldn't be happy doing it against any team with a competent defensive rush. (So no to Necro, Elves, Skaven, some Humans... err, you get the points).

What are the pros?

Being able to see where the personnel holes open before committing?
Being able to do a semi-decent switch/fake-out against an even slower team? (Norse or Amazons, and the like).

The cons?

You can lose too much ground and too much time that your gentle tempo offense becomes... uncomfortable.
Suicide against any wizard.
Even slow teams have ball hunters. Well, the good slow teams.

I don't know. I'm a dedicated speed-merchant (the bashiest I guess is Necro & Humans). So, seeing this would just make me happy. But, then, I'm not the type of team that this should be practiced against.

[Smeborg]

Being as I play predominately Khemri, I always try to have five players in my back field shielding the ball and pick ups, and forming a defensive screen, failure to do so will cost matches. The only time I have less players in my back field is if I am down multiple players or up multiple players, as you can either not field a valid offence holding players back or you have the players to pin there entire team down and lock them into unfavourable positions.

Even using a slow and poor ag team like khemri I always send 2 players to chase any ball handler that is likely to try to hang in the back field stalling the game. This will often force the ball forwards before the opposing coach is fully ready leading to either a quick turn 2 touch down or a mistake which leaves the ball exposed.

Crimsonsun

+1 to that. With Nurgle, which I have played a lot, I always probe with a Pestigor towards any lonely ball-carrier as soon as I reasonably can (much sooner against bash than against AG as the backfield defense is much easier). This forces the offense to commit to a play and usually to take risks.

[mattgslater]

Personnel really matter on both sides of the ball. My Orcs have a MA+2/AG+1 Blitzer with Dodge and Mighty Blow. If the Thrower is out, I may sometimes leave him alone with the ball outside of blitzing range, but only if I have a plan.

It's not just one strategy, mind you. But they all have in common the necessity that your opponent will be unable to hit or mark the carrier, and that the carrier can get to safety in one turn without rolling more than one set of easy dice. That's really a personnel thing. It's about MA, AG, and ball skills on that one player. A +2AG/+2MA/Blodge Thro-Ra is a very rare thing, yes, but he would completely change the way you'd play Khemri. This conversation is at the heart of that.

[Jimmy Fantastic]

Matt G Slaterrrrrrr Love it lol.
Hanging back is fine a lot of the time. Like most things in BB it is situational.