Interception rule improvement

[Grumbledook]

I don't see why you need wording, just have charts of which squares can be used and which can't

why make it any more complicated than that

obviously it is too late for them to go in the rulebook but no reason they can't be plastered around the net and put as part of tournament rule packs

[GalakStarscraper]

I don't see why you need wording, just have charts of which squares can be used and which can't

why make it any more complicated than that

Because Grum ... you cannot chart every possible angle. You have to have wording that explains how it would work even if its a tournament pack rule. Personally I would never use this for a tournament ... but you need wording that works if you actually would.

Tom

[Grumbledook]

Draw a line from the furthers corners of the squares of the passing player and the target square. Any square that this line goes through and any in the 8 surrounding squares to them are eligible for an interception, unless that square is outside a bounding box which encompasses both the origin and target square.

sure it increases the amount of area for interception, but isn't more interceptions something that was wanted?

the "bounding box" makes it simple to clear up players who are next to the thrower or catcher but not "between" them, which is often the most problematical interpretation of interception attempts

Code: Select all

_ x x _ _ _ _ _ _
x C _ _ _ _ _ _ _
x _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ x
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ T x
_ _ _ _ _ _ x x _

rubbish diagram to show what I mean by that, the squares marked x can't intercept they are outside the bounding box, T is the thrower, C is the Catcher

Throw in a few example diagrams and job done surely

[DoubleSkulls]

"Draw two lines from the leftmost corner of the throwers square to the leftmost corner of the target square and from the rightmost corner of the throwers square to the rightmost corner of the target square. Every field between these squares which is intersected by one of these lines is eligible for an interception. Borders and corners belong to all adjacent fields."

But there are situations with this system that don't look plausible to me:

I think with that wording and first example the squares to the left and right of the thrower & catcher are touched by the line (on the corner) so would be eligible for interceptions.

The wording needs to be more in English too. Maybe something like this:

Draw a line from the the leftmost corner of the throwers square to the leftmost corner of the target square, and from the rightmost corner of the throwers square to the rightmost corner of the target square. Every square touched by a line, including the edges, is eligible to intercept.

We'd need a diagram too. Otherwise its harder to visualise.

[plasmoid]

More problems:
If the throw is more horizontal than vertical then measuring leftmost to leftmost and rightmost to rightmost will not produce the desired result at all.

Also, on a completely vertical throw, who decides which of the leftmost corners is being used? The top one or bottom one. It will make a difference of 1 square on either side of both the thrower and reciever.

Cheers
Martin

[Grumbledook]

hence my suggestion of using two corners that are the furthest apart of the corresponding squares

[Daddy_Thorg]

After thinking over it for a while the last example I made doesn't seem so odd. I believe the proposal of gandresch is fine an just needs a good wording.

Any square that this line goes through and any in the 8 surrounding squares to them are eligible for an interception, unless that square is outside a bounding box which encompasses both the origin and target square.

sure it increases the amount of area for interception, but isn't more interceptions something that was wanted?

Not for me. I didn't like interceptions from far outside the flight path. Regarding the changes to safe throw and diving catch it looks to me as if handicaps for passes are not desired.

If the throw is more horizontal than vertical then measuring leftmost to leftmost and rightmost to rightmost will not produce the desired result at all.

Also, on a completely vertical throw, who decides which of the leftmost corners is being used?

hence my suggestion of using two corners that are the furthest apart of the corresponding squares

For a diagonal pass that would be the corner behind the thrower / catcher. Leftmost and rightmost according to the passing direction should do it. Perhaps it is easier to write: "Let the opponent choose the best corners." That saves many words.

[gandresch]

Hi,

what about:
To measure out, if a player is able to intercept, take two, parallel lines. Each line touches the square of the thrower and the catcher in one point at a time. All squares between each of this touch points, that are intersected or touched by the lines are in range for an interception.

Together with a picture, that should do it.

At first I thought about:
To measure out, if a player is able to intercept, take two, parallel segments, whose starting points are part of the square of the thrower and whose ending points are part of the square of the target, that have the maximum distance of all possible segments. Each square, that is touched by the open path from starting to ending point of each segment may go for an interception.

But somehow i thought, that no one would read the rulebook, if it would be written like that, hehe.

Greets,
gan

[alternat]

what about considering only the squares crossed by the red line and switching the roll to a +1 to the die roll?

- less argueing
- less squares available compensate for the easier roll
- chance for Impact to sell a "chain gang" set made up of a small chain and two poles to define passing range and intercept available squares... ok, just kidding about this.

[GalakStarscraper]

- chance for Impact to sell a "chain gang" set made up of a small chain and two poles to define passing range and intercept available squares... ok, just kidding about this.

We are actually asked to make miniatures for this by the Eletronic Football Players Club. It was stalled from happening when the 3 headed Human coach figure they asked us to make did not sell very well (ie the buying power they represented was not as strong as we had hoped).

Galak

[Darkson]

Did I miss that one?

[GalakStarscraper]

Did I miss that one?

The 3 headed coach? (it was a coach with 3 different head options meant to resemble 3 famous NFL coaches).

[Darkson]

Sorry - thought you meant a model with 3 heads (mutant), not one with 3 seperate heads!

[alternat]

- chance for Impact to sell a "chain gang" set made up of a small chain and two poles to define passing range and intercept available squares... ok, just kidding about this.

We are actually asked to make miniatures for this by the Eletronic Football Players Club. It was stalled from happening when the 3 headed Human coach figure they asked us to make did not sell very well (ie the buying power they represented was not as strong as we had hoped).

Galak

always one step ahead!