Receiving Team Should Setup First

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:23 pm

your league sounds slightly more varied in it's rules than I am used to, but we can always talk about it

Jural · Post by **Jural** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:29 pm

Personally, I've always thought it would be interesting if the set-up were done in an alternating fashion. However... I think this could end up adding too much time to the game

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:06 pm

I disagree, I think that it will lead to more time between touchdowns but the overall time of the match will be the same if not shorter as the LOS Blocks that can tie up a lot of the first turn after each TD or restart will be minimised.

this whole shift will make the roster makeup a whole more interesting landscape

Is this one of those ideas that gets a few people interested and then gets forgotten whilst the majority get sarcastic in IP discussions or is the Chaos team broken ramblings?

seems like it

MadLordAnarchy · Post by **MadLordAnarchy** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:27 pm

voyagers_uk wrote:Is this one of those ideas that gets a few people interested and then gets forgotten whilst the majority get sarcastic in IP discussions or is the Chaos team broken ramblings?

seems like it

Typically it's very difficult to discuss change in any context.

I don't know what implications moving players back at the start creates but it seems innovative. I do actually like the line of scrimmage as a concept - I like the big uglies getting it on up front while the skill players try to play round them.

DaImp · Post by **DaImp** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 4:34 pm

A quick history lesson

1st Edition Blood Bowl had the 2 teams lining up just infront of their own endzones and making a mad dash for the middle of the pitch to secure the ball.

2nd Edition Blood Bowl had the teams setting up 4 squares back from the centre line. The offensive team started with the ball in hand - no kicking

3rd edition Blood Bowl introduced the line of scrimage and the kick-off.

I think it would be an interesting experiment to try out the set up as per 2nd edition, but with kick-offs. I personally don't think allowing the defending team to set up second is a good idea though.

Jural · Post by **Jural** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:52 pm

voyagers_uk wrote:I disagree, I think that it will lead to more time between touchdowns...

The more time between touchdowns was in reference to my own idea- Alternating players, team by team, one at a time, on the pitch after a score. The rules would otherwise be the same (3 minimum on the LOS, 2 Max in each wide.)

I didn't mean to detract from your Rugby type start.

As a matter of fact, the concept of a neutral zone in the middle of the field, even if it is 2 squares wide, is fascinating. Especially with a kick-off, as one could allow the ball landing in these squares to NOT be a touchback. In addition, new skills/cards/kick-off results could be introduced which let players get set up in the neutral zone.

Good idea, I'm just curious if it wouldn't kill the slow teams. But worthy of consideration.

Ziggi Abschuss · Post by **Ziggi Abschuss** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 9:26 am

voyagers_uk wrote:Did 2ed favour AG4 teams?

The 2nd ed was so totally different that it is hard to compare, but in our league it was the humans/orcs (they had the same stats back then) and dwarfs that ruled. Then again dwarfs had St6 blockers etc. AG as we now know it was actually 3 different stats: AG for dodging and picking up the ball iirc, TS for throwing and CL for catching. That made differentiating between different types of agility/dexterity a lot easier. But then again all the skills worked a bit differently as did blocking. Movement was 2 different stats: MA and SP (sprint)(the MAs of today are pretty close to old MA + SP). You could move up to MA (normally 4) and still block with all players. The game mechanics were pretty different as well. There was no turn over, the games were normally played until one team scored 3 TDs etc.

DaImp wrote:2nd Edition Blood Bowl had the teams setting up 4 squares back from the centre line. The offensive team started with the ball in hand - no kicking

iirc we played 2nd ed with a kick off...

So much for that rant for now.

Ziggi

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 10:41 am

DaImp wrote:A quick history lesson

1st Edition Blood Bowl had the 2 teams lining up just infront of their own endzones and making a mad dash for the middle of the pitch to secure the ball.

2nd Edition Blood Bowl had the teams setting up 4 squares back from the centre line. The offensive team started with the ball in hand - no kicking

3rd edition Blood Bowl introduced the line of scrimage and the kick-off.

I think it would be an interesting experiment to try out the set up as per 2nd edition, but with kick-offs. I personally don't think allowing the defending team to set up second is a good idea though.

So 1st Edition was almost Dodgeball-esque.lol

2nd edition seems to reflect both NFL and Rubgy to a degree

3rd ed and since still has this lets just form up on this central line and you can hit me ethos.....

one of these days I have to try 2nd, plus LRB 5.0 skills and kick off's

MadLordAnarchy · Post by **MadLordAnarchy** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 11:20 am

I'm heading towards 2nd ed with updates for what was actually good since.

stormmaster1 · Post by **stormmaster1** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 11:35 am

I tried the first edition start a few years ago with LRB4 rules, and no turn limit, just a 3 score target. Fast teams (almost) always scored first but eventually got ground down my slow cages with no time constraints.

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:39 pm

MadLordAnarchy wrote:I'm heading towards 2nd ed with updates for what was actually good since.

How do the league members feel about that?

MadLordAnarchy · Post by **MadLordAnarchy** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:19 pm

It's not actually a specific change - it's a migration where we're adding in more and more fun things so we've got multi-race teams, more complex weather, kickoff, and injury tables, refs on the pitch, player quirks & aging, pitch conditions, home stadia, stuff like that. I don't really care for the main ruleset the great things about 3ed are turnover, the clear time frame, and improving the blocking and I pick and choose what works for me of the rest. My people mostly don't have another frame of reference as almost all of them were recruited into the world of gaming by me. Of those who had played BB before, I think I'm 3-1 for in favour.

As I don't have the same constraints, I can consider the option of receiving team sets up first without having to worry about the impact on AG 3 teams because I don't have those teams. I can see that for me at least, attacking holds too many cards and the receiving team are massively favoured.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:37 am

Maybe the receiving team should set up first, then the kicking team, but right after the kicking team finishes (before the ball is placed), a receiving player not on the line should be allowed to go "into motion" and take a move action so long as he doesn't cross the LoS. That would be very much like a regular play in Am.FB, making the BB kickoff a weird combination of standard play and special teams.

Hey, then maybe we can require the offense to start 5 on the line! And eligible receiver rules!

Joemanji · Post by **Joemanji** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:40 pm

voyagers_uk wrote:I think MLA is onto something and would go one further. both teams should start back from halfway (say 5 squares).

Another possibility would be to have the receiving team start on the LoS, but the kicking team start 3 squares off it. That way both teams get an advantage ...

I've been thinking about possible skills that allowed your team to use different formations on kickoffs. The idea being that the player with the skill is calling a special play. A simple version might be allowing a team to put 3 players in each widezone.