Discuss Fantasy football-style board games - GW's Blood Bowl, Impact!'s Elfball, Privateer Press' Grind, Heresy's Deathball, etc. THIS IS NOT AN NFL FANTASY FOOTBALL SITE!
stick_with_poo_on_the_end wrote:What is the obsession with shoe horning American football terminology in? I don’t see cricket fans referring to their Werewolves as “slips” and their Ghouls as “silly mid Offs”, nor the rugby fans insisting there troll slayers are “hookers” or “Fly Half’s”
Does everything really have to have football and reference attached to it?
Maybe it’s just me, but I just see a dwarf runner as a dwarf runner, not a quarterback. And a blocker as a blocker not a tight end guard or whatever it is they are called.
It's a bit eccentric and seems a bit silly at times to me, but what the hell. Fair play. TBH it's nice to see people innovate and come up with ways to make the game more interesting.
Even if I still can't tell the difference between a tight round end and a standard nose tackler...
stick_with_poo_on_the_end wrote:What is the obsession with shoe horning American football terminology in? I don’t see cricket fans referring to their Werewolves as “slips” and their Ghouls as “silly mid Offs”, nor the rugby fans insisting there troll slayers are “hookers” or “Fly Half’s”
Does everything really have to have football and reference attached to it?
Maybe it’s just me, but I just see a dwarf runner as a dwarf runner, not a quarterback. And a blocker as a blocker not a tight end guard or whatever it is they are called.
It's a bit eccentric and seems a bit silly at times to me, but what the hell. Fair play. TBH it's nice to see people innovate and come up with ways to make the game more interesting.
Even if I still can't tell the difference between a nice tight round end and a standard nose tackler...
As far as terminology, my idea was to meld all three football games. Some positions are natural fits for one game or the other, and if the name seems properly descriptive, then it's just logical. My terms aren't all American (there are no Midfielders in AmFB, and "flanker" is slang for a tall, fast Wide Receiver).
@Ikterus, above: "Center" carries a connotation in a great many games (Volleyball, Basketball, AmFB) that makes the idea of having more than one of them seem confusing to American ears. I don't mind using a "foreign" term, but I far prefer Midfielder.
@Ikterus, P2: I still think the "Nose" and "Ends" are different, as are any guys between them on a stacked defense (still need term, but it's not dire, and this will have to be worked out as the vocabulary evolves... anything but Tackle). But there's no reason you can't just reference the DL as a whole. You could also rename them (L/M/R) Lineman, but that's a BB term that might not apply (on many Orc teams, there are Linemen, but the line is all BOBs and/or Troll).
EDIT: To my AmFB sensibilities, Center is an offensive position, but if the community likes the idea of a Defensive Center, then rename the middle lineman a Defensive Center, or just Center. Then continue with the AmFB offensive terms on the DL for stacked line, making non-Center interior players Guards? Or calling them L/R Center? So a 32023 defense has a Left End, Left Center, Center, Right Center and Right End?
Still, though, I like Noseguard: it's so descriptive. Ooh... how about Guard for interior defensive players? I like that much more than Center, and it lets you then put a (L/Nose/R) designation (not to mention an article) to signify which and keep it from being confused with the skill. So a 32023 defense would have a Left End, L-Guard, Noseguard, R-Guard, Right End. It's not a common occurrence, but I've done it, and I saw a 4-man line last week (it was quite interesting: an undead team with two Mummies at DT, er, DG/DC/whatever, and Block Ghouls on the End; never seen anything like it, and it worked pretty well, got a defensive TD off the first drive. To be sure, I had no Tackle or Wrestle, he didn't win the game and I knocked one of his Ghouls down anyway, but he got to spread the line out and force dodges, and could easily have made me burn actions or even a TRR had I not generated a lucky (<31%) open Pow).
Reason:''
What is Nuffle's view? Through a window, two-by-three. He peers through snake eyes.
What is Nuffle's lawn? Inches, squares, and tackle zones: Reddened blades of grass.
What is Nuffle's tree? Risk its trunk, space the branches. Touchdowns are its fruit.
I think Blood Bowl needs its own terms not a mish mash of loads of other games that lead to confusion
centre just meands the centre of the pitch, I don't build anyone to specifcally play there
calling someone a guard would cause confusion with the skill as well and what does it actually mean in bb terms?
its like posistions in basketball, i don't get it there either, players playing both offence and defence, doesn't basketball also have a guard position, no idea what they do when going forward or back
american football has differnet players for offence and defence, blood bowl you use a lot of players for both, so that is why the separate names work in american football but not in blood bowl (imo)
football positions are derived mainly from the jobs players do on the pitch as they tend to stay in those positions through out the game
blood bowl needs positions like ball carrier, retreiver, line fodder, marker etc, depending on what happens during a drive players have to alter their role
descriptions on player builds are more useful than positions where they set up for what is a brief time in the game
also I usually put a defensive thrower build/ball retriever player type what you have labelled a safety for example
I will also often use the wide players from one side to go after the ball when i've kicked it then the ones on the other side to back around towards the centre of my half to be the safeties, this is why I can't see the NFL terms working
So really, there are three different characteristics that a player possesses on the field. A player has a position (who they are and how they do what they do), a placement (where they go and who they play against) and a purpose (how they're used), no? This is no different from any sport, except that "placement" is called position, and "position" is really physiology. There's no reason that the Midfielder on the off-side can't be a marker or a rusher or even a secondary retriever on some teams; it still doesn't change the fact that he does it from the offside midfield. A Zombie and a Dark Elf Blitzer in that spot are night-and-day when it comes to function on Turn 3 of the drive, but on that first turn they're pretty much the same guy give or take a few skills, with the same immediate responsibility give or take a little scheming.
Similarly, in American Football, one CB might play man coverage while another drops into a zone, or rushes the passer. It's the same way in most sports.
Reason:''
What is Nuffle's view? Through a window, two-by-three. He peers through snake eyes.
What is Nuffle's lawn? Inches, squares, and tackle zones: Reddened blades of grass.
What is Nuffle's tree? Risk its trunk, space the branches. Touchdowns are its fruit.
Grumbledook wrote:I think Blood Bowl needs its own terms not a mish mash of loads of other games that lead to confusion
Bingo! If people start giving tactical advise like this, I think a lot of people will be more confused rather than enlightened - for example, I've no idea what Iketurus was on about. If AmF was a global sport (by which I mean a top sport around the world, not just shown across the world) it might make sense to use it's terminology, but it isn't, so it doesn't. Given the places where BB is mainly played, it would make more sense to use Football (soccer) terminology - more people will understand that.
Reason:''
Currently an ex-Blood Bowl coach, most likely to be found dying to Armoured Skeletons in the frozen ruins of Felstad, or bleeding into the arena sands of Rome or burning rubber for Mars' entertainment.
There are some places where AmFB fits beautifully as an analogy and Assoc FB does not fit at all, specifically on the line. This ain't soccer by any stretch of the imagination, and while I'm happy to nod to the parallels, it's got to be its own thing. Personally, I'd rather make an Esperanto than a Klingon out of it, adapting the most applicable term from the big 3 football games for positions, and then using this core terminology of space to describe defenses and maneuvers to be named by their claimants, inventors, or a more concrete lexicon of existing maneuvers and setups (diagonal blocking, 1TTD offenses, chain-pushing vs. chain-blocking, etc).
Reason:''
What is Nuffle's view? Through a window, two-by-three. He peers through snake eyes.
What is Nuffle's lawn? Inches, squares, and tackle zones: Reddened blades of grass.
What is Nuffle's tree? Risk its trunk, space the branches. Touchdowns are its fruit.
Well, I lik this idea, and I think people get confused as to a player's position and the name for where he lines up on D or O. For example, you can put a thrower on the line, in the wide, or in the backfield, deep or shallow. And he remains a thrower (or runner, or blitzer, or hobgoblin...)
But to talk offensive or defensive terminology, you need a vocabulary which is independent. So any reference to "I like runners" or "but blitzers are BLITZERS" is a knee jerk reaction not related to Matt's point.
Now, Luckily there is an easy answer... You have your inner wide, your outer wide, you have your linemen, which can be subdivided into the mid line and the end line players. Then you have your backfield players. Players near the line who can be blitzed without a leap, dodge, or previous block are called up backers, and your players who are within 5 squares of the line but can't be easily blitzed are called your deep men.
I'm not married to the terms, but I think that really sums up every available position on defense, and if we stick to Blood Bowl terminology, it should work!
When I think about it I realise what some part of the problem might be. I believe that our perception of the game (BB that is) is influenced by the sports that we know and follow.
AmFB is a game that is built around an amount of plays (that usually only last for a few seconds) and the strategy involved is how you use those plays and counter the the plays of the opposition. Right? This also goes in some respect for Basketball, and Handball (for those of you that know that sport).
This makes an AmFB:er think about BB in terms of strategic plays and how you set up the players matter a great deal.
Those of us that follow Soccer and Rugby, setups don't matter as much. Those sports are more dynamic and the flow of the game is what matters. Sure you have positionals but how you set up around the scrum in Rugby might change a great deal during the match. Also in Soccer the positionals are often just a general hint on where you'll find the player. In a Ruck or Maul the Rugby team "improvises" a set up that will fit that exact moment in the game.
This might explain why you have such difficulties at finding a terminology but also to convince us why that is necessary in the first place. Speaking for my self I don't think much about how I set up the players. This might be a fault in my abilities as a BB coach but it might also be because I percieve the game in a different way than you do, Matt.
I do think that it would be great to find a terminology that we all can use, but I still think that less is more when it comes to the detail. However it would be great to get an easy way of understanding the finer details of the AmFB way of looking at BB.
Incredible insight Ikterus. I had never thought of it that way, but that is probably exactly why the European guys here resist Matt's terminology.
Jural wrote:Now, Luckily there is an easy answer... You have your inner wide, your outer wide, you have your linemen, which can be subdivided into the mid line and the end line players. Then you have your backfield players. Players near the line who can be blitzed without a leap, dodge, or previous block are called up backers, and your players who are within 5 squares of the line but can't be easily blitzed are called your deep men.
This is becoming a very interesting debate. It is true that Matt's terminology seems whacko to me, I'm sure much of this is because I don't have enough knowledge of AmF.
The terms that I use / have heard used in the UK:
Safety - from AmF, refering to a deep centrally positioned player on defence. I've also heard the term sweeper - from soccer.
Runner - a player positioned between the ball carrier and the endzone, within striking distance of a score.
Ball carrier - self-explanatory.
Corner - if I've heard this term, it's more used in association with cage formation e.g. front corner or back corner
Also, there are a number of general terms e.g.
Behind the ball - this definitely comes from soccer, soccer teams often defend with all 11 player behind the ball and this is an effective way of defending in BB
Mark - to stand in an opponent's tackle zone - again I suppose this has come from soccer
One-on-one / Last man - when the ball carrier is running alone deep in opposition territory and only one defender is free to blitz / tackle him, again from soccer
Friend / Friends - ball carrier support by one or more players
Line fodder - the plebs who occupy the LOS on defence
Corridor of Uncertainy - refers to the 2 squares next to the sideline where players are at risk of a crowd push against frenzied opposition. The term comes from cricket (specifically Geoffrey Boycott) and describes the area around a batsman's off stump where bowlers will bowl to make the batsman uncertain whether to leave the ball or play, in the hope of having the batsman caught behind the wicket, lbw or bowled.
Just a few but there are many others that aren't leaping to mind. I have heard hardly any terms to describe positions on the set up alone. This is because, IMO, it's not that important a part of the game. BB is a flowing game, and what you do once you start to move your players is much more signficant.
