Help me think this through (5 drive BB)

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:37 am

Ignoring the difficultly that slower teams would have in scoring in 4 turns, it would be almost impossible for them to turn over their opponent and score in four turns - and thats even with MA6 teams in my experience.

So you'd probably need to do something to either reduce the size of the pitch or speed up slower teams.

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 10:30 am

Ian, you are assuming, I take it, that the 4 turns will always start from the half way point. That is definitely not where I am coming from and not where I think Martin is coming from.

assuming my Dwarf team drives to within 4 squares of the end zone and kicks to the square next to it. The next drive has only 2 rows of squares to line up in and I have a solid D with which to play take-away

I fancy my chances to win on Defense every time. I am sure that AG teams fancy their chances to pin me back in my half, but this is all Tactics for me.

it may see the return of 2 deep End zones and a touchback zone say 4 squares from the end zone for the offense to start in.

It is a good slant and brings the game nearer to NFL which is a good thing

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:30 am

I missed that

Is the reset even necessary? You could make it like rugby league where after a while the team has to kick or turnover, but unlike NFL, this isn't a stop in play. So effectively the ball gets kicked every 4 turns of continuous possession or something.

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:17 am

I think the reset is necessary, otherwise the slow teams would suffer.

you would have Gutter Runners or Various Elf catchers running away and kicking on turn 4 to put the ball somewhere they can reach and score next turn.......

The difference between BB and League is such that the "Line" mentality of league is not evident here. so the huge gaps that develop would be too easy to exploit.

I have often thought more of a 4 down mentality would suit the game. however that many resets would bog the game down

Some teams can score in 1-2 turns(most in fact with good positioning) and that will continue to happen. the teams that need more will of course use 4 turns to grind and if they do not score, kick for position and hope to regain the ball quickly and score next drive.

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:27 am

The only grey area for me is with the punt itself

I wanted to say that everyone can kick it 5 squares irrespective of ST or AG and that the Kick skill allows you to drop it anywhere on the path. To benefit from this the player with "kick" has to be the one kicking the ball.

this obviously will cause some turn 4 shenanigans where you might get a situation similar to Rugby where they try to force the pass / hand off to the kicker to get better field placement. Ball carriers may take kick as a 4th skill.

a different slant on things

The kicker models may see a resurgence

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:32 am

or maybe 6 squares and Kick allows you to halve the distance to 3

thoughts?

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:55 pm

voyagers_uk wrote:I think the reset is necessary, otherwise the slow teams would suffer.

You would need an offside rule.

1) The kicking team aren't allowed to catch or pick up the ball until after the receiving team have tried to (probably the simplest).

2) Kicking players in advance of the kicker are unable to handle the ball (as per #1).

Joemanji · Post by **Joemanji** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 3:41 pm

Sounds like the official NAF rules from 2nd ed. In that each team had four "downs" to score. Each down made up of any number of turns, lasting until the ball wasn't caught or the ball carrier was knocked over. In which case the game restarted with the receiving team still in posession of the ball. I like idea of updating that variant.

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 4:13 pm

ianwilliams wrote:
voyagers_uk wrote:I think the reset is necessary, otherwise the slow teams would suffer.
You would need an offside rule.

1) The kicking team aren't allowed to catch or pick up the ball until after the receiving team have tried to (probably the simplest).

2) Kicking players in advance of the kicker are unable to handle the ball (as per #1).

I was thinking more thatthe ball was called "dead" at the point of landing, no bounce, no scatter.

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 4:14 pm

Joemanji wrote:Sounds like the official NAF rules from 2nd ed. In that each team had four "downs" to score. Each down made up of any number of turns, lasting until the ball wasn't caught or the ball carrier was knocked over. In which case the game restarted with the receiving team still in posession of the ball. I like idea of updating that variant.

never played 2nd, so it would be interesting to get your views Joe

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 8:55 pm

Hi guys,
thanks for all your feedback.

I can see the similarity to the 2nd ed. NFL variant - but IMO, the variant played like cr*p. Continuous setting up of teams made it so painfully slow.

I hope and think that what we're talking about here will be nothing like that.

IMO, if you play a rule of maximum 4 turns of possession (potential punt) then set up again, then I think you'll avoid a lot of problems that would come with trying to play without re-setting.
It does sound interesting.

Even so, I'm personally more interested in a 4x4 turn variant. I think it will be very tense. And I don't feel bad for the slower/bashy teams. Setting up last as the defense will make their job quite a bit easier. And besides: Games can be won on straight defense. That will put the game at 0-0, play defense in the overtime, prevent the score for 4 turns, an you've won without ever getting into the opposing EZ

Cheers
Martin

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 10:37 pm

plasmoid wrote: I can see the similarity to the 2nd ed. NFL variant - but IMO, the variant played like cr*p. Continuous setting up of teams made it so painfully slow.

I hope and think that what we're talking about here will be nothing like that.

Never played it, so cannot really comment.

plasmoid wrote: IMO, if you play a rule of maximum 4 turns of possession (potential punt) then set up again, then I think you'll avoid a lot of problems that would come with trying to play without re-setting.
It does sound interesting.

This has really sparked my interest and puts a lot of emphasis back on tactics without devaluing the current strategies

plasmoid wrote: Even so, I'm personally more interested in a 4x4 turn variant. I think it will be very tense. And I don't feel bad for the slower/bashy teams. Setting up last as the defense will make their job quite a bit easier. And besides: Games can be won on straight defense. That will put the game at 0-0, play defense in the overtime, prevent the score for 4 turns, an you've won without ever getting into the opposing EZ

The game should not be won by nullification, a TD must be scored, I am even against a coin flip these days. There is no fun in it... if you don't get a winner after overtime, call for a replay like a good cup match....

prisma · Post by **prisma** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 6:52 am

I never player 2nd edition, but that "field position"-idea (setting up where the ball was after 4 turns, not in the center of the pitch) sounds interesting to me... however, if they would set up near their own endzone, and only have 4 turns to score, could slow teams (dwarf, nurgle, khemri, ...) still score ? I don't think so...

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 9:27 am

Nope. Probably not.
But they could move the ball far - earning better field position, either for taking the ball and scoring or for halting the opposition for 4 turns and then getting the ball back.

Cheers
Martin

prisma · Post by **prisma** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 9:42 am

Okay, so which chances would the slow and bashy teams then have ? Move the ball further down, and reduce the number of opponents on the pitch...
BUT (and I guess it's a big BUT) both teams will have 2 possibilities to bring "fresh" players onto the pitch until they get into ball-possession again.
That reduces their chances again.
I like the general idea, but will a bashy (but not stalling!!) playstyle be a proper and competitive strategy ?
Maybe setting defense up after offense will help them, but I don't know...

Anyway, can someone please post a first version of a "playtest ruleset" here so we can try it out and add some reality to the theory discussed here ?