35 coaches online • Server time: 14:06
* * * Did you know? 199 games were played yesterday.
Recent Forum Topics  Diving Tackle vs Pog... | Fumbbl Cup - Are you... | Southern Wastes Leag... |
2022-09-30 13:59:33
5 votes, rating 4
5 votes, rating 4
passing
Before I start I wish to state that I have not had the chance to play many games or spectate any, nor have I used all the available races in BB.
That being said, it seems to me that passing, previously already discouraged but present, isn't really seen on much the BB pitch at all anymore, especially since the release of BB2020.
I for one think that there should be a change in how the passing game is affected by rules and nerfs. Running with the ball and blocking your way to the endzone is cool and all, but it has become the only real way to score points effectively.
This also means that some races which have unforgiving stat lines for a running/blocking game are left out cold since the passing game has been so heavily nerfed.
Opening up the rules and incentivizing a passing style of play again (for certain races) would open new strategic and tactical possibilities, as well as bringing back some present in the 2016 version of the rules.
Essentially I'd like the game to have more than one playstyle which can be effective or relatively easy to use in order to score points. At any rate, these are simply thoughts on the current ruleset, therefore I am conscious that these changes will probably never occur, but I though it would be interesting to see what other coaches think.
That being said, it seems to me that passing, previously already discouraged but present, isn't really seen on much the BB pitch at all anymore, especially since the release of BB2020.
I for one think that there should be a change in how the passing game is affected by rules and nerfs. Running with the ball and blocking your way to the endzone is cool and all, but it has become the only real way to score points effectively.
This also means that some races which have unforgiving stat lines for a running/blocking game are left out cold since the passing game has been so heavily nerfed.
Opening up the rules and incentivizing a passing style of play again (for certain races) would open new strategic and tactical possibilities, as well as bringing back some present in the 2016 version of the rules.
Essentially I'd like the game to have more than one playstyle which can be effective or relatively easy to use in order to score points. At any rate, these are simply thoughts on the current ruleset, therefore I am conscious that these changes will probably never occur, but I though it would be interesting to see what other coaches think.
Comments
Posted by C0ddlefish on 2022-09-30 14:14:32
I quite like the addition of specific passing stats so that there are specialist throwers. That feels quite 'sports simulation' sensible.
Fundamentally it is the implementation of Wildly Inaccurate that has hurt the passing game. In the past worst case you might drop the ball at your feet, or the ball would land at least in the rough vicinity of where you were aiming (most likely well out of danger of your own end zone).
Now it could end up almost anywhere.
Solutions?
- Wildly Inaccurate deviates from the target square not the thrower
- a specific Passing Skill to rule out Wildly Inaccurate instead of one of the really duff new Passing Skills (I'm looking at you Running Pass).
Fundamentally it is the implementation of Wildly Inaccurate that has hurt the passing game. In the past worst case you might drop the ball at your feet, or the ball would land at least in the rough vicinity of where you were aiming (most likely well out of danger of your own end zone).
Now it could end up almost anywhere.
Solutions?
- Wildly Inaccurate deviates from the target square not the thrower
- a specific Passing Skill to rule out Wildly Inaccurate instead of one of the really duff new Passing Skills (I'm looking at you Running Pass).
Posted by koadah on 2022-09-30 14:30:19
It is correct that Wildly Inaccurate deviates from the thrower's square. It should just occur less often.
You should not be able to completely prevent it.
You should not be able to completely prevent it.
Posted by C0ddlefish on 2022-09-30 14:59:01
Yeah that's probably fair if they are in a load of tacklezone, or mass Disturbing Presence.
But it shouldn't take at 2 or 3 skill ups: Pa1+, Cannoneer, Accurate to stop a Thrower chucking the ball backwards when in clear space.
There's a skill that prevent fumbling the ball, why not one that stops WI though?
But it shouldn't take at 2 or 3 skill ups: Pa1+, Cannoneer, Accurate to stop a Thrower chucking the ball backwards when in clear space.
There's a skill that prevent fumbling the ball, why not one that stops WI though?
Posted by koadah on 2022-09-30 15:35:58
That's fair logic.
IMO there wouldn't be skills to completely prevent a fumbles or interceptions. Only reduce their chances of happening.
But you're lucky. I'm not on the rules committee. :)
IMO there wouldn't be skills to completely prevent a fumbles or interceptions. Only reduce their chances of happening.
But you're lucky. I'm not on the rules committee. :)
Posted by koadah on 2022-09-30 15:37:06
Too many players cannot pass at all IMO and too many are worse than they need to be.
Posted by C0ddlefish on 2022-09-30 15:49:34
Actually even something as simple as deviate from the thrower but use the throw in template so it at least travels roughly within the direction of where they were aiming would be better
Posted by koadah on 2022-09-30 16:01:44
There has to be a chance that it could go backwards or there is no point to it. Then you may as well just remove it.
Posted by mekutata on 2022-09-30 17:22:22
If we had the option to turn off Wildly Inaccurate I'd do so in a heartbeat.
Maybe with the exception of Bommas.
Maybe with the exception of Bommas.
Posted by koadah on 2022-09-30 17:42:22
Just removing it would be a great option.
I'd also like... if you have already rolled a fumble, roll again, on a 1 it's wildly inaccurate.
I'd also like... if you have already rolled a fumble, roll again, on a 1 it's wildly inaccurate.
Posted by Nelphine on 2022-09-30 20:17:13
but.. teams with dedicated passers.. still play like they did before? and now it's more in line with football (should it be? that's for others to decide) where only the QB does any passing, and he controls the pace?
seems fine to me, but i'm also passing MORE in the new ruleset than I did in 2016.
seems fine to me, but i'm also passing MORE in the new ruleset than I did in 2016.
Posted by Hovring on 2022-09-30 23:36:28
I think the real issue is passing is done with a d6, 2+ is the only reliable roll you would risk taking especially since you also have a risk on the other end with the catch. That makes passing plays desperate plays, just like when you have to 3+ dodge with the carrier in the running game.
The only solution I see is to make passing a much safer action. A simple buff would be using the d8 for passing. A more interesting buff would be boosting most of the passing skills by adding more effect that saves you from risking turnovers, just like safe pass. For example cloud burster could have the added effect of not causing a turnover unless the ball is caught by an opponent, this way you can have an inaccurate pass landing somewhere upfield and still be able to recover the ball.
The only solution I see is to make passing a much safer action. A simple buff would be using the d8 for passing. A more interesting buff would be boosting most of the passing skills by adding more effect that saves you from risking turnovers, just like safe pass. For example cloud burster could have the added effect of not causing a turnover unless the ball is caught by an opponent, this way you can have an inaccurate pass landing somewhere upfield and still be able to recover the ball.
Posted by ivanybw on 2022-10-01 03:00:48
A new ruler with less squares for long and bomb, wider quick n short.
This also will help with ttm, true pinnacle of bb.
This also will help with ttm, true pinnacle of bb.
Posted by Scugnizzo on 2022-10-01 11:26:07
I think that the chance to intercept/deviate the ball is also too much to deal with for passing to be actually worth it. I mean, remove the possibility to intercept on long bombs or something to actually make that tactic a little bit viable...
@Nelphine: I agree with you on the irl role of a QB, but in AF they pass the ball CONSTANTLY (albeit in multiple phases). In blood bowl you either block your way and run through to the EZ or you do the same and wait to make a simple, risk free pass which then takes you to the EZ.
I like Hovring's ideas, but changing from a D6 roll to a D8 roll for passing won't go down that well I think...I would have left everything the same as in BB2016 and simply added the PA stat to players.
@Nelphine: I agree with you on the irl role of a QB, but in AF they pass the ball CONSTANTLY (albeit in multiple phases). In blood bowl you either block your way and run through to the EZ or you do the same and wait to make a simple, risk free pass which then takes you to the EZ.
I like Hovring's ideas, but changing from a D6 roll to a D8 roll for passing won't go down that well I think...I would have left everything the same as in BB2016 and simply added the PA stat to players.
Posted by erased000047 on 2022-10-02 05:34:48
i don't even understand why passing is being discussed. games workshop is not about to faq passing. they don't care about anything but the bottom line.
you act like discussing a rule will effect change. maybe it will make you feel better or maybe it will help you play better with passing within the parameters of the current rules but nothing will change. its not just about the passing rules are worse now than before either its also- in no order -
a) the shitty passing skills
b) the nerfing of everything elf to make them non passing teams-
c) making the fouling game even better
d) in reality making skaven the best "passing" team out there -
all this makes passing just stupid. you think GW can/will make passing better in future rules editions? don't hold your breath.
you act like discussing a rule will effect change. maybe it will make you feel better or maybe it will help you play better with passing within the parameters of the current rules but nothing will change. its not just about the passing rules are worse now than before either its also- in no order -
a) the shitty passing skills
b) the nerfing of everything elf to make them non passing teams-
c) making the fouling game even better
d) in reality making skaven the best "passing" team out there -
all this makes passing just stupid. you think GW can/will make passing better in future rules editions? don't hold your breath.
Posted by koadah on 2022-10-02 14:10:40
We don't have to use GW rules. I sure don't.
Think of them more as "guidelines". :)
Use what you like. Change what you don't.
On Fumbbl we can only use what the devs code for us.
They have coded the ability to change player stats. We can do that.
If we have the option to remove or use modified Wildly Inaccurate then I think that we're good. :)
Think of them more as "guidelines". :)
Use what you like. Change what you don't.
On Fumbbl we can only use what the devs code for us.
They have coded the ability to change player stats. We can do that.
If we have the option to remove or use modified Wildly Inaccurate then I think that we're good. :)
Posted by Rags on 2022-10-03 11:00:57
I agree that Wildly Inaccurate scattering from passing player rather than target is a major flaw which could be easily rectified either by deviating from target or by using throw in template from passer.
But there's also problem of the passing skills briefly mentioned by Swampserpent. GW went with exactly twelve skills per category to facilitate skill randomisation tables, but couldn't come up with twelve decent Passing skills. Their silly solution was to split OK skills like Accurate into two skills which too weak to be worthwhile. Introducing a Passing stating was evidently intended to encourage dedicated throwers and the passing game, but the skills nerf has undermined this.
It's a serious contradiction and design flaw, but could probably resolved easily enough. Accurate could be restored to it's former status (former glory), Running Pass and Dump Off could be combined into single skill, as could maybe Fumblerooskie and Nerves of Steel.
There's a few options to adjust the randomisation. One is to simply to duplicate key passing skills like Pass and Accurate on the table, so they occur more than once. This would mean they are more likely to be acquired randomly, which makes sense. A generic thrower should be more likely to get Pass before other more niche skills.
But there's also problem of the passing skills briefly mentioned by Swampserpent. GW went with exactly twelve skills per category to facilitate skill randomisation tables, but couldn't come up with twelve decent Passing skills. Their silly solution was to split OK skills like Accurate into two skills which too weak to be worthwhile. Introducing a Passing stating was evidently intended to encourage dedicated throwers and the passing game, but the skills nerf has undermined this.
It's a serious contradiction and design flaw, but could probably resolved easily enough. Accurate could be restored to it's former status (former glory), Running Pass and Dump Off could be combined into single skill, as could maybe Fumblerooskie and Nerves of Steel.
There's a few options to adjust the randomisation. One is to simply to duplicate key passing skills like Pass and Accurate on the table, so they occur more than once. This would mean they are more likely to be acquired randomly, which makes sense. A generic thrower should be more likely to get Pass before other more niche skills.
Posted by Carthage on 2022-10-03 15:52:39
Wildly inaccurate should use the throw in rules from the thrower. Controller gets to pick which sideline or endzone to point towards. Hail mary pass skill turns wildly inaccurate to just inaccurate.
Posted by Scugnizzo on 2022-10-12 11:34:30
Well, maybe if enough people start discussing the rules and manage to get a few suggestions across to GW, maybe the game could be more balanced. After all, if they can improve a product by making its consumers happy, why shouldn’t they listen if enough of us discuss and suggest?