41 coaches online • Server time: 00:19
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Creating a custom to...goto Post ramchop takes on the...goto Post NBFL Season 32: The ...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
plasmoid



Joined: Nov 03, 2009

Post   Posted: Jul 15, 2020 - 02:01 Reply with quote Back to top

Besides, 5 turns is quite a long time, even for slow teams.
The fact that most teams usually take 8 turns to score doesn't mean that they actually need it.
Purplegoo



Joined: Mar 23, 2006

Post   Posted: Jul 19, 2020 - 17:54 Reply with quote Back to top

I caught the podcast for a change this morning, and I enjoyed the discussion around this topic. I mostly enjoyed AD's passionate defence of 'penalties'; of how the system adds a layer of complexity, it makes 2H / OT RR management even more important, it increases the number of options for winning and makes you think differently, etc.

It was fun for a number of reasons. Firstly, all that cerebral ballet stuff speaks to me (probably too loudly). Secondly, I've never heard anyone be positive about penalties before (so a point of difference), and lastly, it was nicely argued.

Thinking about it as the day has worn on, though, I don't think the argument holds enough water to sway me practically. Usually, I kick if I win the toss in a game of Blood Bowl. If the game has OT, I'll usually receive. This is because, usually, I'll defend when I have the best chance of defending because over 8 turns, the offence has a big advantage. If OT is involved, I know that if kicking in 2H, I can make more decisions about my re-roll management. If it's going to be a tight game going to OT, the likelihood is that it's 1-1 with scores in T8 and T16, and there are one or two scares along the way. In the first half, on my drive, the scary stuff that causes me to bleed RRs is forgotten come OT. Driving in 2H 0-1 down, the re-rolls I spend are more likely to be vital to keeping the game alive (I am less likely to have a choice in spending them: there is no point having more RR than the other guy and losing 0-1 in 16 turns), whereas the kicker can choose to manage that resource a bit if he likes. That sways me enough to change my general approach.

So I don't think it's likely that in the second half, the guy trying to level up has had a lot of chance to access this additional layer of penalties complexity and be mindful of the possibility. He's most likely just trying to stay in the game. If the other guy then gets to camp with his three extra re-rolls he saved come OT, to me, that's exacerbating my issue with penalties further still, not making me happy that there is another route to victory available, in theory.

Tangentially - I think RRs are widely undervalued these days.

Anyway. The thought occurs that someone clever could actually use FUMBBL's millions of games to come up with a good OT house rule. There must be a scenario where the chance of a generic team on offence drops from a 60/40 chance of having more TDs after 8 turns than the defender to 52/48, or whatever it is / whatever we'd like it to be in an OT scenario. Perhaps it's Blitz! although if you know it's coming, it's less effective. Perhaps the answer is another RR and an extra man (another go around the KO table?), or something more subtle and more elegant than consta-Blitz!?

Anyway. Words. Not one for house rules myself - but penalties does action me enough to trigger posting. I’d rather a replay than ending a game on a roll off!
King_Ghidra



Joined: Sep 14, 2009

Post   Posted: Jul 20, 2020 - 12:12 Reply with quote Back to top

One of my local TT leagues allows both teams a 4 turn drive during OT
If it's still equal it goes to a penalty system which involves rolling 2d block dice for each of five penalty kicks (knockdowns are a success iirc). You can use RR's on these if you have any.

This is at the more complex end of the spectrum and probably still has its flaws in terms of favouring teams that can more easily accomplish quicker scores, but is very involved for all players and even-handed on the whole I think.

FWIW I'll pitch a different suggestion geared more towards practicality: if a draw at end of normal time just go straight to roll off w remaining rr's. The game takes long enough to play as it is, and I don't necessarily want to play another half of however long OT takes + pens. So just roll off straight away and accept that you can't complain if you can't win in normal time.

Clearly the worst from a player agency and satisfaction perspective but certainly the best from a time efficiency perspective.
Grod



Joined: Sep 30, 2003

Post   Posted: Jul 20, 2020 - 12:46 Reply with quote Back to top

I imagine from a practical point of view a 5 turn OT limit might be more attractive for RL tournaments that use OT where you dont want one game to holdup everyone else?

_________________
I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.

Oscar Wilde
Purplegoo



Joined: Mar 23, 2006

Post   Posted: Jul 20, 2020 - 13:43 Reply with quote Back to top

OT isn’t an issue for the vast majority of TT tournaments; a tie is a tie. That’s the best way, really, any form of OT is going to be putting lipstick on a pig to a certain extent, although I appreciate why the KO format is useful online.
mickyg



Joined: Feb 09, 2020

Post   Posted: Jul 20, 2020 - 14:39 Reply with quote Back to top

I'm not much of a tournament player but heard about this from the podcast and had an idea I figured I'd add.

A modified kick-off table that heavily favours the kicker. e.g.
2: Get the ref: Only kicker gets a bribe
3-6: Perfect Defense
7: Weather
8-11: Blitz
12: Pitch Invasion / Throw a rock: does not affect kicking team
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Jul 21, 2020 - 02:04 Reply with quote Back to top

Purplegoo wrote:
I caught the podcast for a change this morning, and I enjoyed the discussion around this topic. I mostly enjoyed AD's passionate defence of 'penalties'; of how the system adds a layer of complexity, it makes 2H / OT RR management even more important, it increases the number of options for winning and makes you think differently, etc.

It was fun for a number of reasons. Firstly, all that cerebral ballet stuff speaks to me (probably too loudly). Secondly, I've never heard anyone be positive about penalties before (so a point of difference), and lastly, it was nicely argued.

Thinking about it as the day has worn on, though, I don't think the argument holds enough water to sway me practically. Usually, I kick if I win the toss in a game of Blood Bowl. If the game has OT, I'll usually receive. This is because, usually, I'll defend when I have the best chance of defending because over 8 turns, the offence has a big advantage. If OT is involved, I know that if kicking in 2H, I can make more decisions about my re-roll management. If it's going to be a tight game going to OT, the likelihood is that it's 1-1 with scores in T8 and T16, and there are one or two scares along the way. In the first half, on my drive, the scary stuff that causes me to bleed RRs is forgotten come OT. Driving in 2H 0-1 down, the re-rolls I spend are more likely to be vital to keeping the game alive (I am less likely to have a choice in spending them: there is no point having more RR than the other guy and losing 0-1 in 16 turns), whereas the kicker can choose to manage that resource a bit if he likes. That sways me enough to change my general approach.

So I don't think it's likely that in the second half, the guy trying to level up has had a lot of chance to access this additional layer of penalties complexity and be mindful of the possibility. He's most likely just trying to stay in the game. If the other guy then gets to camp with his three extra re-rolls he saved come OT, to me, that's exacerbating my issue with penalties further still, not making me happy that there is another route to victory available, in theory.

Tangentially - I think RRs are widely undervalued these days.

Anyway. The thought occurs that someone clever could actually use FUMBBL's millions of games to come up with a good OT house rule. There must be a scenario where the chance of a generic team on offence drops from a 60/40 chance of having more TDs after 8 turns than the defender to 52/48, or whatever it is / whatever we'd like it to be in an OT scenario. Perhaps it's Blitz! although if you know it's coming, it's less effective. Perhaps the answer is another RR and an extra man (another go around the KO table?), or something more subtle and more elegant than consta-Blitz!?

Anyway. Words. Not one for house rules myself - but penalties does action me enough to trigger posting. I’d rather a replay than ending a game on a roll off!



Thanks for the kind words, and thoughts Goo.

I would contend though that some of your unease with the practicality of penalties in regards to reroll management comes precisely because you actually alter your normal strategy because of the possibility of OT.

In effect, you're already taking into consideration all the complexities I mention and adjusting your gameplan from the opening kick-off by diverging from your usual plan of kicking. Surely if anything, that's really just adding anecdotal evidence to my argument? Wink

There still is a layer of complexity for your opponent here though too - if you choose to receive against me first in such a scenario, I am fully aware I can throw all my rerolls against the wall vs you in h1 while defending, wheras you are going to need to make judgement calls in h2 on most rerolls (and these get much more complex if you fail to score or I one turn a reply).

And all of this needs to be considered on the opening kick off! Fun!

[edit] I would also say we have a weird scenario here on FUMBBL where rerolls are both undervalued in open play due to CRP mentality, but also over-represented in tournament play due to the lack of seasonal rebuys. It's quite easy for a lot of people to completely miss the complex nature of reroll management/penalties when they are not only unaware of its nature, but both undervalue their rerolls *and* have loads of them due to unbridled team growth. In effect the racial differences in TRR cost can actually be a bit of a leveler in terms of penalties as well as on-field performance. And we don't really see that so much if every team is carrying 4+ RR regardless of TV cost as there is no pressing reason to cut except coach preference.

_________________
Image
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic