81 coaches online • Server time: 22:06
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post NBFL Season 24: Wint...goto Post GLN 2020 Badgesgoto Post Semitence learns to ...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Poll
Should the new rules eliminate natural oneturners?
Limit Max mv to 9, to hell with natural one turners
31%
 31%  [ 29 ]
No way that will favor bash way too much
41%
 41%  [ 38 ]
One Turn Pie
27%
 27%  [ 25 ]
Total Votes : 92


ClayInfinity



Joined: Aug 15, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2020 - 15:37 Reply with quote Back to top

My game play is long and old and still slightly above average.

My point is that if there is something in a game (like a 10MA OTTD player) you can "try" to counter it. You may succeed or you may fail.

My point is "banning" it is not the answer
mattwakeman



Joined: Feb 15, 2005

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2020 - 17:26 Reply with quote Back to top

To counter grinds bring back subs. You can stall as much as you want if the defending team can bring in players 3x closer to the ball than the attackers are.

Yes, it would need to be tweaked but every house rule league I have ever played in allowed subs if only to counter the drudgery of a whole half being boring because the first turn took out three players from one team leaving them with nothing to do.
dolphinandrew



Joined: May 09, 2017

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2020 - 17:39 Reply with quote Back to top

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I find (on balance) that stalling being something you want to do adds more interest (and tension!) to the game.

Sure, sometimes it's dull if it's a safe stall, but tense, unsafe stalls are a lot of fun (for me). And at least safe stalls tend to have quick turns.

Just a back and forth of quick scores doesn't quite have that tension in practice. And I don't find safe, quick scores particularly interesting at all.
Muff2n



Joined: May 20, 2017

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2020 - 18:01 Reply with quote Back to top

dolphinandrew wrote:
Many truisms


I'm with you. I find a tense stall attempt very exciting. And whilst I accept that safe stall attempts are boring, the turns from thereon are at least quick so the negative is minimised. I'd still be in favour of some safe stalling prevention mechanism, which the leaks are hinting at.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2020 - 18:12 Reply with quote Back to top

Although stalling and turn control is required to make hard the equalizer TD for the opponent team and sometimes exciting (for example, an agile team stalling vs a bash team is generally an exciting stalling), the boring stalling with 11 player bash team vs an outnumbered team clearly unable to defend or to sack the ball carrier is not exciting.
A stalling is exciting if the defending team can actually do something to stop it.
If it's just keeping the ball inside a cage till the turns are over with nothing to risk, well, that's a boring stalling in my opinion.
Verminardo



Joined: Sep 27, 2006

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2020 - 18:43 Reply with quote Back to top

Really surprised by the poll results, this is pretty much on the fence, I thought everyone hates natural one-turners. I guess everybody hates them but everybody also wants one. A bit like billionaires.
mrt1212



Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2020 - 18:48 Reply with quote Back to top

Verminardo wrote:
Really surprised by the poll results, this is pretty much on the fence, I thought everyone hates natural one-turners. I guess everybody hates them but everybody also wants one. A bit like billionaires.


Some us had natural one turners for parents... Wink
Frowny



Joined: Apr 27, 2020

Post   Posted: Aug 06, 2020 - 15:03 Reply with quote Back to top

I would much rather allow everyone at least 3 or so turns on a possession.it would need Ottds by just making them less necessary. It would also nerf stalling, since there is no benefit to stall more of they are sure to get 3 turns. Maybe call it "overtime" so if they have a turn, the half also ends.

Then shorten the half to make it still equal game lengths. Kill 2 birds with one stone
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Aug 06, 2020 - 15:57 Reply with quote Back to top

3 turns could be too many, but 2 should be enough (and would promote a passing game).
Frowny



Joined: Apr 27, 2020

Post   Posted: Aug 06, 2020 - 16:32 Reply with quote Back to top

Yes, one could trial it with 2 3 or 4 turns and see what is most balanced.

I would prefer a 6 turn half with a guarantee of 3 turns per team ( so still max half of 8 turns) but there is now almost no incentive to Sall past 3 turns (which isn't stalling, it's quite a fast drive.) I think it would force more action and make most games about 4 good drives instead of really only 2ish.

2 turns would be real rough for slower or low ag teams like khemri or ogres or even orcs since passing and even handing off is so hard.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Aug 06, 2020 - 16:41 Reply with quote Back to top

Yes, with 2 turns Tomb Kings and other slow teams should have a Catcher.
Joost



Joined: Mar 17, 2014

Post   Posted: Aug 06, 2020 - 17:39 Reply with quote Back to top

With 2 turns I’m not sure how you would beat wood elves, pro elves or AG4 skinks.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Aug 06, 2020 - 19:20 Reply with quote Back to top

Do you prefer to play vs Wood Elves scoring on last turn, leaving you only a turn to score, or vs Wood Elves doing the same thing but leaving you 2 turns to score?
Wood Elves can easily score in 1 turn, so 1 turn or 2 would not make a great difference to them (1 turn is a bit harder but doable), but it could make it for other races (most races can't 1 turn at all, or not as easily as Wood Elves).
Also, Wood Elves have been nerfed by the new ruleset.
Not a big nerf, but a nerf indeed.
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