39 coaches online • Server time: 10:20
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Secret League Old Wo...goto Post Creating a custom to...goto Post ramchop takes on the...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
HyperboLemuR



Joined: Jan 08, 2013

Post   Posted: Oct 06, 2021 - 18:27 Reply with quote Back to top

Nelphine wrote:
Anyone have any idea behind the intention of the change of FA? I realize intention doesn't necessarily matter, but I'm still curious. Was FA just considered too weak before? (Probably valid)


You're assuming GW does stuff intentionally and thinks things through which leads to nothing but despair
Grasshugger17



Joined: Jun 29, 2020

Post   Posted: Oct 06, 2021 - 19:40 Reply with quote Back to top

HyperboLemuR wrote:
Nelphine wrote:
Anyone have any idea behind the intention of the change of FA? I realize intention doesn't necessarily matter, but I'm still curious. Was FA just considered too weak before? (Probably valid)


You're assuming GW does stuff intentionally and thinks things through which leads to nothing but despair


I've written a precis of your post:

GW leads to despair
Catalyst32



Joined: Jul 14, 2008

Post   Posted: Oct 07, 2021 - 03:46 Reply with quote Back to top

NO.
Foul Appearance does not affect MOVEMENT ACTIONS.
It affects BLOCK ACTIONS.

Foul Appearance has never before affected a Blitz in this game in the way you say before and it does not affect a Blitz in that way now.

A Blitz is part of the CORE MECHANICS of that game and that does not change just because of your weird interpretation of how they write the Foul Appearance Skill rules now.

No. Just NO.


ArrestedDevelopment wrote:
SavageJ wrote:
My read on FA/Blitz, as written, is that you lose the Block portion of the Blitz action, but not the move. Note that Blitz specifies that both the Move and Block elements are actions.


Blitz is its own action which combines both. You lose your "action" when you fail FA, which means you lose your blitz - move and block. There's no distinction between either part of the blitz - it's all a blitz action.

When you blitz, you *declare* a blitz, but *nominate* the target of the "block" element - so if you roll a 1 on FA, you lose the declared action - in this case you've only declared a blitz, thus you have to lose the movement as well.
sebco



Joined: Feb 14, 2005

Post   Posted: Oct 07, 2021 - 07:46 Reply with quote Back to top

Catalyst32 wrote:
NO.
Foul Appearance does not affect MOVEMENT ACTIONS.
It affects BLOCK ACTIONS.

Foul Appearance has never before affected a Blitz in this game in the way you say before and it does not affect a Blitz in that way now.

A Blitz is part of the CORE MECHANICS of that game and that does not change just because of your weird interpretation of how they write the Foul Appearance Skill rules now.

No. Just NO.



May 2021 GW BB FAQ :

Q: If a player with the Foul Appearance skill is chosen as the target of a Blitz action, when do they roll to see if the action is wasted? (p.78 )
A: As soon as the Blitz action is declared. This will mean that, if they fail, they will lose their entire action and will be unable to make either the Move action or Block action as part of the Blitz action.

_________________
I like cheese but don't call me skaven !
Malmir



Joined: May 20, 2008

Post   Posted: Oct 07, 2021 - 07:53 Reply with quote Back to top

https://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=match&id=4333407

Early in the second half (maybe turn 3) I target his dump off runner. He chooses to dump off and the pass goes wild and lands on my guy blitzing who catches it. I now have the option in the client of hitting the witch elf my guy blitzing is stood next to instead (or of dodging to hit the runner). Should I have been able to hit the witch? If I had, would I have then been able to move too? (I dodged and went for the runner as I wasn't sure).
JanMattys



Joined: Feb 29, 2004

Post   Posted: Oct 07, 2021 - 10:55 Reply with quote Back to top

Catalyst32 wrote:
NO.
Foul Appearance does not affect MOVEMENT ACTIONS.
It affects BLOCK ACTIONS.

Foul Appearance has never before affected a Blitz in this game in the way you say before and it does not affect a Blitz in that way now.

A Blitz is part of the CORE MECHANICS of that game and that does not change just because of your weird interpretation of how they write the Foul Appearance Skill rules now.

No. Just NO.


You need to update about that mate Smile

_________________
Image
sebco



Joined: Feb 14, 2005

Post   Posted: Oct 07, 2021 - 13:19 Reply with quote Back to top

Malmir wrote:
https://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=match&id=4333407

Early in the second half (maybe turn 3) I target his dump off runner. He chooses to dump off and the pass goes wild and lands on my guy blitzing who catches it. I now have the option in the client of hitting the witch elf my guy blitzing is stood next to instead (or of dodging to hit the runner). Should I have been able to hit the witch? If I had, would I have then been able to move too? (I dodged and went for the runner as I wasn't sure).


Have just seen it (quickly).

What you did is ok.

But if you have blitzed the witch, that would have been against the rules.

You targeted the runner then dice have been rolled so it was no more possible to change your target. You could have blitzed nobody if wanted (to pick up the ball, for exemple, if it would have landed elsewhere) but it was no authorized to blitz another player than the targeted runner.

That said, I'm not 100% sure the client is wrong on that. Maybe it only shows how many block dice you would roll against any target without allowing you to really throw the block dice when you already anounced another target.

_________________
I like cheese but don't call me skaven !
stowelly



Joined: Mar 16, 2017

Post   Posted: Oct 07, 2021 - 13:54 Reply with quote Back to top

Just NO! Laughing
JackassRampant



Joined: Feb 26, 2011

Post   Posted: Oct 07, 2021 - 18:03 Reply with quote Back to top

Nelphine wrote:
Anyone have any idea behind the intention of the change of FA? I realize intention doesn't necessarily matter, but I'm still curious. Was FA just considered too weak before? (Probably valid)
I think it was probably a function of the changes made to the Blitz action. Like, in particular, now that you have to target your blitz victim before moving, it makes some sense that you'd make any relevant rolls, like Dump-Off and Foul Appearance, when you make start-of-action rolls, like Bonehead. Now, which comes first, I have no opinion.

BTW this effectively gives all Dump-Off attempts (without Nerves of Steel) a net +1, because that's one less Tackle Zone for the pass. So it's a buff to that skill too.

As someone who took Foul Appearance first on my UW goblins in LRB6, I can tell you sometimes it's better to get the blitzer into a tackle zone by failing Foul Appearance after moving into attack position, forcing him to end his move out of position. It's all situational there.

_________________
Veni, Vidi, Risi
JanMattys



Joined: Feb 29, 2004

Post   Posted: Oct 07, 2021 - 18:44 Reply with quote Back to top

JackassRampant wrote:
BTW this effectively gives all Dump-Off attempts (without Nerves of Steel) a net +1, because that's one less Tackle Zone for the pass. So it's a buff to that skill too.


I disagree.

First, sometimes to get to the ball a player must do some dodge rolls or other risky stuff like Leap. In bb2016 the blitzer had to try those before getting to you, and a failed roll meant you kept the ball on your carrier. Now you have to decide whether to get rid of the ball before the blitzer takes any real risk. Just the declaration of Blitz is enough to lure you into a risky ball action that has a 1/6 chance (at the minimum) to create a loose ball.

Second, knowing where the ball will be is a huge advantage now for the attacker. The blitzer is not forced to come to you if the ball is somewhere else, and may redirect his movement in order to mark the new carrier, or put a tz on a loose ball. In the old rules a successful dumpoff could make the blitz action mostly irrelevant, as the ball was no longer there.

Third, dumpoff was mainly a dark elf runner thing. He could quickpass at 2+. Now he's got Passing 3+, Which means that the new dumpoff without the blitzer's tz penalty is pretty much equal to the old dumpoff with the blitzer's tz penalty.

_________________
Image
Malmir



Joined: May 20, 2008

Post   Posted: Oct 07, 2021 - 18:52 Reply with quote Back to top

sebco wrote:
Malmir wrote:
https://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=match&id=4333407

Early in the second half (maybe turn 3) I target his dump off runner. He chooses to dump off and the pass goes wild and lands on my guy blitzing who catches it. I now have the option in the client of hitting the witch elf my guy blitzing is stood next to instead (or of dodging to hit the runner). Should I have been able to hit the witch? If I had, would I have then been able to move too? (I dodged and went for the runner as I wasn't sure).


Have just seen it (quickly).

What you did is ok.

But if you have blitzed the witch, that would have been against the rules.

You targeted the runner then dice have been rolled so it was no more possible to change your target. You could have blitzed nobody if wanted (to pick up the ball, for exemple, if it would have landed elsewhere) but it was no authorized to blitz another player than the targeted runner.

That said, I'm not 100% sure the client is wrong on that. Maybe it only shows how many block dice you would roll against any target without allowing you to really throw the block dice when you already anounced another target.


Thanks for the info and I am glad I did what I thought I should. I have reported it as a bug.
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