pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
 Posted:
May 04, 2006 - 23:49 |
 
|
| BigMac wrote: | | Unless you play exclusively against other teams that have a "do-not-play against dirty player policy" in a seperate division, you are cheating. |
BigMac: you can call this a lot of things - one popular term is 'cherry-picking', another appropriate one would be 'lame' - but it just ain't cheating. It isn't cheating by the Fumbbl site rules (as long as there is no pre-match agreement not to foul), and there isn't a paragraph in the rulebook which could prove it to be cheating.
You can dislike it as much you like. You can disapprove of it as much as you like. You can speak out against it as much as you like. And many, many coaches will be right there with you on that. But please don't call it cheating: it isn't, and lots of people react badly to that word being thrown around.
Edit: BTW, the initial guide to dealing with DP was full of excellent advice, and I too would like to see more coaches (including myself) taking on more violent games. I just think we have to be careful about accusations of cheating.  |
_________________
Join us in building Blood Bowl Sixth Edition.
In other news, the Hittites are back. Join us in #fumbbl.hi  |
|
Oblitzamanger
Joined: Jan 31, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 00:14 |
|
I agree it is unfair to not play teams with dirty player, but it is not quite cheating, although it is pretty scummy. Any team should be able to handle any team. This means that a team developed to play bashers should still be able to play baller teams every once in a while. This also means that a team not developed to play teams with dirty player should be able to handle a game with them anyway.
Ultimately, there is no way to punish people for only playing certain types of teams, and there shouldn't be. If there was a goal for [R], such as highest TR or TS, then this might matter, but there isn't any formal goal, and so no need to be able to play any type of team. It should be up to the coaches disgretion which teams his team plays. Therefore, it is not really cheating. I think Sk8bcn and DrDiscoStu have already mentioned this. It is like saying your Wood Elf team will never play Chaos for fear of being bashed to pieces. Although any coach who has serious team developement in mind for their Wood Elves that plays a Chaos team of about equal TR/TS is purely insane, they should be able to deal with it through good team building.
This issue comes down to cherrypicking, which is not remotely what this thread was about. So let's drop it. And as for you other people who want to discuss whether or not fouling with a dirty player is a good tactic or not, get out of here. This thread was created to help people deal with fouling, and how to foul themselves.
I found this thread helpful, but there are many loose joints to the arguments. For instance, teams at TR 100 are probably not good at fouling. How do you counter foulers at TR 100 or around there?
In addition, some teams can't afford to lose players through fouling, such as Vampires and Amazons (this is purely my opinion). So how do you stop fouling wars or your best players being fouled without actually having to risk a foul or multiple fouls?
Lastly, why would getting in the first foul on a high AV player such as a Big Guy be useful just to be sure to get the first foul in? If the point is to get an opposing player off early while detterring them from fouling back, then why would you foul an AV 9 troll?
(I just want to point out here that I am in the category of coaches who thinks that anyone who fouls unnecessarily in a game is breaking a "truce". However, I have never complained and have dealt with it in my own ways, which included fouling back and ignoring it ever happened. I do accept fouls which are necessary for the strategy of the game. However, this thread suggests that all fouls are strategically necessary, even if they look and seem unnecessary. In short, it is all part of the game, but enough about that. It has already been over-discussed...) |
_________________
paulhicks wrote: I AM THE KING OF THE MONKEY PEOPLE AND I MUST SLAY THIS PRETENDER TO MY CROWN
That means you. |
|
BigMac
Joined: Dec 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 00:23 |
|
| pac wrote: | | BigMac wrote: | | Unless you play exclusively against other teams that have a "do-not-play against dirty player policy" in a seperate division, you are cheating. |
BigMac: you can call this a lot of things - one popular term is 'cherry-picking', another appropriate one would be 'lame' - but it just ain't cheating. It isn't cheating by the Fumbbl site rules (as long as there is no pre-match agreement not to foul), and there isn't a paragraph in the rulebook which could prove it to be cheating.
You can dislike it as much you like. You can disapprove of it as much as you like. You can speak out against it as much as you like. And many, many coaches will be right there with you on that. But please don't call it cheating: it isn't, and lots of people react badly to that word being thrown around.
Edit: BTW, the initial guide to dealing with DP was full of excellent advice, and I too would like to see more coaches (including myself) taking on more violent games. I just think we have to be careful about accusations of cheating. |
OK i c.
In geman i had better, less brutal words like "schummeln" or "mogeln".
It is going around the obstacle instead of going over it.
And let me point out this again:
Using Dirty Player / the Fouling strategy without trying your best to win or tie the game is a brutal abuse of the system and should be dealt with by refusing to play teams with a really sucky record. |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 00:31 |
|
At the lowest TRs..... certain players are even more dangerous to the health of your team. If you are using Dark Elves and playing against a Rotter team with a Beast, it is just good sense to foul that thing once you knock it over. Same with wardancers and even dodgers (if you have no tacklers). The logic here is that if it is tough to knock over and you do knock it over..... see if you can avoid having to knock it over again! Another plus is the fact that your opponent has no apoth making it very possible that the offending target will leave the field.
Also, fouling first in a half is a good tactic in that you only stand a 1 in 6 chance of getting caught. Your opponent stands that same chance regardless of whether you foul or not. Besides, once he has the eye on him, do NOT foul unless purely "spot tactical".....
Definitions:
"Spot Tactical": A place to foul completely determined by the game where the eye, DP, turn, and apoth status do NOT matter. An example of this is the proverbial witch elf prone near your end zone and the ball is loose in reach of her. Not fouling means TD. At that point the player you use to foul is not important since the point is not having her skull, it is keeping her prone at least one more turn. One turn scorers are often fouled "Spot Tactical". I have seen a match where AFK_eagle fouled an opposing coach on T16 before scoring. This was the ONLY time i have seen a tactical T16 foul on the last turn since it was a one turn scorer he fouled and the opponent had a last try to score. Eagle won that game by one.
Blood on the Pitch,
__Synn |
|
|
Oblitzamanger
Joined: Jan 31, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 00:41 |
|
Okay, but the Beast has AV 9 (I think) and won't be easily removed unless you are lucky or assists are used, in which case, your Dark Elves are all clustered together and easy to hit. If you don't assist, then the beast most likely won't be sent off and then it stands up and pulverizes the fouler, and BAM! New rotter...
I see the point of fouling a Wardancer because my question only dealt with high AV players. But even so, say you are down a couple players. Even if you remove the Wardancer, your own fouler is liable to be sent off too, at most likely a higher chance than actually removing the Wardancer from the pitch. This is especially bad for say another Wood Elf team. It is hard enough to mark Elves without having players down. So, why do it? I can see the point if the foul is with a 0 SPP linelf and the numbers are about the same. But otherwise, why rush the foul in first? |
_________________
paulhicks wrote: I AM THE KING OF THE MONKEY PEOPLE AND I MUST SLAY THIS PRETENDER TO MY CROWN
That means you. |
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 00:43 |
|
A darkelf lino blocking a Beast needs 3 assists just to knock him over...... so you already have +4 to foul there. You have to be able to screen your mass of foulers to avoid getting completely enveloped but it is a viable tactic.
__Synn |
|
|
Oblitzamanger
Joined: Jan 31, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 00:45 |
|
Ah. I see now. That makes sense...
Thanks. Good tactic.
Your defenition of Spot Fouling is good, but I think there are other situations not similar to that one which could be added. If you want them, I could just pm you. Of course, I think that you knew Spot Fouling had room for improvement. |
_________________
paulhicks wrote: I AM THE KING OF THE MONKEY PEOPLE AND I MUST SLAY THIS PRETENDER TO MY CROWN
That means you. |
|
BigMac
Joined: Dec 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 00:46 |
|
| Oblitzamanger wrote: | In addition, some teams can't afford to lose players through fouling, such as Vampires and Amazons (this is purely my opinion). So how do you stop fouling wars or your best players being fouled without actually having to risk a foul or multiple fouls?
Lastly, why would getting in the first foul on a high AV player such as a Big Guy be useful just to be sure to get the first foul in? If the point is to get an opposing player off early while detterring them from fouling back, then why would you foul an AV 9 troll? |
Hi!
Okay, you only "lose a player to fouling" (have him sent off) if your opponent rolls a 6, and you don't manage to roll a six as well (Argue the call). So, unless you foul consecutively, your player will not be sent off easily. If he is, well thats the dice game.
Fouling wars (you foul - he fouls) are insanity unless you actually foul the opposing Dirty Player! Keep in mind the fact that your opponent has a dirty player makes him predictable. He is almost certainly foul with the dirty player. If you could take the Dirty Player down, take your chance and try to take him out!
If you don't have your own Dirty Player NEVER FOUL BACK unless Get The Ref or first turn or last turn.
The first foul is FREE. It is only a about 1/6 chance to be sent off.
Your opponent will have the same 1/6 chance with his first foul regardles if you fouled first or not. ALWAYS throw the first foul. No matter what game you play. If your opponent does not foul back, you are "blocked" by the now 50% chance form fouling, so it stays at just one foul! There is no "code". No to use your free foul is simply bad coaching.
ALWAYS use a last turn first half foul, since your opponent cannot foul back. Turn 16 fouls are depending on the situation. If you already killed 10 guys, don't do it. If you lost 10 guys DO IT, you owe it to your own dead!
Fouling a Troll with a free foul: it's free. If you get lucky knock the troll out or move him back to the dougout, you face a couple of turns with 3 dice mighty blow blocks less! Stay health, use preemptive protection ^^.
A troll is not a good target for the Fouling strategy. If you want to foul a lot, pick good targets. If you EXPECT TO BE BEATEN UP, use every chance you get to inflict ANY damage at all. |
|
|
BigMac
Joined: Dec 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 00:57 |
|
I would like to re-format the original post and iclude all the contributions...
Any idea how to do that? In FAQ form? |
|
|
Oblitzamanger
Joined: Jan 31, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 01:53 |
|
Darn it. My response didn't make it due to internet problems. The basic idea of it was this: (it was pretty long)
I was wondering why BigMac said hi, although I appreciated the kindess.
I know there is no code. It only aggravates me when people foul just to foul for no apparent reason although as I had mentioned in a previous post, it seems that this thread suggests that there are no un-strategic fouls.
Thanks for clearing up the Troll thing. I knew that it wasn't a good target.
My luck when fouling first (and this applies to both me and the opponent) is pretty bad. Usually the fouler gets sent off (this is the 1/6 roll) and the foulee goes unharmed or stunned. Thus, seeing the luck ratio of the first foul, why is it useful again if there is a greater chance your player will be sent off rather than the opponent's? I need to be told again. Why is it that fouling first is the better thing to do? Is it to scare the opponent, or to have a relatively free shot at a good player? (I might add that it is not relatively free since you have that 1/6 chance of being sent off, which in most cases is higher than actually removing the other player.) |
_________________
paulhicks wrote: I AM THE KING OF THE MONKEY PEOPLE AND I MUST SLAY THIS PRETENDER TO MY CROWN
That means you. |
|
DrDiscoStu
Joined: Feb 20, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 04:44 |
|
| Quote: | Although an injury caused by a foul doesn't award any spp's, doesn't it still count as a team casualty for the +1 on the fan-factor roll (when getting two casualties)? Or am I mistaken in my reading of the rules?
Yes it does
No you are not mistaken
So remember people - make that T16 foul for the good of the team |
Actually I believe you ARE mistaken. Injuries caused by fouls are not taken into account when rolling on the fan factor table. PAge 62 of the living rulebook states
Q. Does the + for inflicting 2 or more casualties on the Fan factor table mean any injuries caused or casualties only caused by blocks as in gaining SPP's?
A. Only casualties that count for SPP's
I can only assume this is the way that fumbbl does it... am I wrong? |
_________________
Check out my fishing and camping blog.
The Black Pearl Bounty-Board.
GUARD CONQUERS ALL! |
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 04:50 |
|
Yep, you are wrong! Also surfs count toward this number for FF.
__Synn |
|
|
nin
Joined: May 27, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 05:14 |
|
about the free foul thing, I have a note: if you make a foul and it is more likely that your player is sent off than breacking the armor and knoking unconcious the fouled player, better foul a really good target or don't use the "free foul" (that's other point where the "get your own DP" advice comes into play) |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 05:28 |
|
Or if you happen to have a full roster full of things like rat linos, skellies, norsemen, or spare orc linos.... then it works well!
__Synn |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2006 - 09:45 |
|
NEVER foul at TR 100 (unless you are stuntys or build your team in a weird way). Most teams have 11 players. Without a ref your chances to injure an opponent is 1/6 IF you manage to get a 2+ on armor roll. You can argue the call but I will neglect the odds (like I neglect the odds way superior to fail to break armor).
You injure on a 1/6 basis and get throwed out at a 1/6 basis (KO is a 15/36).
With the eye, it's a 50% to be caught.
The risk ok getting undermanned the whole game is too high compared to the risk having the opponent beeing undermanned the whole game. You have no bench.No bench no foul, that's what I think |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
|
|
| |
SWL Season CI
Search
