Chingis
Joined: Jul 09, 2007
|
 Posted:
Jun 26, 2025 - 23:35 |
 
|
Changing it would basically need to be one part of a larger rebalancing I think: changing just one part of the game would skew the dynamic.
But here's a thought experiment in a world where everything else stays the same. What if you just changed one tiny rule, which is this: failing to pick up the ball from the ground is no longer a turn over. Losing the ball from your actual posession remains a turn over of course, but not failing to collect it from the floor.
So yes, a player can chase a bobbling ball around the pitch so long as they have the movement! And maybe it will bobble into the tacklezone of an ogre of course (a very organic ways of achieving that "pressure" risk of nearby players), or bobble off the pitch or into the arms of an opponent.
I'm kind of interested to play a game like that just to see what would happen! |
|
|
moph
Joined: Sep 16, 2020
|
| Posted:
Jun 26, 2025 - 23:57 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: |
About the pick up:
the problem is when an AG 4+ player tries to pick the ball up in Pouring Rain.
|
When a AG4+ player has to try to pick up the ball in pouring rain something has gone horribly wrong beforehand or you are playing Tomb Kings.
When you are playing Tomb Kings you are in for that one of 18 of your offensive drives (the 5,5% chance of pouring rain) you are probably not scoring and playing for a draw.  |
|
|
moph
Joined: Sep 16, 2020
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2025 - 00:14 |
|
| Chingis wrote: | failing to pick up the ball from the ground is no longer a turn over.
...
So yes, a player can chase a bobbling ball around the pitch so long as they have the movement! ...
I'm kind of interested to play a game like that just to see what would happen! |
That's the kind of ideas we need in game design! 
Elegant and adding fun.
Adding interesting decisions, like how to screen the ball on the floor.
I would change it so that per turn only one player of the team can try to pick up the ball or the turnover occurs when the player trying to pick up the ball has no movement left or decides to end his movement without having succeeded the pick up. Just to prevent to give a saurus a couple of free tries before you pick up with a skink. |
|
|
moph
Joined: Sep 16, 2020
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2025 - 00:24 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: |
I suggested to give the +1 to players with Sure Hands, as one possible rule. That would actually make Sure Hands more valuable.
|
I think this would be a good way to do it, just one sentence added to the skill. No complicated extra rules. Only making it easier for players that train (invest spp) for the skill, not for everybody.
Which teams besides chaos dwarf would benefit the most from it? Black Orcs? Ogres? Would coaches train saurus as ball carriers? |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2025 - 02:10 |
|
| moph wrote: | | Which teams besides chaos dwarf would benefit the most from it? Black Orcs? Ogres? Would coaches train saurus as ball carriers? |
I guess teams with AG 4+ and AG 3+ players with Primary access to Sure Hands (or starting with the skill). Coaches would not train Saurus as ball carriers, of course.
Almost as good as +AG, but just for adjacent pick ups.
About the idea of no turnover when failing the pick up: it's gamebreaking, way worse than adding the +1 pick up modifier.
Without turnover even clumsy players would have basically Sure Hands for free (as long as they have at least 2 MA left when adjacent to the ball).
With 4 MA left it would be like having Sure Hands x 2. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Things we dislike of...
Search
