| Poll |
| Should the LRB be changed every X years? |
| Definitely, change makes the game more fun. |
|
34% |
[ 27 ] |
| Yes, because no matter how hard you try to equalize, eventually coaches will figure out which rosters are just plain better. |
|
24% |
[ 19 ] |
| Nope, CRP is best. |
|
6% |
[ 5 ] |
| There should be a final version of the rules, but CRP should not be that final version. |
|
21% |
[ 17 ] |
| Learning new rules takes away from time I could be eating pie. |
|
13% |
[ 11 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 79 |
|
WoodPusher
Joined: Jan 11, 2012
|
 Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 01:41 |
 
|
First of all, I'm under the impression that lrb 6 or CRP is intended to be the last set of rules. I hope that isn't the case, whether or not that's the plan. If the rules are changed at some point, I think something should be done about stalling.
I'm not against stalling as a tactic to win games, I do it myself; however, I don't like the fact that stalling is a viable tactic. I don't know how, but I would want a new set of rules to make stalling a bad idea without drastically changing the rest of the game. Or at least make stalling more difficult.
What do you think about stalling? I realize the poll is about CRP, but I'm really trying to start a forum about whether or not stalling should be discouraged etc. in the rules.
EDIT: Some people have stated that CRP was not intended to be the final set of rules. I can't remember why I believed this, so their word is better then mine. |
Last edited by WoodPusher on %b %08, %2013 - %03:%Jul; edited 2 times in total |
|
Smeat
Joined: Nov 19, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 01:45 |
|
| WoodPusher wrote: | | First of all, I'm under the impression that lrb 6 or CRP is intended to be the last set of rules. |
Not as far as I understand it.
| Quote: | I'm not against stalling as a tactic to win games, I do it myself; however, I don't like the fact that stalling is a viable tactic. I don't know how, but I would want a new set of rules to make stalling a bad idea without drastically changing the rest of the game. Or at least make stalling more difficult.
What do you think about stalling? ... |
I think it should fall under the "trolling" section of the Terms of Use for this site.
(and so here it comes...) |
_________________
Let's go A.P.E.!
(...and what exactly do you think they do with all those dead players?...) |
|
xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 01:54 |
|
Hmm, I think you have a couple of false assumptions. CRP wasn't intended as a final set of rules, but after they were produced, GW have taken away all support for the game, disbanding the BBRC and now removing all specialist games. So it is likely to be the only set of rules we have until either the community (NAF/FUMBBL/cyanide players/whoever) comes up with different ones, or GW takes the game up again. I wouldn't hold your breath for either happening any time soon.
Secondly, there hasn't been (and shouldn't be) an attempt to equalize the teams. Some teams are supposed to be worse, and that has always been the case.
As for stalling, meh, it isn't unique to this ruleset. All you can do is not do it yourself, if you dislike it that much. That can be risky, but if you get 2-0 up, your opponent can't really afford to stall... |
_________________
 Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
MRnobody
Joined: Jul 01, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 02:00 |
|
Fix for stalling: play in a league where wins are rewarded, as are total (not net) touchdowns scored.
Or: bring back secret weapon rolls; goblins didn't need the nerf and neither did the deathroller.
And: make it so that only one skill can be used on any given armour roll, same for injury roll. Los sacrifices will be a bit less sacrificial.
Pick better skills; Personally I love it when my opponents stall. It usually results in them not scoring. This is probably because I play as slann. |
_________________
Kill a pixel, Sponsor a Cheater! |
|
Dan-Da-Man
Joined: May 14, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 02:20 |
|
Play better defence and then they can not stall however if your down aload of players there is really nothing you can do and thats just unlucky. |
_________________
 |
|
Beerox
Joined: Feb 14, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 04:27 |
|
Stalling is the least of my worries, but I would like to see a new ruleset. |
|
|
Baron_Samdi
Joined: Mar 17, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 04:51 |
|
Stalling is only possible in online play, like here and Cyanide, or a tournament. Stalling is not usually done in a league environment. When you play person to person, sportsmanship is a lot bigger of a deal.
Having said that, stalling is both good and bad when compared to American Football. In the NFL you try to score as much as possible until late in the 4th quarter when you start to manage your time. In BB it could be considered both realistic and unrealistic with this comparison.
Its also akin to kicking an onside kick when you are in the lead. If you start the game with the ball and score on turn 8, you are banking on being able to prevent your opponent from scoring in the second half. Its a gamble at times.
In my opinion, stalling is only an issue due to kill stacking. If you could not as easily remove your opponents through CPOMP or POMB then stalling would not be that big a deal against the strength teams.
I look forward to the idea of new rules, but there is still so much to keep me interested at this time. |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 04:54 |
|
Stalling is not an issue whatsoever.
Next. |
|
|
Smeat
Joined: Nov 19, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 05:10 |
|
I would comment on how any supposed "solution" to stalling would create more problems than it solves, but I'd have to accept the premise that stalling is a problem - which I don't.
If you lose b/c of stalling, you lost before the stalling started. Solve that, and you've solved stalling. Any frustration should be directed at events that led to the pre-existing loss, not the inevitable resolution of those events. (Read - you might as well ask to solve the "problem" of varying luck, or better coaches.)
| Baron_Samdi wrote: | Stalling is only possible in online play... or a tournament...
...In the NFL you try to score as much as possible until late in the 4th quarter...
In my opinion, stalling is only an issue due to kill stacking... |
1) It's perfectly possible face to face. I have no idea why you think it isn't.
b) Clock management happens all thru an NFL game. It may be easier to notice in the 4th, but it's quite often a game plan from the initial kickoff - and if it isn't, it's often quite noticeable in its absence.
But, yes - it's comparable, and a perfectly valid, acceptable (and completely foreseeable) tactic.
iii) While having a numbers advantage (usually) makes stalling easier, it is not a requisite for/for not stalling. More, one of the 2 ways to stop stalling is to continue punishing a team (away from the ball) while they stall, and threaten even more - a diff kind of "pressure", that ~can~ be done even if down players. |
_________________
Let's go A.P.E.!
(...and what exactly do you think they do with all those dead players?...) |
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 05:12 |
|
you know...when you start advocating for a change to the rules, it usually helps to provide some kind of reasoning as to why you think something needs to be fixed...
"i don't like it" isn't a valid reason...
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 05:14 |
|
How is this trolling? He isn't anti-stallers, he just doesn't like the mechanic.
I agree totally with the OP. I will stall more than most, and in a perverse kind of way I enjoy the tactics that go with a good stall.
However I dislike it as a viable game mechanic. I can think of 2 fixes for it. What we did back in the day was to play with 3 balls. It doesn't prevent stalling totally, however in most situations it does.
Why stall with one ball when your opponent is scoring with the other 2?
The 3 ball game is an extremely exciting way to play.
The other fix you could do is that when the player is in a position that he doesn't have any dice to roll to score, he's obliged to score. However this would certainly favour certain races over others and I would guess other measures would have to be brought in for balance.
Another rule I used (which wasn't directly for stalling) and was mainly to prevent certain dwarf plays in 2nd edition, was an ice hockey style offside. But thinking about it, this wouldn't suit modern BB
Lastly, I know where you got the 'this is the last ruleset for BB' thing. The BBRC announced that it was the culmination of their project, and it was the last set they would do for the foreseeable future and possibly ever. A company like GW would never put one of their games in such a coffin (unless they lost the licence). |
|
|
ClayInfinity
Joined: Aug 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 05:23 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: |
The other fix you could do is that when the player is in a position that he doesn't have any dice to roll to score, he's obliged to score. However this would certainly favour certain races over others and I would guess other measures would have to be brought in for balance.
|
This is the only viable "mechanic" to implement a rule...
You could house rule it in your league (both here and on table top) but other than that I dont think you should be mucking around with mechanics of the game.
Having said that, I consider it "clock management" not stalling. Some teams need to manage the clock (ie Dwarves) otherwise they lose alot of competitiveness in, again, League environments. |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 05:28 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: |
I agree totally with the OP. I will stall more than most, and in a perverse kind of way I enjoy the tactics that go with a good stall. |
I think that's the part of it some people don't get. A good stall against a good defense is a thing of beauty. As is a good defense trying to 'break' the stall, either by pressuring the ball, or relentlessly killing the screeners.
Of course when the dice just roll one way nothing is interesting, but why on earth would I score early if I KOed 7 guys? Just to give you the chance at 3 KO rolls instead of 2?
| harvestmouse wrote: | | However I dislike it as a viable game mechanic. |
Why? I mean I dislike certain things about CRP myself, but I'm not sure how stalling really is a new game mechanic in CRP vs. any other edition. This is assuming we are talking about meaningful games where both sides have a vested interest in actually winning the game without other oddities of bounties or fluff.
Stalling is so highly tactical that I can't see why people really disapprove of it. Sure, it can make some games 'boring', but some games are just 'boring' because the CAS dice wind up totally one sided, or the dodge dice keep on showing 1s.
If you're a slow team vs. a fast team you almost have to play for the 2-1 in a 'normal' game. It's hard to do that if you can't stall. If you're a fragile team you may want to burn a few extra turns off the clock before you have to line up and get mauled by the harder hitting team. Generally it's easier to keep your guys out of harms way at that point, rather than actually having to play defense for 3+ turns at the end of the half. Same for some bash vs. bash matchups, though frequently it's about limiting KO rolls. Especially if you can score on the last turn of the half, no reason to give out 2 sets of KO rolls in that case.
But maybe those situations aren't what people mean by stalling? If not, then what exactly is meant by stalling, and why exactly is it a 'bad game mechanic'. |
Last edited by licker on %b %08, %2013 - %05:%Jul; edited 1 time in total |
|
MisterFurious
Joined: Aug 11, 2010
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 05:29 |
|
| WoodPusher wrote: |
EDIT: Some people have stated that CRP was not intended to be the final set of rules. I can't remember why I believed this, so their word is better then mine. |
You believe it because it was said by some BBRC members. CRP is indeed supposed to be the Final Set In Stone Rules For All Time. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2013 - 05:46 |
|
| licker wrote: | | harvestmouse wrote: | | However I dislike it as a viable game mechanic. |
Why? I mean I dislike certain things about CRP myself, but I'm not sure how stalling really is a new game mechanic in CRP vs. any other edition. This is assuming we are talking about meaningful games where both sides have a vested interest in actually winning the game without other oddities of bounties or fluff.
Stalling is so highly tactical that I can't see why people really disapprove of it. Sure, it can make some games 'boring', but some games are just 'boring' because the CAS dice wind up totally one sided, or the dodge dice keep on showing 1s.
|
Well I certainly don't think this is CRP specific, and I don't think the OP intended it to sound that way, more something to fix after CRP. As I said, I came up with fixes for my group in 2nd edition. So it's been around since then.
Funnily the reason we needed house rules to prevent stalling was because of a house ruling........
It could have been that they (game designers) saw stalling in 2nd edition and tried to fix it, as 2nd ed wasn't a certain limit of turns, but the first to score 3 tds. However my group was playing to a time limit.
GW style table top games are meant to create as near as possible with a dice /turn based game a believable scenario. This is the first fundamental rule of their game design. Stalling breaks this fundamental rule horribly. The reason being of course, that no real life event would have 'turns' because simply a drive would be a fluid action and as scoring is 1 point per score, there is no reason not to score (unless you wanted to stop someone coming back onto the pitch).
As stalling is such an artificial situation, I dislike it principle. Again, I point out I have no problem with using it, it being used or dislike seeing it.
Time management is of course an issue in real field sports. Footall (Soccer) would be the closest to BB on how teams would really deal with time management, and would you ever get a team sitting on the goal line running the clock down against a full(ish) team? No you wouldn't. Would you get the team hanging around in the backfield keeping the ball away from their opponents? Yes, possibly. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Finishing the 60 Gam...
Search
