Carthage
Joined: Mar 18, 2021
|
 Posted:
Jan 21, 2026 - 17:23 |
 
|
The more I think of it the more I like the "ball carrier has no TZs".
Its easy to mark and keep track of, the rule is clean and easy to understand and it has multiple effects.
A break tackle AG3 blitzer with a RR gets a 75% chance to cage dive with that for a desperation 1 die or uphill. But it also let's the "attack the cage corner and base the ball carrier" kind of anti-cage play benefit too. No assists from the carrier in trying to clear whatever you tagged them with. Benefits both types of attacks in cage cracking. And all of that logic is just as relevant in breaking elf screens. |
|
|
Chingis
Joined: Jul 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 21, 2026 - 19:36 |
|
If you want to stop 'stalling for turn 8' being plan A, B and C of a vast swathe of teams, sure you can try and make it more risky, but the best way to reduce stalling is to ensure that players are not incentivised to stall in the first place! Or at least ensure that the incentive applies in a much reduced set of scenarios. Why do players want to stall? Because they perceive that scoring is too beneficial to their opponent. If you genuinely want to reduce stalling, and especially if you want to do it in an organic and elegant way (unlike the rock rule), you need to address that. |
|
|
JohnDaker
Joined: Aug 01, 2014
|
| Posted:
Jan 21, 2026 - 20:01 |
|
| Chingis wrote: | | Why do players want to stall? Because they perceive that scoring is too beneficial to their opponent. If you genuinely want to reduce stalling, and especially if you want to do it in an organic and elegant way (unlike the rock rule), you need to address that. |
Because scoring means giving the opponent 3 free blocks.
i.e. scoring put you from an advantageous position to a disadvantageous one. If it were to just put you back in a neutral position instead, maybe more people would make the gamble to score, to have another opportunity at scoring if defending well.
But changing that could push to more 0-0 scores instead of 2-1... |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 21, 2026 - 20:45 |
|
Maybe the answer, if damage is the problem, would be a TV discount for players beyond the 12th or something. But I don't think that would work, because if I take away on defense, I frequently stall just to keep KO recovery from coming up, and more bench means fewer KOs have to hit which makes stalling more important. So IDK. There are a lot of incentives to stall.
I think Matt might be onto something with just making stalling harder, but I also think making TDs matter more might be a bigger deal, so ... lowering the price of skills to 15k, or 30k for elite or secondary skills? That would push randoms, encouraging development and up-prioritizing high-scoring games. This is actually something I think the new money rules kinda do, a little bit, as that extra 10k matters more now, but like others here, I think that's weaksauce and easy to game around.
This is a large enough problem that any direct approach is likely to be either insufficient or broken, though, so you kinda need a hodgepodge of different philosophies to manage it. I don't hate the stalling rules, I just think they're not the real way forward so much as one arm of a pincer strategy, and I don't see the other arm.... |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
Loon
Joined: Aug 14, 2024
|
| Posted:
Jan 21, 2026 - 22:29 |
|
Since this is now the fix stalling thread, how about this: After a TD, automatic Blitz! and no KO rolls for the team that was scored on. Call it a momentum advantage. That may give enough of an edge where teams feel they can realistically score twice in a half vs the likelihood of a tie. |
|
|
moph
Joined: Sep 16, 2020
|
| Posted:
Jan 21, 2026 - 23:38 |
|
Stalling is more or less in baked in the turn structure of the game. It balances slow teams against fast. Everything that will make stalling harder, will advantage fast teams. |
|
|
Carthage
Joined: Mar 18, 2021
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2026 - 02:44 |
|
| Chingis wrote: | | . If you genuinely want to reduce stalling, and especially if you want to do it in an organic and elegant way (unlike the rock rule), you need to address that. |
Well kinda. Its that scoring is generally *more risky* than not scoring if the objective is winning. So you can either change the incentive gradient by making scoring less risky or making not-scoring more risky.
I think most of the ways to make scoring less risky are more of an upheaval of the game than making not-scoring more risky. GW seems to agree given the throw a rock rule. My problem with throw a rock is its not skill-expressive. It just happens on a die roll. I want to earn my fuck ups.
That's why I think the ones I suggest with a modified blitz action or no TZ ball carriers works better. Skill expressive, and makes not-scoring riskier. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2026 - 06:44 |
|
I've still not seem 1 argument or point that explains why stalling is negative. Orvwjy more sacking would be beneficial. The game has incredible tactical depth already. Every suggestion I've seen would either make the game more luck decendant/more dicey or it would remove the rich tactical depth the game offers and turn it in to Dreadball, which is essentially blood biwl where you can't stall... and it's tactically bereft.
Removing stalling is as fundamental as removing offside in football. It would just destroy the game |
_________________
 |
|
JohnDaker
Joined: Aug 01, 2014
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2026 - 06:53 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | I've still not seem 1 argument or point that explains why stalling is negative. |
Well, it's the High Elves post, so probably no point of arguing about stalling 
So, Lions with ST4? and keep MA 8?  |
|
|
Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2026 - 08:54 |
|
| Garion wrote: | I've still not seem 1 argument or point that explains why stalling is negative. Orvwjy more sacking would be beneficial. The game has incredible tactical depth already. Every suggestion I've seen would either make the game more luck decendant/more dicey or it would remove the rich tactical depth the game offers and turn it in to Dreadball, which is essentially blood biwl where you can't stall... and it's tactically bereft.
Removing stalling is as fundamental as removing offside in football. It would just destroy the game |
It's a classic case of people thinking they know what they want from a game without actually knowing. Much like the Magic the Gathering player who thinks counterspells shouldn't exist because it doesn't feel fun to have your spell countered without understanding the importance they play in game balance.
While I think GW does a pretty abysmal job of balancing BB, when I see these type of threads, it makes me glad the community doesn't balance things.
As far as high elfs go, really have to see the stats to judge them, but I'm not overly impressed by the skill suite revealed. |
|
|
CrisisChris
Joined: Dec 11, 2023
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2026 - 09:26 |
|
After reading all the stalling arguments here I also thought about the topic and I came up with this:
To me it is not the stalling itself that makes a game feel bad. It is more the fact that there are situations where you are doomed to do nothing at all. One example - and that is why this came up in the High Elf threat, I guess - is Elfs playing against developed Dwarfs. Once caged up with all the guard around there is not so much to do. Removing players normally does not work. Fouling is sub-optimal. So you can try to save your team and wait. Call it strategic depth, but from a game experience perspective it is just a bit boring.
In American Football 🏈 you have the first down rule that somehow prevents stalling. I wonder if such a Thing could be implemented. |
|
|
Zelmor
Joined: Sep 29, 2022
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2026 - 09:54 |
|
Nothing wrong with stalling plays. If you get stalled on often that is a sign that you should improve your game. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2026 - 10:29 |
|
| Drrek wrote: | | Garion wrote: | I've still not seem 1 argument or point that explains why stalling is negative. Orvwjy more sacking would be beneficial. The game has incredible tactical depth already. Every suggestion I've seen would either make the game more luck decendant/more dicey or it would remove the rich tactical depth the game offers and turn it in to Dreadball, which is essentially blood biwl where you can't stall... and it's tactically bereft.
Removing stalling is as fundamental as removing offside in football. It would just destroy the game |
It's a classic case of people thinking they know what they want from a game without actually knowing. Much like the Magic the Gathering player who thinks counterspells shouldn't exist because it doesn't feel fun to have your spell countered without understanding the importance they play in game balance.
While I think GW does a pretty abysmal job of balancing BB, when I see these type of threads, it makes me glad the community doesn't balance things.
As far as high elfs go, really have to see the stats to judge them, but I'm not overly impressed by the skill suite revealed. |
Very well put
| Zelmor wrote: | | Nothing wrong with stalling plays. If you get stalled on often that is a sign that you should improve your game. |
As is this
As for high elves... we know the roster with the exception of ma stat on the lion and dragon prince.
I suspect it'll be ma 7 for both but wouldn't shock me if dragons got ma8 dance they now come with a negatrait |
_________________
|
|
MerryZ
Joined: Nov 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2026 - 10:37 |
|
Has this post been about high elves at all ? |
_________________
Kaptain Awasoam, Dicer of All Men and Women and Children and Puppies. |
|
Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2026 - 15:23 |
|
| Garion wrote: |
As for high elves... we know the roster with the exception of ma stat on the lion and dragon prince.
I suspect it'll be ma 7 for both but wouldn't shock me if dragons got ma8 dance they now come with a negatrait |
I mean, we expect that MV is the only thing we don't really know, but technically we don't know strengths or passing either (though I really doubt they'll make a ST4 elf piece, because they're cowards). And the MV values are a pretty big deal.
But the other thing I don't think we know (someone correct me if I'm wrong) is skill access. Considering 2 of the other elf teams don't have Devious access, I am interested to see if the linos here have access to it (though I doubt it). And its highly unlikely imo that they gave any of the pieces primary strength access, but I hope they did. |
|
|
|
|
| |
The Great 2020>20...
Search
