Fumbling a throw

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Thu Apr 18, 2002 2:57 pm

I've been going back over the ECBBL rules for our next season and one rule comes to mind that I think would be worth examining for the official rules revision.

We currently play the old OBERWALD-mooted rule that the range penalties for a pass do not increase the chance of a fumble but do increase the chance of an inaccurate pass. This is to prevent the frequent example of a long bomb fumbling on a 1-4, being inaccurate on a 5 and being accurate on a 6. Foul Appearance and Tacklezones affect the chance of a fumble as normal.

Does anyone else play this rule?

Marcus

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Apr 18, 2002 3:30 pm

No ... in my very honest opinion this rule so favors the Elf teams that I would never let it in. If your experience is that it doesn't ... that's cool, but doesn't change my belief.

The increased fumble rule is there to prevent teams like Wood Elves or Skaven from running 3 Gutter Runners or Catchers down field and winging a Long Bomb in the midst of them ... not a strategy I want to encourage in any way, shape, or form.

Sorry, Marcus, I'm a big advocate on the passing fumble rule being linked to the range ruler .... be really difficult to persuade me otherwise.

As for the realism aspect ... don't care. Its a game mechanic needed to make the game balanced between AG 3 and AG 4 teams. I don't spend too much time on realism arguments on a game with wizards lobbing fireballs onto the pitch and troll eating your own teammates.

However, before you think I'm coming off TOO negative with this post ... one of the things I love about BB is the ability to tailor the rules to your leagues taste and in most case no one argues your right to do so. In this case, if it works for you thats cool ... just won't allow it in my leagues.

Galak

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Thu Apr 18, 2002 4:14 pm

I'm having a little trouble getting where you're coming from. In my experience low AG teams have just as legitimate a need to throw a long bomb than high AG teams do. In fact, given that low AG teams generally have lower move, they tend to have to throw longer passes (when they do pass) than faster teams who can use use their higher MA to close the distance.

I guess what I'm getting at is - why do Fast teams have to be discouraged from throwing long bombs? and how does the fumble rule impact high AG teams more than low AG teams?

Marcus

Acerak · Post by **Acerak** » Thu Apr 18, 2002 6:08 pm

If you do away with the restriction, you make passing skills less valuable, because people don't need them to move the ball downfield. They need the skills to move the ball downfield accurately, but that's about it. It also renders HMP virtually worthless except for distance. If a natural roll of 2 or better will always move the ball downfield under the range ruler, then why bother automatically making the pass inaccurate?

Currently, passing skills do two things:

1. Increase the likelihood of a ball reaching the target.
2. Decrease the likelihood of the passer fumbling the ball.

The range restrictions keep teams honest. I'll side the Galak. Assume Wood Elves could casually fling the ball downfield with very, very little chance of fumbling it. How do you stop them from moving their catchers back and then 'punting' the ball deep? The AG2 team isn't going to be able to catch up. The Wood Elf team suffers a turnover - no big deal, as they've already moved their scorers downfield - and they score next turn.

-Chet

Dangerous Dave · Post by **Dangerous Dave** » Thu Apr 18, 2002 7:57 pm

We play that the length of pass, TZs etc do affect the chance to fumble. However, any roll on the dice of 4 or more is never a fumble. So in your example, 1-3 would be a fumble 4 and 5 inaccurate and 6 spot on the money.

In addition, we play that you cannot intercept a fumbled pass.

Dave

Longshot · Post by **Longshot** » Thu Apr 18, 2002 9:12 pm

why should they score next turn?

dont you play with a downfield defence against that kind of race?
a linbacker, 2/3 lineman and a thrower can give a very fast counter-attack and the wood-elf (or whatever) shouldnt try those long pass if you defend that kind. this is what i think.

i think the idea is good and realistic (it is quite important to me) but may be hard to use with all the coach in the league.

Will see it for the next season maybe but the pass rules works good for the moment so..i dont know.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Apr 18, 2002 9:34 pm

The point is not that you have a defense against.

Listen the point is that if I'm playing Skaven or Wood Elves and I can land the ball 2/3 into your half of the pitch with 2 to 3 players around it that puts the odds in my favor of scoring.

This is what this rule allows. WE and Skaven get a 2+ to basically punt the ball each possession.

Galak

Longshot · Post by **Longshot** » Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:32 am

you will always be in favor of scoring if you get the ball at the beginning of the drive...
But at least, this is not a safe pass and you might loose the ball and your opponent could score during your offensive drive and do a breack.
But all that is another subject about defence.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Mon Apr 22, 2002 10:32 am

This is what this rule allows. WE and Skaven get a 2+ to basically punt the ball each possession.

Sorry, I still don't see how speed or agility is a factor in this.

1: A bombed pass to the middle of nowhere is not an odd-on score for Skaven or Woodies. In fact it's a very poor play.

2: The tactic is not out of reach of slower or less agile teams as they are more likely, in my experience, to want to throw a desperation pass like that - usually to move a loose and isolated ball back towards the pack.

I'm not trying to talk you around, I just can't quite understand your reasoning here.

Marcus