Stalling, What if...

[phil78]

If it's quite a short league so rookie ish teams I'm guessing if you can farm a few spp and get more skills on your key players you'd be at a big advantage.
Compared to a long term league where most of the teams will be well skilled across the board

[swilhelm73]

That would be a nice idea for BB! Stalling should have some risk.
Stalling is necessary but sometimes makes the match dull and boring (I stall because my opponent would do the same, but I don't like it very much).

Who says it doesn't have risk? I recently lost a championship game against DE (as chaos) because I stalled on T7, so they would not get two turns to score. and my opponent pulled off an unlikely play to put a TZ on my ball carrier, who then failed a 3+ dodge with an RR.

Was this outcome likely? No. Was it a risk? Yes.

[MattDakka]

That would be a nice idea for BB! Stalling should have some risk.
Stalling is necessary but sometimes makes the match dull and boring (I stall because my opponent would do the same, but I don't like it very much).

Who says it doesn't have risk? I recently lost a championship game against DE (as chaos) because I stalled on T7, so they would not get two turns to score. and my opponent pulled off an unlikely play to put a TZ on my ball carrier, who then failed a 3+ dodge with an RR.

Was this outcome likely? No. Was it a risk? Yes.

Usually, the risk of stalling is very low, compared to scoring without stalling and give the opponent a chance to score, so we can reasonably say that stalling has far less risks than not stalling.
If the stalling was risky, people would rarely stall.
I meant to say this: "Stalling should have more risk".
Sorry for me being unclear.

[solarflare]

If stalling had more risk, it would be a huge benefit to agile teams. Orcs, dwarfs, etc. would be reduced to Tier 2. In my opinion, significant game re-design would be required. Or, everyone could just play elves. Neither of those seems appealing to me.

I'm all for playing to have fun. And it's important to me that my opponent also have fun. I don't foul his players (just because I can) when I've already put 5 in the casualty box. But, if I'm playing against elves and can limit you to just one turn to score, then I have done what I need to do in the context of the game. It's good strategy. Not poor sportsmanship.

[MattDakka]

If stalling had more risk, it would be a huge benefit to agile teams. Orcs, dwarfs, etc. would be reduced to Tier 2. In my opinion, significant game re-design would be required. Or, everyone could just play elves. Neither of those seems appealing to me.

I don't think that Orcs, Dwarfs and other basher teams would drop to tier 2 for that reason.
Anyway, I don't think that seeing more elves around would ruin a game that currently it's heavily oriented towards bash teams, at least in perpetual leagues.

[swilhelm73]

If the stalling was risky, people would rarely stall.
I meant to say this: "Stalling should have more risk".
Sorry for me being unclear.

I think they've got the balance right. Stalling is a strategic choice, that generally is worth it, but not guaranteed. It forces the agile team defense to actually play defense instead of just trading scores knowing that their agility will allow them greater clock control. Seems right to me.

If you want to make stalling riskier, you'd also need to make it riskier to score in 1,2, or 3 turns. And now we are talking about a different game.

[swilhelm73]

I don't think that Orcs, Dwarfs and other basher teams would drop to tier 2 for that reason.
Anyway, I don't think that seeing more elves around would ruin a game that currently it's heavily oriented towards bash teams, at least in perpetual leagues.

From what I've seen, agile teams do fine in perpetual leagues, though people are less likely to play them. This isn't because they don't win enough, but because most people get more enjoyment from slowly building up a team then watching it wax and wane.

Looking at the recent champions in the perpetual leagues I am in: Vampire, Pro Elf, Necro, Dark Elf I simply don't see a problem with the agile v bash balance.

Though the one caveat I would throw in, I would like to see it harder to destroy a team. At high TV, if you lose a bunch of players, you can find yourself in a cycle where you don't get enough money to replace players because the TV from your remaining stars is to high. Yes, cutting stars will shorten the recovery period, but makes things even harder in the short term. Perhaps allow stars to be "sold" for their TV value?

[MattDakka]

From what I've seen, agile teams do fine in perpetual leagues, though people are less likely to play them. This isn't because they don't win enough, but because most people get more enjoyment from slowly building up a team then watching it wax and wane.

Take a look at FUMBBL Blackbox division (a perpetual league that everybody can check) and you'll see how many people play bashing teams (Chaos Dwarfs are the most popular team).
Considering that it's a competitive division, I don't think people there play just to build super teams for the sake of it, but to build a team that is reliable for winning matches.
At high TV the best teams in a perpetual league are the basher ones.
Elves can win, but tend to lose some players in the process, losing efficiency (Elf positionals are expensive to replace).
Elves base their gameplay on 1-die rolls, bashers base their gameplay on 2-dice rolls and removing players (less opponent's players, less variables to think about), this is a huge difference in terms of reliability.

[dode74]

Much as I agree with the sentiment there Matt, I have to disagree with your analysis of the reasons for playing bash in . I think it is done to build teams for the majors and, as such, is a team development exercise.

[Hitonagashi]

Much as I agree with the sentiment there Matt, I have to disagree with your analysis of the reasons for playing bash in . I think it is done to build teams for the majors and, as such, is a team development exercise.

Kinda. It's more the games to major efficiency ratio.

Elves play around 20 games, score loads, win big, and are major ready. Any further games at 2k TV after that run a greater risk of losing a superstar than the SPP you could gain off a new player skilling, so usually they get parked then. Bashy teams really have a situation of the sky is the limit. Every game you play, you might lose, but you probably won't lose too many players (except in the claw/claw games), so it brings you closer to a major winning goal.

As a result, while there is about an even number of elves and bashers at low TV, at high TV, most of the elves are dead or parked.

Interestingly, I think elves would actually be penalised more than bashers by making stalling more risky. The easiest way to win as elves is to 8 turn stall the first half, and turn them over in the second, knowing that you've got a pretty 1 turn in reserve (unless you are DE) even if they 8 turn stall you back. The thing is, stalling with elves is a heck of a lot harder than orcs and dwarves...usually on defense, a failed dodge isn't the end of the world, as it just means you fail the shot to break the cage that turn (though there are exceptions), whereas on offense, a failed dodge can mean a broken cage, and it's a real issue if you need to move a cage somewhere else that requires 4 people to move through a TZ.

One way bashers stall is by numerical advantage and an impenetrable wall, and realistically, if an elf can get anywhere near the ball carrier, you are doing a risky stall...so adding a rock etc on the ball carrier wouldn't hurt them half as much as it would elves.

[MattDakka]

Interestingly, I think elves would actually be penalised more than bashers by making stalling more risky. The easiest way to win as elves is to 8 turn stall the first half, and turn them over in the second, knowing that you've got a pretty 1 turn in reserve (unless you are DE) even if they 8 turn stall you back. The thing is, stalling with elves is a heck of a lot harder than orcs and dwarves...usually on defense, a failed dodge isn't the end of the world, as it just means you fail the shot to break the cage that turn (though there are exceptions), whereas on offense, a failed dodge can mean a broken cage, and it's a real issue if you need to move a cage somewhere else that requires 4 people to move through a TZ.

One way bashers stall is by numerical advantage and an impenetrable wall, and realistically, if an elf can get anywhere near the ball carrier, you are doing a risky stall...so adding a rock etc on the ball carrier wouldn't hurt them half as much as it would elves.

Stalling is harder with elves, I agree, and for this very reason elves tend to stall less times anyway than orcs and other bashers, therefore the theoric "antistalling" rock, zap! spell, lightning bolt cast/thrown from the crowd would affect more the bashers and less the elves.
Elves stall if they can afford to do that, but it's not a must-to-do for them as for teams like Dwarfs, Orcs, Chaos Dwarfs, Khemri, etc.
Elves would score quickly, and the bashers would stall less with that rule, in my opinion.
I know, that's a lot of theorybowlcrafting here, but it's just to talk.

[mattgslater]

Stalling is harder with elves, I agree, and for this very reason elves tend to stall less times anyway than orcs and other bashers, therefore the theoric "antistalling" rock, zap! spell, lightning bolt cast/thrown from the crowd would affect more the bashers and less the elves.

When I score quickly on offense in the first half, I consider it a failure with an asterisk, unless I crippled my opponent right out the gate. This is true with elves too. I'd rather stall out and carry a lead going into the half. A lot of opponents will start playing for the tie if they have to receive at 0-1 with 8 turns. And you know what? Stalling often fails, often leads to turnover TDs.

[Magictobe]

Bashing teams got stalling, elves teams got one turn touchdowns.

The problem that people have with stalling is that it takes longer then a one turn TD.

So stalling has his risks of getting the one turn touchdown against.

If there was no stalling, there would be no art of playing defense!!!!! (this is actually a nice one) And this is an art as well.

[DoubleSkulls]

I think half time is one of the reasons why stalling, and in more general clock control, is so important. If half time were removed and instead every 4th turn you get some rerolls back and a chance to recover KOs and return players to the match then it may help encourage teams to delay scoring less, because the change of possession at half time is so important. It would also reduce the effectiveness of 1 turn scorers.

[mattgslater]

If there was no stalling, there would be no art of playing defense!!!!!

Not with you there. There's an art in stopping scores of any speed. But yeah, stalling's a major aspect of the game. It's far from automatic....