Movement cornerwise = 1,5 MA

[Grumbledook]

I like squares, reminds me of how much of a geek I am

[Joaquim]

The weird looking of the LoS... if one makes the hexs with straight lateral movement you get a sightly desplaced LoS... but with all hexs in contact...
This is my favourite solution... you still can count "rows of hexs" to know if that B#$&?!§ is going to score or no....
But having your side slightly to the right of yours opponent half field shouldn't be a so big drama....

Because if you make the hexs the other way you get weird ezs, and a very, very weird Los... wich can be with "neutral" hexs, or... well.... I really don't see a way to do it....

If I really try this I'll let you know about (I'm think of making a small cup t test it...)...

Joaquim

[Pink Horror]

One last note on the CFL:

"Football was developped in Canada at the same time as it was developped in the USA. You've even taken many rules from us to improve your game, many more in fact than we've taken from you." - Zombie

Zombie, I've discussed this before on BB Central. The Canadians were ahead of the Americans in rugby, but the game which is played by the NFL and CFL was developed first in America.

In 1874, McGill University introduced rugby to Harvard University. Before that, the football played by Americans was pretty much the same as the football played back in England - it was soccer. So, at that distant point in time, Canada was ahead, as the Canadians were playing intercollegiate rugby since . Eventually Harvard challenged Yale to a match of rugby, and the game spread throughout the Ivy League.

Walter Camp is credited in changing rugby into the game played by the CFL and NFL. In 1880, he managed to introduce the scrimmage and a form of the snap (heeling). In 1882 he introduced the system of downs. He also introduced below-the-waist tackling 1888. In 1906, after President Roosevelt ordered football to become less violent, a man named John Heissman introduced the forward pass (which Canada didn't have until 1929). Also, the rule for downs was changed to three tries for ten yards (which Canada stole a year later and still uses). At this point, all innovation in football was coming from the US, not Canada.

The wide-open passing offense used in Canada today is purely American in inspiration, and the Canadian rules ruin my favorite part of football - the intricate struggles and movements at the line of scrimmage. I understand Canadian football.

Maybe I should have called the rules changes a lack of changes, because the Canadians stuck with the older rules while the Americans developed the game. But backing off the line of scrimmage is certainly a rules change by any stretch, and everything which makes the Canadian league the "exciting" league (its down system, its passing rules, modern tackling, and modern strategy) was invented in the USA.

Don't accuse me of not knowing something just because I don't like it. I may not have watched the CFL much, but I've read plenty about both types of ball.



Pink Horror

[Zombie]

Sorry, wrong assumption then.

It had a high chance of success, with an American telling me he watched one game once, but the assumption failed miserably. That's what happens with generalization.

[Mirascael]

Any comments? This has really worked for us.

It did for us too!
So our league then wasn't the only one in history.
It was incredible simple and straightforward to play, adding a new tactical and strategic dimension without any increase in complexety at all and made movement much more realistic as well (if you have doubts about this, it's because you never have tried it even once).

OOOOMMMMOOO
OOOX++++XOO
OOOOOYYOOOO

X: moving player
Y: opponent
+: 5 MA spent
M: 6 MA spent

If player X tried to avoid Y's tacklezones, he would have to pay an extra MA for using the M-path.

Nevertheless, never expect this to become an official rule, mankind traditionally rejects ideas which are too good.

[zeroalpha]

Chess players don't seem to get terribly upset by the fact that a bishop can move "further" than a rook as one piece moves on the diagonal and the other moves in straight lines. Both games have a set playing area. I have no problem if 1.5 movement is the way you want to play your bloodbowl. The game appears to work well with the current rules for movement wether its lifelike, realisitc or not.
If it ain't broke.

[Mirascael]

Chess players don't seem to get terribly upset by the fact that a bishop can move "further" than a rook as one piece moves on the diagonal and the other moves in straight lines. Both games have a set playing area.

You dare compare chess and Blood Bowl?
Personally, I think Chess is a dead boring game (there's nothing wrong with Chess, it's just me). But since my first RPG I really appreciate all kind of realistic simulations (fictional and historical) and lost any interest in all kinds of abstract games (ranging from chess and go to risk and monopoly).
Well, the point:
It's unjustified to compare BB and Chess as was done here. Chess and BB are entirely different types of games IMHO.

[Munkey]

Blood Bowl is a lot closer to Chess than it is to reality. The main difference is that there is no chance in Chess.

Back on topic, I quite like the idea of 1.5 movement, but i'm not sure if it will really improve the game and I can't really see that it will catch on, it's just a little bit too complex.

Might be a nice idea for PBeM though, there the computer could count the squares for you.

[GalakStarscraper]

Might be a nice idea for PBeM though, there the computer could count the squares for you.

No offense ... but I'd have to have a league promise to use it before I'd even consider trying to take the time to code it ... not saying NO ... just saying it would have to worth the effort.

I added Progressive GFI because a PBeM league said they were going to use it and then they didn't so that was multiple hours down the drain for a feature that I think has never been used.

Galak

[neoliminal]

I added Progressive GFI because a PBeM league said they were going to use it and then they didn't so that was multiple hours down the drain for a feature that I think has never been used.

Galak

You could always try it.

[GalakStarscraper]

I added Progressive GFI because a PBeM league said they were going to use it and then they didn't so that was multiple hours down the drain for a feature that I think has never been used.

Galak

You could always try it.

The MBBL2 voted it down, and based on requests by the league members the MBBL will no longer try non-team experimental rules unless they are official experimental rules (the only exception being EXP because we are knee deep into it already and I have multiple assurances that EXP is coming as a printed experimental rule soon).

Sorry JKL ... at least I programmed it in for you ... so someday someone could use it. ...

Galak

[Mirascael]

Blood Bowl is a lot closer to Chess than it is to reality. The main difference is that there is no chance in Chess.

As is Monopoly. I cannot imagine a die-hard gamer (BB, WHFB, Avalon Hill,etc.) indulging in a game of Monopoly.
btw: There's another important difference between chess and BB IMHO: Chess does not try to simulate an fictional or non-fictional reality, it's about pure logic.

Back on topic, I quite like the idea of 1.5 movement, but i'm not sure if it will really improve the game and I can't really see that it will catch on, it's just a little bit too complex

Try it out once. You will be very surprised that there is not the slightest increase in complexity.

[Darkson]

I play the odd game of monopoly, normally against people who don't wargame, so that's one statement down the drain.

[Munkey]

No offense ... but I'd have to have a league promise to use it before I'd even consider trying to take the time to code it ... not saying NO ... just saying it would have to worth the effort.

None taken, I haven't even managed to start playing PBeM yet so it's not like i'll be missing anything. I just thought that if this rule were going to be used anywhere this would be the best place for it.

Not trying to make extra work for you though.

[Munkey]

As is Monopoly. I cannot imagine a die-hard gamer (BB, WHFB, Avalon Hill,etc.) indulging in a game of Monopoly.

Hey, don't dis Monopoly Seriously I do play mostly BB but i'm not going to not play a game just because it's the wrong genre (is that the right word?).

It's a lot easier to get my family to play Monopoly than it is BB , although I did convince them to play Settlers Of Catan at Christmas.

Try it out once. You will be very surprised that there is not the slightest increase in complexity.

Maybe complexity is the wrong word, I think there is a lot of scope for confusion and miscounting in a game. I would try it though, but I think there's zero chance of me selling the idea to any of my opponents.