Talk Fantasy Football

What do you guys think about stalling?

And with stalling i mean, not scoring while you can, because if you do your opponent will have the opportunity to score, or to bring in new (dangerous) players

I myself use it quite a lot, like today, i had a cage but didn't want to score in turn 5, and i waited until turn 8, otherwise the fast highelves would have had a chance to score the equalizer.

Do you think it is a valid tactic, or do you see it as non-sportsmanlike-conduct?

Thx,
W

Well I voted for valid tactic, but I really wanted to vote for "A valid tactic, yet unsportsmanlike and extremely boring" option.

Asperon Thorn wrote:Well I voted for valid tactic, but I really wanted to vote for "A valid tactic, yet unsportsmanlike and extremely boring" option.

I can agree with the boring part.
But why do you (as many others) see it as unsportsmanlike? I think for many teams it is THE tactic to win (Dwarves come to mind)

Why would you want to give your opponent a chance at winning, while you don't have to?

If the opponents team's strength is scoring quickly and my strength is defending the ball, I'll do everything to prevent my opponent from using his strength: valid tactics, good tactics. At least nobody will scorn Woodelves because the score every two turns and the games is getting boring.

I once considered it to be good sportsmanship to offer the opponent the chance to score. Nope, it isn't. The game is about chances and probabilities, so use them to your best. With one exception: in league games it seems to be a good idea to ruin your opponent's team by killing as much players as possible. THAT is making the game boring. But scoring slowly? Well, your opponent gets his chances to score himself with every turn you stall ...

Cooper wrote:Why would you want to give your opponent a chance at winning, while you don't have to?

That answers the question. I guess it depends on how you define sportsman. I don't consider it "sporty" to deny equal opportunity to your opponent. Surely it is a valid and winning tactic, which is why I voted that way, but I don't think it is very sporting, or sportsmanlike.

Under my definition, you could still win, but instead of taking advantage of a disadvanted opponent, you are giving him an equal opportunity, yet you still have a sportsman chance of winning by using some good defense.

Now, that said, I stall as well, when I need to. I feel like cheap trash when I do (unless the other guy is a complete ass, then I laugh in his face every turn that he can't do anything), but that is because of how I personnally feel about it. I know not everyone is the same, so I don't ussually press it, and don't complain too much when it is used against me. (Unless they are systematicaly hunting and fouling my 2 or 3 remaining players, then I bitch like hell.)

Asperon Thorn

Perfectly valid. I have no problem with doing it or suffering it. It's in the game.

ive said this many a time but a team can only stall against you if you let them

now of course there are expceptions like you only have 2 players left and such what not but otherwise it hold true and on the same vein its the opposite end to one turn scoring or even 2 turn scoring when your team will find it very difficult to do

agree with grumbledook, your opponent can only stall if you let him.

in the example where the opponent has only 2 players left, that to me is just evidence that the other guy was completely outplayed. in fact most of the time i wouldn't stall there, i'd rather score, kick off to him, take the ball because he can't possibly hope to defend it against you (even if he gets a couple of ko guys back) and score some more....even if you are dwarves

Absolutely positively valid and not at all unsportsmanlike, and i'll say the same even if you're using that time to clear the pitch of every one of my players.

I agree - stalling is definitely not unsportsmanlike - there is quite an element of risk in doing so, and if your opponent has put himself in a position that he cannot do anything about your tactics, then it is his fault for doing so!

Cooper wrote:Why would you want to give your opponent a chance at winning, while you don't have to?

My thoughts exactly. It may be boring and unsportsmanlike, but it's in the game. The name says it all

voted, 100%

agile teams have prob dealing with stalling strong teams
and
strong teams have prob with one turner teams

When I started playing 3rd Ed I wasn't a fan of stalling, but have to grown to realise it is just an additional tactic. I still don't like doing it, but when your opponent has say six KO'd players why do I want to score?

Richard

Its not something I LIKE doing...but if your opponent is fast, or has a lot of guys in the reserves or KO box who might come back and threaten a win or tie then its perfectly vallid.

Its only rarely you'd need to waste more than a couple of turns anyway.

I haven't been on this board all that long - but this topic just seems to re-appear quite often. There's nothing in the bloodbowl world 'broken' about stalling. It's just plain tactics. And here's a newsflash, even fast teams stall occassionally if it can give them an advantage ... like giving Dwarves 2 turns to score rather than 3.

Personally - I let the situation decide for me whether or not my Chaos Dwarfs should stall or not. If I am about to go up be 2 or 3 TD's I'll probably score right away ... if I have a solid numeric advantage in players I'd probably do the same if I think I have a solid chance to get another TD.

There are a lot of effective tactics to develope in Bloodbowl. But few (if any) that can't be countered in SOME way using good coaching skills. Some things are harder to counter than others ...

If your opponent is stalling -
you have to MAKE him to score one way or the other. You can't expect him to score right away if it's not in his best interest. Put players in position to threaten to ballhandler ... or gang up on a few of his players enabling you to get 2-dice blocks - and when they fall you foul the prick. Foul like crazy. Preferably with a Dirty Player. Make him pay a price for using stalling tactics.

If your opponent has a one turn scorer -
You have to take control of the game and play the clock. Stall, if you will. Let him have the ball early in the first - force him to make a play for a TD quickly ... preferably a risky one. If he scores, OK ... now at least you get the ball and hopefully you can parade in for a turn 8 TD. In the 2nd half you do the same ... and make sure to get him shorthanded so his last turn chance for a TD wont be an easy one. Make him dodge for it - and dodge into tacklezones.

If your opponent has high strength piling-on player(s) -
This is potentially the most brutal combination (especially with the way the piling on skill works according to the LRB). But even here you can counter it somewhat. First option is to make sure you have dirty players to stomp all over a piling on player. That will at least force your opponent to be cautious about piling on. Another option is to simply move away from the piling on player so that your opponent has to blitz if he wants to use it. And if he's willing to do that - well at least that should cripple his offence somewhat. Should you fail the dodge roll - so be it. At least then there wont be the piling on bonus so your player should be able to live to fight another day.

In my experience - it's not the you have that decides who wins. It's the way you play that team. Of course ... if you have a TR 200 team vs a brandnew TR 100 then your chances are better, but fairly even teams most often it will come down to how you play the percentages to maximise your chances. Sure, occassionaly the dice will let you down but that's a part of the game. For both teams.