A revolutionary new concept

[grimfang]

Why just let ONE team have the ball? Both teams can kick at the same time... and both teams can recieve... just use 2 balls! Its fun .. try it.
When one ball is used to score, remove it from play... when the second is used to score, reset and em both again! It adds a little variety once in a while!

[zeroalpha]

Why stop at two balls? why not multi-ball like it pinball!! roll a d6

But on a more serious note, i think that alarge part of the appeal of the game is obvisouly the scoring, so having it easy to score is, i think, a good thing.
If you are trying to combat on turn touchdowns what really needs to happen is the field should be extended by one square, but thats never going to happen. I think both teams having 11 players is good

[Coach Barry]

It's been a long time for me since my last reply in this forum. Just wanted to say that I totally agree with Marcus' reasoning, and that the game should be made to score and not to defend. I see too many 0-0 games in football already.

[Smeborg]

Hi, Mestari - I beg to disagree with your base assertion that BB favours the offence.

On the contrary, I think a better way of putting it would be to say: BB is a game which favours those who can master the art of defence.

Playing at the Blood Bowl in Nottingham (6 games over 2 days, against coaches of a reasonable standard), my little team conceded only 2 Touchdowns on the opponents' receive. On both these occasions, my team managed to get the ball off the opposing team before they eventually scored. Out of 8 times (I think) that my opponents received, the offence scored twice, the defence scored four times, and two occasions were shutouts (no score). On my own team's receive, out of 7 times (I think), the offence scored 5 times, and the defence twice.

I don't think the above stats (which are mirrored in my occasional ventures in league play) show any particular bias towards offence. They may show that I and my race (Chaos Dwarfs) are quite good at defence. But I believe a goodly number of coaches could boast of similar playing records (whether in tournaments or leagues).

Mestari - look to your defence, and (if reasonably possible), try and play against coaches who have a reputation for good defence.

Hope this helps.

Cheers

[Mestari]

I don't think the above stats

Oh well... I must say that your stats are really statistically significant

Sorry Smeborg, but you seem to have failed to read the thread before replying.

Assumptions: Equal coaching skill and equal teams
Claim: It is easier to score than to prevent a score.

This can be easily derived from probabilities. As long as the offence isn't attempting anything stupid, such as a lone strike with the ball-carrier that can easily be blitzed, the offence can dictate how the game runs and has a higher probability of scoring. It's a generally acknowledged fact from all the strategy guides etc.

And this, my friend, does indeed emphasise the fact that those coaches who master the art of defence manage so well: they still share the ability to score easier on offence, but in addition, they direct a significant effort on denying this from their opponents.

The fact that a good defender is favoured only supports my argument that offence is generally easier.

With this thread I was trying to explore what would people think the effects would be if the match-off between offence and defence was made more even. But alas, most of those who have replied have not helped in that respect.

Mestari - look to your defence, and (if reasonably possible), try and play against coaches who have a reputation for good defence.

Hope this helps.

:lol::lol:

My all-time record shows that I win over 80% of my games, and I've played against a variety of opponents, ranging from bad to excellent coaches. I'm eagerly awaiting if I can keep up the pace in NAF tournaments.

[Smeborg]

Hi again, Mestari/Teemu -

No hard feelings.

I think your suggestion to allow 12 players in defence would favour the defence, rather than achieving balance. It is close to a common situation in BB, where the offence has 10 players, and the defence 11.

Blood Bowl has a dynamic, like all boardgames or sports that I know. Somebody has to move first, or kick off first, or serve first, or whatever. I think the responses on the thread just show that coaches like it that way, and find the game sufficiently balanced as it is.

Like in chess, the offence has the initiative, but the shape of each drive is determined by the defence.

Cheers