More interceptions

[Mirascael]

Why should there be more interceptions?
Interceptions aren't there for their own sake, I think. "Must have more interceptions because their is a slot on the roster" is a really lame argument in my opinion.
The last two matches I made against Lizzies, I saw Sauri intercepting passes! (I played aggressively).
We don't need more interceptions - we need the former passing rules (passing - intercepting - catching), since the new ones are confusing, completely retarded and not intuituve at all.

[Zombie]

I think interceptions are easy enough allready! But if you want it easier!
Maybe if the interceptor is within "Short Pass!" range of either the thrower or the catcher then they suffer a -1 to their roll rather than -2! BEcause these are the two places in the balls arc where it is easier to catch! Just an idea!

Even on the longest long bomb, you're always within short pass range of either the thrower or the catcher. I guess you must have meant quick pass.

Even then, that's a stupid idea. It's one more range (or two) to figure out and it doesn't really add anything to the game.

[redlizard]

How about this idea:

• Reduce interception penalty to only -1
  If interception roll is successful, must make a catch roll to hold on to it
  If catch roll fails, the ball is "tipped" and scatters 3 times from the interceptor.

If you don't want to have to make a separate catch roll, you could say that it's still -2, but if you miss it by one you get the tipped result.

I'd say that more interceptions isn't necessarily a good thing. I would only use the above suggestions if you changed the interception roll to after the pass.

[Shadow_Dragon]

I think interceptions are easy enough allready! But if you want it easier!
Maybe if the interceptor is within "Short Pass!" range of either the thrower or the catcher then they suffer a -1 to their roll rather than -2! BEcause these are the two places in the balls arc where it is easier to catch! Just an idea!

Even on the longest long bomb, you're always within short pass range of either the thrower or the catcher. I guess you must have meant quick pass.

Even then, that's a stupid idea. It's one more range (or two) to figure out and it doesn't really add anything to the game.

I apologise i did mean quick pass, but if that's too complicated then just make it three squares, if your under the ruler and are within 3 squares of eiher thrower or catcherssuffer -1 rather than -2! Makes sense! May not be a good idea, but i wouldn't say stupid so quickly! Or if three squares seems too much then, just say two!

But then i don't think the rule should be changed anyway!

[D'Arquebus]

If you want more interceptions then this is what to do.

1) The coach in question should take more pass block. (most intercetpions in Gridiron occur because the defense read the pass and move to "pass block" if you will.)

2) Make safe throw affected by the pass modifiers. That is, tackle zones and range. (In my experience once an opposing coach has safe throw investing in a great deal of Pass Block is a much less effective tactic. It also makes sense in a 'real world' comparison. If you are hurling a long bomb down the field to a sprinting receiver it is much more difficult to place the ball in the air to minimise an interception attempt.)

3) Make a missed catch or inaccurate pass, caught by the opposition an interception. (Again in Gridiron the inaccurate pass going to the defender instead of your wide receiver is a fairly common form of interception.)

As to the suggestion of just being in the players tackle zones to intercept I do not like it. It would make the Nerves of Steel TRAIT almost useless, and noone would ever take it.

And while I think the 4 squares of movement on the pass block would not be too bad I would strongly disagree with the "everyone gets a 1 square pass block move". This could potentially allow the defending team to reorder their defense and the layout of the field , anywhere near to where the ball would be passed. This of all the suggestions offered would make passing a less common occurence I think. Not bacause of the intercept attempt but because your opponent would get so many potential free moves.

As to making passing easier to ecourage more potential intercept attempts, I would also disagree. Giving the speed teams a further advantage in an area of the game where they are already incredibly difficult to stop, ie the two turn TD, and just for the sake of a desire to see more interceptions would be a very bad idea.

edit: typos fixed 7/4/03

[Zombie]

Those are are extremely good points. I've got nothing to add except for WOW! Listen to this guy people, he knows what he's talking about!

[Mestari]

How about this idea:

• Reduce interception penalty to only -1
  If interception roll is successful, must make a catch roll to hold on to it
  If catch roll fails, the ball is "tipped" and scatters 3 times from the interceptor.

A nice idea and definitely worthy of playtesting. However, the fundamental problem of increasing interceptions remains the same. With the mere -1 modifier on attempting interceptions, either no interceptions attempts at all or safe throw on most throwers becomes the norm.

A combination of methods presented could be useful: namely the free pass block moves, the tipping rules above, and a slightly tweaked safe throw. It would be interesting to receive playtesting information on the following set of rules:

-Pass Block = can move 4 squares
-Every player can make a "pass block move" of 1 square
-Interceptions at -1 with a catch roll at +1 to determine tipping if the int roll is succesful
-Safe throw at 3+

Should be interesting...

[Khar-peth]

why not make interception roll after the pass roll and change modifier to -1 if the pass is not accurate?keep it -2 if its accurate
this-combined to only tacklezones modifiers causing fumbles- would cause more interceptions...