bouncergriim
|
comments on game after one testI played with my friend last night and he had a few comments to share, after just one test and looking over the rule book some...
Some of the wording seems a bit confusing: (he is FF biased)
Test (period might have worked for this term)
Action (why not call it a turn)
Challenge (why not call these actions)
Dash =?
He also noticed the game seems to get a bit bogged down when you have to move someone just for postioning then wait another turn before you get to do what you really wanted. He thought the game looked quicker on paper than it actually was.
Replacement seems to really increase the length of a test.
The monsters seem to be a little too powerful (more from looking at stats than really playing with them that much)
Any stat above 4 seems to be so powerful it almost merits being worth 2 points of player creation guidelines.
There doesn't seem to be a great difference between 1 skill and 2 as far as success rate (At least with our dice last night)
The impact challenge doesn't seem to fully account for differences in might. Why is the number of succeesses always M-2 not difference between the might of the opponent and your might?
|
GrumpyGrizzly
|
Re: comments on game after one testThis post got larger than intended. Kind of what happens when I let my mind wander a bit. It's got a bit of MathBall in it. Because I was trying to make sense out of what I was thinking.
| bouncergriim wrote: | I played with my friend last night and he had a few comments to share, after just one test and looking over the rule book some...
Some of the wording seems a bit confusing: (he is FF biased)
Test (period might have worked for this term)
Action (why not call it a turn)
Challenge (why not call these actions)
Dash =?
|
I can definitely see where he is coming from. But every game has its own terms and will cause confusion when used to a separate game system. I still sometimes will use the wrong thing (calling an action a turn and the like)
| bouncergriim wrote: |
He also noticed the game seems to get a bit bogged down when you have to move someone just for postioning then wait another turn before you get to do what you really wanted. He thought the game looked quicker on paper than it actually was.
|
I had this problem as well in the beginning. I am by no means a EB expert (spend more time writing a mod for it than playing the game). I found that my number of "wasted turns" went down when I started to think in terms of pairs of player actions. All I can say is that it gets better.
For me the biggest difference between this and Grandma Wendy's FF is that a person isn't able to move each time. The thinking is entirely different.
| bouncergriim wrote: |
Replacement seems to really increase the length of a test.
|
Most of the games that I played were right around the testing for replacement players. I found that it lenthed the game by about 10 minutes on average.
What I got for that 10 minutes was a whole lot more strategy and a reason to bring 10 players to a 1 test party. Once your playing group gets the core rules down, you could try without substitutions and see how it works for you guys.
| bouncergriim wrote: |
The monsters seem to be a little too powerful (more from looking at stats than really playing with them that much)
|
Monsters are the same everywhere  Spend all your time going nose to nose with them, or run around them the best you can. Most are slow movement and real good at jamming up an area and owning a piece of the pitch. I found them to be about right.
| bouncergriim wrote: |
Any stat above 4 seems to be so powerful it almost merits being worth 2 points of player creation guidelines.
|
Looking at the team lists and stats that are above 5 (and not jog), I get this list:
Non-Monster:
JMTDSG
Widowmaker 6 3 5 4 1 2
Dervish 7 4 1 3 1 5
Monster (Might AND Tackle 5+):
Deadwood 3 6 5 1 1 5
Contraptions 5 5 5 3 1 2
Monster(Might 5+, Tackle 4-)
Mummies 4 5 4 2 1 5
Ogres 5 5 4 2 1 4
Terrorpin 4 5 4 3 2 5
Tantor 4 6 4 2 1 4
Ice Troll 4 5 4 3 1 4
Wrat 6 5 4 2 1 3
Troll 4 5 4 1 1 6
Grit 5 is really not a game breaker. Just makes that 0-1 monster you put out there last a bit longer.
Might 5 makes them hard to tackle (impact of success of 3) and gives them a great advantage when it comes time to shove you out of bounds. Now most of these could shove you a maximum of 3 squares + 1 from dash challenge. So this is also not game breaking. You can't put the monster in the faceoff without risking a bribed ref and a 1/6 chance of ejection for the game.
Tackle 5 hurts. But only 3 players in the game have that: Widowmaker (0-1), Deadwood (0-2 or 0-1), and Gnomish Contraptions (0-3). You play against the undead, and you are playing against a slow bashy team. Jog 3 on a deadwood makes it so he's having to take a lot of "wasted turns" to get into position. Widowmaker could hardly be called overpowered. She's not a monster (so low grit and average might) and can't handle the ball (skill 1). All she does it hit and run players. Yeah, she does it well (speaking as the victim of countless widowmaker slide and grinds) but she's still a "finesse" player.
Contraptions are brutal. Jog 5, Might and Tackle 5. Player testers have said that it balanced. I can't comment as I've never player them or against them.
| bouncergriim wrote: |
There doesn't seem to be a great difference between 1 skill and 2 as far as success rate (At least with our dice last night)
|
The distribution on those two is vastly different. I'm going to make the assumption that any conditional will not result in another conditional (will count it as a success) I get the following distribution for a single dice:
-1 success: 16.7%
0 success: 36.1%
1 success: 38.9%
2 success: 8.3%
For a two dice I get:
-2 success: 2.8%
-1 success: 12.0%
0 success: 26.0%
1 success: 30.9%
2 success: 21.1%
3 success: 6.5%
4 success: 0.7%
So if you need just a single success:
1D: Flop: 16.7% Success: 47.2% Earning Momentum: 8.3%
2D: Flop: 14.8% Success: 59.2% Earning Momentum: 28.3%
These are (vastly?) different. But since we key off the flops more than the successes, they won't "seem" very different. I can't give anyone any trouble about dice perception. If it wasn't for the fact that I was SURE that the vassal mod has a mistake in the RNG (it had a mistake in the number of dice faces), then I would never have gotten into the mod itself
What is true, however, is that with the "minimum 1 success" rule that from a defensive (receiving the challenge) point of view that a 1-3 are all equal. Some a number of players on defense play tougher than their stats would have you think.
| bouncergriim wrote: |
The impact challenge doesn't seem to fully account for differences in might. Why is the number of succeesses always M-2 not difference between the might of the opponent and your might? |
I know that this one came up in play testing. Galak can give a better answer than I can about this.
I took a brief look at what would happen to impact challenges under a success=might difference and the current Might-2 system. Note that I didn't look at Might 1. There are no might 1 players on the standard rosters.
Successes needed by different methods for Impact:
2 vs 6 = 4 by diff = 4 by M-2
2 vs 5 =3 by diff = 3 by M-2
2 vs 4 =2 by diff = 2 by M-2
2 vs 3 =1 by diff = 1 by M-2
3 vs 6 =3 by diff = 4 by M-2
3 vs 5 =2 by diff = 3 by M-2
3 vs 4 =1 by diff = 2 by M-2
4 vs 6 =2 by diff = 4 by M-2
4 vs 5 =1 by diff = 3 by M-2
5 vs 6 =1 by diff = 4 by M-2
So for the Might 3, 4, and 5 there is a huge difference between these two different types of calculations. I think it was to keep Might from being an overly important stat. Just a guess.
|
Mad Jackal
|
I didn't write the rules, but as the Demo guy and some-one who's done some of the playtesting I thought I'd say a few things.
In answer to the Impact challenge question.
Challenges are based upon your relevant stat.
and your Opponent's relevant stat minus 2.
Your skill tells you how many dice to roll.
His tells you how high you need to roll.
The combination of these numbers generates the percentage chance of success.
Disengage, tackle, shove and impact all work this way.
Had the rule been "might - might", that would have been an annoying excpetion to the rules. AND caused might to be an overly important factor.
Forget treating the impact roll like "psyching yourself up" to hit him. That isn't it.
It is simply how hard any player needs to hit him to throw a tackle. Alternatively or in addition, it could also be considered the amout of weak spaces that player has (ie hitting at the knees brings most big gusy down regardless of how hard you hit.)
Might 2 players like Imps might not be able to impact the Deadwood as hard as thier might 3 hunter team-mates, but they gain an advantage at hitting in the knees (position).
Stronger players (higher might) have a higher percentage chance of sucessfully impacting (hitting hard enough or well enough) already built in.
Rolling 3 dice for the same target number is easier than 2 dice.
Rolling 3 for a number and 2 for a higher number really throws the probabilty curve you see?
More penalty would be a net loss for the game.
I'll say this. This is not your father's FF. I've had to un-learn a ton of FF habits from other games to play this one better. We all will.
Welcome to the game, don't take this as criticism as opinions are opinions and first impressions are just that.
Play a few more. Get past the point where you're looking up the rules and trying to reconcile the differences to otehr games a lot and keep us posted ok ?
|
Dark Lord
|
Skimmed the thread and it looks like others are saying what I am about to.
| bouncergriim wrote: | | He also noticed the game seems to get a bit bogged down when you have to move someone just for postioning then wait another turn before you get to do what you really wanted. He thought the game looked quicker on paper than it actually was. |
| GrumpyGrizzly wrote: | | I had this problem as well in the beginning. I am by no means a EB expert (spend more time writing a mod for it than playing the game). I found that my number of "wasted turns" went down when I started to think in terms of pairs of player actions. All I can say is that it gets better. |
This was our experience as well. Once I began breaking my team into two squads and working in pairs or threes for ball handling wasted turns became nearly nonexistent.
Funny thing is when we taught the game to two coaches who hadn't played Bl00d B0wl they had no issues with this and it just clicked.
It;s definitely an "old dog-new tricks" problem.
|
Mad Jackal
|
Re: comments on game after one testTerminology is important yes. But to me it is only bad if the term is a common term used wrong in the game. So most of these will be you say “potaytoe” and I “potahtoe” Or “Lorry” vs “truck”.
Test is a term from other sports. Cricket? I like it and challenges because we are pitting two teams vs each other each with a common goal. Score more than the other guy.
Period implies a set amount of time to me. Hockey, Soccer and Basketball all play set amount of time then they take a break and repeat. ElfBall isn’t like that. In Elfball you face off and play until a team scores. It may take 10 minutes it may take 10 months. Then you set up again (I imagine no break, you might not) and do it again. Quarters are just Football’s diviion of the total time played by equal parts. Innings in baseball are the closest to elf ball. Each one varies in length. But of course it’s not quite the same. Baseball gives you another set of “units” to score “points” in. These units are called “outs” and you get 9 groups of 3 outs to score points in. Elfball you just get to score a Point. 1st to One, or two or three wins. Period.
For me the answer to “Action” vs turn. Is because this Sport is continual play. We don't stop and start a play clock. We don’t throw balls to one player until he is out and then throw to another. Players are tacking actions while the game unfolds. I assume that all other players not “active” in board game terms to be “acting” like covering their section of the field or getting into postion or trying to screen the ref.
Challenge, see test above. The terminolgy to me helps set the universe and doesn’t replace fluff, but enhances it.
Dash is just that. A term that fits what it is (or more what it used to be) The extra point of movement. Some game terms just need invented. Nothing else came up that fit as well. “Travelling” is one term that comes to mind for sports terms that make you say “what”?
The whole game is about positioning. Chess has you move pieces now to do something with later. You’ll un-learn your need for instant gratification for each action. Sometimes the right answer is just to move a man to a location give him more options later. Not unlike controlling the center squares in chess. This is actually one thing that has changed from the Gen Con rules set. It has changed in your favor instead of mine. I would prefer more towards “just positional” moving and with the addition of multiple challenges per action you get more chance for instant gratification. Additionally the extra point of movement given to all players helps you on this.
Yes replacements add to the length of game. I argued that as well. But in the end, the balance between needing a bench for one test matches won out. I suggest playing without replacements and playing best of 3. But I also don’t have an issue with the game running over a half hour per score (in my home league). Or over 1.5 hours for the match. Hopefully this is an easy “house rule” or use of optional rules for your league to sort out.
And with all of the time gains made on other rules changes, this one is a wash to me.
Mosters are 0-1 and have their own draw-backs. I have not seen any be “too” good. Granted I have played as much after boosts. But I think like was said, you learn to either gang up and take them down, or play around them,Let us know what your experiences in playing them brings.
Any stat above 4 comes with a reduction elsewhere. Built in weaknesses. And let me tell you how easy it is to flop a 4 dice roll. (Or 5 dice roll.) My current “best” is 5 flops on 6 dice. The other one being blank. Not only that, but the high skill guys tend to throw more which just increases the number of flops they’ll make over time.
When calculating target numbers, no 1 and 2 are nearly a moot point. When rolling dice though. 2 is multiplicatively better. The widow maker with skill 1 will flop lots more than one with skill 2. Flopping is worse than just failing..
And for tackle. Well lets just say rolling 2 dice looking for a 2 is less futile than rolling 1 dice.
Again, this isn't criticism, just discussion and my opinions.
I'd be interested in hearing more.
|
Dark Lord
|
Re: comments on game after one test | Mad Jackal wrote: | | Mosters are 0-1 and have their own draw-backs. I have not seen any be “too” good. Granted I have played as much after boosts. But I think like was said, you learn to either gang up and take them down, or play around them,Let us know what your experiences in playing them brings. |
I haven't seen any problems with monsters. They go down just as hard as any other player. They aren't "Big Guy" with ST 5. One of the reasons for separating Might and Tackle was for big guys, if I'm not mistaken. The nastiest player in my estimation is the Widowmaker.
|
GalakStarscraper
|
Re: comments on game after one testThere have been some great answers already to your questions ... so some of what I say will be repetitive.
But I have to say after so long on TBB ... is was refreshing to see a thread on questions like this that treated the original questions with respect (that is now gone from TBB in my opinion). Thanks to everyone who responded for that.
| bouncergriim wrote: | | I played with my friend last night and he had a few comments to share, after just one test and looking over the rule book some... |
First off thanks for sharing ... some of the best changes to the game came from these types of comments.
| Quote: | Some of the wording seems a bit confusing: (he is FF biased)
Test (period might have worked for this term)
Action (why not call it a turn)
Challenge (why not call these actions)
Dash =? |
Test is a term from other sports and we used instead of a word like Period because Period denotes a give length of real time and since you play to a goal and not a set period of time ... Test seemed more accurate for a description.
Action instead of Turn. A Turn is what you do when your opponent is finished until its his turn again. Now normally this means taking an Action with a player ... but you might not. You might bring an a player from the Bench. You might use the Wizard if you are using the Optional rules. You might use Cheerleaders at the start. In other words ... there are more things that happen during a Turn than the player's Action which is why the game has two seperate terms for this.
Challenges are what you do when a player is taking an action ... and to be honest ... if you are coming from a B.B. world where only one action can be done per a turn by a player ... I think it would be WAY more confusing to the B.B. player's out there to call a challenge an action.
Dash ... This used to be called the Push challenge because it was the player pushing himself to do more. That term confused players. Dash seems simple enough for a name to denote the player spending extra effort to do one more thing.
| Quote: | | He also noticed the game seems to get a bit bogged down when you have to move someone just for postioning then wait another turn before you get to do what you really wanted. He thought the game looked quicker on paper than it actually was. |
Few notes on this:
1) The game plays a lot faster once you get used to the rules.
2) Mad Jackal hit upon the fact that the game has part of its strategy element coming from positioning players.
3) If you find that the game feels bogged down to you after a couple games ... seriously try the optional rule to allow a coach during his turn to move two players at a time instead of one. I talked to one of the best B.B. in the world after a game of Elfball on his thoughts and he discussed that he wanted more to happen during his turn. This was the optional rule we came up with that he thought would make the game more fun to him (I had already come up with this rule for the Boulder Brawl game which is going to use it as a normal rule) and he thought it would be a good fit for Elfball ... so you might want to give this a try.
| Quote: | | Replacement seems to really increase the length of a test. |
It does increase ... but it also makes the decision to have a team with more than 6 players (especially since we are going to start holding tournaments for the game) a real part of the strategy. The overall benefit this rule allowed to me greatly outweighed the increase in game time.
| Quote: | | The monsters seem to be a little too powerful (more from looking at stats than really playing with them that much) |
Unlike B.B. a monster in Elfball has to really give something up in order to be a monster. Compare a B.B. Human Lineman to an Ogre ... 20 points of stats vs 21. Or a Gutter Runner which has 22 points of stats. In Elfball with great power comes something else that has to not be so great.
| Quote: | | Any stat above 4 seems to be so powerful it almost merits being worth 2 points of player creation guidelines. |
The only player that comes out in testing as powerful so far has been the Widowmaker and if you knock her down ... she doesn't get up that great (if she gets up at all (again she trade Grit and Skill to be the tackler that she is).
[quote]There doesn't seem to be a great difference between 1 skill and 2 as far as success rate (At least with our dice last night).[quote]Depends on what a great difference is ... but you are correct its not a B.B. type curve ... that was delibrate. I do B.B. odds in my head so quickly that I spend a game treating it like a math problem. Its kinda nice that the Elfball probabilities are advanced enough calcs that I just wing it and so has greatly added to my enjoyment of the game.
| Quote: | | The impact challenge doesn't seem to fully account for differences in might. Why is the number of succeesses always M-2 not difference between the might of the opponent and your might? |
Actually it does account for the differences.
Keep in mind that since the number of dice you roll is based on your might and the target that you are rolling to get is based on your opponent's might ... the whole roll is really comparing the might of the two players (just with 2 different mechanics).
Galak
|
GrumpyGrizzly
|
Re: comments on game after one test | GalakStarscraper wrote: | Depends on what a great difference is ... but you are correct its not a B.B. type curve ... that was delibrate. I do B.B. odds in my head so quickly that I spend a game treating it like a math problem. Its kinda nice that the Elfball probabilities are advanced enough calcs that I just wing it and so has greatly added to my enjoyment of the game.
|
I had remembered you stating that before, so was a little apprehensive about posting the dice probabilities. But since most people can't keep those strange numbers in their head, I figured you'd let it slide
What I enjoy about them is that no matter how many dice I'm rolling, i've got about a minimum 9% chance of getting ShIMmed. Yet by adding more dice, my ability to earn momentum is what goes up drastically.
|
Mad Jackal
|
Re: comments on game after one test | GrumpyGrizzly wrote: | | GalakStarscraper wrote: | Depends on what a great difference is ... but you are correct its not a B.B. type curve ... that was delibrate. I do B.B. odds in my head so quickly that I spend a game treating it like a math problem. Its kinda nice that the Elfball probabilities are advanced enough calcs that I just wing it and so has greatly added to my enjoyment of the game.
|
I had remembered you stating that before, so was a little apprehensive about posting the dice probabilities. But since most people can't keep those strange numbers in their head, I figured you'd let it slide
What I enjoy about them is that no matter how many dice I'm rolling, i've got about a minimum 9% chance of getting ShIMmed. Yet by adding more dice, my ability to earn momentum is what goes up drastically. |
Thanks for posting that.
I have a table like that I tried to post earlier in development. I mucked up when trying to post it to the boards though. Mine has the conditionals rolling conditional in it, and a column for "at least this many number of successes" in addition to the flop and "exactly this number of sucesses" like you have here. In my opinion, it is a slightly more telling table to the casual viewer as to the benefits of rolling more dice and penalties for rolling less.
I think people should see it and "understand" it, but not have it at the table with them to play.
I use it to evaluate my theoretical playbook creation and team build options, plus to evaluate teams, skills, and players in general, but I'm with Tom.
Turning the whole game into a math problem (like some posters on this board have done) isn't the way to go. Especially when looking up each option of the few dozen you have each turn takes TIME. (the other thing that this group was moaning about.)
|
bouncergriim
|
The other comment that we had was that Might seems to be the most important attribute. You use might in faceoffs, impacts, and shoves.
I see skill as important too, but someone who is a just after other player and not the ball, skill can be ignored almost completely.
The ball handler still has to worry about his/her might, if the get hit you look to that for impact, most players hitting the ball carrier don't have to worry about his might.
Also, if the ball carrier is especially dodgy, then you might want to push instead of tackle and in this case we are back to needing might.
This is just my thoughts, I might be a bit hitting biased, but every player is going to hit/take hits. Not every player is going to see the ball. And there are 6 opponents on the field and only one ball.
I know all the other attributes are important but it seems might can overcome some things like not having enough dodge. You can push an opponent away instead of dodging. And inorder to hit you and tackle vs dodge they still have to impact.
I am not sure how this effects things overall, I am still a neophyte, but just looking for some other insight on this.
|
GrumpyGrizzly
|
| bouncergriim wrote: | The other comment that we had was that Might seems to be the most important attribute. You use might in faceoffs, impacts, and shoves.
I see skill as important too, but someone who is a just after other player and not the ball, skill can be ignored almost completely.
The ball handler still has to worry about his/her might, if the get hit you look to that for impact, most players hitting the ball carrier don't have to worry about his might.
|
I'm going to go with the assumption that monsters are balanced. I've not heard complaints or seen them as a problem. So that elminates all of the players with Might 5+.
The average player has might 3. Defenders have Might 4, but usually Dodge 2.
If you hit a might 4 player straight up with your might 3 player, yeah, there are going to be problems. However if that might 3 player has any dodge, disengage to the rear and slap the meaty dodge 2 player in the back. You're down to needing 1 success for the impact challenge.
High might is a deterrent. I'm terrified for deadwoods right now, but since they seldom have the ball, I can usually ignore them or tie them up a bit.
Shove challenges, again, defenders have Might 4, but shove them from behind and you're down to needing 1 success just like for other players.
I was wondering what two teams were you guys using where Might seemed to dominate the pitch?
| bouncergriim wrote: |
Also, if the ball carrier is especially dodgy, then you might want to push instead of tackle and in this case we are back to needing might.
This is just my thoughts, I might be a bit hitting biased, but every player is going to hit/take hits. Not every player is going to see the ball. And there are 6 opponents on the field and only one ball.
|
Most player are going to take might 3 hits from might 3 players.
Hitting is the main part of the game. I have found that tackle/dodge to be
more important than Might. And we play a mean game of tackle ball.
The ball carrier is not the only one that gets tackled, so dodge is important as well. Having to roll that extra impact can be annoying, but not all that common unless you are tangling with monsters. Put a ball carrier next to a defender and he's going to get hit and brought down (probably, unless his dodge is real good).
Unless you are facing the Dwarves (either list), then you aren't going to be facing a field of mostly might 4 players (that aren't monsters). It's pretty apparent that dwarves have their own problems and that might 4 doesn't allow them to dominate the pitch.
| bouncergriim wrote: |
I know all the other attributes are important but it seems might can overcome some things like not having enough dodge. You can push an opponent away instead of dodging. And inorder to hit you and tackle vs dodge they still have to impact.
I am not sure how this effects things overall, I am still a neophyte, but just looking for some other insight on this. |
Pushing an opponent away definintely a good thing if you have bad dodge. Want to earn some easy momentum, or just want to put them in a good position for some assists. But it costs jog, where disengage does not. These usual high might players are pretty slow, so using jog to move one makes them a bit slower. But that's the price you pay.
High might can make them harder to tackle because of the impact roll. But this can be made manageable by a high dodge/tackle player. Always remember, if it's going to improve your tackle chances (all things being equal), hit them from the back, even if you have to disengage to get there. Often a high dodge player will be able to gain momentum from this.
In our games, it has balanced out.
|
mattwakeman
|
Re: comments on game after one test | GalakStarscraper wrote: | | 3) If you find that the game feels bogged down to you after a couple games ... seriously try the optional rule to allow a coach during his turn to move two players at a time instead of one. I talked to one of the best B.B. in the world after a game of Elfball on his thoughts and he discussed that he wanted more to happen during his turn. This was the optional rule we came up with that he thought would make the game more fun to him (I had already come up with this rule for the Boulder Brawl game which is going to use it as a normal rule) and he thought it would be a good fit for Elfball ... so you might want to give this a try. |
I would actually like to see what effects this has in reality as I can't but help thing that it would change the dynamics of the game quite a bit. Having said that I kind of like it as if nothing else it reduces the number of turns which you spend simply standing a player up and not much more else. But, as with all things, playtesting is required. I just wonder if this change would affect all teams equally...
Also, if somebody was to try this would it not mean that the initial face-off could do with a tweaking? Otherwise the team that won would not only have the face-off action but could then move another two players before the other team does anything. Now again without any real data I have no idea as to whether this would be just too much of an advantage but maybe if you are playing the 'two at a time' rule then the team which wins the face-off can only move one other player initially and then the other side moves two and you are back into the normal groove.
Games are needed to test all of this, lots and lots of games...
|
Dark Lord
|
I think Might is an important skill but honestly it's a rookie mistake to think it is the most important. I don't want to sound condescending with that because we are all rookies to the game at some point.
There are other posts as to why dodge and skill are both important counters to might but to sum it up very simply. It doesn't do much good for a high might player to hit a ball carrier if he can't pick up the ball.
Again, you have to work in pairs or teams. A tackle team has to be able to recover the ball for that initial tackle to mean anything. If he nails a ball carrier, most likely that carrier is about to move, so it's easy for him to get up pick up a loose ball and chuck it to a teammate. Then the high might (probably low Jog) player that has just taken a turn is left in the dust.
Again, most people have covered this but I think in a few games the Bl00d B0wl stink will have left your table.
|
Darkson
|
The only term that doesn't appeal to me is Test, as the only sport I can think of that uses it is cricket, and that's for the 5-day matches.
The others make sense to me, once you start to use them more often.
|
Igor Tahavanale
|
| Darkson wrote: | | The only term that doesn't appeal to me is Test, as the only sport I can think of that uses it is cricket, and that's for the 5-day matches. |
With a couple of the games I've played I don't see a problem with a 5 day match reference  
|
bouncergriim
|
I am enjoying the discussion. I am not taking any of it negatively. I like to know the why of how things came about and reasoning behind rules.
To answer which teams were we playing with. I had made up a couple of teams using battle ball figures 3 strikers, 2 safeties, 2 midfielders, 2 hunters, 1 ogre(middle kingdom based), 1 defender. More or less to let us try all the types of players available (barring the thrower)
The might comment is more based on looking at rules and teams, without much real play testing. honestly in our whole 2+ hour test, we never had to roll impact.
Next time we will try real teams, I just wanted to see what type of players I liked. Definitely need to try a thrower next time. Our lack of picking "skill"ed players was detrimental to ball handling and overall time it took to achieve anything.
Overall, I am looking forward to playing alot more and trying to learn the ins and outs of elfball, I just wish I had more friends that like board games that lived closer.
Also, probably my whole house reaks of Grandma Wendy's FF from all the minis and paints I have in my game room and cupboards. I still like FF, But am looking for something different but similar. I love Sport/Fatasty mesh that just isn't out there much.
(I teach physics, all rules have a reason, ussually empirical in my studies, I also studied theology and philosophy in college so I like well thought out logical explainations)
|
Mad Jackal
|
| Igor Tahavanale wrote: | | Darkson wrote: | | The only term that doesn't appeal to me is Test, as the only sport I can think of that uses it is cricket, and that's for the 5-day matches. |
With a couple of the games I've played I don't see a problem with a 5 day match reference |
Here here.. I think the fluff [unwritten history of the Sport] is full of games that went 5 days or longer.
Test from cricket meaning "played for how-ever long it took" is exactly what we're going for here....
Now all we need is a werewolf team that trys to stall each match until the next full moon. :D
|
bouncergriim
|
Or a team playing against deadlings stalling until day light.
|
Mad Jackal
|
| Quote: | | To answer which teams were we playing with. I had made up a couple of teams using battle ball figures 3 strikers, 2 safeties, 2 midfielders, 2 hunters, 1 ogre(middle kingdom based), 1 defender. More or less to let us try all the types of players available (barring the thrower) |
Actually. I had a long post about that very subject that gotten eaten by the internet gods.
I have a theory that teams like the Pharohs or Valks or Black Widows with a multitude of player types are very good teams to start with to learn the rules of the game.
In so much as you start to very much see the difference between each type when you want to do each action. "I want to pass, but my thrower is over there, so I have a defender who can make it. "Ugh! I think I would rather not pass" Or "I want to knock this guy's block off, but my striker is the only one who can reach . bleh.
To futher that thought, by playing with the mixed bag I think you'll eventually see which players you want on the field and which ones you don't. (IE the team make up that fits your play style.) For example if you always have a thrower there but would rather have a striker, then that narrows down your team choices a bit..
Some races, like Dwarves and Deadlings, and Night Elves are playable and balanced (from my experiences so far) , but not great to learn the rules with as thier tactics are a touch more limited....
|
GalakStarscraper
|
| bouncergriim wrote: | | Or a team playing against deadlings stalling until day light. |
Thnk longer.
Think about the Valkyries having an Alaska type environment with 6 months of day and 6 months of night. Think about the Valkyries stalling do to some players in their reserves being banged up from bar fights the previous night and delaying during the game until the sun rose forcing the Deadlings to delay the Test for 6 months until they could take the field again.
Galak
|
Cephalopod
|
| Dark Lord wrote: |
This was our experience as well. Once I began breaking my team into two squads and working in pairs or threes for ball handling wasted turns became nearly nonexistent.
Funny thing is when we taught the game to two coaches who hadn't played Bl00d B0wl they had no issues with this and it just clicked.
It;s definitely an "old dog-new tricks" problem. |
In our games this has been the case as well. The veteran FF coaches still think in terms of cages and putting everyone together. The newer players form small groups of 2 - 3 models and have power at a point.
|
|
|
|