FInishing Off DB3

Just putting the last bits into the manuscript for DreadBall Season 3 today, and off to be laid out next week. On top of all the new gubbins I’ve been looking at some of the issues in the DreadBall world at the moment and finding elegant and simple ways to address those where possible. In effect, I’m taking the role of the “real” DreadBall Governing Body and tweaking the game rules to ensure that the game is as fun and exciting a spectacle as it can be. This is the same sort of thing that sports governing bodies do on a regular basis and I see no reason why it wouldn’t apply in the Corporation as much as on Earth.

The two main areas of concern this time were the whole issue around launching the ball and the example of unpleasant gamesmanship called prone cages. Both have been addressed in different ways to mitigate or avoid the issues and move the game back to where it should be.

Of course, many Coaches haven’t bumped into either of these problems in their own games, but I’d rather they never did. As ever, it is the top players and the tournament circuit which digs deepest into the detail of the rules and bends things furthest soonest. Im sure they’ll find something else to exploit, and I would expect nothing less. It’s the way to find that competitive edge. For my part, I’ll continue to fix what I deem to be undesirable in terms of tactics and rules that reduce the game’s level of tactical thought and fun.Β This means that you can just get on and play the game. I’ve got your back πŸ˜‰

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in DreadBall - The Futuristic Sports Game. Bookmark the permalink.

74 Responses to FInishing Off DB3

  1. Henry says:

    Hi Jake, I’m curious that you think the Prone Cage (a tactic that only works against Judwan, and has plenty of opportunity for failure even then) is undesirable, but the rampant dominance of the Judwan in general isn’t an issue? I’m not a particular fan of the prone cage but I’m all for anything that curbs Judwan a bit, since they do seem to be running away with it a little right now…From what we’ve seen though, I’m hoping the Season 3 teams create some new problems for the Judwan.

    I’m not bitter ;-), but I did have a rather frustrating league game against them last Monday (although that was as much to do with my Robots abject failure to pick up the ball than the Judwan themselves…)

    • Quirkworthy says:

      I disagree that the prone cage is only of use vs Judwan. It is a general stalling tactic which simply drags the game out and slows things down and can be used against any team. Yes it can fail, yes it’s a bit tricky in part, yes other teams can Stomp on the prone models (risking being sent off). In general though it’s a horrible piece of gamesmanship and encourages entirely the wrong sort of play. More than one of the playtesters’ responses to this was that anyone doing it needed a slap. That’s hard to include in the rules though.

      I’ve not said that the Judwan are not an issue, just that I am not convinced that the problem is as bad as some vocal individuals are claiming. They are a very new team and I have seen a great deal of evidence that people are simply not experienced against them. However, I think they are benefitting from a synergy of abilities which is moderately too effective overall. Season 3 seeks to curb them in a couple of ways to bring them more in line with the other teams. Time will tell if this works as intended.

      • Henry says:

        Great to hear – I’d sooner Judwan were more balanced with the other teams than have to rely on obviously unintended tactics to have a chance against them…

        I wasn’t convinced at all when I first heard that Judwan were too good, but I’ve steadily come round to that way of thinking – I watched a league game last night between our Judwan player and are Veer-Myn player – Judwan were home and with a single player with a safe pair of hands were able to score 6 points before a Veer-Myn player was even moved (apart from one of the back 3 who was misdirected out of the way of the 3 point zone!). The game did go full time in the end, and through some good luck with slams and strikes, the Veer-Myn were able to get the score back to 0 by rush 10, only for the a safe pair of hands player to sprint back on again, and take the score back to 6-0 in a single round before the end of the game!

        I think you’re right, and synergy of abilities is the problem – they’ve got some serious advantages, that when taken together make them seem extremely strong in all areas – from what you’re saying though, I think I’ll be satisfied that they’re more on a level after the changes! Looking forward to hearing more!

        • In the couple of games I’ve played the Judwan they’ve failed to impress anything like as much as they ought to on the stat line. That probably says more about my playing (and my dice rolling abilities) than the team themselves.

          I think the Nameless (and possibly the Teratons) look far more terrifying.

  2. Hey Jake,

    Vis a Vis ‘launching the ball’ – I have a sneaking suspicion that this is going to be in relation to using Judwan to misdirect opposing Jacks onto the firing line?

    Just want to say that although I have been a staunch defender of Judwan in terms of team balance, I have recently changed my stance.

    Currently I’m playing Judwan in a league against a even mix of Dread ball and newbies, of my six games played so far I have won all six by landslide. Frustrated with this, me and Chris sat down the other night, swapped teams and tried to find way s to beat Judwan.

    Now, as far as I see it, Judwan have the following game winning options:

    1. Misdirect can be used offensively to push any opposing Jacks onto the firing line, then follow this up with an easy 1 point goal and you have a recipe for game over. Boring style.
    2. A sensible opponent will try to block off the 3 point zone with three players to limit the Judwan’s scoring ability. However once again, two Judwan working together can usually very easily run around the back of this wall and misdirect the enemy out of the way, leading to an easy 3 point option.
    3. Strikers, Long arms, and Skill 4 means the Judwan can play a very efficient passing game, enabling them to move the ball up and down the pitch with ease to get it in the hands of a key positioned striker.
    4. Being strikers, Judwan are so fast moving (6 move and 3 speed) that they can just carry the ball to pretty much any where without the need to pass and then still score at the end of the movement.

    The other thing Judwan have going for them is that they are exceptionally survivable – 4 dice at speed three to dodge means they can easily go toe to toe with even the strongest Guards in the game and usually the worst they’ll suffer is being sent off for a rush or two. In the rare event they do die, they can be resurrected for 4 MC where most of the downsides to this method either become beneficial to the Judwan, or are not applicable.

    In addition, movement 6 and Speed 3 means that most potential evades can be avoided, and those evade tests which need to be taken can be reliably passed.

    All this comes together to create a team with a wealth of easy game winning options ahead of them, and very few weaknesses.

    I’ve always been a subscriber to the idea that in Dreadball, you use your own innate strengths to overcome your weaknesses and limit the strength of your opponents. So for example, as an Orx player I always kill their strikers very quickly so my jacks can compete.

    Against Judwan though, you’re wasting your time, you can spend all match chasing them around the place and going for scoring opportunities where you see them, but whatever of their strategies that you try and mitigate, they can just fall back to the equally powerful plans B or C or D.

    Anyway. I hope I’ve convinced you. Now I have some suggestions:

    1. Judwan should be “fragile” to reduce their survivability

    or

    2. Judwan should lose one dice to all dodge rolls (less survivable)

    or a combination of 2 plus 3

    or

    3. Misdirect should only be available as a defensive power, therefore you should not be able to move as part of a misdirect action (would make it much harder to push jacks on the launch line)

    and

    4. Misdirect is supposed to be like martial arts where you use your enemies strength against them and use it to push them away when they swing for you. Therefore it makes no sense that you can run up behind someone and misdirect them – they can’t see you, why would they swing for you? (this would mean that the misdirector would have to face many more slambacks, where the opponent has more dice too)

    Anyway. I’m looking forward to seeing what you come up with.

    James

  3. Hipcat says:

    I’m interested to see how the ball launch is reconfigured. My League current uses the “Hyperkinetic Ball Launcher” house rule:

    Hyperkinetic Ball Launcher
    In an effort to further increase player injuries, the ball launchers in the BAD Ass arenas are configured to fire the ball at near supersonic speeds. Instead of attempting to catch the ball at launch (as an inaccurate pass), the ball instead counts as an opposition throw of 3 dice (4+), in an attempt to injure the player. This follows all the rules for throwing the ball at the opposition, with players allowed to Dodge (or not) as normal. The ball then scatters normally.

    Caused only one fatality so far (a Striker not facing the launch) but has proved good for a laugh, while causing a subtle adjustment in the way teams approach the launch line.

    • Lee says:

      I first read about the ball launch being treated as a ball being thrown at opposition on the Mantic Forums, an intriguing idea. Personally, I haven’t really encountered any problems with the rules as written, but this variant seemed very characterful!

      • Daron says:

        I like the Hyperkinetic Ball Launcher idea so there’s penalty for being in the ‘tube’ but not rush-losing/potentially game-losing penalty.

        In 29 games with various teams including Season 3 Beta, I’ve seen Launch Tube loss twice. One game a jack got stuck facing the launcher and from then until game end, he failed to catch (no coaching dice left to even try).

        • lostcarpark says:

          While I agree it’s pretty rubbish when someone gets stuck in that situation, I think it’s unsporting for their opponent to take advantage of the situation. Someone posted on the Mantic forum about this happening to their opponent, and what a miserable game it turned out for both players. I had to point out, that if he was having such a miserable time, perhaps he could have taken a break from scoring unopposed strikes and slam the player off the launch line to let him back in the game…

    • Quirkworthy says:

      It’s not quite this, but it’s a similar idea.

  4. Lee says:

    Curious Jake, what about the ball launch specifically were you aiming to “fix”? Any chance we will see an ability for Strikers to use their Strength? Would be great to see a “fend” type ability…maybe FF Strikers would live longer! πŸ™‚

    • D. Randolph says:

      I’ve been toying with a house rule allowing Forge Father strikers to make slam backs.
      1. It allows them to use their excellent strength stat for survivability purposes only.
      2. It doesn’t allow them to do anything that a normal striker shouldn’t be able to do (like move opposing players)

      To be honest. I still don’t know if they are worth 9 mc even with that.
      I’ve been calling the rule “Grit”.

      Anyone else try this?

    • Quirkworthy says:

      @ Lee – There are 2 main issues about the launch. One is pushing your opponent into a position where they are likely to fail to catch the ball thus ending their Rush. This can cycle so that they lose many Rushes in a row.

      The second is the flip side where you place a Striker in a position to catch the ball on launch, they pass it off for a strike which then relaunches and you do it all again. Easy win.

      Neither is interesting to play and both are too easy to do if you are set up for it. So I’m making them both impossible.

  5. lines42 says:

    Jake, I highly appreciate you listen to the players and the issues they come up with! This is what made BB become such a solid an loved game throughout its 25+ years. Thy designers updating and released a new LRB every few years to to make the game better and better adjust it to the player’s experiences.
    I’m looking forward go a similar approach for DB and you seem to be willing to do that. Hopefully that’ll make it as long-living and solid as BB.
    Keep it up!

    Anyway, regarding the issues from S1+2 it would be great to know what you did with them asap so we can uses this changes from now on instead of waiting for S3 release.

    You’re willing to share those informations beforehand?

  6. sideofiron says:

    I hope the changes aren’t too drastic. I’d hate to be driven away from a game I currently enjoy just to simplify it for those who can’t apply more than one degree of consideration to their tactics.

    • lines42 says:

      Yeah, this is what Jake’s gonna do. Make the game a totally different one for those to stupid to play. Is that what you’re thinking?
      As far as I remember the changes he did so far (like Mind like water) were only minor but effective.

      • sideofiron says:

        I’m sure you mean
        ‘TOO stupid…’ and… the ‘changes he HAS MADE’.
        Though since the vocal complaintants so far are crying for drastic changes, I’d hate to see Jake ostracise both those who don’t think changes are necessary and those who will inevitably sulk that the changes don’t go far enough…

        • lines42 says:

          Thanks for improving my english. Still learning…

        • Quirkworthy says:

          You can never please everyone whatever you do. What I’m aiming for here is a balance that avoids the worst excesses whilst retaining as many options for tactical cleverness as possible. As a general design principle there are still times when you have to sacrifice a choice to streamline a rule or reduce the playing time of a game, and some might call that dumbing down. However, I tend to come at these problems from more of an overview and am most worried about how the thing works as a whole. Is it satisfying as a complete experience, is the question here. Does it go on too long, is there enough to think about, are there interesting choices throughout? That sort of thing.

          These particular changes swap one set of tactical options (in the case of launching the ball) for a different set, but in doing so also removes an unintended and annoying game feature.

          The mitigation of prone cages is a move to avoid stalemate positions and stalled games as this is very much against the intention and the feel of the game when played well. The best DreadBall games move quickly and change all the time. Removing tactical choices which bog the game down in static positions seems like a good thing.

        • sideofiron says:

          The prone cage is an anomaly which ultimately was the victim of some significant exaggeration by people who wouldn’t even test it. It is still only marginally effective against one team (the same team everyone is whimpering about as unbalanced).

          The fact that it was unreliable made it a desperate tactic to use irrespective of whatever nerf you feel is necessary.

          So far I’ve enjoyed the subtle complications that new rules have brought, but I do have concerns that revisiting concepts to simplify or even mitigate the risks has the potential to be a massive step backwards.

        • Quirkworthy says:

          Any change has the potential to break things, but then there are things which are slightly broken already and need something doing about them. If not change then what?

          The changes I’m making are not dumbing things down, they are changing one small part of the overall set of tactical options from one group of possibilities to another. The top down view of numbers of options is basically unchanged.

  7. sho3box says:

    Going on past form I have no doubt that you will make some sensible decisions that improve the game Jake.

    Im looking forward to seeing how you do implement them.

  8. LavaJohn says:

    I’m sure many people will be happy to read this post Jake. Keep up the good work.

  9. Kris V says:

    The Judwan are the biggest problem in the game right now. They are a problem both because they are 1) unbeatable by any other team, in a game between players of roughly the same skill level; and 2) they are not tactically challenging to play, which both violates the game’s precept of tactical depth and reduces their enjoyability.

    I just played a tournament here in Chicago U.S.A. yesterday and I used a Judwan team. Out of five games, I won every game. I won four of my games by 7-0 landslide and the fifth could have gone that way too but in the end it was just a win. Three of my games were over in three or four of my rushes, I think I needed a fifth Judwan rush to blow another guy out. My opponents tried all kinds of things to shut me down, including locking down their back scoring zone with three players. Whatever they did, I just busted it up and scored and scored and scored. The Judwan are just too good, at everything. They have a 4+ skill, 6 move, 3+ speed and can throw out to 12 hexes. And of course they can feint, rolling 4 or 5 dice on 3+.

    So what was it like to win so big? Pretty awesome and self-validating, right? No, it was not. It felt too easy and I felt like I hadn’t really earned those victories.

    After my third game, I decided to stop playing Judwan in their present form. While you have to use some tactics with Judwan as with any team, they are so good at everything that you don’t have to try very hard to score one three-point goal after another. The risk and living on the razor’s edge are gone. You aren’t in a desperate struggle, where the best player will likely win and luck will have its say. All you have to do is not screw up.

    So if a Jake Thornton game stands for tactical depth and careful consideration of fine strategy points, then the Judwan undermine all of that by making winning too easy.

    During the tournament yesterday, I thought the best way to fix the Judwan would be to take away their Long Arms ability. Passing 12 hexes is crazy and in a tournament those passes will be between Judwan with skill 3+ so it gets even worse. Just ask my opponents.

    Reading the comments here, I like the idea of reducing a Judwan stat by one though. Speed 4+? Maybe. To be fair to the Judwan, if they cannot move opposing players then they cannot win. Good luck moving Veer-Myn with Speed 4+ vs. their Speed 3+. Still, maybe that would work. I guess it would have to be playtested.

    Maybe Skill 5+ would work too. Then you have something more like a Veer-Myn and scoring will be an issue. Not sure that would fix the problem though, given everything else that Judwan have going for them. Again, playtesting would tell you.

    Anyway, each of the above three options (remove Long Arms, reduce Speed, reduce Skill) would at least bring the Judwan more into line with their point value and additionally make them more challenging to play. If the Judwan got more challenging to play, I might even pick them up again sometime.

    –Kris

    • Quirkworthy says:

      The Judwan will get more challenging with these changes. Whether this will bring them back into a perfect balance remains to be seen once you guys have pushed it about for a few months. Things are happening so quickly with DreadBall that it’s all a bit tricky to really tell. It needs some settling down time.

  10. Laertes says:

    I think that it could be good to join all the rules in just once rulebook in a year or so!

    • Quirkworthy says:

      I expect it will happen eventually, though quite when I’ve no idea. At present there are only 2 books, with another due out. That’s not exactly a huge sprawl πŸ™‚

      Not yet, anyway.

  11. Rolex says:

    All I can say is: Thank you Jake.
    No one can ask for a “perfect game”. All players can ask for is that, as issues arise, they are analised, pondered and, eventually, taken care of.
    IMO that’s the best garantee for the future of the game.

    • Quirkworthy says:

      Thanks Rolex. People do ask for perfect games, though it’s not something that’s easy to deliver. The Judwan are a good example of the problem. As they are out of kilter they throw most of the other data out of kilter too. When the teams are more in line we can start to look at finessing them more as a set. However, there are loads of other considerations here such as learning curves for different teams and evolving tactics.

      I think there are a number of changes in S3 that will have subtle impacts on different teams and may help tweak the relative potencies overall. We’ll see.

      • Rolex says:

        I know that people do ask for perfect games, I just mean that is IMO an unreasonable expectation, if you have a clear vision of how hard it is.
        What I ask is game support. That issues that arise are analized, pondered and eventually taken care of, to improve the game.
        That’ what it takes to make me an happy gamer. πŸ™‚
        The fact you are doing this is what make me confident to spend hundreds of euros on deadzone. I know that the games I love are in good care.
        Keep up the good job. πŸ˜‰

  12. James 'Maz' Marsden says:

    Can’t say i’ve had issues with either ‘fault’ myself.

    Hopefully this stops the bleating though.

    One idea i saw that would be cool and would help mitigate judwan was that you take all the movement based bonus dice strikers get (evade, stand up, dash) and give them to jacks instead.
    immediately tones down the effectiveness of Strikers who are kind of an ultimate player type any way, and it also helps jacks have more utility.

    strikers still get all the ball handling skill bonuses and dodge

    • Quirkworthy says:

      That might mitigate the Judwan, but what would it do to other teams? Any team that has no Strikers suddenly gets better; those that have many get worse. That’s the trouble with sweeping global changes to core stats. The balance of how it effects each team varies and can easily upset the balance in one place as you fix it in another.

      It’s an interesting idea in abstract though it may be the wrong time to consider it now.

      • James 'Maz' Marsden says:

        yes it prbably is the wrong time as the game is still so much in flux

        can’t wait for S3

        • Dom P. says:

          Completely decimates Veer-Myn and makes them near-unplayable, that’s the major issue in that scenario. The whole Veer-Myn team is Striker based in the same way Judwan are, but with more balanced weaknesses,

  13. E r i c k B o u c h a r d says:

    I’d be curious to see if making the Judwan Jacks (who can’t slam) instead of Strikers would have made enough of a difference…

  14. Ducky says:

    Im wondering why the ball launces is not a dice test 123 ball from the left 456 ball from the right.

    Simple no need for complicated rule changes.

    Judwin tend to win because the person who is playing against them tries to kill rather than score.

    They score to easy for that to work.

  15. Posted this in another forum previously, but here’s my take on why Juds are seen as OP…

    I think the problem the Jud haters are having is that despite only having Strikers, the Judwan have more flexibility than any other team.

    If you consider Misdirect the equivalent to Slam (it may not knock down but it moves enemies around as well as choosing their facing) you realise the Juds are the only team where a player gets to Run as part of every action and has bonus dice to at least one option in each category and is good or above average at each too…

    They can all do their Offensive Actions (Misdirect & Steal) on the run and get bonus dice with a 3+ target
    They can always do their best Defensive Action (Dodge) with a bonus die and a 3+ target
    They can all Shoot and Throw on the run with a bonus die and a 4+ target
    Their can all Pick Up and Catch with a bonus die and a 4+ target

    Compare that to any other team where getting a bonus die and the ability to run first on an Offensive Action means they can’t do the Ball Handling Actions at all and vice versa…

    The only real disadvantage they have is their weak armor. I’d strongly argue that Pacifist is pretty irrelevant given the whole package – in any given game, winning’s more important than injuries and kills. Even in a League situation you’re almost never playing the same team back to back so ruining their roster helps other teams more than it helps you. Also top that off with the fact that it’s safer to resurrect Juds on the cheap since they never use Strength and if they’re losing a skill they can lose Pacifist and become better full stop, they can lose Long Arms and become a better choice for shooter (since they now can get bonus points). Misdirect is the only starting skill that makes them strictly worse if they lose and even that only removes one tool in their arsenal since they can still pass the ball around and take shots.

    • You’ve largely hit the nail on the head with this mate, if I can though I feel you’ve missed one important thing.

      Both as the controlling coach, and as the victim team – there is nothing even remotely fun about winning the game through misdirecting their Jacks onto the launching zone.

      To mitigate this I think it should be as follows:

      If a jack is on the launch line facing the right way then he has to go for a catch, if this is failed, or impossible (due to lack of coaching dice) then the launching ball should be treated as having been thrown at the Jacks head. At this point the jack needs to do a dodge test which can have five outcomes.

      1. Ball doubles Jack – Jack gets pushed back one hex (opponents choice where), he goes down, potentially either dying, going off for a couple of rushes, or laying uninjured on the floor.
      2. Ball beats Jack but doesn’t double – Jack gets pushed back by 1 hex, facing the hex he left (opponents choice where)
      3. Jack equals Ball – Jack stays put but can turn to face any direction
      4. Jack beats Ball – The ball misses the jack and keeps travelling, the Jack stays put
      5. Jack doubles Ball – The Ball misses the Jack and keeps travelling. The Jack can move 1 space and face a direction of his choice.

      In the event of option 1, the Jack’s team will lose that one rush as next time the ball is launched the jack will not be stood up in the path.

      In options 2 or 3 the Jacks team will lose that one rush, but next time the ball is launched it will either hit the Jack in the back of the head (same as throwing the ball at back of someone’s head, no attempt at catch is made), or if they moved, the ball will launch unimpeded.

      In options 4 and 5, the jack went for the catch, realised he couldn’t do it so dodged out of the way in time for the ball to miss him completely. Player doesn’t lose his rush.

      I think this solves the problem of winning games through putting your opponent on the launch line, as it means there is never an option to lose all your remaining rushes, and there is always a good chance the Jack will be able to avoid losing even a single rush.

      What do you think?

      • To be honest was purely looking at the juds – the launch issue is completely separate. In the league I’m in we use hyperkinetic rules – basically you can’t catch the ball on launch, it’s treated as if it was thrown by an opposing corp jack, i.e. opposed roll 3 dice at 4+, get to roll dodge dice if you can see the ball.

        My problem with the current launch rule is that it has an overly punishing “failure state”. Basically if you end up on one of the launch hexes facing right (towards the opponent’s launch side), a decent player can almost guarantee you don’t get another turn for the rest of the game especially if you’re on the right hand side of the pitch (the one or the two spot). Some people claim it’s bad play but some times it’s just bad luck. In five games one of my corp strikers (the same one) has fluffed an open pick up (4 dice) on a launch hex and my opponent just did it today (on the last turn of the game). All an opponent needs to do after that is stick one threat hex on my striker and then score each turn (any score will do). Ball relaunches, striker fails catch, turn over. Rinse and repeat. Even with coaching dice or no threat hex there’s still a much too high chance that a player basically can’t do anything for the rest of the game.

  16. E r 1 c k says:

    Out of curiosity… During the playtest games, did the Judwan perform much differently before it was finally decided to give them the Misdirect skill?

    My opponents and I haven’t tried the Judwans yet and we’re not very tempted to try the team from what we’ve been reading… I lost a landslide against the Robots (playing Veer-myn) and I can hardly imagine winning against a team which has about the same characteristics as mine except 4+ skill (I lose a lot of Pick up the ball rolls and I’m investing heavily in Coaching Dice…) and the Judwans’ perks, since my 3 Guards so far didn’t manage to do much (except kill a single robot, once)… I’m eager to see the changes in season 3!!!

    • lines42 says:

      Afaik some players tried to cage Judwan players im the corners of the pitch by surrounding them with models (or at least this possibility was discussed). The caged player didn’t have a chance to break free and just got beaten to death. That’s the main reason they got the Misdirect ability. It was mentioned somewhere in Jake’s design blog.

      • lines42 says:

        Here’s a quote from Jake’s blog: During playtesting, the Judwan worked well enough from the start in terms of scoring and winning matches. … Eventually people also worked out ways to block them into corners from which they couldn’t escape because they had no Slams and no ability to move their opponents about or break holes in lines. …
        What Misdirect does is to allow you a new type of action called Feint. A player using this action rolls off against an opponent in a similar way to a Slam, but if they win they will turn or move their opponent (depending on how well they do) without harming them. This gives the Judwan the skills they need to move through and past opposition without any unpleasantries, and makes it impossible to block them into a corner. This solved the problems that playtesting had shown, making them both more competitive and loads more fun for both Coaches in one change – and still no Slam.

        • E r 1 c k says:

          Thanks. Seems like giving them Jump might have been sufficient…

        • Henry says:

          @E r 1 ck – Jump wouldn’t have helped them score points – perhaps it would have been sufficient to let the other team block off the 3 point spot with 3 players and then they’d only be able to score 1 point strikes for the whole game, but with Zees able to block all 3 zones, that wouldn’t have been that good for Judwan…

  17. Craig Johnson says:

    The prone cage or rather trapping a prone player is too easy to do with the nameless with their gotcha ability

    • Henry says:

      That’s not what a prone cage is – the tactic Jake is referring to and proposing to deal with is holding the ball at the side of the pitch with 4 of your own players surrounding him. You basically sprint on the spot with the 4 surrounding players, dashing until the fall down. The only way to get to the ball carrier is to stomp and take out one of the players on the floor which is hard for most teams, but impossible for Judwan, so barring the ball shatters card coming out, you hold the ball until the end of the game and then score in extra time, winning instantly…

    • Craig Johnson says:

      Well this was another pain having my marauders pinned down thanks to gotcha

  18. Ducky says:

    I did try to make a judwin cage around the prone cage.

    Put six judwin around the cage and dashed around in a circle until they fell over. Then watched as the player got fouled trying to brake out.

    Once he was out stole the ball and won.

    It was a long boring game. And it was sheer luck he was sent off not i was killed.

  19. Daron says:

    Curious how they got out of your perimeter. How did they pass through the Judwan-filled spaces since rules say you can’t go through spaces with a player (even a downed one).

    • Henry says:

      I think he’s saying the Judwan won the match because the opposing player got sent off fouling his way past a downed Judwan…

      The rules allow a pass over downed players though, so the non-Judwan team could have passed the ball out over the duel lines of downed players if they had a striker as their 6th ‘Loose’ player…

      • Ducky says:

        From memory my oppent tried to sneak as a result a striker got sent off early in the game. A guard tried to sucker punch and was on the bench.

        The other striker was holding the ball two jacks and a guard where dashed until they fell over. I set my judwin cage up.

        The other player came over a fouled got sent off. So my opponent stood his guard up fouled Stomp sent my judwin off for three and his striker ran out.

        Only time a prone cage has backfired normally its a boring game.

  20. Daron says:

    Tracking now. Stomp makes sense. I was thinking they were just trying to stand up and walk on out through the downed Juddies.

  21. Daron says:

    Another RI question: Guard is about to slam my Jack (who has RI). I declare RI when Guard has reached 2 hexes away. Jack slams Guard w/o effect. Guard can continue his Slam.

    Does Guard’s slam get the didn’t start adjacent bonus dice? He did start not adjacent. He didn’t, however move to adjacency (the Jack did).

    It seems to me the Guard gets the bonus dice but other have argued the Guard doesn’t because it wasn’t his move that brought about the models being next to each other.

    • Craig Johnson says:

      We’ve always played that both jack and guard receiving the moving bonus

      • Daron says:

        Same here. There is contention on Mantic DB forum about it though.

        • Leon says:

          its a slamback and no bonus dice for moving on slamback

        • Daron says:

          That’s why there’s a question, Leon.
          It’s a continuation of a Slam that the Guard started.

        • Leon says:

          Well after the Jack running iterferance slam the guard could slam if he is still on his feet and yes he would get the bonus if he did not start next to the jack. but the guard would not get a bonus dice on the jacks slam as its a slamback and there is no bonus dice for moving on a slamback.

  22. Chris says:

    Any news on the launching of the ball?

  23. Ducky says:

    Jake

    I really think we need to stop and re evaluate the posssible rumoured speed 4 increase to judwin in an attemptt to fix them.

    While I agree something needs to be done for tournament play.

    The problem is league games. As it stands now judwin at the start can easily misdirecte opponents off the 3/4 strike hex. This becomes almost impossible about half way through a leaugue game, and impossible at the end.

    With teams picking up 360, plus one to strength etc judwin cant move players off the strike hex and scoring only one point strikes dont win games.

    In fact towards the end of a league game the entire game revolves around judwin trying to misdirect, failing dying and losing by a landslide. You think a prone cage is bad for the game. And yet having to play a game where the strike hex is completely blocked off and you cant do anything is fair.

    With a speed increase judwin won’t be playable in a league.

    • I disagree.

      Let me explain. I’m playing Judwan in my league. I’m a good player but by no means am I better than some of the guys who play (at least not provably so). 6 of my games were played with Judwan at speed 3 – I won each game with an easy landslide victory. (ease of misdirecting and survivability). In these 6 games I lost 1 player and bought him back.

      The last two games I played I self nerfed myself to speed 4, I won the first game by landslide, but it was very up and down throughout. I lost the second game by 2 points, and again it was very up and down. In these two games I lost 4 players and bought two back.

      In my opinion this shows that speed 3 is too easy, and speed 4 is more balanced.

      I also refuse to misdirect people onto the launching grid anymore as I believe it’s too easy (and boring) to do this. So I would also be happy to hear about rules affecting catching the ball from the launch.

      • lines42 says:

        Yes, I’m curious about these erratas too. But after having asked 4 times now without success I’m sure we won’t get an answer from Jake before the release of S3. Although he wanted to post something end of July :-/
        In my opinion the changes to Juds and launch should be added to the FAQ for those that don’t buy S2. Just like the Mind Like Water change for those only playing S1.

  24. Pingback: Dreadball Evolution – The Wargamers Forum Archive

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s