Jump to content
RedSam

Something that bothers me about kicking

Recommended Posts

In the game of Guild Ball, the two KICK stat numbers represent (as I see it), the accuracy of a player when kicking the ball and the strength of their leg (i.e. how far they can boot it). Those are two fine things to represent in the game, but I think something is being forgotten; when aiming at a target that is far away, a person will generally have less accuracy than when aiming at a target that is close. This is simple physics - when closer to a target, the target is bigger and thus variations in kicking direction are less likely to affect the outcome.

This bugs me. In the game, Shark is just as likely to hit his target from 8" as he is from 1". This is simply not realistic. Now, I know we have to suspend our disbelief occasionally for the sake of effective game mechanics, but I don't think that has to be the case here.

I propose changing the KICK stat to a single number, rather than two. This number would represent the number of dice a person rolls when kicking base-to-base with their target. For every inch of distance between (rounding down), subtract one die from the pool.

This would mean that at 4", someone with a KICK of 8 would roll four dice. At 8", they only roll one. I think this would better represent how people actually kick a ball. Tap-in already does this to some extent by making goals easier as you get closer, but it has no effect on passes and suffers from only having two values ("close" and "far").

Any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RedSam said:

In the game of Guild Ball, the two KICK stat numbers represent (as I see it), the accuracy of a player when kicking the ball and the strength of their leg (i.e. how far they can boot it). Those are two fine things to represent in the game, but I think something is being forgotten; when aiming at a target that is far away, a person will generally have less accuracy than when aiming at a target that is close. This is simple physics - when closer to a target, the target is bigger and thus variations in kicking direction are less likely to affect the outcome.

This bugs me. In the game, Shark is just as likely to hit his target from 8" as he is from 1". This is simply not realistic. Now, I know we have to suspend our disbelief occasionally for the sake of effective game mechanics, but I don't think that has to be the case here.

I propose changing the KICK stat to a single number, rather than two. This number would represent the number of dice a person rolls when kicking base-to-base with their target. For every inch of distance between (rounding down), subtract one die from the pool.

This would mean that at 4", someone with a KICK of 8 would roll four dice. At 8", they only roll one. I think this would better represent how people actually kick a ball. Tap-in already does this to some extent by making goals easier as you get closer, but it has no effect on passes and suffers from only having two values ("close" and "far").

Any thoughts?

Honestly? It sounds kind of "fussy" to work out, and kind of at odds with the modern, dynamic game design... I think the current system for kicks works fine...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not my cup of tea. I quit worrying about real world justification when I quit Warhammer in favor of smooth rulesets. I completely threw it out the window and into a dumpster when my favorite captain became a model with a scythe. After all it's a completely impractical weapon.

Also this seems like it'd really throw off the balance of ball/killing and really the entire game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see this matching the current rules philosophy. Currently everything is or it isn't. Distances are absolute. It's a nice idea but I don't think it flows with how the game is played, which is part of what makes it different from other games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm missing is another class of players, the goal keepers. Once an opponent is in range of scoring I'm just at the mercy of the dice, I'd love if each team had 7th player, the goal keeper kept in that sweet 50mm spot for goal post. Think; a goal post with stats.

When it comes to distances, I don't think that adding fracturisation of kick distance to determine kick difficulty would be healthy for the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FearLord said:

Honestly? It sounds kind of "fussy" to work out, and kind of at odds with the modern, dynamic game design... I think the current system for kicks works fine...

This ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think changing something as central as KICK so drastically this far into the game's life cycle could possibly be healthy for it's playerbase, unless that change was entirely compatible with the current number's printing, then you have to ask if it's worth changing at all, and if it's compatible with the current design, as has been pointed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont mix game mechanics too heavily with reality. Its a game after all. Its just like the fact jaecars pitfall becomes a heat seeking anti bird missile for dirge, unrealistic, but its a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Napoleon said:

Dont mix game mechanics too heavily with reality. Its a game after all. Its just like the fact jaecars pitfall becomes a heat seeking anti bird missile for dirge, unrealistic, but its a game.

This. Fluff/Realism never enter my mind when I think about game balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that our group has talked about is "long shot." To match how easy it is to score from within 4 inches, it should be an automatic +1 TN for any shot 8 inches and higher. So in essence from 0-4 inches is tap in, 4.00001-7.9999 is normal and 8+ inches is a long shot. This would make Shark, Midas, and all the other threats at least consider moving in for shots. Just a pipe dream though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I don't think the OP's original suggestion is that bad.  As he pointed out, Tap-in already takes into account the closeness of a player to their target.  While changing a core mechanic of the game at this point in its life cycle would certainly cause an uproar, I do think the logic behind adjusting the kick mechanic as suggested makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GoonieLaw said:

Honestly, I don't think the OP's original suggestion is that bad.  As he pointed out, Tap-in already takes into account the closeness of a player to their target.  While changing a core mechanic of the game at this point in its life cycle would certainly cause an uproar, I do think the logic behind adjusting the kick mechanic as suggested makes sense.

But why? It isn't imbalanced currently. It complicates the game needlessly. It doesn't add anything. The game is full of unrealistic things. Seems silly to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like an overly complicated change.

 

As someone who is getting hella pumped on the new edition of 40k, simple rules are totally fine by me!  It is a game after all and everything can't be overly detailed and have it expect to take less than 2 hrs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue with the suggested change is you can't separate power and accuracy then.  Models like Tenderizer who have the ability to clear the ball a good distance but unreliably can't exist.  The bigger issue is just that for the most part, 1 kick die is more or less as reliable as a 2 kick stat due to the way modifiers currently work.  It makes the distance half the only super relevant bit of the stat in more instances than I'd like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the comments. Good points all around.

I was probably underestimating the extra in-game complication my idea would cause. People measure most kicks now anyway, but going from "is it less than this long" to "how long is it exactly" would add quite a bit of effort, especially if there's stuff along the ball path.

i especially liked your point, @LunarSol - separating power and accuracy does seem good. I hadn't really thought about the players who can kick farther than others but might not be as accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, RedSam said:

Thanks for the comments. Good points all around.

I was probably underestimating the extra in-game complication my idea would cause. People measure most kicks now anyway, but going from "is it less than this long" to "how long is it exactly" would add quite a bit of effort, especially if there's stuff along the ball path.

i especially liked your point, @LunarSol - separating power and accuracy does seem good. I hadn't really thought about the players who can kick farther than others but might not be as accurate.

Just to throw that in because no one else did: 

Locus wouldn't really work, would he? :D 

Everyone else here made really good points. Rules don't need to be needlessly overpresent in every inch of a game. It's a simple mechanic. That is why AOS is really easy to learn, just as an example. The 8th Edition of 40k might give me some fun again aswell. 

Also the reason why I dislike The 9th Age: Fantasy Battles. If you go through terrain, you have to test for dangerous effects. Some units throw one die, some two, three or four, depending on unit type, then it depends on... something else, I don't know from my head right now... on what number you suffer a wound while moving through a certain type of terrain. You have fear, terror or horror or something, psychology tests, you need to count the amount of lines in your regiments when determining close combat results. This is all completely unattractive nowadays. It still has a fanbase, but the amount of time, money, and RULES, hell no. I'm fine with Roleplaying Rulebooks. Those I love. But when it comes to moving a single model or unit over a battlefield I don't want and need 20 rules occuring at once just because I positioned myself a few inches up the field. 

And most importantly, I want some positive feedback from the game. This is basically what modern "user experience", just to abuse that word here, is almost all about. The Experience. It's  not quiet an experience to  shuffle through 150 pages of rules to find out all that stuff I mentioned and more.

I hope that gave you some insight. Some things are always subjective, but in most cases a simple ruling is preferred over an overly complicated one, just to sum everything up. Easy to learn, hard to master ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jmrhode1 said:

One thing that our group has talked about is "long shot." To match how easy it is to score from within 4 inches, it should be an automatic +1 TN for any shot 8 inches and higher. So in essence from 0-4 inches is tap in, 4.00001-7.9999 is normal and 8+ inches is a long shot. This would make Shark, Midas, and all the other threats at least consider moving in for shots. Just a pipe dream though

This would only effect the following models in standard format: Angel, Sakana under Corsair's legendary, Friday, Midas, oBrisket, Ballista on legendary turn, and Flint within mallet's aura. As those are the only models that have a kick above 8". Any model with exactly 8 would just become a "7.9999..." for all intents. Of these models only Midas has a power level that is beyond "pretty good" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea, but a better mechanic might simply be that the target number is one lower when the kick is within 4" generally, rather than just on goals, and job's done. For a bit more granularity, the mechanic could be that the bonus happens at half or less the kick-stat's distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about an opposite of tap in a sense. If the distance you're kicking is over half your kick (For example a kick 4/8 model kicking anything over 4") the TN is +1. So Vitriol kicking the ball 6" to Midas, or a the goal would need a 5+. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, RTOAHB said:

How about an opposite of tap in a sense. If the distance you're kicking is over half your kick (For example a kick 4/8 model kicking anything over 4") the TN is +1. So Vitriol kicking the ball 6" to Midas, or a the goal would need a 5+. 

See my above reply for list of models. Except this time those 7 models are the only ones able to make a kick at it's current 4 TN from 4.0001-4.9999" away. So you might as well remove dealing with fiddly "half" effects and just make all kicks 5 TN with a -2 TN to anything within 4"

It would mostly mean there's no to take a shot outside of tap in range besides YOLO shots. Guild kill becomes the name of the game and goal defence becomes nearly an auto win with a good goalie unless every player gets a new pass at kick stats. This plus goal def means 4 die kicks become a coin flip outside 4"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who finds it hard enough to get a single 4 on 4 dice i dont like this change :). Personally, though I like trying to mirror realistic circumstances I dont think it would be a good idea to overly complicate it either. Tap in was a change that helped signify this and I think worked rather well. I dont think its needed to account for every inch of distance to reflect the dice as i think the game would suffer more than benefit from this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RTOAHB said:

How about an opposite of tap in a sense. If the distance you're kicking is over half your kick (For example a kick 4/8 model kicking anything over 4") the TN is +1. So Vitriol kicking the ball 6" to Midas, or a the goal would need a 5+. 

It just discourages the dynamic passing game, which is again one of the original game design goals - to create a game where the ball could be moved around and used for dodges and the like. It also hurts teams who are weaker at kicking, since Shark kicking to someone 7" away is looking for a 5+ on 4 dice and boiler kicking 4" away is looking for a 5+ on just 2 dice... these teams then get to make less use of team work actions for dynamic movement...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, FearLord said:

It just discourages the dynamic passing game, which is again one of the original game design goals - to create a game where the ball could be moved around and used for dodges and the like. It also hurts teams who are weaker at kicking, since Shark kicking to someone 7" away is looking for a 5+ on 4 dice and boiler kicking 4" away is looking for a 5+ on just 2 dice... these teams then get to make less use of team work actions for dynamic movement...

 

This is a fair point and probably enough to discourage me from saying my point is valid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, RTOAHB said:

How about an opposite of tap in a sense. If the distance you're kicking is over half your kick (For example a kick 4/8 model kicking anything over 4") the TN is +1. So Vitriol kicking the ball 6" to Midas, or a the goal would need a 5+. 

this is how you kill football for a lot of teams that aren't swimming in 4 dice kicks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×