2 square endzone

Everything dealing with the video game developed by Cyanide!
User avatar
Scram Lyche
Posts: 143
Joined: 22 July 2015, 10:04

2 square endzone

Postby Scram Lyche » 17 September 2016, 16:58

If I recal correctly, 2nd edition BB had an endzone 2 squares deep. As we know the current pitches only have 1 square worth of endzone. Think anyone could convince me that (a) it doesn't matter or (b) 1 square is better than two?

Because I'm firmly of the opinion that it should be 2 squares.. It would be nice to be able to defend the goal line without having the near certainty that your player will be crowdsurfing next turn.

It's not a big deal, but I don't understand it and would have preffered 2 squares deep.

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 7040
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: 2 square endzone

Postby dode74 » 17 September 2016, 17:08

It did used to be 2 squares. I have no idea why it changed.

Not sure which is better. 1 square means placing a receiver in the EZ is a risky proposition, while 2 might make for fewer touchbacks...
Image

User avatar
dragonwolf
Posts: 442
Joined: 09 September 2015, 10:59

Re: 2 square endzone

Postby dragonwolf » 17 September 2016, 19:56

as i love to surf , i think i would hate the concept of 2 square deep . The number of time i surf a player on the last time of my drive resulting on a ko or an injury and scoring at the same time. It would take a strategic element of attacking playbook while certainly creating other option in the defending one i guess

User avatar
Darkson
Posts: 2713
Joined: 17 September 2008, 20:43
Location: Somewhere on the same planet as you.
Contact:

Re: 2 square endzone

Postby Darkson » 17 September 2016, 21:04

I have no confirmation, but I can hazard a guess that the reasoning for it was because the 3rd ed board was a fixed size (for printing reasons), the squares got a little bigger (25mm 2nd ed, ~29mm for 3rd ed) to cope with the slightly bigger scale figures, and through playtesting it was found that only having to move 12 squares to score was to easy.
Galak 3:16 says "There is a point in time that a player really should read the rulebook."
Home of the ARBBL
TalkFantasyFootball admin - PM me if you need help.
Nope, I was talking about a 0TTD on a Blitz! using TTM.

twitch/the_sage_bb
Posts: 616
Joined: 17 December 2015, 08:06
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theSagebb/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/the_Sage_BB

Re: 2 square endzone

Postby twitch/the_sage_bb » 17 September 2016, 22:56

Hmm, interesting. Surfs aren't even the biggest deal here; the ball (not) bouncing into the crowd is a huge factor.
I'm not sure which would be better either.
Interestingly, could have 5/8 chance at a second catch attempt for the TD on a failed handoff!
Content: Twitch / Youtube ; Updates: Facebook / Twitter
(because people with big banners are just compensating)

Valcurdra
Posts: 554
Joined: 21 November 2012, 04:35

Re: 2 square endzone

Postby Valcurdra » 17 September 2016, 23:52

I prefer the danger of the crowd surf being there. Keep it to 1 square.

User avatar
Scram Lyche
Posts: 143
Joined: 22 July 2015, 10:04

Re: 2 square endzone

Postby Scram Lyche » 18 September 2016, 02:09

I have no confirmation, but I can hazard a guess that the reasoning for it was because the 3rd ed board was a fixed size (for printing reasons), the squares got a little bigger (25mm 2nd ed, ~29mm for 3rd ed) to cope with the slightly bigger scale figures, and through playtesting it was found that only having to move 12 squares to score was to easy.
Interesting, you could be right and if so we lost 2 whole rows because balancing the books. If true this is an outrage and the culprit should be harangued through the street by an angry mob.

Seriously though, we are bereft of endzone tactics because of this.. and just 1 row looks stupid, I bet the NFL and rugby have 2 rows :evil:

User avatar
Darkson
Posts: 2713
Joined: 17 September 2008, 20:43
Location: Somewhere on the same planet as you.
Contact:

Re: 2 square endzone

Postby Darkson » 18 September 2016, 09:56

Seriously though, we are bereft of endzone tactics because of this.. and just 1 row looks stupid, I bet the NFL and rugby have 2 rows :evil:
No idea about the NFL, but not necessarily for rugby:
Rugby Union: "with anywhere between 10 and 22 metres behind each try line to serve as the in-goal area."
Rugby League: "A scoring area called the in-goal area extends 6–11 metres (6.6–12 yards) from each try-line to each dead ball line."
Galak 3:16 says "There is a point in time that a player really should read the rulebook."
Home of the ARBBL
TalkFantasyFootball admin - PM me if you need help.
Nope, I was talking about a 0TTD on a Blitz! using TTM.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron