Hi,
very interesting post you posted. I was wondering how worked the MPFL stoppage system, I understand it more now; even if I don't think I can adapt this game for the next months/years here in France. Stoppage, as you said, has to be timed for fair game. SO the game "flow" will be too "chopped" for the "average joes" here. If I want to have a chance to spread the game in France, I have to keep it simple.
In my theorical point of view (since I di'nt make my first game for now!), the necessary stoppage in the buzzball rules are suficient for us.
Like you said, it gives a good entry level "zone game" for both offense and defense, an opening for special rules (fumble, interception, etc...).
The other major advantages of it are that game can't be (in a certain way) argued (I guess it's easiest to marshall a pass simulation system than a real ttqb passing, when things goes too fast for eyes sometimes), and that we doesn't need physical skills to make a play.
WHat I mean is that the real passing skills can really ruin a strategy for a beginner/average coach. Imagine a perfect open play for a WR, no coverage on him, big gain possible, and then...you miss the pass because you're not skilled in TTQB passing, or worst, you're disabled, or can't stand too long, etc...Imagine your opponent is not good in strategy, but 's got fast WRs and can hit a target at 100 yards the eyes closed : the game (in the way I want to play) become unbalanced.
The other thing I don't like in "real passing" is the fact that we quit the coach simulation game to enter in a game of skill, like bowling, billiard or whatever. I want to keep the game in a pure strategy aspect (the wargamer 's speaking, no doubt
).
BUT I respect all the game technics and rules, I'm nobody to tell anyone "this is better than that"
to conclude :
Quote:
|
my question is, WHAT EXACTLY IS IT ? (wargaming, if I understood correctly)
|
IMHO, it's quite the same than MF : a tabletop with scenery (battlefield or football field), miniatures (often 28-30mm scale), an opponent and some rules you have to deal with.
The difference is that MF is governed by real life physics (like a slot car race instead of a video game), where wargames is governed by pure theorical rules.
When a athlete is running on a field, his skills are determined by the base tweaking, weight, figure stance. On a wargame, the skills are determined by written stats and theorical competences.
The passing sticks in MF are simply rulers, like we can see in wargaming. Often in wargames, warriors can shoot in a rules determinated range. You use a ruler to see if the bullet hit an enemy or not.
In MF, it's the same thing, but you replace the bullet by a peacefull football.
FInally, in MF you see if the pass is good turning on the board, and lets physics (and some luck!) tells you if it's complete or not. In wargame, physics are replaced by the stats (gun range/eficiency, enemy armor, etc...) and some luck too (the use of the dices).
As you can see, it's quite similar !
Dimitri