Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Came across an interesting issue in a game of Dreadball I was playing a while back, although have had it happen to me in Blood Bowl too (having been on both sides of it), and wondered what people's thoughts were on doing this in games and whether it's considered good sportsmanship? Should what is considered 'good sportsmanship' in athletic sports have any bearing on a board game?

For anyone not familiar with the term, 'running up the score' refers to an event in sports (usually team events) where a team has such an advantage that they are practically guaranteed victory and so, perhaps to stop humiliation of an opposing team and in the interests of sportsmanship, don't rub their faces in it. In football/soccer for example, if a team is up 4-1 they might sub some younger players onto the field or bring on defensive players in place of strikers just to see the game through to the end. In the NFL, the coach will start calling more conservative play calls to run the clock down.

To bring this back to wargaming, the worst example I saw was in a game of Blood Bowl where a Goblin team player (on a side note, I do think anyone who plays Goblins needs a bit of a kinder opponent as they are doing well if they don't have to restart their team after every game!) was down 3-1 with 2-3 turns left. They had just a couple of players left on the pitch while the opponent (think Chaos) had almost a full squad. Basically it ended with the Chaos player having one guy with the ball stopped 1 square from the endzone. One goblin on the pitch was prone and surrounded by 8 players who just proceeded to foul him each turn. Eventually enough people watching shouted at the guy and the Chaos player ran his player into the endzone to finish the game!
In a similar instance, playing Dreadball I was about to lose - guy just needed to make 1 throw to win the game and wrap up victory. But, a round of kerb-stomping took place and one of my players was killed. Not really any benefit to the other guy, but it was a league game and I had to restart my team as a result.

It's not something I've ever done to someone when I was winning, but does it make me a weaker player for doing so? Should I just be playing Elf or Halfling teams perhaps?!

I actually think this is a question beyond just sports games and can apply to many other wargames - you've got the win in the bag and just winning is enough, you don't need to destroy your enemy, have them driven before you and hear the lamentation of their women?

What are people's thoughts on this?

Seem to be a few people channeling the spirit of Conan here then

Nurglitch wrote:If your opponent is having fun, sure. If they're not, you're being a dick.

Think thats a good point actually. I probably wouldnt run up the score against someone I dont know well, although have had it done to me. Against friends I might be a bit more brutal though..

H.B.M.C. wrote:I dunno. In Blood Bowl it seems kinda fitting to pound the other team into the dust, even if you're clearly winning.

That seems to be within the spirit of the game.

Yes although the guy had already been pounded in the example of the blood bowl game.. Perhaps he should have known he would have this coming playing a goblin team but still!

I really hate to hear about things like that happening. The first (and I think most important) rule of introducing a person to a new game is that they have fun with the game. I wouldn't ever deliberately give someone a 'win' but I'd take my time with it, explain decisions (while you are covering the rules) and absolutely, never, ever, ever kerb-stomp someone in their first outing.

I had someone do it to me I think with 4th edition WHFB, absolutely tore me a new one. The game was just so awful generally that I didn't go back to it for 2 editions and had a painted army just sat in a box.

From my experience I think the people that do this tend to struggle to find opponents and with good reason, it's just not very good behaviour IMO.

Veldrain wrote:
If your going to play a goblin team in a BB league you should expect this to happen. Why would an opponent hamper his xp just because you have a squishy team or a game of bad rolling.

Well I suppose the point to make here is that you don't get XP for fouling. The only benefit is to weaken your opponent, and if they only have 2-3 players on the pitch you have already achieved that objective.

Going from the latest community edition BB rules (I'm not sure if BB16 followed suit) there is no overall casualty caused bonus. I know in previous versions of the game the fan factor could get pushed up or down by the amount of casualties caused but I think that has gone (instead its just based on win/loss). Of course causing casualties in the game has its own rewards, and in fact the hard hitting teams rely on it as its the only way to beat teams like Elves or Skaven, and you do get the SPP for causing a casualty, but you expressly get no XP for fouling.

What I was trying to express in the OP (and I don't think altogether successfully) was when you have already won the game, and you don't get any benefit from fouling the 3 remaining players on the opposing team (who are quite sensibly staying prone) why twist the knife when it doesn't give any benefit to you?

Think Easy E made an interesting point: If you know you are going to win the game and its settled, why not just get the game over-with? I've honestly found myself a few times (NOT playing with a goblin team I should add ) doing the equivalent of 'taking a knee' and just pushing through the last few turns. I wouldn't leave the other guy hanging over the edge of the building and saying a few one-liners before giving them a push...

Veldrain wrote:

 Pacific wrote:

Veldrain wrote:
If your going to play a goblin team in a BB league you should expect this to happen. Why would an opponent hamper his xp just because you have a squishy team or a game of bad rolling.

Well I suppose the point to make here is that you don't get XP for fouling. The only benefit is to weaken your opponent, and if they only have 2-3 players on the pitch you have already achieved that objective.

That's real funny considering I did not once mention fouling. As you said, there is no XP for it so in a league game there is little benefit to it.

Steady on chap we are all friends in the same hobby here

The example I'd tried to give in my first post was about someone playing as a Goblin team, and them just having a goblin surrounded by 8 opposing players and being fouled (so I had brought it up rather than yourself).

Sorry mate! No offence intended.

That's a shame you have had that experience Illumini as from my perspective they aren't the usual ones. I've found most people I've played (going back to release of 3rd edition in the 90s) behave pretty reasonably and don't try and faceplant people they are already beating comfortably. In the example I gave in the OP, that was in a club and the chap doing the '8 players around one Goblin fouling' had a bunch of people around him doing some good-natured jeering after 1 turn of that activity. Eventually he laughed (recognising the behaviour was gakky) and ran his player into the end zone, finishing the game. Perhaps good that I haven't played a few of the cut-throat bastards commenting in this thread by the look of things though

I'm not sure what the campaign balancing is like in BB16, but in the last community edition (which was the fan-edited version of 3rd edition, which had come out of the massive tournament scene and fan community in the many years BB was a 'dead' game) the balancing works pretty well. You have quite a strong handicap system where the difference in team value can be used on inducements (extra re-rolls, extra staff, random events or even star players). Your team can be struggling, but suddenly having Varag Ghoulchewer on the line of scrimmage, or even an extra re-roll, can make all of the difference.

I'm actually just starting a league now (hence me thinking about and starting this thread) and because I'm the most experienced player in the group (couple of the guys have only played once or twice, or only have experience of the computer game) am actually using Goblins. This is because they are in essence a 'hard mode' and their poor strength and durability means you have to play really, really carefully with them. That being said they are *tremendous* fun to play with and some of the things you have mentioned there are part of the team: Fanatics swinging the ball and chain (this moves randomly), a bombardier throwing a bomb (this one a particular favourite against closely packed groups of dwarves! ), or even your troll trying to pick up and throw a goblin with the ball - who might try and eat the Goblin instead! I would say I have lost most games playing as Goblins (I will say lost most, probably nearly all, and quite convincingly!) but it's always tremendous fun playing them, and you are never, ever short of opponents. Playing with Elves and scoring, where everything seems to be on a 2+ and they are so annoyingly good, is never ever as satisfying


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Not Sports game related, but perhaps a similar sentiment, from Necromunda.

During its original run, I was usually to be found jockeying for position in the top three gangs. And my Cawdor usually got filthy hard, and pretty wealthy.

To make things a bit more fun, or at least less punishing against gangs of lower status, I invested in as many Power Mauls as I could afford, and play a close combat strategy against them. Sure, I’d still give them a good shoeing - but Power Mauls never lead to Serious Injury rolls.

It was a happy medium of me being able to stick the boot in good and proper, without my opponent risking ending up in an ever worse position.

To my mind, it was sporting. To others, possibly condescending?

I would say this is pretty sporting behaviour!

In a campaign I ran with the original version I remember some gangs coming to resemble small Imperial Guard armies in size and kitted out with plasma guns, grenade launchers, and other exotic kit that would make the Deathwatch blush. Think we ended up having to have two on one games against some of the guys that had had to restart, and some narrative events (have them taking on a genestealer infestation and things like that) just to try and balance, and that was beyond the balancing mechanisms already deployed in the campaign.

Out of interest have they addressed that problem with the latest version? I remember it was omitted from the new release originally (along with a quite dubious advancement table, which looked like it would exacerbate differences in gang ratings) but I haven't kept up with the latest campaign books.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Kind of how I plan to utilise Palanite Enforcers. When you delve into the background of Necromunda, it’s clear that a certain level of gang warfare isn’t just turned a blind eye to, but actively encouraged by House Helmawr.

So for me, it’s more a case that Palanite’s don’t really suit a player gang (other opinions just as valid). Rather, they should be part of the wider ecosystem, as much a narrative presence as an in-mission one.

Certainly I can see a Palanite Precinct being a very powerful presence. Better armed, armoured and equipped, and even more numerous than your average gang. Like Guilds, they’re something for the gangs to partly fear, and partly take advantage of.

But that’s for an actual Necromunda thread!

Yes I agree about the Palanites, in the old Necromunda the Adeptus Arbites fulfilled a similar sort of role; you could play them as a kind of 'gang' but I always thought they worked well as a GM-led gang to get involved if they wanted to.

If you are after an idea to turn things up to 11, or a fun way to end a campaign, check out these rules for Movie Marines. Basically it's designed as an 'all gangs against the marines' as a final game to get everyone's gangs on the table and a fun way to end the campaign. The rules were designed for NCE but I'm sure pretty straightforward to update the rules for the current edition.

https://yaktribe.games/community/threads/fluff-marines-in-necromunda-rules-battle-report.9829/#post-219738

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:

 Illumini wrote:
I have some friends that used to play blood bowl. They no longer do because of a lot of experiences like the one above. Players intentionally trying to kill the other team so they must restart, and run-away players just dominating the league.

To me, bloodbowl sounds like a pretty poor game, where you need great sportsmanship to actually have an enjoyable time for everyone involved.

The campaign mechanics sound terrible, pretty much pushing players to just mash up their underdog opponents, and it also sounds like the balance between teams is horrible. I can think of a ton of ways a goblin team could be good and still feel like goblins. Spiders with webs, backstabbing bonus, extra trolls, squig-shenanigans, fanatics, endless chumps so it doesn´t matter if you knock out the normal goblins etc. "They are meant to be bad" sounds like a lazy excuse for bad game design.

Goblins are bad because they are goblins. End of story.

Playing Goblins is like supporting a third-division team in the FA Cup. Usually you'll get gubbed on a rainy thursday night with seventeen people and a dog in the stands, but on occasion a miracle happens and you beat Man U at home.

Never have I seen a better summation of playing Goblins in BB