"I don't like the rules for scheme A because I've got hundreds of reasons why they shouldn't be like that, mostly prestige and honor, cheapness etc etc. If you compare it to scheme B you'll see analogies.."

"Stupid comparision LOL"

lol NAiL, here you think you've kinda owned Ramone and crushed all his theories but in fact you didn't even get to his point..

(Which is BnG obviously)

Query. Does it matter if i use luckless cwt or the default intermidiate scheme ?

yea nail, lay off the ropeknocking in elite thing, you argued enough about it in WEL... its not gonna happen 

@Doubletime, There's intermediate scheme in the site scheme page, Use that scheme. It is NNN luckless.

some rules just where made to make the schemes more enjoyable and longer i guess. imagine an elite with ropeknocking, would end fast and would be no fun because it would be easy to kill your opponents worms unless u have a perfect map...same with blocking in roper, you could theoretically do that every turn and prevent your opponent from atacking you the whole game - lame.
note that imo most bng rules were made because there were some self-proclaimed rope kings who got pissed off because they lost bngs to "noobs"

who the f@#! disallowed 5sec sitters in elite?? lmao..

?

it is allowed (afaik)

Quote from: Chicken23 on December 04, 2008, 08:35 PM
who the f@#! disallowed 5sec sitters in elite?? lmao..

it's allowed
https://www.tus-wa.com/schemes/Elite/

i hate when scheme has a lot of rules. scheme rules had to be simple.
there is always one extra game: "who knows scheme better".
i rly hate bng cuz the only situation i can enjoy it is where my opponent is not cheap.

cheap for me: repeat shots, close tele, 4 sec fullpower, notching, digging, remembering shots,
re aiming using landscape marks, not using reaim....
THERE ARE A LOT! I wish i had WAPX script for BnG where players are disallowed from atleast some of these cheap things, e.g. 4sec full power or close tele


about rknocking in elite:
i rly dunno why it is disallowed. i cant find any reason. Imo knocks add more tactics in gameplay.
e.g. player knocked enemy worm with bungee for bow shot and sent him to mine. I find this as NICE JOB and not like OMG FCKING LUCKER.

I think some schemes must be left untouched no matter if a strategy makes them better. Some schemes are KNOWN to people.

Imagine playing poker with 6 cards would give it more strategy, But the point is people know poker with 5 cards, They have get used to it. 5 card has become like a signature for poker.

IMO some schemes must be left untouched no matter if we add something to them, they become more interesting.

Quote from: darKz on December 04, 2008, 03:02 PM
"I don't like the rules for scheme A because I've got hundreds of reasons why they shouldn't be like that, mostly prestige and honor, cheapness etc etc. If you compare it to scheme B you'll see analogies.."

"Stupid comparision LOL"

lol NAiL, here you think you've kinda owned Ramone and crushed all his theories but in fact you didn't even get to his point..

(Which is BnG obviously)

darKz who are you quoting there?

My point was to do with rope knocking in elite being regarded as cheap, in response to one of Ramones posts. It had nothing to do with his BnG theories.

Wooka I'm not asking anyone to change the rules... we are just having some friendly discussion and debate.

+ About intermediate, I really think that it should be obligatorty to play best of 3 games (bo3), and report 1 win (or maybe 2).

You cannot play a game of inter with only 1 round, it won't be fair. This is because alot of the inter strategy and gameplay is determined by the deployment of the worms at the start of the round. Seeing as only 1 round will be played, the player who starts first will have an obvious advantage. When played bo3, each player has a chance to start first and so it reduces the luck varuant hugely.

And to all those people who say inter is a noob scheme and its all luck or whatever, go play some of the NNN pros and see if you can beat them!

Inter is as skillful as any other scheme on wa.
You can't really say one scheme requires more skill than another anyway.
Yes shopper is easy to learn, but if two pros played a game would you not still have an exciting match on your hands...

Quote from: pr on December 04, 2008, 09:39 PM
about rknocking in elite:
i rly dunno why it is disallowed. i cant find any reason. Imo knocks add more tactics in gameplay.
e.g. player knocked enemy worm with bungee for bow shot and sent him to mine. I find this as NICE JOB and not like OMG FCKING LUCKER.

ye exactly PR xD

Quote from: pr on December 04, 2008, 09:39 PM
i hate when scheme has a lot of rules. scheme rules had to be simple.

They just can't always be simple, because every scheme is different... U have Hysteria with no rules, u have RR with 3 rules or u have BnG with.. much more rules...
U have poker with "simple" rules and u have preferans with "complicated" rules.. It's common thing in any game..

Quote from: pr on December 04, 2008, 09:39 PM
there is always one extra game: "who knows scheme better".

That's true, but I am not playing that game, believe me. I'm only posting my suggestions here cause BnG is my favorite scheme and I'd liked it to be played on a more "decent level" in future.
If I bother this community with this, I won't post a single post again about it, np.

Quote from: pr on December 04, 2008, 09:39 PM
i rly hate bng cuz the only situation i can enjoy it is where my opponent is not cheap.

Don't hate BnG cause of that. Isn't that a case with any other scheme? If opponent plays cheap, who can enjoy it?

Quote from: pr on December 04, 2008, 09:39 PM
cheap for me: ...4 sec fullpower...

I don't think 4 sec fp have to be a cheap shot, it can be vns in fact. I wouldn't forbid it...


Fact is that we are stucked here on a "repeated shot" rule. Some ppl think "BnG have enough of rules already, we don't need to add them more, it will cause too many complaints"... I think - let the new players (or any1 that don't play BnG much) spare a 5 minutes of time to read the rules and learn them. My point is that if new players get used to throw ie. 3 sec nades all the time then they will never develop the skill that is required for this scheme... what's the point then? Then change this scheme name to NtD (Nade to Death) or something. 

@MI

Quote from: MonkeyIsland on December 04, 2008, 10:11 PM
IMO some schemes must be left untouched...

That would be true if we had some kind of "official" rules. But what can we stick to? worms2d, BTP, some league rules...? With the time schemes were always "upgrading"... It would be the best thing if all those schemes were already in game by default, with strictly defined rules and stuff... But unfortunately they are not..

4sec fp can be not cheap. but in most cases it is. when player can throw 3 sec, use lg 4,5 sec but throws 4sec fp constantly and maybe uses landscape marks IT IS FKN LAME.

Quote from: NAiL on December 05, 2008, 01:27 PM
+ About intermediate, I really think that it should be obligatorty to play best of 3 games (bo3), and report 1 win (or maybe 2).

You cannot play a game of inter with only 1 round, it won't be fair. This is because alot of the inter strategy and gameplay is determined by the deployment of the worms at the start of the round. Seeing as only 1 round will be played, the player who starts first will have an obvious advantage. When played bo3, each player has a chance to start first and so it reduces the luck varuant hugely.

And to all those people who say inter is a noob scheme and its all luck or whatever, go play some of the NNN pros and see if you can beat them!

Inter is as skillful as any other scheme on wa.
You can't really say one scheme requires more skill than another anyway.
Yes shopper is easy to learn, but if two pros played a game would you not still have an exciting match on your hands...

yep, intermediate scheme should remain untouched as the others...and report should be 1 win when you win bo2.