The Ultimate Site of Worms Armageddon
All About TUS => Announcements => Topic started by: MonkeyIsland on April 12, 2012, 08:29 AM
-
Every now and then people seem to get bored of the current league system and that's why I'm here for!
We've been experiencing 4-5 separate leagues in the past 3.5 years. This plan have worked good and have showed results. Wasn't perfect, but imo it worked. Many of you have been with this plan for long enough, so it is a good time to gather your ideas for tweaks or new plans for the leagues. (or even not touching it at all!)
Summery of current plan:
4 active leagues and 1 inactive, with completely separate ratings:
Classic League: (containing 8 schemes, the most popular ones)
- BnG
- Roper
- TTRR
- Shopper
- Team17
- Elite
- WxW
- Hysteria
Free League: (containing 19 schemes, less popular schemes)
- Battle Race
- Big RR/Tower
- Boom Race
- Bungee Race
- Capture The Flag
- Elemental
- Forts
- Golf
- Holy War
- Intermediate
- Jetpack Race
- Kaos
- Mine madness/BnA
- Mole Shopper
- Parachute Race
- Plop War
- Pro
- Super Sheep Race
- Walk For Weapons
TEL, TUS Elite League, Only focusing on Elite scheme
TRL, TUS Rotated League, Focusing on one specified scheme each season voted by members.
TNL, TUS Normal League, Only focusing on Intermediate scheme, which is currently disabled due to inactivity.
Current new flawed/incomplete plan:
All leagues will be merged into one. There will be no Classic, TEL or anything. Instead, all schemes will have the opportunity to have playoffs if they get qualified by enough activity.
Each scheme receives its own season length. For example, 2 months for Elite, 3 months for Intermediate and after that system checks for the possibility of their playoffs. It is kinda like each scheme has its own league.
Since our community needs to know the best all rounders defined by certain schemes, system will pick the best 4, 8, 16 players of last seasons of all specified schemes (leagues), and set a playoffs combining of those schemes.
Pros: (will get updated more)
- Since each scheme have the opportunity to have its own season and playoffs, certain scheme fans can focus on their own scheme and enjoy having playoffs for their own scheme. (Even for new schemes like Aerial)
Cons: (will get updated more)
- It seems that after first seasons, people lose the motivation. When there comes a new scheme for TRL, it acts like an announcement: "New scheme!! Go go go!!" and that creates activity. With all schemes being there waiting for their PO, I guess system has the potential to get bored after few seasons.
- A system like TRL, makes semi-fans of a scheme to participate (because there's no other scheme), this adds up to TRL activity to have possible playoffs (or does it?), with all the schemes being there, no scheme will have enough activity to have its playoffs. In other words, the activity required to have playoffs in certain scheme, will now split into small bits for each scheme and none will have the opportunity for playoffs.
Other ideas are welcome. Please think it through first and give us enough details.
I find division plans cool and interesting, but I don't support them because at this time, I think our community doesn't have enough activity to handle division plans.
There are 12 days left to new classic league. Depending how much this discussion goes, I don't think it would be possible to implement the new plan in 12 days. So a fair date would be at the end of the next classic league, probably along with the release of TUS2.
*If you like the new system, please post so that we can keep track.
-
My sugestion is not so much for the league, but the site.
I think the site in general is awesome, however, In my opinion, the sites home page could be improved. I think the focus point of the home page, and the site in general, should be the league itself. W2's league site had the top 20 right centered on the page. It was motivation and you wanted your name there. Everyone could see who is first and it made you want to be first. The home page here has a small block of past winners. The classic winners name from the last season should be huge on the home page aswell as the top 10 as the focus point.
I think if winning and being in the top 10 of the current season was more prestigious, it would actually increase activity.
I feel the focal point of tus is the site, when it should be the league itself. I hope that makes sense.
EDIT: I apologize, I think I misinterpreted what this thread was about. I thought it was for suggestions but its about the league system. I'm sorry, please remove my post.
-
system will pick the best 4, 8, 16 players of last seasons of all specified schemes
Can you specify how this is going to work?
-
Interresing
-
It is sort of the same system but turned into scheme-wise rather league-wise. Based on activity, system generates PO for 4, 8 or 16 players. For the most important playoffs (ex Classic league), system considers someone's performance in BnG, TTRR, Elite ... between some defined time.
I don't know how "picks" go. That must be discussed. For example, how people will find games in this system? For example someone only likes Elite. So is it OK to only search for TUS Elite games? The pick concept gets so weak in this case.
-
Maybe removing "2 picks system" will fix it............
we could ask for example on AG , "Tus roper any1?", "tus ttrr any1?" "tus t17 any1" etc........
it will fix also "free wins"
ofc if players want play more games to other shemes its no problem, as they want but concept is in "1 sheme pick"
-
It is sort of the same system but turned into scheme-wise rather league-wise. Based on activity, system generates PO for 4, 8 or 16 players. For the most important playoffs (ex Classic league), system considers someone's performance in BnG, TTRR, Elite ... between some defined time.
I don't know how "picks" go. That must be discussed. For example, how people will find games in this system? For example someone only likes Elite. So is it OK to only search for TUS Elite games? The pick concept gets so weak in this case.
I don't understand.
If I understand correctly, you're still having a regular playoff to elect the best all arounder. What I'm asking is, how can one get into those playoffs? Can he achieve it by playing only one scheme?
-
(https://i.imgur.com/qDQeQMf.png)
-
i dont feel anything needs to change.... im not fully understanding whats going on here either.... all i do know is...
all this was started by 1 thread about hysteria...... yes, the scheme sucks... but im an oldschooler, so of course ill say that.... and the main voice in that thread (and again, in this short lived thread) is ropa.... who gives a shit about ropa? he dont even play... wtf...
dont change anything :X
-
I am not saying this to quote 300, it just happens that these are the perfect words I can think of to describe this:
This is madness...
-
I am not saying this to quote 300, it just happens that these are the perfect words I can think of to describe this:
This is madness...
We rarely agree. Mainly because it is funny to make you mad by not agreeing with you. But I agree with this.
So what, there will not be picks? Not a Classic League for the real players and not a Free for all the lazy newbies who cannot compete seriously? I can pick Elite and my opponent can go "BOWCHUTERACEMADNESSSHOOTINGRANGESCHEME!"? And like Random00 will lose his overall points, which are like part of history?
This is so unclear, so stupid, I... can't even find words, if you go through with this, that will kill you site.
We are separated enough already! 5 years ago if you wanted to play in a league, you had to learn how to play first, now you people just seem to make up leagues, soon there will be Aerial league and this league and that league and cups and whatnot, STOP IT! Like you go to #AnythingGoes and you cannot find a game, although there are 120 people online, but some are asking TRL, TEL, THL, TWHATTHEf@#!NOTL, Free League, or finally you find a Classic but the guy says: oh I only play Hysteria, you cannot pick anything else.
This is totally ruined and you want to step one level further, great.
-
Ray, we do rarely agree, and I think everyone should pay very VERY close attention to your last 2 paragraphs.
-
Ray, we do rarely agree, and I think everyone should pay very VERY close attention to your last 2 paragraphs.
It's funny, I said the same exact thing yesterday. One league, different ratings. Yes, in that same thread you're arguing against me.
This is the problem with trying to listen to the people. People who can't even listen to themselves.
-
Okay, I just had an idea. Since we know these forum threads always get out of hand - well, I'm not sure, but I guess I'm not the only one who doesn't pay any attention after 8 pages of this back and forth "I'm right." "No, I'm right, you are stupid." "No, you are stupid." thing - so here's what I suggest:
Let's have a meeting on Skype or whatever, something, where we can get together and talk, with our voices and share the ideas, best case scenario would be if some geek could record it and upload it on the site. But if we do this, we do it normally, not Italian-parliament-style, not this back and forth stupidity, normal, grown-up discussion where we share the ideas. We would actually be doing something and in just an hour we could do what this thread would do in months.
-
Ray, we do rarely agree, and I think everyone should pay very VERY close attention to your last 2 paragraphs.
It's funny, I said the same exact thing yesterday. One league, different ratings. Yes, in that same thread you're arguing against me.
This is the problem with trying to listen to the people. People who can't even listen to themselves.
Hardly, this is a totally different situation, I say madness, because it's such a drastic change affecting hundreds and hundreds of players and for what, because no more than 10 players, half of which don't even play this game actively or competitively anymore, said "I don't like Hyst, me me me me"...
And Ray, I don't feel that your idea is fair on the other 99%
-
I personally don't think this idea brought forward would be a good change.
-
And Ray, I don't feel that your idea is fair on the other 99%
What do you mean? ??? The discussion should be recorded and posted on the site.
-
i'm not too sure about changing something in a drastic way. my suggestion for now is just to remove shopper and hysteria in a rating system where points for elite, rr and all those good schemes are getting summed up. and maybe the season lenght is enough if you reduce it to 1 month. i always hated to wait 2 or 3 months untill finally the playoffs starts
-
I don't have the perfect plan as of yet but I'm thinking hard here. avi and everyone else who says "you're not even playing", cut it, change is good when it's an improvement to everyone actively playing right? Your argument has no weight. Take your hate for ropa somewhere else and let's be productive here.
Also, it wasn't 1 thread which caused this discussion, it was like 3 or 4 threads. The latest one being the drip too much which caused the barrel to overflow.
-
i'm not too sure about changing something in a drastic way. my suggestion for now is just to remove shopper and hysteria in a rating system where points for elite, rr and all those good schemes are getting summed up. and maybe the season lenght is enough if you reduce it to 1 month. i always hated to wait 2 or 3 months untill finally the playoffs starts
Removing a scheme is a bit complicated, since then do you remove the points of those from the overall to each season? That wouldn't be fair, or from just next season? So, hmm, I don't know.
The bigger problem with a season that is so long is that some players get to play a lot of games at the early stage of the season, then just take their place at the top of the standing table and just wait for the season to end and not play any more games, so it's difficult to catch them or qualify to a Playoffs spot. End of the season is always more inactive.
-
Separete league is very good idea,
Many peoples dont play tus coz they not play some other shemes, coz they dont like or just dont have skills to play it.
Guy who like only rope shemes will not play league coz they rules force him to play bng past 50 min.
...from others side, Guy who is pro in ground shemes must to play ttrr. Maybe he dont wanna spending many of hes time to learning roper?
what about those players?
Current league system is maked only for overall players who can play all shemes ---- yeye,i know then its TEL but its not enaugh.
if we make seperate league for all shemes, tus will have more players,
more players = more fun.
thats the point.
-
Separete league is very good idea,
Many peoples dont play tus coz they not play some other shemes, coz they dont like or just dont have skills to play it.
Guy who like only rope shemes will not play league coz they rules force him to play bng past 50 min.
...from others side, Guy who is pro in ground shemes must to play ttrr. Maybe he dont wanna spending many of hes time to learning roper?
what about those players?
Current league system is maked only for overall players who can play all shemes ---- yeye,i know then its TEL but its not enaugh.
if we make seperate league for all shemes, tus will have more players,
more players = more fun.
thats the point.
Yes, every single league in the history of worms - okay, might be exaggerating here - was an all-around league. So was this. The Classic League is an all-around league and you shouldn't be competing in it unless you do play each scheme that it includes, you can't go "ah BnG? okay free win bye" that is just not how it works.
Just imagine what you are saying, I'm referring to an older post of mine in this thread, we are separated enough already! Just think about it, 10 people asking for TUS game in #AnythingGoes, each for a different scheme? That is madness, nonsense. There are just not enough people who actively play here for that to happen.
-
for ttrr you don't really need to put something new up. theres those challenges and i think that's enough. although i don't play them since it's all about the longer you try the better time you get. i used to try some in the past and on one map i was 3rd with 2 seconds slower than mab and ryan. so yeah, i'm absolutely no fan of "the longer you try, the better result you get". doesn't really say anything about your skill. why? because in a league game mab and ryan would prolly beat my by 5-10 seconds and in challenges only by 2-3 seconds.. yup.
TEL is cool. i always liked elite and theres a handfull people that like it too. community is really poor these days though. not many oldies around that are/were good. mainly nubies that play weird schemes all day. it's even worse than back in the days. and back in the days this game was dead already. now it's almost burried
nor am i a fan of bng since you can learn every shot in 1-2 months and then you gonna hit like every shot. kinda like those ttrr challenges. whatever
i dunno really, a league with top 6 schemes is good, doesn't need to be seperated, but please remove shopper and hysteria since you can't compare them skillwise with elite, t17, ttrr, roper, wxw or bng. major change should be the removing of those 2 schemes.
you could do seperated leagues of course. but then the statistics got to stay and not beeing resetted every season which just motivates me more to play them. with resetted ratings and stats you just play to qualify for the playoffs. but with keeping stats you are about to get good stats AND qualify for po's u know. that way we can seperate a rope league, tel, t17 and all that stuff + having an allrouind (classic) league with those 6 schemes. that league can be resetted i think
i also like the dub_c idea with top 10 on front page and what not. good stuff
-
Shopper doesn't take any less skill than any other scheme. It's just, generally speaking, people use very bad schemes and very bad maps, thus making it lose much of its real depth.
Since people seem to be unable to comprehend that WxW and Roper are basically the same scheme, a work around that has worked in the past (although clearly flawed) is to add WxW and Shopper as the same rating, but it makes little sense because historically, the best shoppers were usually more "default" players. But for some strange reason, people seem to think that because rope is used to often in shopper, rope skill plays a big role in it, but it doesn't.
-
i have no idea what your intentions are. whatever
yeah ropa. shopper doesn't need any skill besides piling worms and making right use of the weapons. it's just crap.. wxw ftw
-
Basically twistah, I disagree and I love family guy.
-
Wow. It's good to see signs of people who fights for current system finally. Seriously why can't you just discuss a simple thing? I said new plan, ehm let me quote myself:
Many of you have been with this plan for long enough, so it is a good time to gather your ideas for tweaks or new plans for the leagues. (or even not touching it at all!)
I put 3 options on the table, tweak, new plan or not touching current system. Why you guys lost temper? :o
The new plan was around before HHC's new points system. Then Anubis mentioned it in Hysteria thread. Why attacking ropa?
This is just a thread to see if there are better solutions. I even marked the new plan as flawed/incomplete. Take a deep breath and think if we could change to a better system or not. Nobody said we're removing 3 years of stats or anything.
lol this is just a discussion thread. I swear I didn't meant any mama joke by it.
-
I disagree too.
Separate the leagues by scheme will cause a bizarre inactivity in TUS. Some schemes like BnG and Team17 will be forgotten and wont touch playoffs.
The same for "divisions plan". Ppl wanna create fake accounts to play in the lower divisions to take season trophies.
So imo i believe that the current system is the best.
How to be a good wormer? Playing all schemes. Being a overrall. The proposed system goes against this.
If We can to make it better, the main change must to be about the schemes - not about the system.
-
Current new flawed/incomplete plan:
All leagues will be merged into one. There will be no Classic, TEL or anything. Instead, all schemes will have the opportunity to have playoffs if they get qualified by enough activity.
Each scheme receives its own season length. For example, 2 months for Elite, 3 months for Intermediate and after that system checks for the possibility of their playoffs. It is kinda like each scheme has its own league.
I like this idea, of one big league with seperate playoffs for all schemes. The picks are gonna be a hassle though. And also, you probably need to pay attention all of the sub-leagues get the attention they deserve. This could turn into quite a mess if all schemes start at random times during the month.. people will find it hard to gain a good overview of the situation.
Since our community needs to know the best all rounders defined by certain schemes, system will pick the best 4, 8, 16 players of last seasons of all specified schemes (leagues), and set a playoffs combining of those schemes.
The (former) classic league schemes only? Or does moleshopper count too?
I find division plans cool and interesting, but I don't support them because at this time, I think our community doesn't have enough activity to handle division plans.
I liked the divisions in WACL though. They were like groups in cups. Not vertical (best players in div1 and so forth), but horizontal (all players divided randomly in groups, best 2 or so advance to p/o's.). It was always a thrill to see what players/clans were in your group; and it also gave not-so-good players a chance to advance if they had the luck to be paired into an easy group.
However, WACL was for clans.. in singles it would run into quite a few issues. I used this system for WL in the early months, but more than 50 players it cannot sustain.
I already posted the idea of alternating schemes each month. Most people like multiple schemes, so it shouldn't be hard to get a TRL up each month that they like to play in.
That's just a first thought though, I'm planning to think about this some more :)
-
The (former) classic league schemes only? Or does moleshopper count too?
All-rounder will be by the schemes we specify. Also, same can go for some collection like free league.
To non-creative people,
I've already done leagues for TUS2, so it is not very pleasant for me to recode it, not to mention a new plan changes many many things in the codes. I did this thread cause I see a drop in activity and I'd like to see what changes could lift things back up again.
-
I'm planning to think about this some more :)
Lol, I love that expression...
-
I'm agree with Professor, the current system is the best. I quote his sentence:
""How to be a good wormer? Playing all schemes. Being a overrall. The proposed system goes against this.
If We can to make it better, the main change must to be about the schemes - not about the system.""
About Hysteria, it's one of the most skillful schemes and the most played here (see TRL statistics). Why you should remove it from classic league ?! If I do not like a scheme that does not mean it should be removed...
-
The (former) classic league schemes only? Or does moleshopper count too?
All-rounder will be by the schemes we specify. Also, same can go for some collection like free league.
To non-creative people,
I've already done leagues for TUS2, so it is not very pleasant for me to recode it, not to mention a new plan changes many many things in the codes. I did this thread cause I see a drop in activity and I'd like to see what changes could lift things back up again.
It's not necesarrily the changes that cause activity, people come and go, you have to accept that. :)
-
Hi everyone! :D
Could somebody explain me (in short) why we would need these radical changes?
I think the system now is almost very good, it needs some changes but not that radical way :) I think the Classic league is good as it is. I don't agree with people who says: "Remove Shopper and Hysteria". Those schemes are not the best, because the luck factor is higher than at the other ones, but if you would remove them, you would go on a wrong way; it's the easiest to learn how to play these schemes. If you'd remove them, the new players would have hardly no chance to win versus a good player. The player with less skill will get bored, because they won't win vs a good player in wxw, ttrr, elite... only if they practice 1-2 years (lol). And don't forget, that those schemes are funny :D If you play just for win and not for fun at all, then same on you.
What I'd like to suggest is to change the free league. I don't really have ideas, only some: why is a season in free league so long? For me it means that I don't play free league, because why? If I won 20 games in a row, who cares? What people can see is: the season never will end..
So I think the season in the free league should be as long as the season in classic league. And I think the schemes on classic league could add to free league (MODIFIED!) (maybe who pick a scheme like that, can get not so many points).
To sum up: I think if you'd change the free league, then the less skilled players (and who likes for example BigRR) could compete there. (.. even there could be a lot of little clans, which can practice in free league vs each other).
-
I really feels like making two different style of league, serious where would be hardcore points challenge for players, and kind of league without points, that would satisfect alot of freestylers and just players who cares about fun like dilboy, I would like to nerd on such league actually XD And also such league would help to get skill for noobs, and same way keep practise for pros with serious playing but without loosing smth
-
I'm still wondering if this new system will allow someone to reach the classic league playoffs by only playing one scheme.
-
Sorry I missed that. It doesn't. Since it will look for collection of schemes and average of them all together. 1 good scheme won't get qualified.
-
anyway i wouldnt like to touch pos being a poor player in rope games. Its like noob bashing, it's a shame.
TEL n' TRL are the right place for "one-scheme lovers".
Playing classic league any player must to improve ur skillz to become a better player.
-
I actually support Tomi's suggestion to dramatically reduce the Season length of FreeLeague, If I had the time I would play if PO's were after 1/2 months.
-
MI
does your idea include all free league schemes would count into the overall rating?
-
I really feels like making two different style of league, serious where would be hardcore points challenge for players, and kind of league without points, that would satisfect alot of freestylers and just players who cares about fun like dilboy, I would like to nerd on such league actually XD And also such league would help to get skill for noobs, and same way keep practise for pros with serious playing but without loosing smth
I have an idea how to make that work, damn! you'll guess Im idiot, and so am I, but I really feels like that would work awesome. On freestyling league points would add spectators after watching replay like rating system works now. People have to vote for awesomeness of players gameplay.
1. This means players in game (let it be hyst) will trying to do the most dynamic turns to get more points (that means no more telestuff and darksiding but awesome shots and tryes on hyst!)
2.People would get points from their game rate (guess better to make rate for each player, cuz rate both ppl with same rate is kinda sucky), so people wont loose points! only get them like WO works. Thats awesome cuz will kill things like avoiding cuz of fear to lose points and so on
3. Ppl will rate games by dynamic of turns. So it asks schemes where can happen dynamic turns and moves. ttrr, hyst, bng, roper, inter, defentely boom race, and surely warmer! Warmer scheme will work here the best, so this way we getting new contingent players on tus! freestylers will pwn on tus too and keep challenging for best warmer player!
There's alot of cool stuff I can give you as example about this idea, but what about problems?
1. Someone would like to keep rate every game 5/5 even if player didnt deserve that. way to solve: people have votes, same number each day, so ppl wont like to waste them match.
2. Will be alot of games, ppl wont spectace all of them and dont rate. way to solve: just need motivations! to let ppl watch and rate games make stats such as top-10 best reviewers, as higher number of reviews as higher reviewer on stat
-
i want changes in schemes - not in system league ::)
-
i want impos system, would bring some activity to fos.
-
The new system suggestion seems too complicated tbh. Why not keep it simple and successful - like as it is right now.
-
good, i like it ;D yay
-
I think the site in general is awesome, however, In my opinion, the sites home page could be improved. I think the focus point of the home page, and the site in general, should be the league itself. W2's league site had the top 20 right centered on the page. It was motivation and you wanted your name there.
+1000.
fap fap fap at rating.
https://www.tus-wa.com/leagues/classic-stats/
no reasons to fap...
-
Maybe removing "2 picks system" will fix it............
we could ask for example on AG , "Tus roper any1?", "tus ttrr any1?" "tus t17 any1" etc........
it will fix also "free wins"
ofc if players want play more games to other shemes its no problem, as they want but concept is in "1 sheme pick"
Nice idea too, but I see a problem with the lamers who do noobbashing even more then, because they'll only play their best scheme. I think it'll work if you have the rule, if you want to reach the play offs you have to play at least about 10 different schemes. If people start to play almost only schemes where they r "pro" anyway, they might get too bored too fast because there won't be enough improvement and alternation for them. If u get bored because you don't try enough schemes you will quit wa sooner or later and that would be sad of many pros would make breaks of wa after some time then.
-
continuing from my post in the hysteria thread (https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/leagues-general/hysteria-in-the-classic-league/msg114541/#msg114541)
TEL is suffering from too many consecutive seasons, so I have an idea that will likely help TEL and other TRL schemes.
Multiple TRL's. Split up the schemes by popularity, so you have different tiers. One tier could be Elite/Hysteria, so those two schemes would alternate back and forth in their own tier. All the other schemes could be their own tier, or you could split up even more by popularity (like another TRL tier could be TTRR/Team17 just looking at the Season Info page activity). What this does is keep schemes more fresh by not repeating 2 times in a row or more, and it let's schemes not have to take forever to show up in TRL again since they'll be in their own tier.
As for classic, it seems active as ever, and I still like it, so I'm not sure a huge change even needs to happen. I am curious what others are thinking though, so I do enjoy hearing everyone's ideas. I just haven't heard anything too convincing yet.
the '2 pick system' I feel should stay because of the same reasons everyone is saying -> fewer games will be agreed on in AG if everyone is asking for their scheme only. the '2 pick system' promotes activity and makes people expand their skills. the occasional free wins are unfortunate, but I feel the overall effect of the '2 pick system' is still positive and healthy for the league.
-
I don't think MI's proposed ideas would work too well; even though every scheme would be pickable, most people wouldn't agree to play unless both picks were one of the main schemes. We can easily bring in new schemes and phase out inferior ones without this system, and it's probably better that way.
Not every popular scheme needs playoffs, and if there were more than a few playoffs for players to deal with, they'd never get played. The main thing that needs adjusting is the relative importance of schemes in the all-round league. Some old schoolers like me want hysteria and shopper removed, though it'd be best for them to at least be playable since we need new players. We should group schemes like this:
Roper/WxW
Elite/Intermediate
Team17/Shopper
BnG/Hysteria
RR
So that clans and players only have 5 areas where they need points. This way, old schoolers wouldn't ever feel forced to pick hysteria or shopper for points, when they can BnG or Team17 instead. The BnG/hysteria grouping kind of combines two schemes that a lot of people really don't want to play, and it slightly lessens their combined effect on ratings. This wouldn't be perfect, but it'd be an improvement :0.
-
good point, mab. that's my thought too. the classic league with the main skill schemes + removing or pairing shopper and hysteria would be enough already. i still like my idea of addition to the classic league to have maybe rope, elite, rr and what not in an own league that doesn't get resetted. so if you really are only into ropers or any other scheme you could play the scheme related league only. not sure about playoffs there then though, cos the top 8 players would prolly stay on those spots for ever
-
continuing from my post in the hysteria thread (https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/leagues-general/hysteria-in-the-classic-league/msg114541/#msg114541)
Multiple TRL's. Split up the schemes by popularity, so you have different tiers. One tier could be Elite/Hysteria, so those two schemes would alternate back and forth in their own tier. All the other schemes could be their own tier, or you could split up even more by popularity (like another TRL tier could be TTRR/Team17 just looking at the Season Info page activity). What this does is keep schemes more fresh by not repeating 2 times in a row or more, and it let's schemes not have to take forever to show up in TRL again since they'll be in their own tier.
As for classic, it seems active as ever, and I still like it, so I'm not sure a huge change even needs to happen. I am curious what others are thinking though, so I do enjoy hearing everyone's ideas. I just haven't heard anything too convincing yet.
Franz, what you basically want is the current system, but with more TRL's? Is that correct?
I don't feel much for that. It's not just TEL with issues, it was TRL too when not-so-popular schemes were picked (like BnG).
In that respect I'm more in favour for MI's approach. That one has countless TRL's, but at the same time, only 1 league really. (yet, the picking-thing etcetera seems too big a hurdle).
In all honesty, I think we should keep classic as it is. The system is fine people say, but the schemes.. And well, everybody has problems with different schemes. It wouldn't be right to throw out hyst because it's the most played scheme.. that can only hurt business. :-[
We can try to change the schemes into something better (an improved version of Hyst, an improved version of BnG, etc.), but hmm.. such attempts haven't been very fruitful in the past. ???
Randomsteria is better than hysteria IMO, but can you really force that onto the community?
If anything, the only real change within our reach (IMO) is to find a way to give new energy to the current TRL's. TEL has been going on for too long. Elite could be added as just another TRL-scheme.
In that case we'd go down 1 league (only Classic, Free & TRL left), that's not a bad thing IMO.
A 4th league could be used though for experimental things:
1/3 of the seasons as a back-up TRL (for Elite mostly)
1/3 of the seasons as an alternative all-round league (with only all rope schemes, or only all default schemes for example [edit: or that each player remove 3 schemes-thing])
1/3 of the seasons as a TRL for the most popular FreeLeague scheme
Something like that :)
-
Seems like MI is removing the troll posts that derail the threads of importance. It is kind of scary to see Komo and Avi fuse together. It's ugly, but it's powerful. Makes me think of DBZ.
I still believe that separating the schemes would benefit the league. Most if not all of us focus on more than just 1 scheme anyway, in fact, I would be quite interested to see if there is anybody out there that only picks the same scheme over and over again. The point regarding less activity due to separating the schemes is there, sure, but it's minor. There is usually always 1 scheme both players can decide on to play, I am very sure of that since we have a broad variety of schemes.
It would get rid of a lot of avoider since people search specifically for their scheme they want to play. It is no secret that people search TUS games and avoid someone because he/she can pick whatever scheme he wants and you are simply forced to play it. Avoider would also have a harder time to get into playoffs by noob bashing, the scheme specific playoffs would only be reachable by beating players that are at least moderate enough to have fun in the league. The Majority of players in scheme separated league games would be players that are either good at the scheme, have fun in the scheme, or are willing to improve in the scheme since noone forced them to play. Of course if you face someone that is good, has fun and wants to improve in it will be a very hard enemy, which is in my opinion the core element of competition. People in leagues come together that enjoy the same thing in things they are good at and love to measure their skill. Not people that come together and pick a scheme based on where they get more points even though they suck at it or don't enjoy it and MOST IMPORTANTLY: Don't want to get better at it.
In separated leagues there would be a stronger sportsmanship, it's a scheme you care and like, you want it to have a good reputation. It's the fact that you don't want to lose in the scheme you want to reach playoffs in so you care about sportsmanship and fairplay, getting a bad reputation hinders you a lot more to get into your favorite scheme PO since it will have less players to play with, which is in this case a good thing. If you cow you will lose your valuable points, in current system it's different, since it's a scheme you don't care in it won't matter you can still reach PO with the remaining schemes. In the current league system it is possible to reach playoffs by completely ignoring 1 scheme, destroying the purpose of an allround league in the first place.
I believe the classic league system is perfect for clan matches since you have a way bigger pool of people to play with on each team. I think clan matches are the most balanced matches we can have in Worms regarding skill since both clans usually pick their strongest players in the scheme. Clan Matches should be way more important than singles.
-
Separate leagues is avoid heaven.
If your name is Ryan or Mablak good luck finding a game in the ttrr league. And not just because these two rule roperacing but because it's a scheme that in nature makes it very easy to calculate your chances before the match starts.
edit: some of your reasons are very valid anubis it's just that for me they're not strong enough to lose what IMO a league should be centered around: declaring the best wormer (all arounder). But I accept things do change, so if that's not of importance nowadays then it makes sense to do without it. Although I find the league to be in part responsible for the motivation of the players, I'm not asking for playoff moderators to baby sit even more, their work is a hell.
But if I win a season I sure as hell want everyone to know. You should give more importance to winners. Perhaps an announcement post analyzing said player's season, something other than a badge in a profile no one is going to look at anyway.
-
oh why bother... ;D
ropa is right with that post....
and splitting the league is just a horrible idea.. the community is small, (see, neither one of you play) so why make it smaller?
-
You make it sound like ryan and Mablak are not beatable in ttrr, never do mistakes or can't have a bad day. There are a lot of people capable of defeating them in TTRR, you have 3 worms not 100 like in TTRR challenges. Of course schemes that involve no luck and only rely on skill have people that dominate it. That's the nature of skill based competition, that there is an elite group of people that dominate it.
-
You make it sound like ryan and Mablak are not beatable in ttrr, never do mistakes or can't have a bad day. There are a lot of people capable of defeating them in TTRR, you have 3 worms not 100 like in TTRR challenges. Of course schemes that involve no luck and only rely on skill have people that dominate it. That's the nature of skill based competition, that there is an elite group of people that dominate it.
You know this. Now how many people in the community think like you and how many others would avoid them?
I'm not raising a question on if it would make sense for them to dominate or not, I'm raising the question on how hard it will be for them to find a game. They're just an example to illustrate a point.
-
You make it sound like ryan and Mablak are not beatable in ttrr, never do mistakes or can't have a bad day. There are a lot of people capable of defeating them in TTRR, you have 3 worms not 100 like in TTRR challenges. Of course schemes that involve no luck and only rely on skill have people that dominate it. That's the nature of skill based competition, that there is an elite group of people that dominate it.
You know this. Now how many people in the community think like you and how many others would avoid them?
I'm not raising a question on if it would make sense for them to dominate or not, I'm raising the question on how hard it will be for them to find a game. They're just an example to illustrate a point.
Well I agree that the success of players dominating a scheme rely on other people without set-up games. Which is sad because such people don't understand the basic concept of competition and just avoid. Fair point.
-
Mablak this is my deep point of view about schemes from what I've experienced in these years. I have never had a favorite scheme and as chakkman says, the variation of schemes always keep me excited and I've played a fair amount of each whenever I had a chance.
When someone play a specific scheme over and over, he'll get more familiar with it, gain experience, get to know the not-to-do list and so on. (captain obvious)
All these years, almost all the whining about a certain scheme came from the people who were new to that scheme. I can't stress that line enough. Also you are a very good case/player to know this because you're pretty good in Intermediate. I've had enough debates about how noobish Intermediate is. You know how many times people pointed out that Intermediate is a lucky scheme because it has random placements. Many people never bothered to look one step ahead of random placements to see that actually one of the skills is to manage random placements.
That being said, these arguments happen time to time about specific scheme and always starting from people who are new to the scheme and get confused about the events in the game and before they start gaining a little experience they start suggesting tweaks to the scheme which is way too soon.
One of the majors flaw people see in schemes is losing while having more worms or leading the entire game. When they lose a game they were leading, most of the times they think it is a scheme flaw rather than their own flawed tactics.
An example for that is when people lead in Intermediate with more worms and health point thinking their opponent is darksiding because he is doomed and has no choice, then SD comes and all worms become 1hp, now they lose because their opponent was actually wasting time for this moment. At this point, they get mad and try to tweak intermediate to have no hp reduction at SD. It is reasonable though, they were leading the game and in 1 turn they lost. But what they don't see is that the reason they lost was "not considering SD timing". More a tactic flaw rather than a scheme flaw.
The more we play a scheme, the more we gain experience, the more we see these tactic flaws and ultimately, we categorize that as less lucky, more skilled. (Generally speaking, not obvious cases like TTRR)
Now when you categorize the schemes like this:
Roper/WxW
Elite/Intermediate
Team17/Shopper
BnG/Hysteria
RR
The schemes are getting sacrificed for many people according to your point of view of schemes.
For example, you are truly an expert in TTRR and you have dedicated a category for TTRR because you know it damn pretty well. (I do believe that TTRR needs its own category) On the other hand, I've heard the phrase "TTRR is just a small version of WxW" several times. I'm sure it makes sense to many people here. So why not make it RR/WxW then? The reason is that you know TTRR deep to your bone and you are sure it has nothing to do with WxW.
I wonder how much Dario would accept the Elite/Intermediate category.
Team17/Shopper is the worst combination you made but clearly drawing your point of view. You are putting WxW and TTRR together there because you think "Team17 is just some version of Shopper". The post has gotten long enough, I won't go into details why.
So my question is this:
If we gather all "experts" in every scheme to make categories, wouldn't our final conclusion be like dedicating one category for each scheme?
I'll reply to other posts later. This post is long enough :/
@Anubis,
Are you planning to come back at all?
-
Roper/WxW
Roper has nothing to do with wxw. RR and shopper have much more similarities to wxw.
-
Roper/WxW
Roper has nothing to do with wxw. RR and shopper have much more similarities to wxw.
Why not? Because there's crates with weapons instead of health crates? You're still doing the same thing, roping very fast from A to B and then try to get an attack in, and after that, you pile, not to mention how the skills translate, in real WxW maps (those that barely give you enough time to attack) usually the best roper wins, as opposed to the best shopper (who is a totally different scheme in which time is spent in strategically using the weapons as opposed from roping from point to point). And really, most of the attacks in WxW are not different from roper, you barely get there and attack with whatever you can. Surely you can punish mistakes easier because it's easier to pile worms together and break havok in WxW, but on high skill level, it usually come downs to roping skill and crate luck, the way you attack is irrelevant because most of the time you're only gonna get one worm and if you can hit with a zook you can hit with a sheep, the only difference in the damage dealt, which is what makes WxW luck based, in part, but all down to roping.
Now I do agree that the roping style might seem more similar to that in RR because both maps use straight lines but not really, as you're doing mostly kicks, spikes and scrolling at full speed, something not very present in RR. I do consider roper to be the best part of roping but you just can't ignore the similarities. It used to be very obvious in leagues like LW, were they actually had very high skilled WxW players, that were the same people highly skilled in roper, many of them couldn't elite or bng, they were very easy to beat in things like shopper with a bit of head.
-
@Anubis,
Are you planning to come back at all?
How dare you make me post off-topic MI! ;)
TL;DR Version: Yes, but.. see PM.
-
All these years, almost all the whining about a certain scheme came from the people who were new to that scheme.
Works both ways. Those who are great at certain scheme and have great success with it might be biased towards conserving the same things that allow him to enjoy said success, even if they are hindering the enjoyment / fairness of the scheme.
edit: that PM is an alias petition ;D
The schemes are getting sacrificed for many people according to your point of view of schemes.
For example, you are truly an expert in TTRR and you have dedicated a category for TTRR because you know it damn pretty well. (I do believe that TTRR needs its own category)
I think Mablak knows practical every scheme and he bases his opinion on gameplay and league logic as opposed to plain taste. But do correct me if I'm wrong.
On the other hand, I've heard the phrase "TTRR is just a small version of WxW" several times. I'm sure it makes sense to many people here. So why not make it RR/WxW then? The reason is that you know TTRR deep to your bone and you are sure it has nothing to do with WxW.
Thing is, you're going to hear many things, not all points are valid, opinions can be wrong. It's your job to judge.
-
Roper/WxW
Roper has nothing to do with wxw. RR and shopper have much more similarities to wxw.
Why not? Because there's crates with weapons instead of health crates? You're still doing the same thing, roping very fast from A to B and then try to get an attack in, and after that, you pile, not to mention how the skills translate, in real WxW maps (those that barely give you enough time to attack) usually the best roper wins, as opposed to the best shopper (who is a totally different scheme in which time is spent in strategically using the weapons as opposed from roping from point to point). And really, most of the attacks in WxW are not different from roper, you barely get there and attack with whatever you can. Surely you can punish mistakes easier because it's easier to pile worms together and break havok in WxW, but on high skill level, it usually come downs to roping skill and crate luck, the way you attack is irrelevant because most of the time you're only gonna get one worm and if you can hit with a zook you can hit with a sheep, the only difference in the damage dealt, which is what makes WxW luck based, in part, but all down to roping.
Now I do agree that the roping style might seem more similar to that in RR because both maps use straight lines but not really, as you're doing mostly kicks, spikes and scrolling at full speed, something not very present in RR. I do consider roper to be the best part of roping but you just can't ignore the similarities. It used to be very obvious in leagues like LW, were they actually had very high skilled WxW players, that were the same people highly skilled in roper, many of them couldn't elite or bng, they were very easy to beat in things like shopper with a bit of head.
I will agree to disagree. Its both our opinions and neither of us are wrong. However, the thought of roper being grouped with wxw makes me throw up a little in my mouth.
-
However, the thought of roper being grouped with wxw makes me throw up a little in my mouth.
Don't get me wrong, this happens to me too.
-
I think Mablak knows practical every scheme and he bases his opinion on gameplay and league logic as opposed to plain taste. But do correct me if I'm wrong.
Every scheme? No.
Does he have a very good tight grip of the game? Yes! Probably the only player that could gather this much experience combining all schemes.
Our taste are combined with our experience and logic. Ask 2 programmers about their main programming language compared to other languages and see how they will explain their taste with reason.
If I want TTRR advice, I will run to Mablak.
Hysteria advice? I could but there are much better choices.
Team17? Not a good idea.
To me Roper and WxW are closer than TTRR and WxW on gameplay, however in roping techniques, Roper is closer to TTRR. But I believe they each deserve their own category. I have a high chance beating Dub-c in WxW and a low chance beating him in Roper.
-
I agree with Mablak on grouping schemes for points... his idea is a less extreme version of grouping all the defaults and roping schemes into their respective groups and making the points earned and lost kept in those two categories... so if you win a ttrr, you gain points in your Roping rating, if you lose a bng, you lose points in your Default rating... no more gaining and losing points based off individual schemes.
However, i disagree with the way he grouped the schemes... I don't care if the best shoppa players are great defaulters (that's a ridiculous statement in itself which can easily be countered), that doesn't make shoppa and t17 as similar as Roper and wxw... not even close.
Also, I would consider myself well-balanced in all of the classic schemes, yet I have major problems with the fundamental makeup of most of the schemes and would like to see change. T
he Tus shoppa scheme has the absolute worst crate options I think I have ever seen, same with WxW. Also, no more city shoppas or other generic premade maps... you must learn how to make a good shoppa cavern and you should be playing on a new shoppa cavern map every time... it's really not that hard to make
Team17 has too many hillbilly BIG EXPLOSION INSTANT KILL weapons that break the scheme, most notably patsy's magic bullet.
Roper is the stalest scheme in the league - you hide in the same place all game, fetching crates like a mindless dog, over and over and over, plus rules like zook first turn and w2w at sd make very little sense... roper needs the most work on. Even if you believe the current roper scheme isn't crate based, you have to admit it is the most mind-numbing scheme out there.
BnG needs to have no rules, the sheer amount of complaints involved with the scheme should be more than enough of a case for that change
Hysteria could use random worm rotation... also, the scheme should be played with AT LEAST a total of 6 worms per color... the creators of hysteria intended it to be 8v8, cut this 4v4 bullshit out, especially in clanners.. it just quickly turns into a rotate rape/ 1v1 darkside bore-fest... I thought the whole point of hysteria was to try to use a variety of weapons in the best possible way in only one second.... you're supposed to teleport around your enemy in potentially lethal locations, not find a pussy hide and throw a grenade or petrol every turn until you uncover their hide so they can just teleport and darkside again and again and again. In my mind, hysteria played in a cavern map would be extremely interesting.
I would like to see ttrr changed on how times are scored. play with 3 or 4 worms and add up your best two times... I would personally favor playing with 2 or 3 worms and adding up all of your times ... if you fall and end your turn, you pretty much lose unless the other guy falls, or you could make that turn's time equal to your worst time + 15 seconds or something. i don't think the community would like that, however, i think it would be a better representation of skill than letting you have 3 tries to count just 1... ttrr stresses consistency already, just not enough IMO...
Fixing the schemes and grouping them up like Mab's idea would be the best change for the league IMO
-
Leagues:
Classic League
Elite, T17, TTRR, Roper, BnG, WxW
And Just keep the league as it is. Maybe lower the seasons lenght.
Besides the Classic League you then got sub-leagues with all kind of schemes. The stats are not being reset, until you do it on your own (set it like 1 reset possible every 2 months or so). Not sure about the playoffs/season system yet though. But that way I would be motivated to even play a Battlerace match or what not, because I can report a win there. That scheme also is very skilled, but theres no really competition in it, since none bothers up spending much time on jumping around. A report in a league on the other hand makes sense. And I mean not like in the Free League where everything gets just summed up. Would be really cool to see in ANY scheme the top guys. Really <3. Would make much more sense to play anything every now and then. I'm totally specified on the Classic League schemes, because they are kinda the only schemes in a good league, or the only ones that are worth playing and spending his time on to get to playoffs.
The Classic League would be the main league and those sub-leagues just get played if you feel playing a "special" scheme. Since the stats are being kept it really makes sense to me.
Please think about my 2 cents.
-
Mablak this is my deep point of view about schemes from what I've experienced in these years. I have never had a favorite scheme and as chakkman says, the variation of schemes always keep me excited and I've played a fair amount of each whenever I had a chance.
When someone play a specific scheme over and over, he'll get more familiar with it, gain experience, get to know the not-to-do list and so on. (captain obvious)
All these years, almost all the whining about a certain scheme came from the people who were new to that scheme. I can't stress that line enough. Also you are a very good case/player to know this because you're pretty good in Intermediate. I've had enough debates about how noobish Intermediate is. You know how many times people pointed out that Intermediate is a lucky scheme because it has random placements. Many people never bothered to look one step ahead of random placements to see that actually one of the skills is to manage random placements.
That being said, these arguments happen time to time about specific scheme and always starting from people who are new to the scheme and get confused about the events in the game and before they start gaining a little experience they start suggesting tweaks to the scheme which is way too soon.
One of the majors flaw people see in schemes is losing while having more worms or leading the entire game. When they lose a game they were leading, most of the times they think it is a scheme flaw rather than their own flawed tactics.
An example for that is when people lead in Intermediate with more worms and health point thinking their opponent is darksiding because he is doomed and has no choice, then SD comes and all worms become 1hp, now they lose because their opponent was actually wasting time for this moment. At this point, they get mad and try to tweak intermediate to have no hp reduction at SD. It is reasonable though, they were leading the game and in 1 turn they lost. But what they don't see is that the reason they lost was "not considering SD timing". More a tactic flaw rather than a scheme flaw.
The more we play a scheme, the more we gain experience, the more we see these tactic flaws and ultimately, we categorize that as less lucky, more skilled. (Generally speaking, not obvious cases like TTRR)
Now when you categorize the schemes like this:
Roper/WxW
Elite/Intermediate
Team17/Shopper
BnG/Hysteria
RR
The schemes are getting sacrificed for many people according to your point of view of schemes.
For example, you are truly an expert in TTRR and you have dedicated a category for TTRR because you know it damn pretty well. (I do believe that TTRR needs its own category) On the other hand, I've heard the phrase "TTRR is just a small version of WxW" several times. I'm sure it makes sense to many people here. So why not make it RR/WxW then? The reason is that you know TTRR deep to your bone and you are sure it has nothing to do with WxW.
I wonder how much Dario would accept the Elite/Intermediate category.
Team17/Shopper is the worst combination you made but clearly drawing your point of view. You are putting WxW and TTRR together there because you think "Team17 is just some version of Shopper". The post has gotten long enough, I won't go into details why.
So my question is this:
If we gather all "experts" in every scheme to make categories, wouldn't our final conclusion be like dedicating one category for each scheme?
I'll reply to other posts later. This post is long enough :/
@Anubis,
Are you planning to come back at all?
MI, to say that I'm not a good resource on Team17 is silly, you've probably never seen me play it. I don't think Team17 is just some version of Shopper: these class pairings are partly designed with the idea of personalized scheme weighting in mind. And as far as similarity goes, imagine listing every possible scheme that could exist (ordered by similarity) and dividing it into 5 sections, I think the split schemes as listed would fall into the same broad categories. I'm not saying the split schemes are equivalent, they're simply within 20% similarity of each other. And I've heard many opinions claiming WxW is similar to Roper, which I didn't think was justified at first, but with the advent of more difficult WxW maps, there's not much difference anymore.
Currently, since there are eight schemes, they have an equally-weighted 12.5% contribution to your rating each, which I think is very inaccurate. And even with all schemes being equal, you're forcing your own viewpoint on others, we can't really escape that. But with the scheme classes, your own activity helps decide what kind of contribution a scheme can get. If you never want to pick WxW, BnG, or Shopper, then those schemes will probably have an effective weighting of under 10% for you, depending on what other people pick. It will certainly depend a lot on which schemes are popular, but I see it as an improvement.
To try and even things out, I think it would be best to have at least 2 schemes to start off with in each category, the RR class could have RR, TTRR, and maybe Tower RR. And it would behoove us greatly to have some kind of balance requirements that say "you have to be good in all 5 classes to be a good all-rounder", though I'd first like to see if people agree that the current scheme weighting could be improved.
-
combining schemes into grouped ratings makes no sense. I understand that all this started from people disliking hysteria, but grouping hysteria into another scheme's rating is not the solution. nor is grouping every other scheme just because you can; that's just making more of a mess for what seems to be no real benefit. if we go by scheme popularity, I can see the case for removing a scheme like Shopper, and maybe that should be argued, but I wouldn't want it to just be bundled into another scheme's rating just because it's unpopular -> it should either get removed or somehow fixed.
and that's what I'm thinking: just remove a scheme due to popularity, or try to fix the scheme itself. right now BNG and SHOPPER are the least popular and deserve some sort of action. BNG right now is just unpleasant to play. Games are often long, played on flat maps making them repetitive and less exciting, and the rules try to make games fair and balanced, but all they do is make everyone feel uneasy and feel 'cheaped.' BNG could do with a lot more excitement, just removing rules and playing on more creative maps, and at least go up to 2 worms each, if not more. SHOPPER? I'm not a great shopper mind to figure out how to make it more competitively appealing to everyone, so if anyone has a great idea, we probably could really use it. SHOPPER needs a lot of help. And if nothing can be done, maybe it should be removed from classic.
ROPER by the way, I also believe needs to go up to 2 worms each. That's how it is in clanners, and it should be consistent. Just like how in ELITE, you don't just double the amount of worms per player in clanners making it 8v8. I believe ROPER singles also benefits from the added strategy of having 2 worms, such as piling, and it also makes those far crates more interesting if there's another worm pile on the other side of the map (try to unpile or not?). this is getting long enough, so I'll stop here for now.
-
And to respond to the idea of individual leagues, I love it. It would increase the overall skill level of WN, make things more competitive, and allow for more accurate league systems. But it wouldn't be best for the game. Currently, we just don't have enough people to make it work, it would be hard for people to find games when everyone is just looking to play one or two schemes.
The good thing about an all-round league is that people compromise and play schemes they normally wouldn't play, and this is also where a lot of people grow to love schemes. And there are actually some schemes that only work in an all-round setting, that people only want to play occasionally to show their skill diversity. For now we need to continue with a reasonably populist approach to the main league, or face the game dying out.
-
and this is also where a lot of people grow to love schemes.
How many of you started to love X scheme because you got play time on it by having opponents pick it in league games?
-
and that's what I'm thinking: just remove a scheme due to popularity, or try to fix the scheme itself. right now BNG and SHOPPER are the least popular and deserve some sort of action. BNG right now is just unpleasant to play. Games are often long, played on flat maps making them repetitive and less exciting, and the rules try to make games fair and balanced, but all they do is make everyone feel uneasy and feel 'cheaped.' BNG could do with a lot more excitement, just removing rules and playing on more creative maps, and at least go up to 2 worms each, if not more. SHOPPER? I'm not a great shopper mind to figure out how to make it more competitively appealing to everyone, so if anyone has a great idea, we probably could really use it. SHOPPER needs a lot of help. And if nothing can be done, maybe it should be removed from classic.
I don't agree with your SHOPPER stance. It's pretty popular in cups. Also very popular on wormnet in general. TUS Classic is nevertheless the domain of the 'skilly' wormers.
You can throw shopper out cause it's unskilly, but you probably won't stimulate newbies to enter the competition when you remove one of their fav schemes.
I agree with BnG. The 1rBnG is pretty good though, as much as it still won't be my fav.
ROPER by the way, I also believe needs to go up to 2 worms each. That's how it is in clanners, and it should be consistent. Just like how in ELITE, you don't just double the amount of worms per player in clanners making it 8v8. I believe ROPER singles also benefits from the added strategy of having 2 worms, such as piling, and it also makes those far crates more interesting if there's another worm pile on the other side of the map (try to unpile or not?). this is getting long enough, so I'll stop here for now.
It's pretty hard to think for 2 though ;)
The schemes-thing is a real problem though IMO. I was playing clanner with Peja today and I was wondering what scheme I could pick that would make a great fun match. Now that i've kinda gotten tired of the lameness in hyst... only T17 somewhat made the cut.
We decided to go for freeleague schemes instead. :-X
Nevertheless, I wouldn't recommend TUS to go all drama and fix pretty much every scheme out there. It's more of a duty for the community perhaps.
Again, I haven't said this often enough. If it were up to me I'd throw out all the old schemes and think of new ones that are:
1) complete (no 2-weapon games, but schemes that make use of as many weapons as possibly can without f*ckin up the game balance).
2) FUN
3) competitive: noob can stand somewhat of a chance vs the pro's.
4) easy to understand (no long lists of houserules and unwritten cheapness laws).
5) challenging and unpredictable (!).
The current scheme-issues are the fault of the players who keep on urging for more 'skill-based' play. They have stripped every scheme to its very core and removed all things that could make it 'unpredictable'. The logical result: 1) 2-weapon games; 2) no-fun; 3) not competitive; 4) hard to understand; 5) predictable (games follow the same plan all the time) > boredom.
If only people would realize that. :(
But yeah, that's a question of mentality. And as long as I'm the only one who supports my fun-approach, nothing's gonna change.
Therefore, TUS should stick to what we have now. And like I suggested just add elite to the TRL and use the TEL league for experimental stuff (freeleague trl; different allround combo's, etc.).
-
combining schemes into grouped ratings makes no sense. I understand that all this started from people disliking hysteria, but grouping hysteria into another scheme's rating is not the solution. nor is grouping every other scheme just because you can; that's just making more of a mess for what seems to be no real benefit. if we go by scheme popularity, I can see the case for removing a scheme like Shopper, and maybe that should be argued, but I wouldn't want it to just be bundled into another scheme's rating just because it's unpopular -> it should either get removed or somehow fixed.
and that's what I'm thinking: just remove a scheme due to popularity, or try to fix the scheme itself. right now BNG and SHOPPER are the least popular and deserve some sort of action. BNG right now is just unpleasant to play. Games are often long, played on flat maps making them repetitive and less exciting, and the rules try to make games fair and balanced, but all they do is make everyone feel uneasy and feel 'cheaped.' BNG could do with a lot more excitement, just removing rules and playing on more creative maps, and at least go up to 2 worms each, if not more. SHOPPER? I'm not a great shopper mind to figure out how to make it more competitively appealing to everyone, so if anyone has a great idea, we probably could really use it. SHOPPER needs a lot of help. And if nothing can be done, maybe it should be removed from classic.
ROPER by the way, I also believe needs to go up to 2 worms each. That's how it is in clanners, and it should be consistent. Just like how in ELITE, you don't just double the amount of worms per player in clanners making it 8v8. I believe ROPER singles also benefits from the added strategy of having 2 worms, such as piling, and it also makes those far crates more interesting if there's another worm pile on the other side of the map (try to unpile or not?). this is getting long enough, so I'll stop here for now.
Scheme classes do make sense once there are too many schemes, it's not that confusing. Still, this idea is only assuming most people don't want to abandon any schemes, but I'd fully support removing shopper as a start. That would bring relative weight of other schemes to a more respectable level.
Hysteria is still a major problem, it's too damn hard to get rid of without some suitable replacement. I think in the end, we have to let it stay until we can find something more worthwhile. But for most of us, playing it feels like flipping a coin, so I think the hate is going to continue.
-
and this is also where a lot of people grow to love schemes.
How many of you started to love X scheme because you got play time on it by having opponents pick it in league games?
Before I joined mm, I wasn't going to play any schemes but rr/roper, but now I'm up to play almost every scheme, even if I'm not good at them. I think people should have a chance to try all schemes, otherwise they will lock themselves in the 1 scheme cage... just boring :)
-
HHC nice words, you bring interesting ideas. you're definitely bigger picture than I think anyone is so far, so I applaud you for that.
"It's pretty hard to think for 2 though" --> not quite sure what meant here though, on my 2worms ROPER idea ;p
-
HHC nice words, you bring interesting ideas. you're definitely bigger picture than I think anyone is so far, so I applaud you for that.
Thanks :)
"It's pretty hard to think for 2 though" --> not quite sure what meant here though, on my 2worms ROPER idea ;p
Have you ever played with 2 worms by yourself? It's quite a challenge. It's kinda like holding your arms outside and rotating one arm clockwise and the other counterclockwise. Sooner or later you'll synchronize and move them both in the same direction. Or.. it's like playing on 2 controllers at the same time when you're playing FIFA football on a console. :-X
You tend to mess up your hides; hide both worms on the same side of the map, etcetera. It's quite a challenge IMO.
-
I think this is the point. I'm hearing a lot of complaints that people realize ROPER is one of the most repetitive schemes and on top of that people still complain about crates --> this adds the extra strategy of having 2 worms just like in a clanner, and also changes how people deal with impossible crates if worms are on different parts of the map. Besides, it's not even a new concept, this was often how it was done in Worms2 even back in the day when people played 1on1.
-
this thread is making my head hurt. It started off as "new plan for leagues" and its turned into "new plan for schemes"... its gone way off course... people are saying "nice I agree"... then contradicting their "agreement" in the very next post, it really hurts my head, dont know where to start. All this from a "I hate hysteria" thread... gah, hate it
-
combining schemes into grouped ratings makes no sense. I understand that all this started from people disliking hysteria, but grouping hysteria into another scheme's rating is not the solution. nor is grouping every other scheme just because you can
It didn't start from people disliking hysteria. Scheme classes are the result of loads and loads of talking to achieve one goal: whoever wins the league at the end of the season is the one who deserves it the most*
I'm not going to go into detail about the system right here because to be quite honest I feel it would be wasting my time big time. But because I know you don't need all the details to realize a concept I'll try to sum it up:
the system assumes that the overall rating represents true worm skill in all schemes, but I can't tell if that's the goal of TUS classic league, or if it should. Scheme classes exist because something else forces it to be: balance. Balance is the term used to define in a rating number how balanced a wormer is scheme wise, ergo balance is there to stop people from scheme bashing and regulates other parts of the rating to ensure that the better you are at more schemes the better your rating is.Basically balance rewards or punishes your rating based on your all around skill.
Because you can't force people to keep balance amongst so many schemes, for activity reasons, that's when scheme classes came up.
Does this make any sense to you?
*based on all around skill and his performance through a season
-
HHC... i think your idea for "fun" based schemes are great, for funners....
this is a league, we all wanna know whos the best, and compete for the win, and bragging rights.
most of us still have fun, while competing, and try not to take it too serious... but the competition is what drives most of us... not really a funny, unpredictable, lots of weapon scheme :X
i still think the league is fine how it is... as Dub said, its crazy to think roper and wxw are classified together.... Ropa says it is.. because your roping, collecting a cr8, and making an attack..... but does that mean hyst, and elite are the same thing? your trying to kill your opponent with the limited weapons your allotted...... nope, not the same scheme at all...
yeah, that was a bit more far fetched, but just trying to stress roper and wxw are hardly the same :X......
as MI said... he is much more likely to beat dub in wxw then roper, theres a very good reason for that
-
Ropa says it is.. because your roping, collecting a cr8, and making an attack..... but does that mean hyst, and elite are the same thing? your trying to kill your opponent with the limited weapons your allotted...... nope, not the same scheme at all...
That's a way to put it, if your aim is to oversimplify it to the point it's not even close to what I'm saying.
And I'm not sure of how good MI is currently at roping, but assuming a fitting WxW map for competitive gameplay the better roper will win 9 times out of 10, assuming of course both players are familiar with the scheme.
-
all im trying to say is they are not the same scheme in any way... not even close...
and neither is t17 and shoppa, they are even farther apart...
but keep fighting for what you believe in ropa!! you keen dooo eeett
-
all im trying to say is they are not the same scheme in any way... not even close...
Hardly trying are you? You've said this a couple of times already without adding any substance to the argument. I know you don't agree with me. It doesn't matter, you're not achieving anything. Really, I don't want to explain things to you, it's a hell of an exercise. I'll keep doing my thing like you suggest because whilst I'm certain you'll never listen to me, others will, and you will eventually listen to those other people.
-
good point ropa
-
combining schemes into grouped ratings makes no sense. I understand that all this started from people disliking hysteria, but grouping hysteria into another scheme's rating is not the solution. nor is grouping every other scheme just because you can
It didn't start from people disliking hysteria. Scheme classes are the result of loads and loads of talking to achieve one goal: whoever wins the league at the end of the season is the one who deserves it the most*
I'm not going to go into detail about the system right here because to be quite honest I feel it would be wasting my time big time. But because I know you don't need all the details to realize a concept I'll try to sum it up:
the system assumes that the overall rating represents true worm skill in all schemes, but I can't tell if that's the goal of TUS classic league, or if it should. Scheme classes exist because something else forces it to be: balance. Balance is the term used to define in a rating number how balanced a wormer is scheme wise, ergo balance is there to stop people from scheme bashing and regulates other parts of the rating to ensure that the better you are at more schemes the better your rating is.Basically balance rewards or punishes your rating based on your all around skill.
Because you can't force people to keep balance amongst so many schemes, for activity reasons, that's when scheme classes came up.
Does this make any sense to you?
*based on all around skill and his performance through a season
imo this is the best post i have read so far in this thread. im just afraid people wont read what it is really about. its not about saying roper = wxw.
adding schemes to groups wont equalize them, they are still different. but looking on the commonalities, in reference to the skills you need to handle them, would help to balance the league out. so far u have 8 schemes each worth the same. if you have 8 schemes its easy to focus on a few schemes while beeing average at the others to reach playoffs.
by putting them into groups you would balance the whole stuff out. it wouldnt be possible to specify on just 1 scheme because you also need to be able to play the schemes where similar skill is needed.
for example: imo hysteria and bng got the same key skill: accuracy!. your tactics in hysteria can be perfect but without doing the right shot at the right time >> u lose
so whats the problem in saying: roper needs the same key skill as wxw? for me its more obvious then in the hysteria example.
i also can agree on the shopper/team 17 thing, where its about weapon knowledge.
all schemes in classic league have already shown their singularity by beeing played in this league for years and developing int his time.
current system: 2 or 3 schemes out of 8 are enough to reach playoffs
ropas system: u need to be competetive in 2 schemes to to be succesful on only 1/4 of the whole league.
key question: which system is rather qualified to decide who is the best allrounder?
-
Who exactly is getting robbed from the standings anyway, due to lack of 'Scheme Classes'? Your criticism of the current system makes it sound like lots of players are not reaching their 'true' place in the rankings, but when I look at final standings for each season, each player deserves to be there over the rest for one reason or another (if you disagree, we can discuss a specific player or just someone's stats if you like).
And who is getting into playoffs with only 2 schemes Peja? I'm not sure if any of these accusations are even true or just made up to help an argument. I'm sure others would like to hear as well. I know I'm curious now.
If that wasn't the goal, to single people out, that's fine, but I get the feeling this discussion is just turning into idealistic theory of 'The Truly Perfect System.' And even if these 'Scheme Classes' do ever get decided upon, they would likely continue to be controversial because we've already seen many heated responses arguing against them --> and all this for what? Would it really drastically change what we're seeing now? Would it really be worth the trouble?
-
And who is getting into playoffs with only 2 schemes Peja? I'm not sure if any of these accusations are even true or just made up to help an argument. I'm sure others would like to hear as well. I know I'm curious now.
well just an example, if you look on phanton, he is highly focused on team/hysteria and only a few time vs weak opponets he puts other scheme to balance it out. as long as he keeps up his t17/hysteria wins and is able to balance the rest of the schemes against much weaker guys he is constantly reaching playoffs although he doesnt really play schemes like elite/bng/ttrr at all. do you think this a good example for an allrounder?
-
he is 52wins, 5 loss - team 17
70 wins, 20 loss -hyst
16 wins, 6 loss- shoppa
5 wins, 0 loss - bng
23 wins, 10 loss - roper
7 wins, 3 loss - elite
19 wins, 11 loss - wxw
7 wins, 6 loss - ttrr
he has 60% or better in 7 schemes.... 6 out of those 7, he has played atleast 10 ore more matches.... he is 70% or better in 5 schemes, 4 of them 10+ games...
he may not be one of the best 'all arounders' but he has solid win percentage, and maybe hes making up his points by quantity of games in his higher skilled areas... (i dont blame him)
how exactly do you guys want this league to work???? no1 in playoffs except the very best of the best??? anyone else in playoffs, there must be a bug?
-
now describe how Scheme Classes would solve everything?
I'm guessing t17 and hysteria wouldn't be grouped together, so what's stopping phanton from still playing t17's and hysteria's for two Scheme Classes? In fact, wouldn't this help phanton more compared to some others who'd get their favorite schemes bundled?
I personally think phanton is a good allrounder and deserves a spot for his effort. it's not like there a tons of people getting ripped off of playoff spots --> he is simply one of the better players in all recent seasons. and all with the help of playing hysteria and t17, two schemes people have been arguing are like flipping a coin. (oh and all the other schemes he still has good win percentages in). he's good.
(all this is moot for phanton this season anyway, he's currently serving his playoff ban until next season when he can qualify again)
-
well ropa took a look at all the schemes and said the balance of the classic is flawed because some skills get more rewarded then others. (example: wxw + roper = 1 basic skill but 2 schemes based on it)
the solution would be a system where similar schemes get paired.
lets just assume someone is mainly focused on wxw/roper/hysteria/ and worse in the other schemes:
in the current system he covers 3 of 8 ratings
in ropas/mablaks idea:
Roper/WxW
Elite/Intermediate
Team17/Shopper
BnG/Hysteria
RR
he would only cover 1 rating of 5 (because bng would affect his hysteria rating)
classic league wants to find the best allrounder and so far we have 2 ideas how to backup the all round factor.
idea 1: we base the league on 8 different schemes with same worth (current system)
basic idea: every scheme requires a specific skill, thats why the league is balanced
idea 2: we base the league on 8 different schemes divided in x groups related to their skill level.
basic idea: all schemes require different skills, to balance the league we pair schemes with similar skill to groups.
to decide which idea is better we have a lot of stuff to discuss and tbh i cant really support one of these 2 systems with 100% (because im way to inexperienced compared to a lot of people here, just can talk from my point of experiece)
i see evidences for the second idea. for example: people with an unbalanced skillset reaching playoffs.
to be on top of an allround league you should be better then just average in all schemes.
how scheme pairings would solve something:
if someone is only bad at hysteria, he wil lose points in an 1:1 vs someone who is only good in hysteria. the fact he would beat him in 7 of 8 schemes is useless then. in this case, the better allrounder is losing points. with a paired system he would have the chance to compensate his hysteria problem with bng.
-
most of us still have fun, while competing, and try not to take it too serious... but the competition is what drives most of us... not really a funny, unpredictable, lots of weapon scheme :X
It doesn't have to be that black & white. Look at Normal. That one matches all the criteria, but is still considered skillful.
1rBnG definitely is a step forward from regular BnG. Would you call it a luck-game? I wouldn't.
I don't think playing worms (or TUS) should be one big penis-contest. We all know by now Random and Mablak are the most badass players. What's left to prove?
If you want more competition, and more players engaged in that competition, then lighten up the schemes and make them more 'complete'.
TTRR is a great scheme, but for a popular (all-round) league it isn't. I have 0% chance to win there vs the vast majority of active TUS players.
I have tried to improve my skills in it in the past, but I never got any better. With my crappy KB, crappy technique, lack of cheats and hands that just don't have the rr-finesse, I'm doomed to suck at it forever.
The lack of fast roping I can compensate for in regular ropers by playing smart & safe and hiding/piling well. And also by keeping my cool when things don't go as planned.
WxW is the same story as TTRR. It's only about top speed-roping (and knowing the map...). Shopper on the other end doesn't really require fast ropes, but good knocking skills, good strategic insight and knowing how to use a whole bunch of different weaps. Even if you suck at one aspect, you can still compete.
Anywho, my point being. If you want TUS Classic to appeal to more people, make the schemes more fun and appealing to new(!) people. Don't go even further on this hyper-specialized penis-contest thing.. it's just gonna drive more people away.
-
I don't think playing worms (or TUS) should be one big penis-contest. We all know by now Random and Mablak are the most badass players. What's left to prove?
Let me ask you something HHC, do you believe in your own words? Is your argument that we should drop aiming to compete because two players dominate? Every league has seen a dominant player born. TUS hasn't. TUS inherited them. And instead of asking yourself, why is this happening? how can we improve the competition and the attitude so we see better and better players? (this is a league, remember?) Instead your propose that what we do is move further and further away from it and then we complaint that two players dominate.
TTRR is a great scheme, but for a popular (all-round) league it isn't. I have 0% chance to win there vs the vast majority of active TUS players.
I have tried to improve my skills in it in the past, but I never got any better. With my crappy KB, crappy technique, lack of cheats and hands that just don't have the rr-finesse, I'm doomed to suck at it forever
So you just figured it would be a good idea to claim that TTRR is not a scheme all arounders should focus at all in because you suck at it and you don't have any confidence left to improve. I mean, when you were writing all this crying about people with cheats, good keyboards and amazing taps didn't you for one second think of people like Cueshark and Pi?
Either way yes, if the aim of this league is to be as popular as possible then HHC ideas will work. But they have major drawbacks. For one, the skill level will lower like it's been lowering for months now, with only three clans experiencing what I consider top of the top skill level of play (and that's only when they play each other), and also the forums will been filled with trolling and spam.
Because the motivation from noobs to become pros comes from pros directly, be it people they admire or people they read about in a forum or look at in a standings.
-
Who exactly is getting robbed from the standings anyway, due to lack of 'Scheme Classes'? Your criticism of the current system makes it sound like lots of players are not reaching their 'true' place in the rankings
"
That doesn't bother me the slightest franz. I'm not saying the standings are inaccurate. I'm saying the system can be improved for everyone, not just for the 8 top players.
Peja: yeah, you understand the basics.
-
Let me ask you something HHC, do you believe in your own words? Is your argument that we should drop aiming to compete because two players dominate?
Nop. My point is that it's pretty mad to try and be the superbest in this game, when there's obviously no money/prizes to win or any social respect for that matter ;D
It's just about e-penis size. And like I said, we know who the best/better players are, what's left to prove?
Every league has seen a dominant player born. TUS hasn't. TUS inherited them.
That's a bold statement for someone who hasn't played in years. I'm just going to dismiss it.
So you just figured it would be a good idea to claim that TTRR is not a scheme all arounders should focus at all in because you suck at it and you don't have any confidence left to improve. I mean, when you were writing all this crying about people with cheats, good keyboards and amazing taps didn't you for one second think of people like Cueshark and Pi?
Hmm.. I'm just saying TTRR is a highly specialized scheme. It deserves a league, but maybe a league of its own instead of (in Mablak's proposal) determine 20% of one's overall rating. In a league that is meant for everybody 'rape'-games like TTRR don't really fit.
Either way yes, if the aim of this league is to be as popular as possible then HHC ideas will work.
And if the aim of the league is to be as good as a skill-determinator as possible then only the 30 elite players who dominate the rankings will be pleased, while the rest suffers in lethargy and complete boredom.
I mean, these guys want to kick out hysteria and maybe shopper and t17 too. What's left? WxW, BnG, no-crate rape roper, Elite and TTRR. Oh jolly! I'll f@#!in' pass for that.
For one, the skill level will lower like it's been lowering for months now, with only three clans experiencing what I consider top of the top skill level of play (and that's only when they play each other)
:')
Because the motivation from noobs to become pros comes from pros directly, be it people they admire or people they read about in a forum or look at in a standings.
The motivation comes from enjoying the game and the wish to engage with other people in fun and competitive games.
-
so, phantom is misrepresenting what an all arounder is, by the current system...
but if we go through all this change, and group together schemes that dont have any business being grouped together, this will only benefit phantom...
instead of having 2 out of 8 schemes he is putting up impressive numbers, he will have 2 out of 5...
it seems to me your talking in circles to prove one point meanwhile contradicting your overall view....
-
so, phantom is misrepresenting what an all arounder is, by the current system...
but if we go through all this change, and group together schemes that dont have any business being grouped together, this will only benefit phantom...
instead of having 2 out of 8 schemes he is putting up impressive numbers, he will have 2 out of 5...
it seems to me your talking in circles to prove one point meanwhile contradicting your overall view....
No, you just missed or skipped some posts (surprisingly). The one on "Balance" by me and then posteriorly the ones were Peja explains it with his own words.
Each class counts towards 20% of your rating with heavy punishment if you abuse 1 or 2 classes only, moderate punishment if you abuse 3 and the system rewards you for competing in at least 4 of the 5, or trying to compete to be more precise.
A player could still get into playoffs by playing one or two schemes, it will just take much more wins than one who competes in 4.
But like I said, all this only make sense if the aim of the league is to declare the best all arounder.
edit: avirex, when I told you yesterday, after 6 times of you stating you don't like the system (without even fully understanding it, at all) and asked you to stop being irrelevant by continuously repeating you don't like it , you said good point. And now you say you're not a fan, for the 7th time. I know you lack such thing, but some of us other people have the ability to read a post and remember it, so you don't need to remind us of your stance on this all 10 times, specially considering:
a) you don't understand what we're talking baout
b) you're unable to reason your opinion in a successful way.
-
yeah, not a fan....
anyone like this idea besides ropa and peja?
-
so, phantom is misrepresenting what an all arounder is, by the current system...
but if we go through all this change, and group together schemes that dont have any business being grouped together, this will only benefit phantom...
instead of having 2 out of 8 schemes he is putting up impressive numbers, he will have 2 out of 5...
nah, no really
it seems to me your talking in circles to prove one point meanwhile contradicting your overall view....
-
Nop. My point is that it's pretty mad to try and be the superbest in this game, when there's obviously no money/prizes to win or any social respect for that matter ;D
It's just about e-penis size. And like I said, we know who the best/better players are, what's left to prove?
Believe it or not, there's people out there who have the confidence to be number one, this is how Mablak became number one and why Random became number one. Now instead of asking yourself, why are no number ones coming up you choose to believe leagues make no sense because two players dominate.
That's a bold statement for someone who hasn't played in years. I'm just going to dismiss it.
So you're going to dismiss me saying that TUS has not seen born any dominant players?
You said there's no reason to compete in a league owned by two people. These two people didn't start playing this week. So if you're dismissing someone, you're dismissing yourself, and you're also bold and bald.
Hmm.. I'm just saying TTRR is a highly specialized scheme. It deserves a league, but maybe a league of its own instead of (in Mablak's proposal) determine 20% of one's overall rating. In a league that is meant for everybody 'rape'-games like TTRR don't really fit.
Are leagues meant for everyone? We obviously have such different ideas that I see no point in arguing. I hope for a league in which the best compete, and if you can't have fun in your first month in a WA league and you can't compete, tough luck, try harder, play funners, practice. You basically want people to jump into the league and have fun from day one, and you seem totally unable to grasp the huge drawbacks this has
And if the aim of the league is to be as good as a skill-determinator as possible then only the 30 elite players who dominate the rankings will be pleased, while the rest suffers in lethargy and complete boredom.
Boredom is subjective. You're clearly not a competitive kind of guy, but please do me a favor, never forget we're talking about a League here. League.
Whilst you seem to think that fighting your way to the top whilst struggling a lot at the beginning is a pain in the arse, I believe that the reward you feel when you do reach the top is infinitely superior to being allowed to compete from day one because the league is basically casual and you can go without ever learning how to compete in such a relevant scheme (specially through this last 5 years) such as RR.
:')
Yeah, I'm a big nostalgic guy with tinted glasses that can't look past the fact that clans are as good nowadays as they were back then I'm just biased.
Is that what you meant? Only three clans nowadays are comparable to the top 10 of only last league. If you think this is not a direct effect of putting no emphasis into high level competition then you must have a different theory and I'm dying to hear it.
The motivation comes from enjoying the game and the wish to engage with other people in fun and competitive games.
The motivation to finish playoffs you mean?
-
Is that what you meant? Only three clans nowadays are comparable to the top 10 of only last league.
What possibly makes you think you can pass judgement over players and clans when you haven't played any games in years?
Tell me that and then come again to make statements about people's skill level.
If you think this is not a direct effect of putting no emphasis into high level competition then you must have a different theory and I'm dying to hear it.
I don't believe the skill level is dropping.
I don't believe there's 'no emphasis on high level competition'.
Really ropa, go back to your chat channels and leave discussions about worms and TUS in its present form to players who actually visit wormnet once in a while.
-
Is that what you meant? Only three clans nowadays are comparable to the top 10 of only last league.
What possibly makes you think you can pass judgement over players and clans when you haven't played any games in years?
Tell me that and then come again to make statements about people's skill level.
Ever heard of pundits? Sources? Common sense? I don't need to play (which doesn't mean I don't, for the record). I have you to tell me that Mablak and Random are the best and can't be beaten (you used this as an argument against all around leagues) and then, when I say they're dominating because we're not seeing new players giving them a challenge you dismiss my point because I don't play everyday.
I don't believe the skill level is dropping.
I don't believe there's 'no emphasis on high level competition'.
Well, here's hoping you eventually open your eyes.
Really ropa, go back to your chat channels and leave discussions about worms and TUS in its present form to players who actually visit wormnet once in a while.
Why? Isn't it good to have different perspectives? I know you rather I wasn't here so everyone would still listen to your ideas on how to make this Worms Reloaded. But you'll have to learn to live with it and come up with better material other than "your opinion is invalid because you don't play everyday".
-
You are free to engage in discussions no problem. But all you do is nitpicking over insignificant details just to get proven right. All that on the presumed basis that you 'know' the game better than newer players do.
I counted the posts you made in these league changing-topics.
You scored 44 posts.
1 message to say you'd like to see the classic league schemes divided into 5 categories.
43 messages disagreeing with Komito, Avirex, Franz, myself, etcetera.
-
1 message to say you'd like to see the classic league schemes divided into 5 categories.
43 messages disagreeing with Komito, Avirex, Franz, myself, etcetera.
I see it more as
1 opening posts
43 posts solving doubts
Even though, I fail to see how this is relevant? You use the same post to tell me I'm nitpicking to be right and then you intermediately manage to ignore all substance of my post just to attempt to illustrate a point: something to do with how many of my messages are quotes, and how many aren't?
Now, this is my last attempt at trying to get an explanation for your claims, if you choose to not answer then please, choose to not reply.
You claimed 2 players dominated the league as a point against all around league, you implied there's no point, with such dominance.
These two players became good before TUS.
Now, because no new TUS player can beat them (you said this, not me) then I claimed that the level has gone down, clearly, at least, in all around, because other leagues put more emphasis on it, I like to believe that Mablak and Random are the players they are now because of this.
Please HHC, either admit you contradicted yourself or accept that even if you might think I don't play worms I can still have a voice, and even if it pains you, said voice can tell you when you're wrong, the same way it can happen viceversa, but you seem to have no interest in doing so, you rather focus your attention in dismissing all I have to say because you seem to think playtime has something to do with having a pair of eyes.
-
If I were to respond to each and every fragment of your post i'd soon be posting messages of Komito-proportions. I select the things I like to respond to and keep my messages as small as possible.
It's easier if everyone justs posts the idea they support and why in a single post. There can be some feedback, but the more messages you post and the further away it moves from the original topic, the less likely people are gonna remember what your initial stance on the issue was.
Arguing over details gets you nowhere. So I don't go there.
edit: Nope, not going to respond to that. My opinion on the matter is clear in my previous posts. Not worth discussing any further for me. (and btw, don't blame me for not responding to something that has been edited into a post AFTER i posted my reply)
-
If I were to respond to each and every fragment of your post i'd soon be posting messages of Komito-proportions. I select the things I like to respond to
I asked you specifically to answer to something. I asked you please.
Is "I don't respond to details" an excuse I'm supposed to take? What a let down.
-
I agree with the roper/wxw, intermediate/elite, in fact the only one I don't agree with is t17/shopper. That doesn't mesh so well for me. I see where the premise is in theory, but they don't really coincide in my opinion.
As far as HHC/ropa dialogue, Mablak and Random do seem to be a cut above, you don't see new people challenge them or get to their level because their skill has been attained over many years. The good 'early' players that kicked ass in league early on, MPH, Volcom, Bizerker, Wario, ect. had only been playing a few years. Now this learning curve from bottom to the top of the standings is years and years. I can't imagine how long it would take me to get anywhere near the level of expertise in the game of worms that Mablak has. So in that aspect, TUS certainly has 'inherited' the dominant players, but not because TUS is lame, but the rules of the game have changed.
The community is pretty linear these days. In the early days of worms armageddon, aliasing was rampant, and you never knew who was an alias and who wasn't, because people could get very good very fast in comparison with their peers. Nowadays, you can spot an alias right away, and everyone knows who the best players of the community are. I don't think that people are any less competitive.
-
I'm with Walrus on this one...
let me make this clear - I agree with Mablak's/ropas system, just not the way the schemes are paired. Sorry avi, lawl
-
Don't you guys think an opinion should stand on the reasoning behind it rather than on the person uttering it? ::)
but i dont think inactive players of the league, carry much weight as far as opinions on how the league works is concerned
By this standard, people who don't actively moderate a league, don't carry much weight as far as opinions on how the league moderation is concerned. Guess that would end the discussion entirely, wouldn't it?
If someone has an idea and then has a convincing motivation for that idea, then it's worth checking into, whether it's the world's biggest genius or the world's biggest idiot, whether it's the world's biggest douche or the world's nicest person.
"You don't even play" is a very weak argument against someone's idea. It's just ad hominem, that never works. Just like "he's the most active player" is a weak argument.
Besides, going for ad hominem usually distracts from the problem at hand. Discussions would go a lot smoother around here if people would disagree with an idea rather than with the person uttering it - would make it less of a self defense thing and more of a co-operation to find a solution to an existing problem, don't you think? :)