The Ultimate Site of Worms Armageddon
Leagues => Leagues General => Topic started by: WookA on February 02, 2010, 08:23 PM
-
the current rules are AFR, we can change it if enough people want to get rid of it
vote away!
-
I have always been one of the guys who always said no afr in shoppas, however, I think its important in order to be able to hide in a hard place and not just get ground zooked. There are weapons however where I do not think afr is neccessary.
-
I have always been one of the guys who always said no afr in shoppas, however, I think its important in order to be able to hide in a hard place and not just get ground zooked. There are weapons however where I do not think afr is neccessary.
Aren't we talking about attackting from ground only if you wish to do it? It seems to me that you think that poll means only afr or no afr, without any exceptions.
I voted the 2nd option - no afr. Why? Attacting from ground is sometimes needed on my evil caven maps. ;) But also, this would be more flexible to have 2 options of attack.
-
it's only a shopper omg no afr is best.. no need this poll, newbs startin playing shopper learn rules "AFR" they take it too serious , but in league it's other situation, not many of us picks it so i wouldn't mind if AFR 'd get deleted
-
NO AFR is more..... "fun" :D
-
imo shoppa without AFR loses all his charm ^^
I remember when i learned to play shoppa in wwp these rules:CBA AFR KTL were sacred for me :P
"Some things must not change"
Peace
-
Surely AFR, but I don`t care if someone drills me from rope or from ground ;P
-
Shopper without afr is like sex witout a girl.
-
Shopper without afr is like sex witout a girl.
-
Shopper without afr is like sex witout a girl.
dont think thats true, but I also voted for AFR, simply because in most cases you can do more damage without attacking from rope more easily.
As an example I think of weapons like bazooka, or missilie/pigeon at some narrow hide, where you often can do max. damage with attacking form the ground, but from the rope it requires much more skill. Because its a common belief that Shopper is mostly a luck scheme there should be a many skill components as possible in this scheme.
(btw: OT: this reminds me, that I totally dislike the TUS Scheme as it is; the old FB scheme or the WO scheme [from the tourneys that FFie hosted] are much better imo).
-
I never understood why the AFR rule was put into Shopper in the first place. Always preferred to play without. :)
-
NO AFR!
Adds another dynamic, allows for a greater range of attacks, allows for accuracy on things like dyna drops to.
ALTHOUGH having the AFR does make the game somewhat more challenging as you need to make more time to set up attacks on rope and so need to rope faster and more consistantly.
-
i voted NO AFR and always prefer shoppers with no afr from the fb rules and fb scheme
-
most of the people who posted say no afr, but most votes are for afr :o
-
Clone Random00's post for me plz :)
-
Clone Random00's post for me plz :)
I totally dislike the TUS Scheme as it is; the old FB scheme or the WO scheme [from the tourneys that FFie hosted] are much better imo).
There, so sort it!
dont think thats true, but I also voted for AFR, simply because in most cases you can do more damage without attacking from rope more easily.
Yes, having AFR forces players to rope more consistantly, especially on tighter maps as you must make extra time for setting certain attacks than you do if you could just shoot from the floor.
Im happy with or without it, both ways have pros and cons
-
AFR is such a useless rule. You'll find that most people will attack from rope anyway, even if afr is not a rule. Seems to me that in most cases, attacking from rope is better than attacking from the ground :)
Someone posted about higher accuracy when on the ground, but you also pay a penalty; no way to effectively retreat. It also costs time to deliver a shot when you're NOT on the rope (takes time to land, doesn't it?) so the "forcing people to rope accurately" reason is utter nonsense.
-
It also costs time to deliver a shot when you're NOT on the rope (takes time to land, doesn't it?) so the "forcing people to rope accurately" reason is utter nonsense.
For weapons like homing missiles and pigeons, in an instance where a player is hidden in a hard to reach spot (say on the roof of the map), it can require extra time to set up a shot if your on the rope. It CAN be quicker in these situations to stop on the floor, click the target and fire straight up in the air.
In league games every second can count, especially if you have a hard crate or fall, and in SOME situations a player would have been able to make a turn if the AFR rule was not play. You cant argue against that because any league playing shoppper player understands that these situations do happen, as they do in wxw.
For example you fall on the far left hand side of the map and have 4 seconds left, no time to rope to the last worm on the far right, so launch a homing missile from foot.
If you get bad wind, a straight zook from the floor will be the most effective thing to do.
Im in support of no AFR, although playing shopper with or without it offers equally enjoyable game play for different reasons.
-
paragraph one: yes, but then you'll leave your own worm wide open for any range of attack, piling possibilities and gives your opponent drowning options. That's hardly a strategy I'd embrace unless I had no choice.
paragraph two: I'm not talking about WxW here, though, nor was this thread about WxW. the only times I ever had time trouble was if I wasted too much time with inefficient knocking. Either that or you picked the wrong map for shopper (or your turn just plain sucked, in which case you deserve not to have proper retreat options)
not attacking from ropes gives you no advantage in comparison to attacking from rope. Yes, sometimes it's easier to attack from the ground cause your opponent hid well, but a) your shot will most likely not be a direct hit and thus less effective and b) will rob you of retreat options.
In a manner, not attacking from rope has more disadvantages than advantages and I feel personally feel it is therefore really unnecessary to take even further punishment for doing so by skipping a turn afterwards.
-
paragraph two: I'm not talking about WxW here, though, nor was this thread about WxW.
Neither was I, you must have been confused when you read paragraph two.
not attacking from ropes gives you no advantage in comparison to attacking from rope.
Yes, sometimes it's easier to attack from the ground cause your opponent hid well.
So we agree...
-
No quote mining, please :)