The Ultimate Site of Worms Armageddon
Leagues => Leagues General => Topic started by: Senator on May 31, 2021, 05:45 PM
-
We need to define what changes to the official league schemes are allowed if players mutually agree on them. Obviously it's not allowed to play Full Wormage and report it as Intermediate, for example. What about scheme variants? Do we need to set limits scheme by scheme? Please discuss! Here's a list of the current Allround league schemes:
Aerial
Big RR
BnG
- Less initial health, for example
Elite
Hysteria
Intermediate
Roper
Shopper
Team17
TTRR
WxW
-
Obviously it's not allowed to play Classic and report it as Intermediate
There is no scheme called Classic though? Intermediate is now considered a Classic scheme, as in Classic/Free/TRL/TEL.
Did you mean to right something else? Otherwise what am I missing here?
Edit:
Honestly, I don't mind any variation as long as the players agree. If they cannot agree the TUS scheme should be used with no variations and also in PO players must use the TUS scheme with no variations.
-
Classic is a default scheme in the game. Changed it to Full Wormage to avoid confusion. :D
-
Classic is a default scheme in the game. Changed it to Full Wormage to avoid confusion. :D
Ahhh, I thought you were talking about TUS stuff lol, yeah THAT Classic. :D
Honestly, I don't mind any variation as long as the players agree. If they cannot agree the TUS scheme should be used with no variations and also in PO players must use the TUS scheme with no variations.
I should say as well, of course I mean any variation within limit, of course if you change it enough it isn't even the same thing, and people who spent a lot of time setting records and achieveing high ranks in a scheme might be upset to see other people playing other variations.
So I guess it isn't an easy choice after all, but i'd support it, allowing certain changes such as sudden death options, health, hotseat time among others is fine I think.
-
I come to talk about the intermediate scheme. I would like to propose the possibility, if both players agree, to change the options of SD and round time (minimum of 10 minutes). Why?
1) it will please players who want to play a faster match of intermediate. The absence of 1HP SD leaves players less concerned about waiting for the 1HP SD as a chance of victory, which favors faster matches.
2) it will please players who think the 1HP SD is unfair. It is an old discussion, but always had a part of players who think it's unfair.
Despite the fact that changing the SD option is something that alters the tactical aspects of the scheme intermediate, I don't think it changes the essence of the scheme. For me it's an acceptable variation and which I know players who would like.
I would also like to ratify the possibility that the intermediate scheme can also be played in the original version of the game with crates, dud mines and power of cluster and mortar set to 3.
-
We should collect info about what's people's favorite variant for each scheme and make it "official variations" allowed to choose. My proposals:
Hysteria: Play variations such as Selecsteria (https://www.tus-wa.com/schemes/scheme-3398/) so there's no need to whine over telecows, as this showed to be a common issue not long ago.
Intermediate: Variant with luck free start positions + much more wide tactics possibilites Freemediate. (https://www.tus-wa.com/schemes/scheme-3399/)
Roper: 10 min SD scheme (currently 20).
TTRR: Play with more or less worms + consider milisseconds + bo3. All 3 at once or agree what will be considered.
WxW: Choose wheter to play with oil drums on/off. Or just remove drums already haha.
-
Collecting a bunch of variations that people enjoy sounds great, within reason of course, we can't have people playing Darts and reporting it as a TTRR. :D
As long as there is still a mandatory standard when players can't agree which version they want to play. I'd also imagine Playoff matches would use the standard scheme as well yes?
After all, this is an entirely new ERA, so changes can be welcomed with a fresh mindset to suit the current player base.
-
We should collect info about what's people's favorite variant for each scheme and make it "official variations" allowed to choose. My proposals:
Hysteria: Play variations such as Selecsteria (https://www.tus-wa.com/schemes/scheme-3398/) so there's no need to whine over telecows, as this showed to be a common issue not long ago.
Intermediate: Variant with luck free start positions + much more wide tactics possibilites Freemediate. (https://www.tus-wa.com/schemes/scheme-3399/)
Roper: 10 min SD scheme (currently 20).
TTRR: Play with more or less worms + consider milisseconds + bo3. All 3 at once or agree what will be considered.
WxW: Choose wheter to play with oil drums on/off. Or just remove drums already haha.
Collecting a bunch of variations that people enjoy sounds great, within reason of course, we can't have people playing Darts and reporting it as a TTRR. :D
As long as there is still a mandatory standard when players can't agree which version they want to play. I'd also imagine Playoff matches would use the standard scheme as well yes?
After all, this is an entirely new ERA, so changes can be welcomed with a fresh mindset to suit the current player base.
These sound very good ideas to me. I am the guy who don't like drums in WxW. People will never agree 100% with a scheme, so adding more variants would be great.
I need to say that there are schemes I consider Variations which are minimal changes to a scheme and Original Variants which are "heavy variations" or "fusion of schemes", schemes that are similar to an existing one, but they change the gameplay so much that we cannot really say it is just a simple variation. Original Variants are too original to be a variation, but too similar to one or more schemes to be a very original idea.
I would like to compare Taxonomy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy) of Worms schemes with Biological Taxonomy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_(biology)) in which we use Binomial nomenclature (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_nomenclature) to determine species. There's the Genus (the Generic Name) and the specific epithet. All schemes classified in the same Genus would be accepted as a valid TUS league choice, schemes classified as a different genus would be considered another scheme. For example: Island Team17 and the Old TUS League Team17 are from the same genus (Team17), they are variations of the same idea. Mole Shopper and Shopper may have similar aspects, but their gameplay is completely different, so they might be from the same Family or even Order/Class/Phylum/Kingdom (more probable), but they are definitely not from the same genus, so you cannot report a game of Mole Shopper saying you won a Shopper game.
BTW, maybe one day I'll try to make a classification tree with the taxons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxon) of the Worms schemes.
-
I have played a ZaR Ropers in TUS league, but that's only because my opponent agreed to it.
A ZaR Ropers, can easily last up to 20 minutes depending on map, as well as the player's rope & bazooka skills. Though, ZaR Ropers can end faster, which itself can also be a preferable option.
Imo, people's attention span of today, is quite low. Example of this can be seen in youtube videos, tiktok, and removal of long movie introductions. People rather get to the point, get it over with, and move on to the next. This is where ZaR Ropers shine, games can be fast depending on map and skills, which is not a negative in itself. Toss aside the crutches and shout ''I CAN DO THIS!'' :D
-
Ah and by the way: I like the Team17 scheme that was being used in WL (Worms League) or the one Deadcode often plays. I vote for it to be the official T17 scheme from now on.
About Selecsteria and Hysteria, I think both schemes should exist, since many players don't like the Worm Rotation tactic and many players like it.
-
What about Supermarket Shopper? :(
As a side variety of simple Shopper, this scheme would quite popular and often played I think. And since only 1 match of it can be kinda unbalanced, a bo3 would solve it.
-
About Selecsteria and Hysteria, I think both schemes should exist, since many players don't like the Worm Rotation tactic and many players like it.
There can be only one default scheme though, and since any new scheme has failed endlessly to take over, the current scheme is appropriate.
-
I should say as well, of course I mean any variation within limit, of course if you change it enough it isn't even the same thing, and people who spent a lot of time setting records and achieveing high ranks in a scheme might be upset to see other people playing other variations.
So I guess it isn't an easy choice after all, but i'd support it, allowing certain changes such as sudden death options, health, hotseat time among others is fine I think.
Where do you draw the line is the problem. Is it ok to report 80normal as Intermediate? Is it ok to change the SD setting of Intermediate? Is it ok to use a scheme where multiple crates drop each turn and report it as Shopper?
Do we need to come up with a huge list of allowed modifications?
-
Scheme variations should be allowed when it doesn’t affect completely its gameplay (such as adding some rules or changing too many settings), e.g.:
WxW: allow only bungaWxW as variant
Roper: only roundtime should be allowed to be changed to a minimum of 5 minutes. Zar cannot be a variation because it’s a completely different scheme on its own
Hysteria: no variations, telecow is a part of the meta and adding select worm at the beginning of the round makes it completely different
Big rr: allow 40 seconds with no nana
TTRR: allowing to choose between 3 or 5 worms and also decide if milliseconds should count
Other schemes should not allow variations because they are completely fine, shoppa and elite scheme for example in this league are the most competitive version you could have
-
Scheme variations should be allowed when it doesn’t affect completely its gameplay (such as adding some rules or changing too many settings), e.g.:
WxW: allow only bungaWxW as variant
Roper: only roundtime should be allowed to be changed to a minimum of 5 minutes. Zar cannot be a variation because it’s a completely different scheme on its own
Hysteria: no variations, telecow is a part of the meta and adding select worm at the beginning of the round makes it completely different
Big rr: allow 40 seconds with no nana
TTRR: allowing to choose between 3 or 5 worms and also decide if milliseconds should count
Other schemes should not allow variations because they are completely fine, shoppa and elite scheme for example in this league are the most competitive version you could have
What the hell is bungaWxW? Is that where you cosplay as Raphael while you play? :D I'm guessing it's WxW with Bungee instead of Ninja Rope.
When it comes to Roper, i've been changing the hotseat time from 5s to 15s for as long as I can remember. When I ask for longer hotseat time people usually put 10s no problem and that's a good compromise in the middle. This was important when maps became more and more complex as taking time to plan your route became normal when met with almost impossible crates. I'd actually like to see this scheme replaced with the one the w2 WR guys use, their scheme is the best Roper scheme i've ever seen. Although I think zar is a great scheme, it's just too different in my eyes to the core gameplay and tactics that traditional Roper has offered since even before WA existed back in W2. I'd like to see zar in TRL though.
Hysteria, I agree with Sbaffo on this one, any alternative scheme which changes the fundamentals and tactics is too much in my eyes. Hysteria as it stands with no rules is the more challenging, balanced and skilled version in my opinion. I think Selecsteria is great as it's own individual scheme, however I do not see it as an alternative, I see it as a completely different scheme(Hence why it has a different name lol).
Isn't Big RR already 40 seconds with no nana? I'm happy for players to play with the 30s, 10s retreat and nana scheme although I think it's pointless lol.
TTRR - Not only do I think counting milliseconds should be allowed, I believe it should be the mandatory scheme. I've seen plenty games where the loser actually won in reality. They get several draws where they are over half a second faster, then they lose by like 0.10 milliseconds and end up losing, even though throughout the series of games they were 1-2 seconds faster. It makes no sense and I think it's absolutely ridiculous to play like that.
If this is to be taken seriously, perhaps an official thread made by MonkeyIsland or Senator should be posted where anyone is free to post suggestions of what they think should and should not be allowed in changes to every scheme available in Classic Schemes. Then after 2-4 weeks we can collect the ideas and TUS staff can make a list of allowed alternatives.
@Senator, I wouldn't allow 80hp as an alternative of Intermediate as it's a completely different scheme with largely different tactics and gameplay style. Although I believe the default Intermediate scheme which our Intermediate is based on should be allowed, simply because it's historic and the absolute standard which all variations are based off of. It's also the scheme most casual players are familiar with and is a possible introduction into a League for them.
BnG is an interesting scheme for alternatives because there are so many different options you can change which do not change the fundamentals and core gameplay.
-
This is an official thread.
-
This is an official thread.
:D ::)
Silly me, I thought this was a different thread.
I'll make a post later then, thanks!
-
Bunga wxw is ano’s scheme, i think it was named like that as far as I remember
I do like ttrr without milliseconds because it pushes you to perform out the boundaries, but if people like to count milliseconds then why not
-
I do like ttrr without milliseconds because it pushes you to perform out the boundaries, but if people like to count milliseconds then why not
In regards to pushing you to perform out the boundaries, isn't it pretty much the same either way? Milliseconds or full seconds, you are going to push yourself equally as hard either way no?
If I were to choose though, i'd expect TTRR without milliseconds to feel ever so slightly more relaxed against more experienced players as you have a 50 frame window to draw as opposed to a single frame.
On the other hand though, depending on a players perspective, perhaps it's the increased chance of a draw which pushes you to try harder to prevent more time being spent doing rematches. Although i'd still say the smaller possibility of a draw with milliseconds would mean the stakes are higher pushing you to get the best possible time.
Although from my perspective i'd always be playing against myself anyway, regardless how good or how bad my opponent is in anything, i'm always trying to push my own personal limits, i'd rather lose and play well than play terrible and win.
At least it's in agreement either way is suitable though, i'm happy either way just think MS is more accurate and realistic.
-
Thoughts on knocking in Elite and T17? Why is it disallowed?
-
1 year later I'd like to propose something for TUS Shopper as a possible scheme variety/changing, if these are ever to happen in the future :D
Shoppa:
- AFR rule is mandatory (next to CBA)
- No weapons are nerfed
- Inf LG is enabled
- Bazooka drops as well from the weaponcrate
- Petrols are removed from the crates (so that constant flameblocking and trapping the other playa in a corner wouldnt be possible)
As of now these are not in the TUS scheme
-
AFR is very debatable.
Many of us believe it's the more evolved version of the scheme as it opens up many more possibilities, more attacks, more counters, more strategies.
Personally speaking, my vote is to keep AFR optional, at least until someone can present information to change my mind.
If you want to make AFR mandatory, you may need to limit the map selection as well to balance it.
-
AFR is very debatable.
Many of us believe it's the more evolved version of the scheme as it opens up many more possibilities, more attacks, more counters, more strategies.
Personally speaking, my vote is to keep AFR optional, at least until someone can present information to change my mind.
If you want to make AFR mandatory, you may need to limit the map selection as well to balance it.
Since Shopper is in the Rope Season, wouldn't it make more sense to let it be considered as a legit roping scheme, so therefore the AFR rule should be followed? I know that you guys had long topics and discussions about this, that it should be different than wxw and roper but still. :D Roper and wxw schemes have much different mechanics and maps yet all of these require AFR rule. Shopper without AFR is pizza without cheese. A man without manhood.
The TUS shoppa scheme is enjoyable as well as it is now not a problem for me, just saying it is basically a Team17 scheme with infinite ninja ropes on custom maps..