Changing Classic League Schemes

[Aerox]

1. Hysteria is the scheme kids today play. Elite isn't. New players have confidence in Hysteria because it is one of the most played scheme of theirs, ergo the scheme gets to be picked most. Your father may call you noob not being able to play Chess with him while you pick Tetris against him. A gamble game.

So you're saying the new generation of wormers is more fond of hysteria? Shopper is still the most played scheme and Hysteria ain't even close: http://stats.worms2d.info/hbschemes.txt

It's only in TUS where hysteria is the most popular scheme, and this thread is to try and figure out why beyond reasonable doubt.
 

2. High skilled players, which are considered BnG/Elite/RR/Roper players mostly, don't take Hysteria seriously and don't bother to learn. I mean comon, who wants to learn Tetris when there is Chess? I am sure I can find hysteria games between pr0s and no0bs that pr0s lost because of very bad mistakes not because of  "gamble shots".

There's many experienced hysteria players that share the view that Hysteria is a "pro-bashing" scheme. I am sure I can also find a replay proving the opposite of what you claim so I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish with this particular point.

3. Our top clans consist of old players. People who are grown with classic schemes. Old players expect new ones to crawl back to them and learn the art of classic schemes. I don't think I've ever seen a new clan being welcome to the league.

I don't understand any of this or how it's relevant to the discussion.

4. Hysteria is picked because you can have fun and at least finish the game. Same goes for Intermediate. People don't give away free wins for Hysteria/Intermediate because they can play to the end no matter how low their skills are. But they do for TTRR/Roper.

What do you mean finish the game? Are you saying people tend to leave Elites and Ropers before they're finished because they're getting owned? Or are you saying that they have a bigger chance in competing until the end in hysteria regardless of skill level, because if that's what you're saying, thanks, it's what I've been saying all this time.

If you think Hysteria is flawed, simply present your fixed scheme, or even better a replay of players played with that scheme and let us move on.

There is no point in presenting a fixed scheme or a fixed set of rules if you can't even get people to admit there's a flaw in how the community approaches this scheme and under what cirumstances they do. It would be like all the other times (w2 roper, Nrbng, less luck Team17, Less luck Shopper) people have come to this board with sensible scheme tweaks to improve competition: it will all be ignored because it doesn't have the support of the effective majority, ergo those who only play one scheme and can't even construct a logical argument.

Cheers

[HHC]

There's many experienced hysteria players that share the view that Hysteria is a "pro-bashing" scheme. I am sure I can also find a replay proving the opposite of what you claim so I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish with this particular point.

Can you name any? Other than old-schoolers who only play it cause it's in classic and they MUST?

There is no point in presenting a fixed scheme or a fixed set of rules if you can't even get people to admit there's a flaw in how the community approaches this scheme and under what cirumstances they do. It would be like all the other times (w2 roper, Nrbng, less luck Team17, Less luck Shopper) people have come to this board with sensible scheme tweaks to improve competition: it will all be ignored because it doesn't have the support of the effective majority, ergo those who only play one scheme and can't even construct a logical argument.

I think we all had our reasons to deny those schemes. There was interest in w2roper, but it was soon discovered the scheme had major drawbacks (the inability to recover from an early mistake for example). NrBnG was nice for some, but in essence it was still the same BnG that people consider boring and unappealing.
T17 and Shopper schemes have been altered during the years to better suit competition. The 7 girder rule in T17 for example was accepted within weeks and it greatly improves the scheme. It wasn't changed cause of the endless discussions, but because one guy took action and actually made a scheme with 7 girders.

As far as I see it:
1) the complaints about hysteria in this thread are rather vague. It's something about being 'noobish', 'cheap', 'lucky', etcetera.
2) There's been a thread by lacoste to change the scheme: https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/schemes-13/lets-work-on-the-proper-hysteria-variation/ He got butchered; nothing came out of it.
3) Everyone has his own problems with hysteria and his own ideas. Other than lacoste, nobody made an effort to present a scheme-fix.
4) Nothing was done, nothing is being done, nothing gets done.
5) ropa has 300 new posts, which cost him only 5 mins to write (as if) and has thus spent another 25 hours on this forum arguing over nothing (see point 4). Not to mention all the time he has wasted reading the other replies.
But then, it's not a waste of time for ropa. He needs arguments like penguins need fish.

I know I sound cocky when I say it, but really ropa, you are wasting your life. All you do is argue with people over the internet. You contribute nothing. No schemes, no maps, no leagues, not even games played to this community. Absolutely nothing.

How many more pages do you need to realize that? This thread isn't going anywhere, just like all those other threads you participated in. How many more people do you need to visit this thread and tell you to 'stfu' and do more useful things before you finally get the clue?

ahh, end of rant.

[Aerox]

There's many experienced hysteria players that share the view that Hysteria is a "pro-bashing" scheme. I am sure I can also find a replay proving the opposite of what you claim so I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish with this particular point.

Can you name any? Other than old-schoolers who only play it cause it's in classic and they MUST?

You could read the thread and answer yourself, I'll give you one that fits your criteria and comes to mind though: Guaton.

I think we all had our reasons to deny those schemes. There was interest in w2roper, but it was soon discovered the scheme had major drawbacks (the inability to recover from an early mistake for example). NrBnG was nice for some, but in essence it was still the same BnG that people consider boring and unappealing.

What about NRBNG exponientally reducing the cheapness. Oh, that's not a valid reason according to you right? Reasons are only those that have a direct impact on popularity and activeness, right?

T17 and Shopper schemes have been altered during the years to better suit competition. The 7 girder rule in T17 for example was accepted within weeks and it greatly improves the scheme. It wasn't changed cause of the endless discussions, but because one guy took action and actually made a scheme with 7 girders.

Wooka's shopper?

As far as I see it:
1) the complaints about hysteria in this thread are rather vague. It's something about being 'noobish', 'cheap', 'lucky', etcetera.

Vague? ShyGuy is vague? I'm vague? I mean, ok, darkz is a bit vague because he has a much more laid back attitude and he's very respectful in forums but how can you say our reasons are vague when we've done nothing but try and prove our points with common sense and "data"  in order to get people to understand it? The only vague thing here is saying "hysteria is the most played because it's fun" without actually sharing any sort of supportive argument for it and assuming that one's personal opinion translates to everyone because oh life would be much easier that way.

All you do is argue with people over the internet. You contribute nothing. No schemes, no maps, no leagues, not even games played to this community. Absolutely nothing.

That's only because you don't give any value to the things I say, but that's more to do with you than it has to do with me.

How many more pages do you need to realize that? This thread isn't going anywhere, just like all those other threads you participated in. How many more people do you need to visit this thread and tell you to 'stfu' and do more useful things before you finally get the clue?

ahh, end of rant.

Well, you certainly not getting it anywhere by making a post only directed to flaming me. If you notice, these previous threads you mention have some resulted in a rule or scheme change, or at least, it has made people aware. All I've been trying to do in this thread is ilustrate a point in hopes people would pick up from there and realize what the main problem with the scheme is. I've done my best to try and make it sound the least subjective possible, I presented statistical data, all this whilst having to deal with people like you who only come here with the intent of judging my persona based on personal opinion as opposed to judging my words.

We can all do that, HHC:

I know I sound cocky when I say it, but really ropa, you are wasting your life.

This is coming from a 35 year old unemployed child molester living in his parent's basement.

[lacoste]

2) There's been a thread by lacoste to change the scheme: https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/schemes-13/lets-work-on-the-proper-hysteria-variation/ He got butchered; nothing came out of it.
3) Everyone has his own problems with hysteria and his own ideas. Other than lacoste, nobody made an effort to present a scheme-fix.

Im still on it, just lately i have other things to do and in meantime playing WO's / TUS cups that im in, but definitely gonna host some of the 3s tourneys/cups here or on WO. Sofar (from the people i played with) almost everyone liked the scheme more than hyst or loved it, i just have to make a marathon of cups to check interest of the whole community. Just not yet.

[Random00]

Could you (HHC and ropa) please write posts that are not insulting? I don't think its necessary to do this.

on topic:
I kinda need another summary from you (ropa and shyguy and everything else who shares their opinion) what the flaw(s) of hysteria are in your opinion.
From what I read your main problem is, that hysteria is being picked by weaker players to have easier wins against better players. Is that right?
If so:
Maybe the weaker player thinks so, but in fact I don't think its true. My overall stats say that I won 176 out of 202 Hysteria TUS games (87.13%). My overall stats say that I won 1175 out of 1346 TUS games (87.3%). I'm aware that the given sample size is not big enough to be somewhere close to have proof, but common sense would say that its not easier to win hysteria against me than generally winning against me.

[HHC]

prove our points with common sense and "data"  in order to get people to understand it?

I thought the 'data' in this thread was lacking.. at best. It's just people throwing in some random numbers without any credible basis, leaving out many variables and presenting their own subjective view as hard facts.

That's only because you don't give any value to the things I say, but that's more to do with you than it has to do with me.

Really? I see everyone else is just dying to hear your opinion ..

Well, you certainly not getting it anywhere by making a post only directed to flaming me.

It's just 1 more post of drivel, it'll get lost in the ocean of boobaadoobaa.

All I've been trying to do in this thread is ilustrate a point in hopes people would pick up from there and realize what the main problem with the scheme is.

How many hysteria's have you played?

You just conceptualize everything and go on and on about presumed theoretical fallacies without ever trying things out in practice. Neither the old scheme, or new ideas to improve it.

I've done my best to try and make it sound the least subjective possible, I presented statistical data, all this whilst having to deal with people like you who only come here with the intent of judging my persona based on personal opinion as opposed to judging my words.

I don't mind debating things, but to be honest, 99% of the posts in this topic aren't worth responding to. They are just full of biased bullshit. Your posts are especially up there. If you want me to judge your words, then yeah, I'm sorry but it's all uninteresting b.s. to me.
People like Mablak have at least something to say, even though I strongly disagree with him and don't care for all the technicalities he posts. You just bitch at a scheme without anything to back it up.

Unlike you, I don't respond to empty posts like that.

I know I sound cocky when I say it, but really ropa, you are wasting your life.

This is coming from a 35 year old unemployed child molester living in their father's basement.

I'm just saying, you don't contribute anything, as much as you seem convinced that you do. I don't think you'll be missed when you can't post here nemore. That's why I feel like you are wasting your time.


edit: sorry Random.

[HHC]

And to contribute something to this topic:

I wouldn't change anything about the scheme. It sucks that there are 'flaws' but I don't think there any good fixes to it. Lowering the SD-time ain't good, because forcing SD is always a big risk. The water comes fast so you have few turns to settle the score. I therefore usually don't force it cause I feel safer just fighting 3vs1 against the side of the map than gamble the SD-play.

Telecow is just part of the game. You can increase timer to 3, but then you just have aerial with no crates, a flamethrower and a cow. It would be weird.

Removing the scheme just because newbies pick it doesn't seem like a valid reason to me. Or a smart thing to do when you want to stimulate the activity of the league.


Hysteria has been played thousands of time. That's a good indication that the current scheme suffices and works out right.


edit for Ropa: I said all I wanted to say, better not start another out-of-context-quotes war.

[Aerox]

I thought the 'data' in this thread was lacking.. at best. It's just people throwing in some random numbers without any credible basis, leaving out many variables and presenting their own subjective view as hard facts.

Like when MI claimed Hysteria was the most popular scheme amongst new players? Because all the "random numbers" I got were taken directly from TUS.

Really? I see everyone else is just dying to hear your opinion ..

As opposed to everyone wanting to hear you rant about me offtopic?

It's just 1 more post of drivel, it'll get lost in the ocean of boobaadoobaa.

So let me get this straight, you're contributing to the problem whilst complaining about the problem?

How many hysteria's have you played?

I couldn't tell but quite a few, actually. Why does that matter at all?

I don't mind debating things, but to be honest, 99% of the posts in this topic aren't worth responding to. They are just full of biased bullshit. Your posts are especially up there.

Wait, so how come you actually responded to me to begin with?

If you want me to judge your words, then yeah, I'm sorry but it's all uninteresting b.s. to me.

So then why post? To have a free dig at me? Ah, fine. Got it all out buddy?

I'm just saying, you don't contribute anything, as much as you seem convinced that you do. I don't think you'll be missed when you can't post here nemore. That's why I feel like you are wasting your time.

Yeah, I got your point the first time you said it, we're wasting our lifes by posting in this thread. Said the murdered to the dead.

edit: I'm glad you got it all out HHC. It's ok, we can be friends, I know your stance on the game, it's totally understandable you die for casualness, after all, you've spent 13 years trying to get good at the game and never managed to this date

[MonkeyIsland]

2. High skilled players, which are considered BnG/Elite/RR/Roper players mostly, don't take Hysteria seriously and don't bother to learn. I mean comon, who wants to learn Tetris when there is Chess? I am sure I can find hysteria games between pr0s and no0bs that pr0s lost because of very bad mistakes not because of  "gamble shots".

There's many experienced hysteria players that share the view that Hysteria is a "pro-bashing" scheme. I am sure I can also find a replay proving the opposite of what you claim so I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish with this particular point.

There's no way till we break it into actual data. Here's 10 of mm's recent lost hysteria games which Mablak participated:

mm as one of the high skilled clans.
Mablak as one of the best players.

First game is vs CF, since CF is one of the top clans I'll skip that. Our discussion is about the abuse less skilled players/teams do.
Second game is vs l3x. At 7:57 Mablak mistakes turn order and teleport on the opponent's worm which was his turn.
Third is vs CKC, skipping.
Fourth game is vs eS.
At 16:15, Mablak uses jetpack and land so near to his other worm. Let's not count it as a mistake.
At 16:53 mm has 4 worms on top while eS has 1 worm darksiding. This is a very good example of so many nags. 4 worms of mm are on top perfectly placed for zook shots. That's a very bad practice in Hysteria. You simply are allowing your opponent to take advantage of his hide/darksiding. In these cases, if the team on top doesn't like to move, they waste time to force the darksider to move. Instead mm is trying shots which have almost no chance of hitting which is allowing eS to try so many zook shots to succeed.
At 19:35 Mablak worms got piled together. At 19:50, Mablak doesn't separate them, he prefer to have a shot instead. In fact he doesn't separate them for the next 4 turns. After than he is shot and he is left with one 4hp worm. This is a situation when eS has tried many shots and they have learned how to shot Mablak's position. So Mablak is left with one 4hp worm and he decided to have another shot which fails and he is dead next turn. I'm sure Mablak was sleepy in this game or wasn't in the mood at all, but I'm failing to see the gamble in this pile of mistakes.
Fifth game is vs eS. This is a normal Hysteria game. eS simply plays better and no major telepiling in this game.

Could you please show me some replays that shows the gambling in this scheme?

[Aerox]

Could you please show me some replays that shows the gambling in this scheme?

Wanna play and see how close I get to beat you even though people claim I never play worms?

[MonkeyIsland]

You don't need to do that since TUS already have many Hysteria replays. All you have to do is watch and point to them like I did.

If you think you can prove your point better by playing pick Random00 as your opponent. I've been coding all my time lately and I'm not in shape. Play with Random00, you as less skilled and him as high skilled. Play 5 games (even more) and show us the replays. We're talking about winning percentage not how close you can get. We will see how your abusing-plan would beat the high skilled player.

Please don't choose another player since Random00 is very much suited for this example. There are better Hysteria players than him but he has winning attitude and self-esteem which overall makes him the better player.

[Crazy]

Playing a few games will not enlighten anything, would need a large amount of games played. Besides, Ropa is not that bad ;P

[Aerox]

Please don't choose another player since Random00 is very much suited for this example. There are better Hysteria players than him but he has winning attitude and self-esteem which overall makes him the better player.

Why not Gabriel?

[ShyGuy]

Could you (HHC and ropa) please write posts that are not insulting? I don't think its necessary to do this.

on topic:
I kinda need another summary from you (ropa and shyguy and everything else who shares their opinion) what the flaw(s) of hysteria are in your opinion.
From what I read your main problem is, that hysteria is being picked by weaker players to have easier wins against better players. Is that right?
If so:
Maybe the weaker player thinks so, but in fact I don't think its true. My overall stats say that I won 176 out of 202 Hysteria TUS games (87.13%). My overall stats say that I won 1175 out of 1346 TUS games (87.3%). I'm aware that the given sample size is not big enough to be somewhere close to have proof, but common sense would say that its not easier to win hysteria against me than generally winning against me.

I don't have time right not for an extremely detailed post, I'll explain later, although they are all tucked away in this thread.

1. It doesn't fit under the definition of competitive in terms of risk and reward.  The scoreboard doesn't matter in hysteria and the game turns into a 1v1 no matter how anyone plays early and mid game.  If the objective of the game is to kill the enemy, yet killing yourself, which would seem to be progressing the enemy's objective, is favorable in many situations, that seems like a direct flaw to me.

2. Hysteria, as the name implies, is supposed to be chaotic.  You have a short amount of time to make a move. Your fingers are smashing those keys frantically to pull a complex move off.  The problem is, with 1 second to do anything, you're actually extremely limited.  Because you're so extremely limited with what you can do, the scheme is abused and that's what makes killing yourself so viable.  You can teleport around and rape your opponent because with 1 second it's too difficult to defend... I've already presented a couple situations where even if you pile your worms to try to protect against rotation rape, the damage dealt will still be in favor of the person who is down a worm, that's why killing yourself in hysteria is viable.  Having 1 second to do anything isn't hysteric, it's just restraining and makes gameplay boring... With 3 seconds, it actually is more hysteric because you have more time, but still a LITTLE time, plus you have so many more options you can do with 3 seconds... more key pressing frantically to try to pull off your move, less of walking for .8 seconds and throwing a nade and retreating.  With 3 seconds, killing yourself isn't viable anymore because defending your worms is actually feasible with 3 seconds - THIS DOESN'T MEAN IT'S BORING, YOU STILL NEED TO FRANTICALLY RUSH TO THE ASSAILANT AND MAKE AN EFFECTIVE MOVE TO DEFEND. 

Those are my 2 big qualms about hysteria, which, imo, is enough to change the scheme.  They could probably be combined because 1 sec turn time results in abuse of the scheme and stale gameplay which results in little risk/reward which results in irrelevant early/mid game which results in 1v1 end game no matter what.

I would recommend lacoste's scheme.. I dunno why HHC said he got destroyed in his thread, that scheme got all positive reception.  It fixes the problems of the current hysteria

[fr4nk]

Time ago noobs were picking shopper to beat good players, now it's been replaced by Hysteria, guess why?
It's way easier to beat a good player in Hysteria, than in Shopper (called lucky scheme by the most here)
Anyway, if there will be an official thread about trying to modify this scheme, I would be glad to give some ideas, this thread is too chaotic.