The Ultimate Site of Worms Armageddon
Leagues => Leagues General => Topic started by: Peja on April 11, 2012, 09:00 PM
-
i decided to create a new topic for the discussions about changing leagues in the hysteria thread:
My idea, guess i already wrote it some time ago:
delete classic league >>> make individuell playoffs for every scheme which is currently in classic.
give the organisation of handling playoffs etc to a few people who are really dedicated for their scheme.
if there are 2 less games for po nvm, less work for the guys to organize.
create new allround league:
i would suggest to use the schemes elite/bng/ttrr/roper: play each scheme once: if theres a winner for exampel 3 points/ draw 1 point each player
the league should be subdivided into separete divisions (A;B;C;D) considering the skill of the people. > for example use the current overall stats for the first pairing (would be fair to the effort people already put into this)
best players in A division go for playoffs, worst go down to the division below.
you need to play a minimum number of games aginst opponents in your division to reach playoff or to advance into an higher division or to stay in your current division. (maybe a less big number to stay as to advance)
to avoid less games cause of inactivity make a very season (like 6 or 3 months)
you also should be able to play vs people from other groups, of course this game should be rated different. like -0,5 points for every division the player is below you and + 0.5 for each division the player is above you.
-
did we really need a new thread?
anyway, as I said in the other thread, you only need 5 ratings, for the 5 skillsets that make a good all arounder:
-roper,wxw
-bng
-elite
-rr
-shopper, t17
the league stays the same, because this is a league after all and surely you want at least a main league to see who the best all arounder is? Or does that not matter anymore in the community (please enlighten me). All these 5 ratings make your overall rating, and playoffs are directly taken from overall rating. you can check your individual ratings and your standings for any of those skills / schemes if you're only interested in that
-
this all seems rather drastic, all from a little whine by twistah about hyst... still
shared ratings for wxw/roper and shopper/t17... The schemes are completely different, especially shopper and t17... being a good shopper player by no means makes you any good at a default scheme like t17... unless im missing something here, which I dont think I am :/
-
somehow i made a big fail, can someone pls delete this?
-
did we really need a new thread?
anyway, as I said in the other thread, you only need 5 ratings, for the 5 skillsets that make a good all arounder:
-roper,wxw
-bng
-elite
-rr
-shopper, t17
the league stays the same, because this is a league after all and surely you want at least a main league to see who the best all arounder is? Or does that not matter anymore in the community (please enlighten me). All these 5 ratings make your overall rating, and playoffs are directly taken from overall rating. you can check your individual ratings and your standings for any of those skills / schemes if you're only interested in that
twistahs topic was about the place of hysteria in classic, last posts were only about new league systems without mentiont he name hysteria >>> we need a new topic.
classic league right now looks weird to me. you have some guys just playing up their fav scheme and for some points to show they have the biggest balls. others are noobashing as hell to reach playoffs. and others just play to have a funny and skillfull game without even reporting.all these different kind of motivations lead to a huge amount of games in the biggest league. but considering all these effects the standings and the playoffs are a joke and dont really show allround skills. i guess the community needs to decide what they want. a competetive league or the ability to play nice games with some point feature.
all people who just want funny games in their sepcific schemes could play one of the seperate leagues, the ones who want to go for the best all rounder could play the new allround league i suggested.
of course thats just my personal point of view.
-
Peja, personally i like changes and tus needs changes.
but i believe that 1 issue each time. There are a lot of ideas in discussing.
-
the league should be subdivided into separete divisions (A;B;C;D) considering the skill of the people. > for example use the current overall stats for the first pairing (would be fair to the effort people already put into this)
best players in A division go for playoffs, worst go down to the division below.
I rly like this idea, lets force it.
For example player in semi-pro level who play often with stronger players have low winning streak, but he could easy won with many many others,
thats why he is lower in seazon standings then player who just play mostly vs noobs.
We could eliminate avoiders and noob bashers.
We could make for example 3 leagues:
1 Division - over 5000 pts
2 Division - 3000 - 5000 pts
3 Division - less then 3000 pts
I know then there are players who has big skilz and few points but f@#! it.
just sayin ::)
-
This idea is good, it's been suggested literally hundreds of times in the past, but it will simply never work for 2 reasons.
There aren't enough players, and timezone variation makes that even worse, we struggle to do 8-32 player cups, this idea would be a disaster.
-
maybe shorter seazons could fix it?
-
this all seems rather drastic, all from a little whine by twistah about hyst... still
shared ratings for wxw/roper and shopper/t17... The schemes are completely different, especially shopper and t17... being a good shopper player by no means makes you any good at a default scheme like t17... unless im missing something here, which I dont think I am :/
What different skills do you need in WxW than you need in Roper? Ability to aim supersheep launchers from rope? It's the same skillset: rope as fast from A to B with just enough time to attack and then use pile tactics on retreats. It's the same scheme, with a couple more weapons (not a big deal since weapon since the emphasis is on getting fast enough to get an attack in.
Shopper and Team17 are also extremely similar. You can come here arguing how roping skill is very important in Shopper. But it isn't. I used to Shop with Chicken all the time (in that short time Shopper got popular in clan matches) because his skills in Team17 and default directly translated to Shopper (if you don't get my point: Chicken sucked at ropes but we beat Ce (a shopper clan) more often than not). People would notice much more similarities if you started playing Team17 in other than double caves or actually started using clever Shopper maps or randoms. Shopper is all about clever use of weapons, it's the main skill of the scheme, it's also the main skill in Team17. They're different the same way indoor football and 11 a side football are different, they have different rules, different timings, and yet they require basically the same skill set bar a few differences.
-
wrong.
-
somehow i made a big fail, can someone pls delete this?
haha peja, that made me lol.
-
What different skills do you need in WxW than you need in Roper? Ability to aim supersheep launchers from rope? It's the same skillset: rope as fast from A to B with just enough time to attack and then use pile tactics on retreats. It's the same scheme, with a couple more weapons (not a big deal since weapon since the emphasis is on getting fast enough to get an attack in.
the schemes are similar yes, wxw requires a different style of roping to roper, wxw has many more weps, yeh essentially the skills are the same, but the schemes are undeniably different and should not be classed as the same scheme, no way.
Shopper and Team17 are also extremely similar. You can come here arguing how roping skill is very important in Shopper. But it isn't. I used to Shop with Chicken all the time (in that short time Shopper got popular in clan matches) because his skills in Team17 and default directly translated to Shopper (if you don't get my point: Chicken sucked at ropes but we beat Ce (a shopper clan) more often than not). People would notice much more similarities if you started playing Team17 in other than double caves or actually started using clever Shopper maps or randoms. Shopper is all about clever use of weapons, it's the main skill of the scheme, it's also the main skill in Team17. They're different the same way indoor football and 11 a side football are different, they have different rules, different timings, and yet they require basically the same skill set bar a few differences.
WRONG
the schemes are completely different, the only similarity the 2 schemes share is that you must collect weapons from crates. Overall weapon knowledge is another similarity, yet this is a feature of any scheme that has a broad range of potential weapons.
dude ur SO wrong its just shameful how wrong you are.
Shopper is about roping and attacking consistently, that is all.
Shopper = ROPE, ATTACK, HIDE. Thats IT. THATS IT.
Skills and gameplay characteristics found in team17 THAT ARE NOT PRESENT IN SHOPPER:
Girders, blocking worms to obtain a turn order advantage OR whatever else - DONT NEVER HAPPEN IN SHOPPA
Tactics... diplomacy... Tactics.... diplomacy......
Bluffing, portraying strength by teleporting in reach of an enemy worm even when you dont intend to attack next turn.
BUNGEE - NO HAPPEN IN SHOPA DOES IT, NO BUNGEE SKILL NEEDED IN SHOPPA cos there is no bungee.
Parachute jumping, navigating the map efficiently with the parachute... NO, THAT SKILL SET AINT SHOPPA EITHER IS IT.
Battlerace skills, the ability to navigate the map quickly and efficiently by walking and jumping, NONE OF THIS EVER HAPPENS IN SHOPPER SINCE YOU ROPE EVERYWHERE DONT U.
Sudden death tactics - NO SD IN SHOPPA IS IT, SO U DONT NEED ANY FORWARD PLANNING WITH REGARDS TO THE LATE GAME.
Destructible terrain, BOOM, predicting the amount of damage a certain weapon will inflict on the terrain.
SO MANY MO4R... so OBVIOUS...
dude seriously, why are you talking about chicken... whats that got to do anything. Since you mentioned chicken, and state that team17 skills are directly related to shopper and to be good at one scheme means you'll be good at the other, I can use that same logic to contradict you.
By your logic a good shopper player would be able to beat an experienced team17 player in team17 solely from his shopper experience. THIS DOESNT HAPPEN, EVER! In order to be a good shopper player, you must learn to play shopper. In order to be a good Team17 player, you must learn to play Team17.
There are loads of shopper noobs who could beat random or chicken in a game of shopper, yet if they were to play them in Team17 THEY WOULD FAIL HARD BECAUSE THE SCHEMES ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!
Shopper = roping consistently, rope knocking, doing as much damage as possible, hiding.
Team17 = bluffing, blocking, walking, chuting, digging, predicting, booming, destructible terraining, forward planning, jumping, bungeeing, preparation for a dramatic change in gameplay dynamics as sudden death begins... dude... the schemes are completely different so apologise for your wrong doing and stop this crazy talk right now.
-
There are loads of shopper noobs who could beat random or chicken in a game of shopper,
this is why we can't have good arguments
-
Guys, take a break from TUS/WA.
Seriously, look at yourselves.
-
this is why we can't have good arguments
Good you accept you were very wrong to state Team17 and Shopper are almost identical schemes.
And Darkone, seriously why post that? I havent played worms or tus in the last 5 days, I just got home from work and saw ropa spouting some BS about how Team17 is the same as shoppa and put him right, no break is necessary, providing a fool proof argument to prove a foolish statement wrong, on a worms forum where matters like this are meant to be discussed is nothing I should feel bad about. If you dont wanna join in the debate, cool, dont tell others to stop though, yeh.
-
And Darkone, seriously why post that?
Because I think you need a break. 5 days apparently isn't long enough.
But don't worry, you're not the only one.
-
please explain why I need a break... for using common sense to explain why team17 is not identical to shopper as ropa claims... I dont.
SURE
my post was A BIT SILLY WITH CAPS and
gaps between lines....
n things...
but the points I made were valid and true and needed to be said.
-
agreed with NAiL... but don't know why there is even a debate on it.. like NAiL said, ropa was dead wrong with that, which is sad, cos he is supposed to be the cocky wormer dick who is usually right underneath it all.. losing that title it seems ::)
-
Ropa just wants some kind of debate, no matter if he gives a shit or not... He is the new komo.
-
There is NOTHING wrong with putting alot of effort into even a very very small issue that doesn't affect alot of people, but affects you personally.
Nail has the right idea, I feel it's shocking what D1 said to him...
I find it ridiculously %$&*in funny how some of the very same people, who believe murderers etc deserve a second chance, are the same people creating such a big fuss and show such hatred towards people who like to explain things in great detail being brutally honest and telling the truth, when you sugarcoat things it holds you back, it's a waste of your own time, just get to the point and be honest, no matter what the cost.
Like lol, this girl at my work, on Tuesday night, we were having a conversation about Juice, cuz the shop made an error and had Coca Cola big bottles at 37p each lol, so I bought 12 of them, and she was asking if theres any left, and I said yeah, theres diet coke as well, and she said "do I look like i drink diet coke" (which is her basically calling herself fat, that's what it really means, don't think it means anything else cuz it %$&*in doesn't, it also means she doesn't drink diet coke) so i said, "how? i'm fatter than you and I like diet coke, I jus like the fat b*$t%^d stuff better" and the other women says like "what are you trying to say like, are you saying she's fat?" and I said "What do you mean AM I SAYING, she is fat it's a fact(then I lol'd) ".
Hmm, their faces dropped then they done that gasp thing, and I was thinkin like, what? why the hell did you ask then, I ain't gonna say she isn't fat, she's gonna think she isn't fat and end up getting even fatter, least now she knows she might do something about it lol.
People at my work n that were calling me fat for like 2 years and I'm like so what, i've been drinking heavily for the last couple years having a bawl, now i'm losing weight cuz I noticed it got out of hand, due to the fact people were pointing it out, at one point one guy even played roy chubby browns "you fat bastard, you fat bastard" theme song over the tannoy for me, which was actually hilarious, I took a bow and everything, was great :) couldn't touch my toes though...
Now people are telling me, you lost weight, and when I shaved for the 1st time in 2 months got a new haircut n that they all telling me, you look good man, my aunts and uncles asking me what my secret is n stuff, i'm still chubby like but I think i'll be back to normal by next summer naturally, the healthiest way to lose weight in my opinion, theres no need to rush.
Man it's an unwritten rule fat people can call other fat people fat anyway, I can do the truffle shuffle, so f^*k you xD
-
hi shyguy, thanks for the troll. avirex no one with a league has listened to you in 12 years, keep it up.
Now back to the the topic of discussion:
he 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.
-
I don't like that idea, then you ruin individual statistics, some people actually play for the sole purpose of 1 scheme they enjoy so much that they can play and not worry about other schemes.
-
wasn't a troll. go back and read NAiL's post and pretend i wrote it if it helps
-
ropa is the new komo, new and improved ;D
-
Oops, miss clicked the thread, wanted to go to the one were Shyguy actually agrees with me on this same topic.
-
ah right, yeh must've mis clicked cos this is the thread where you got owned by me
-
Nail has the right idea, I feel it's shocking what D1 said to him...
(http://meanwhilepics.com/images/meanwhile/Meanwhile_At_The_Hall_Of_Justice.jpg)
tus is making me wanna commit suicide atm so YEH bash it, BASH it all day long
agreed
And I wasn't speaking only about NAiL:
Guys, take a break from TUS/WA.
Seriously, look at yourselves.
Because I think you need a break. 5 days apparently isn't long enough.
But don't worry, you're not the only one.
There are a couple of people that I think need a break from TUS/WA, but I'm not going to force them to take one.
If someone feels I'm talking about them, then perhaps he/she has a reason to think that. Perhaps that person should think about that reason and see if I'm correct rather than disagreeing in a knee-jerk reflex.
Why are you shocked I posted that anyway when in the rest of your post, you're saying there's nothing wrong with speaking your mind?
-
D1, all I said was "I feel it's shocking" I didn't say you are right or wrong.
-
Darkone I said that today, (in jest) AFTER what I said in this thread, YESTERDAY, so dont quote that because its completely irrelevant.
What you just quoted was said AFTER you told me to take a break, so seriously cut that bullshit out please its annoying when you do things like that. I did nothing wrong here, ropa said team17 and shoppa are the near identical schemes, I corrected him. I made valid point in this thread, valid points relevant to an argument that had been made against me as komo also pointed out to you.
You better realise you had no right to tell me I "need a break". seriously overall I like you but you have an annoying habit of patronising fellow wormers when THE DISCUSSION DOESNT EVEN INVOLVE YOU.
You couldnt come back to me yesterday cos U realised that this HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU, and so TODAY you quote me from a thread I posted in TODAY and use it to justify something you said YESTERDAY.
WHAT DID THAT OTHER THREAD HAVE TO DO WITH THIS THREAD? NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL.
Everyone can see thats just BS so apologise to me now and dont do it again. Seriously you're in the wrong here not me, I am not the sort of person to rant about things when im wrong, I ONLY MAKE THESE SORTS OF POSTS when the truth is SO OBVIOUS, SO OBVIOUS, that I have to use this format to highlight just how OBVIOUSLY WRONG YOU ARE.
Learn when to keep your nose out of things that do not concern you, the argument was constructive. Ropa said shoppa and Team17 are near identical schemes, I corrected him, that is all. No input from you was required, yet you felt the need to tell me and ropa we both need a break from worms. GTFO with you're patronising attitude, its not the first time its happened and I doubt it will be the last, unless you learn now and become a better person because of it, which I hope you do.
-
it's okay to speak your mind d1, but the passive aggressive 'I think you should leave and take a break from TUS' was probably not your best commentary. you should be more direct next time if you have something to say, because I also felt a little irk'ed by your choice of words.
-
This idea is good, it's been suggested literally hundreds of times in the past, but it will simply never work for 2 reasons.
There aren't enough players, and timezone variation makes that even worse, we struggle to do 8-32 player cups, this idea would be a disaster.
hm the system should be progressive, so i thought 10% group A, 40 % group B, 50% group C would be ok.
we have a average number of players of about 220 each season, this would make 22 players for group A
possible group A:
best 22 overall players with more then 30 games played in season 24 (number next to the player = games aginst the other best 21 players in season 24 )
Random: 25
Artic :34
crash:23
Ray: 28
Almog 25
MI: 81
Daina: 31
Sm0k: 26
Bryan: 105
Franz:50
Sock: 41
Guaton:20
Kaleu: 42
barmann:4
fr4nk:42
phanton: 73
chelsea: 8
chicken 23: 32
dese: 34
albtraum: 14
r3spect: 59
free: 44
together: 841
average: 38 games
bar & albtraum, obviously were inactive this season. looks like a season with a limit of 30 games against each other (to stay in division) and 50 for playoffs is easy to reach. remember they didnt search for each other.
-
Oh guys relax, i have and idea...lets brb beach?
(http://www.brasilazul.com.br/imagensBAZ/RJ-Cabo-Frio-Praia-do-Fort.jpg)
1,2,3 GOOOO , brb beach
-
may be the only good post in this thread nino ;D
lets go guys!!
-
And just to clarify before I go have fondue.
I don't have an agenda, I'm not trying to impose a system based on my personal taste. MI raised the idea of changing the league and I'm proposing ideas that are a result of weeks of debating, I am by no means asking MI or anyone in the staff here to put them in practice. I'd be happy enough if they understood the concepts behind those systems and why they make sense to guarantee a high level of all around competition. If I can get them to see that and they can come up with systems of their own that guarantee said concepts to shape up then I'd be happy enough. And if not, well, I tried even if that's against your will.
-
thank you for trying dude, good effort... better luck next time, enjoy your fondue...
me and nino are gonna hit the beach!! we will tkae pix of all the thongs, maybe some speedos pix for youropa
-
Oh guys relax, i have and idea...lets brb beach?
(http://www.brasilazul.com.br/imagensBAZ/RJ-Cabo-Frio-Praia-do-Fort.jpg)
1,2,3 GOOOO , brb beach
listen him lol, for 4-5dayz i,m in big along adventure and I feel great ;P
only sun, water, beach, stones and snakes HEHe +fish whit coin :P
fishman`s - old friends
while your understand new league rules I play only CUPs AE
(i agree the old rulez is good - and sistem is good, find what you are looking for)
:-X :-X :-\ 8)
-
maybe some speedos pix for youropa
We went through this already:
http://i40.tinypic.com/2vcfj9y.jpg
-
Quoting avirex from the hysteria topic:
each player has the option to refuse one scheme... but not 1 scheme per person... like, i cant just refuse ttrr, when mablak wants to play... but then refuse bng when komo wants to play...
more like, its a set option, in my profile the scheme i refuse, and no one can pick that scheme vs. me.
I think this is the best idea which has surfaced in the past few days. It doesn't seem hard to implement and it should fix most of the problems people have been recently complaining about.
In my opinion, it should work like that:
- You can set the scheme you "dislike" in your profile settings.
- The scheme can be changed once per season (if you make your decision during season i, it would apply for the season i+1).
- In the playoffs, your opponent wouldn't be allowed to pick the scheme you "disliked" during the season from which you qualified into the playoffs.
- This scheme wouldn't contribute to your overall score (although there is a problem with people who would not "dislike" any scheme at all - their ratings would still consist of 8 instead of 7 schemes - maybe this could be fixed by not taking the lowest-rated scheme into account for such people?).
Any comments?
-
cool idea,I wouldn't have to play bng anymore ! :-*
-
.. so if I "dislike" Hysteria I'd get avoided by like 50% of the active players. Sounds good! :P
-
bye
-
And just to clarify before I go have fondue.
I don't have an agenda, I'm not trying to impose a system based on my personal taste. MI raised the idea of changing the league and I'm proposing ideas that are a result of weeks of debating, I am by no means asking MI or anyone in the staff here to put them in practice. I'd be happy enough if they understood the concepts behind those systems and why they make sense to guarantee a high level of all around competition. If I can get them to see that and they can come up with systems of their own that guarantee said concepts to shape up then I'd be happy enough. And if not, well, I tried even if that's against your will.
hi fassy.
dude you get your girlfriend involved in worms squabbles haha, sad
See in that other thread you're telling HHC to admit he contradicted himself, yeh? Look back on page 1 of this thread and admit you contradicted yourself and got owned by me hard.
-
I thought that by making you believe you owned me you would shut up. I was wrong. On that.
edit: only on that.
Just because I didn't reply to your ownage post were your verbally destroy me to death using your clearly superior knowledge it doesn't mean you're right or anything, I mean, you might be but all it means is that I can't be bothered with someone like you. I'd be wasting my time.
I hope that settles it between you and me, you can continue calling me names and stuff just don't expect me to get into that game, I do it many times, mainly because I'm not very good at picking my battles, but not this time. You can feel proud, or the complete opposite.
-
I was wrong.
good, apology accepted.
-
I thought that by making you believe you owned me you would shut up. I was wrong. On that.
edit: only on that.
Just because I didn't reply to your ownage post were your verbally destroy me to death using your clearly superior knowledge it doesn't mean you're right or anything, I mean, you might be but all it means is that I can't be bothered with someone like you. I'd be wasting my time.
I hope that settles it between you and me, you can continue calling me names and stuff just don't expect me to get into that game, I do it many times, mainly because I'm not very good at picking my battles, but not this time. You can feel proud, or the complete opposite.
Nice edit of post, fortunately I quoted your original post word for word so everyone can see you admitted you were wrong, mug. Be gracious in defeat, now go crawling back under your bridge and dont come out for another year. When you come out I will be waiting for you and you will be owned again.
+ stop viewing as a guest
-
I thought that by making you believe you owned me you would shut up. I was wrong. On that.
edit: only on that.
Just because I didn't reply to your ownage post were your verbally destroy me to death using your clearly superior knowledge it doesn't mean you're right or anything, I mean, you might be but all it means is that I can't be bothered with someone like you. I'd be wasting my time.
I hope that settles it between you and me, you can continue calling me names and stuff just don't expect me to get into that game, I do it many times, mainly because I'm not very good at picking my battles, but not this time. You can feel proud, or the complete opposite.
Nice edit of post, fortunately I quoted your original post word for word so everyone can see you admitted you were wrong, mug. Be gracious in defeat, now go crawling back under you're bridge and dont come out for another year. When you come out I will be waiting for you and you will be owned again.
+ stop viewing as a guest
Do you realize that an administrator could most likely confirm that you're straight up lying?
Myy original post, edited before I read your post was something really close to the following:
I thought that by making you believe you did you would shut up.
I was wrong.
On that
Secondly, I never browse without being logged in.
Again, an admin could confirm both of these, but I do ask they don't take this as me asking, I don't want them to waste time on proving you wrong.
edit: what's with the name calling? when did this start? Help me remember when was it you started hating me so much? Was it after I told you how bad you were in that haxball game? is it because I'm not black?
-
You appear as a guest (or hidden) when viewing topics, true fact. Look at the forums home page, your name never appears on the recent user list (not that this is any crime).
You asked HHC to answer one question in the other thread, so I ask you one question now.
Were you wrong to say that Team17 and Shopper are extremely similar schemes that require the same set of skills "bar a few differences", when I clearly pointed out that the similarities are minimal and the differences maximal.
Were you wrong yes or no?
Answer me like you demand others to answer you.
+ the name calling started because of the way you choose to address, and the ways you have chosen to address people throughout the years on worms forums. Whenever you pop up on TUS you make sweeping statements that often bare no truth to how things actually are. Remember before when you were making up all that rubbish about "tus propaganda", and the trolling of tus before that, I put you right both times yet you still dont seem to have learned not to do it, maybe now you will learn.
-
(http://wa-mems.do.am/_nw/0/40435196.jpg)
xD
-
Oops, miss clicked the thread, wanted to go to the one were Shyguy actually agrees with me on this same topic.
I mean in that thread I clearly said I disagreed with the pairing of shoppa and t17... nice try though?
-
Why are you guys going off topic and now arguing about who was logged in, wtf lads.
-
yay =) no more t17
-
maybe people should take a look at barmans post......
maybe im missing something, but i really do think its a good idea... and it would solve the MAIN problem....
you know, the problem that raised the discussion for ropa to go on a total rampage??? yah... that one...
-
the schemes are similar yes, wxw requires a different style of roping to roper, wxw has many more weps, yeh essentially the skills are the same, but the schemes are undeniably different and should not be classed as the same, no way.
go back and read NAiL's post and pretend i wrote it if it helps
I mean in that thread I clearly said I disagreed with the pairing of shoppa and t17... nice try though?
ns I'd say
-
oh, i actually didn't notice nail wrote that, seeing as the very large bulk of what NAiL and I have been saying dealt with team17 and shoppa, not wxw and roper... i thought that was pretty clear, tho... guess you did technically get me. you're still 100%-right-ropa
I think grouping wxw and roper is valid, but I could also see roper being grouped with ttrr... maybe all three schemes. They all have to deal with rope speed essentially.
Also, if we're going to group elite with intermediate, we have to assume intermediate becomes a classic league scheme, and we've already had debates about that and there are some problems.. intermediate really needs at least a best of 3 structure to be fair, and that takes a lot of time, plus if someone crashed it would be a mess since you wouldn't know who has the first move the first game
-
oh, i actually didn't notice nail wrote that, seeing as the very large bulk of what NAiL and I have been saying dealt with team17 and shoppa, not wxw and roper... i thought that was pretty clear, tho... guess you did technically get me. you're still 100%-right-ropa
I think grouping wxw and roper is valid, but I could also see roper being grouped with ttrr... maybe all three schemes. They all have to deal with rope speed essentially.
Also, if we're going to group elite with intermediate, we have to assume intermediate becomes a classic league scheme, and we've already had debates about that and there are some problems.. intermediate really needs at least a best of 3 structure to be fair, and that takes a lot of time, plus if someone crashed it would be a mess since you wouldn't know who has the first move the first game
The thing is ShyGuy, ultimately, if you're asking people to keep a balanced games played between all the classes or most classes in order to be able to compete rating wise, you can't have that many classes. Shopper is one of the least popular LEAGUE schemes, so if you figure out you need to pair it with another scheme, whilst pairing it with team17 isn't perfect, I can argue (and I've done it) that it's the closest you'll get, certainly closer than Shopper/WxW
-
(http://wa-mems.do.am/_nw/0/40435196.jpg)
xD
ROFL, nice xd
thats made everything worthwhile xD
-
I just can't agree with that. shoppa and wxw use the exact same scheme and exact same rules with the exception of the w2w rule. They both require consistent attacking and require the use of a rope to fetch a crate. Yes, in w2w every turn will probably be speed-based depending on the map, but in a shoppa a far crate requires speed if you have some knocking plans in mind... even if it is a closer crate, you often will hustle for it so you can spend time knocking and setting up your shot. I'm really not in favor of totally linear wxw maps, if they were a little more complex with the hides, it would be even closer to shoppa, but since linear wxw maps have become the standard, i can't make that point. I just feel the there are way more differences in t17 and shoppa and they are way more apparent, although there are some core similarities.
-
I just can't agree with that. shoppa and wxw use the exact same scheme and exact same rules with the exception of the w2w rule. They both require consistent attacking and require the use of a rope to fetch a crate. Yes, in w2w every turn will probably be speed-based depending on the map, but in a shoppa a far crate requires speed if you have some knocking plans in mind... even if it is a closer crate, you often will hustle for it so you can spend time knocking and setting up your shot. I'm really not in favor of totally linear wxw maps, if they were a little more complex with the hides, it would be even closer to shoppa, but since linear wxw maps have become the standard, i can't make that point. I just feel the there are way more differences in t17 and shoppa and they are way more apparent, although there are some core similarities.
Who do you think would win in a shopper game, Dario or someone who is only good at ropers?
And who would win a WxW (assuming a hard map) the good roper, or the good defaulter?
I think it's a way to look at it that also shows which schemes require similar skillsets.
-
I don't think the argument of shoppa and t17 both require above average use of weapons is compelling enough because in shoppa you can only do so much with a weapon from a rope where in t17 everything is so much more dynamic. In shoppa, the terrain is the same the entire game, so your anticipation of your opponent's weapons and how they use them and how you react to that is quite limited. not to mention in shoppa, you will most times attack with the weapon you get during the active turn, or else you will fall behind and have a bigger chance of losing. In t17, the terrain is always changing, you can hold on to weapons and wait to use them at the optimal time, and not only do you have to be creative with your weapons, you have to very much anticipate what weapons your opponent may have and position yourself accordingly. Team17 is so much more weapon orientated than shoppa (like i said, in shoppa, once you get the weapon you pretty much use it the same turn), that it is hard to group the two because shoppa has weapon usage skills to a degree, but not as much as t17. I guess the point I am trying to make is the main theme of t17 is weapon usage and the main theme of shoppa is consistency. In shoppa, being more consistent trumps being more creative IMO, but of course, if you can do both, that is really great. In t17, using weapons more creatively trumps attacking whenever possible, meaning having a lead in t17 is less important than it is in shoppa. That's why i believe wxw and shoppa are more similar, because their key theme is consistency.
While t17 and shoppa both require weapon creativity, that element only goes so high in shoppa while that element is like a skyscraper in t17.
-
Still waiting for an answer to my question, if you dont answer in the next post ill assume you are saying that you admit you were wrong to say shopper and team17 are extremely identical "bar a few differences". Thats ok, we all make mistakes.
Who do you think would win in a shopper game, Dario or someone who is only good at ropers?
And who would win a WxW (assuming a hard map) the good roper, or the good defaulter?
I think it's a way to look at it that also shows which schemes require similar skillsets.
Its 50/50. Look at the played shopper games on TUS, there is absolutely no visible trend in the better defaulter winning the over the better roper, neither is their a trend towards the opposite.
Shopper has to be the most luck based scheme, without doubt. The only game changing default skill involved in shopper is that of doing as much damage as possible with each weapon (assuming we take things like piling, or the rare accurate plop shot/drop for granted). Even still fall damage is of little relevance. Most league players can deal maximum damage with a weapon in shopper (whether defaulter or not), its not hard to drop a weapon on a worms head in an open map with 30 seconds of time), the only way to deal more damage is by creating extra fall damage. Most players are aware of this and will hide in such a way to avoid additional fall damage. Even if they dont, fall damage doesnt even make that much difference, take this example:
A worm has 150hp in shopper. You pick up a sheep, drop it correctly and deal say 70 damage (without additional fall damage), you then need to deal another 80 points worth of damage in order to kill that worm. Even if you deal 80 damage with the sheep, you'll still need another two turns to kill that worm with normal powered weapons, unless you have the LUCK of picking up a high power weapon like dynamite.
A game changing weapon in shopper is the petrol bomb. Petrol bomb in effect acts as a girder (if the enemy worm is positioned correctly), in fact its worse than a girder seeing as there is no escape. If you have the LUCK of picking up 3 petrol bombs, just like the luck of collecting higher powered weapons than your opponent then it can win you the game.
Now im not saying that shopper is solely a luck scheme, not at all. Shopper is a game of consistency, if you think about it its probably the most "consistently good play" demanding scheme. Due to the nature of shopper you really cannot afford to mess up one turn. Creativity is minimal in shopper (due to the fact of being pretty much ALWAYS able to attack your opponent in any given turn). In a scheme like Team17 creativity has a huge role as you can avoid being attacked by blocking and taking the high ground. You cannot avoid being attacked in shopper, thus crate luck plays a ridiculously HUGE part in deciding the game assuming both players play sensibly.
If played on a good map, by good I mean a tight map with ample hides, hides that you can really HIDE in and avoid maximum damage, then shopper becomes a far more interesting scheme. Take fatal fanatic and old bloopy maps for example, these allow for far more interesting games than say... a map like dogma city shopping. What!? How can you knock dogmas famous map? As handsome as that map is, its terrible for gameplay. You can attack without fail easily every turn, there are no hides that actually make it significantly harder for you to be attacked by the enemy and the map is open as hell. Its sad that most shopper maps bare more resemblance to dogma city shopping, and less to old bloopy and fatal fanatic maps.
Like you said ropa, if shopper was played on more intricate maps all of the time, the scheme would be far more intensive, and far more enjoyable. However, even on intricate maps, default skills ARE NOT the deciding factor when it comes to winning. CONSISTENT ROPING is the deciding factor in shopper, along with getting good weapons as opposed to shit ones. Note I did not say good roping, consistent roping, sensible attacks and consistent roping to hides after you attack.
So yeh its 50/50, assuming both players are at decent level, the better defaulter has no greater advantage in shopper than the better roper as MOST of the default skills you learn in defaults are NOT translated into shopper, MINIMAL similarities in default skills are shared between defaults and shopper. Falling from your rope during a turn is game changing, picking up a flamethrower instead of a dynamite is game changing, starting first or second is game changing. Shopper does not require as many default skills as you seem to believe.
-
Even if they dont, fall damage doesnt even make that much difference, take this example:
What about the thousand examples where FD does actually make the difference? FD is the difference between a 3 turn and a 4 turn kill with balanced shopper weapons. Because 48x3 is still < 150.
A game changing weapon in shopper is the petrol bomb. Petrol bomb in effect acts as a girder (if the enemy worm is positioned correctly), in fact its worse than a girder seeing as there is no escape. If you have the LUCK of picking up 3 petrol bombs, just like the luck of collecting higher powered weapons than your opponent then it can win you the game.
It's only game changing if you know how to properly use it. Don't
Creativity is minimal in shopper (due to the fact of being pretty much ALWAYS able to attack your opponent in any given turn). In a scheme like Team17 creativity has a huge role as you can avoid being attacked by blocking and taking the high ground. You cannot avoid being attacked in shopper, thus crate luck plays a ridiculously HUGE part in deciding the game assuming both players play sensibly.
This doesn't even make sense to me, what does the amount of times you manage to attack per turn have anything to do with creativity? There's a huge difference between doing 55 damage with a grenade and tossing it in a way that the worm is launched to a spot you can kill him afterwards taking advantage of piling and turn advantage. Not everyone does a display of creativity every turn, doesn't mean it's not there.
What!? How can you knock dogmas famous map? As handsome as that map is, its terrible for gameplay.
It's a bad map for leagues because some people have mastered in stupid amounts. But I think you underestimate the depth of this map.
You can attack without fail easily every turn, there are no hides that actually make it significantly harder for you to be attacked by the enemy
There are actually a couple of risk reward hides that require very precise knocks and can also allow perfect pixel blocks. Dogma City is a map were a good shopper can really shine against a not so good now, again, by abusing little map gimmicks that aren't good suited for league play.
and the map is open as hell. Its sad that most shopper maps bare more resemblance to dogma city shopping, and less to old bloopy and fatal fanatic maps.
So yeh its 50/50, assuming both players are at decent level, the better defaulter has no greater advantage in shopper than the better roper as MOST of the default skills you learn in defaults are NOT translated into shopper, MINIMAL similarities in default skills are shared between defaults and shopper. Falling from your rope during a turn is game changing, picking up a flamethrower instead of a dynamite is game changing, starting first or second is game changing. Shopper does not require as many default skills as you seem to believe.
You seem to assume the roper can just as easily petrol block or use a full damage flamethrower as the defaulter.
-
What about the thousand examples where FD does actually make the difference? FD is the difference between a 3 turn and a 4 turn kill with balanced shopper weapons. Because 48x3 is still < 150.
Even if it is the difference, the point is additional fall damage is one of the only default skills directly translated into shopper (point I was making). If you think about it, doing extra fall damage with weapons from the rope is a skill directly translated from roper, not defaults. "Ropers" know how to deal fall damage as its a big part of roper/wxw.
Even if you do additional fall damage, fall damage doesnt win you the game 99% of times. Your opponent falling from rope, failing to hide, missing a shot, or collecting worse weapons than you is what wins you 99% of shopper games.
It's only game changing if you know how to properly use it. Don't
Your posts seem to give the impression you assume "ropers" dont have any BASIC weapon knowledge. Dropping a petrol bomb or using a flamethrower is not an advacned default skill, go watch NNN replays to see advanced default skill. Shopper is NOT the scheme for advanced default skill. I believe you are confusing you're terminology here, you seem to be confusing the word "roper" for "noob". Noobs dont know how to use weapons properly, ropers know how to use weapons properly, defaulters know how to use weapons properly and a whole f@#! load more when playing DEFAULT schemes.
This doesn't even make sense to me, what does the amount of times you manage to attack per turn have anything to do with creativity? There's a huge difference between doing 55 damage with a grenade and tossing it in a way that the worm is launched to a spot you can kill him afterwards taking advantage of piling and turn advantage. Not everyone does a display of creativity every turn, doesn't mean it's not there.
Sure its there, in tiny doses. Its less creativity, more accuracy, its hard to be creative with indestructible terrain. Sure, you may need to be creative in shopper sometimes, but these situations are few and far between, compared to default schemes, compared to Team17.
It's a bad map for leagues because some people have mastered in stupid amounts. But I think you underestimate the depth of this map.
"Mastered" the map? Exactly how can you master dogma city shopping? Sure you can be aware of "risk/reward" hides as you say, yet most players (whether default playing or not) can scan a map at a glance and tell instantly were the "risk/reward" hides are, its not like its a big secret, or something you only discover after years of playing the same map, you can tell instantly whats gong on in a map just by looking at it.
There are actually a couple of risk reward hides that require very precise knocks and can also allow perfect pixel blocks. Dogma City is a map were a good shopper can really shine against a not so good now, again, by abusing little map gimmicks that aren't good suited for league play.
I wont deny that, (although city shopping is still a very basic/boring map). Rope knocks are a default skill? I consider rope knocks to be a roping skill, rope knocks are most apparent in... again, roper, more so than any default scheme. Sure you rope knock in intermediate , but not rope rope rope rope rope knock (full power rope).
You seem to assume the roper can just as easily petrol block or use a full damage flamethrower as the defaulter.
Yes I do. There is nothing hard about dropping a petrol bomb to block a worm, or firing up a worm against a wall with the flamethrower, again, this is basic worms knowledge that you learn in your first months of play. These are not default specific skills, these are basic general skills.
There is no trend on TUS that shows the better defaulters win against the worse defaulters in shopper, if there was a trend then you would have a point, however there is no trend.
My point is you claimed that the better defaulter will beat the worse defaulter in shopper, when there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE to support this. Like I said its 50/50 assuming both players have their BASIC knowledge of how to use weapons down.
-
I wont deny that, (although city shopping is still a very basic/boring map). Rope knocks are a default skill? I consider rope knocks to be a roping skill, rope knocks are most apparent in... again, roper, more so than any default scheme. Sure you rope knock in intermediate , but not rope rope rope rope rope knock (full power rope).
There's probably more total rope knocks in any regular intermediate game than there is on a roper, at least meaningful ones. In intermediate, like in Shopper, it's a creative skill, it facilitates kills sometimes. In roper it's much more of just touching the worm because you want him to get out of a hard hide or whatever, were he falls is hardly relevant since all you want is to attack. This is why piling is a much more demanding skill in default (intermediate) and in shopper. To much more extent in intermediate, were clever knocking can get you really far. That's a game changer, you can turn a great hide into a kill opportunity if your opponent can't picture a potential knock and plop from the hide he is about to reach. You're not just roping to the crate and oh shit I can't hit him there I'll knock him just enough so I can get a hit in.
Yes I do. There is nothing hard about dropping a petrol bomb to block a worm
If you're hiding in a drill hole.
-
There's probably more total rope knocks in any regular intermediate scheme than there is on a roper. In intermediate, like in Shopper, it's a creative skill, it facilitates kills sometimes. In roper it's much more of just touching the worm because you want him to get out of a hard hide or whatever, were he falls is hardly relevant since all you want is to attack. This is why piling is a much more demanding skill in default (intermediate) and in shopper.
I forgot about inter, I edited my post before you replied. I still dont think that this is relevant to your argument especially when in the days you talk about playing shopper with chicken (Ce etc), intermediate was played at nowhere near the level of skill it is played at today, it was hardly played competitively at all, if at all.
Where the worm ends up after you knock IS relevant in roper if you are going for fall damage, yes knocks need to be more precise and are more frequent in shopper, yet this is a roping skill, a roping skill found in defaults, yet a roping skill nonetheless.
If you're hiding in a drill hole.
Drill holes do not exist on indestructible maps.
There is no trend on TUS that shows the better defaulters win against the worse defaulters in shopper, if there was a trend then you would have a point, however there is no trend.
Any thoughts about that?
-
Drill holes do not exist on indestructible maps.
You genuinely didn't get what I meant with that? I trust a roper that has never had any experience with petrol beyond knowing what it does to be able to block a worm on a cave or "room", but I'm sure that in your experience playing shoppers you're aware that petrol blocking can happen in a bunch of non obvious places.
Where the worm ends up after you knock IS relevant in roper if you are going for fall damage, yes knocks need to be more precise and are more frequent in shopper, yet this is a roping skill, a roping skill found in defaults, yet a roping skill nonetheless.
Roping skill is not Roper skill. Roping skill existed before Ropers. RR requires roping skill but they're definitely not the same skills required to play Roper.
There is no trend on TUS that shows the better defaulters win against the worse defaulters in shopper, if there was a trend then you would have a point, however there is no trend.
That is not definite data is it? It could be explained by many factors, like that many people learn the game by playing Shoppers, it's many people's first "wormnet" scheme and that. But even if you could somehow draw a definite connection between that and my theory not being true the data would still be somewhat invalid because we're assuming, when debating, the hypothetical that the maps used meet our criteria of league standards, and this is not happening right now in TUS, at least not constantly, so ultimately there are too many variables in play to be able to judge based on TUS ratings. At least, this particular case.
-
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?
again, these arguments about which 'Schemes' belong to which 'Classes' will likely never end. even if an executive decision was made by MI, whatever possible benefit these 'Scheme Classes' bring can't possibly be worth all this trouble.
-
again, these arguments about which 'Schemes' belong to which 'Classes' will likely never end. even if an executive decision was made by MI, whatever possible benefit these 'Scheme Classes' bring can't possibly be worth all this trouble.
The proposal of change came from TUS directly. If a change is due at least let's make sure things like newbie bashing, avoiding and scheme specializing doesn't happen in the all around league, you might see it as too much trouble designing systems that stop these things from happening, I'm trying to give you one.
-
the fact people giving heated responses cant be a factor to stop a debate. some people keep trying to cut down a conversation about how to improfe the league. finnaly we talk about something useful and related to our league. thats nice, so let people talk, share ideas. it isnt essential something will be changed after this. but its essential to do this discussions, cause otherwise we stagnate.
-
the fact people giving heated responses cant be a factor to stop a debate. some people keep trying to cut down a conversation about how to improfe the league. finnaly we talk about something useful and related to our league. thats nice, so let people talk, share ideas. it isnt essential something will be changed after this. but its essential to do this discussions, cause otherwise we stagnate.
that's fair, feel free to continue refining these Scheme Classes. I didn't want all discussions to stop completely.
My point was that even if an agreement or compromise happens, we don't even know if this overall idea is even better or worse, marginally or drastically.
-
@ peja: sorry m8, thread has been well and truly hijacked however there are 2 or 3 other threads with regards to league changes right now, not that you need to stop posting in this one either.
You genuinely didn't get what I meant with that? I trust a roper that has never had any experience with petrol beyond knowing what it does to be able to block a worm on a cave or "room", but I'm sure that in your experience playing shoppers you're aware that petrol blocking can happen in a bunch of non obvious places.
Yes I got what you meant by that, regardless as to whether or not the petrol block is obvious, its dropping a weapon from a rope, the physicality is the same as an "obvious" petrol drop. Sure, the better defaulter may spot a "non obvious" petrol block whilst his non-experienced-in-default counterpart may not, however this is such a small detail, and a such a rare occurrence that it is not a relevant supporting point to the argument; "the better defaulter wins in shopper". "Non obvious" petrol blocks are not something you associate with general shopper play. A non obvious petrol block is attributed to creativity, I didn't deny creativity existed in shopper I said that creativity is minimal in shopper.
Like I keep saying, you do not win most shoper games because of minor discrepancies like "non obvious petrol blocks", most shopper games, in fact the overwhelming majority of shopper games are won due to the loser falling from rope during his turn, failing to attack or failing to hide.
Roping skill is not Roper skill. Roping skill existed before Ropers. RR requires roping skill but they're definitely not the same skills required to play Roper.
What I said was rope knocking is a roping skill. Its a roping skill, defaults require roping skill, yet this is not a default specific skill. This is a skill shared between the two, yet it is a roping skill.
In the days you talked about playing shopper, when would you rope knock in a default scheme for the league? You wouldnt beacause you dont rope knock in elite or Team17. Its only in the last half decade in which Intermediate has taken off that a link between rope knocking in default schemes and shopper can be drawn.
Yes, you are right to say rope knocking is also a default skill, however this is one of FEW default skills linking shopper and defaults. This is my argument; that default skills found in both shopper and defaults are few and far between, they are minimal.
Its funny how in your attempt to explain why you think the better defaulter is the better shopper player, the best examples of default skills found in shopper are "non obvious petrol blocks" and rope knocking. Its funny because in your "day" (the days when you played shopper in Ce) rope knocking was not even a skill associated with default schemes at all because the only default scheme that incorporates rope knocking (intermediate), was not played in your day, at least not at a competitive level.
That is not definite data is it? It could be explained by many factors, like that many people learn the game by playing Shoppers, it's many people's first "wormnet" scheme and that. But even if you could somehow draw a definite connection between that and my theory not being true the data would still be somewhat invalid because we're assuming, when debating, the hypothetical that the maps used meet our criteria of league standards, and this is not happening right now in TUS, at least not constantly, so ultimately there are too many variables in play to be able to judge based on TUS ratings. At least, this particular case.
EXACTLY.
Like you said, people start by playing shoppers, they learn how to use the weapons by playing shoppers, they learn how to rope knock in shoppers, they learn all the necessary skills required to win a game of shopper against a player of any skill level.... IN SHOPPERS! Aside from the rare (so rare that they are irrelevant) details like "non obvious petrol blocks", a shopper player needs no default experience to beat another player in that scheme. In fact, seeing as "non obvious petrol blocks" (and ALL other details) are possible in shopper if the map allows, it makes sense that the shopper only player will also discover these things in due course and ascertain the same attention to detail in shopper as the defaulter, without having to have played years worth of default schemes.
The fact that there is no correlation proving that the better defaulter will win the shopper supports this view. Its not like a scheme like Team17, where the better defaulter will generally beat the shopper player and there is a trend to support this.
Your original argument was that shopper was identical to Team17 bar a few differences, then I think you accepted that shopper is way off being on a parr with Team17 in terms of the amount of defaulting knowledge and skill required, and now you're saying that default knowledge is prominent and also relevant in shopper so long as the map is properly designed.
I would agree that Shopper, out of all the roping schemes requires the most "default" knowledge, however it is not the sort of knowledge that can only be discovered with years of default playing. To simplify, you can learn everything you need to know about shopper (in order to beat any player), by just playing shopper alone. There are no skills that you could not learn from just playing shopper alone as opposed to playing both schemes.
I stand by the fact that shopper is a scheme primarily based on consistent roping and hiding coupled with "common sense" attacks in the vast majority of games. You still have not said anything about the original point you made about shopper being "extremely similar to Team17 bar a few differences" and I am wondering why, when I feel I have explained in more than enough detail why the similarities between Shopper, Team17 and other default schemes are minimal.
-
the fact people giving heated responses cant be a factor to stop a debate. some people keep trying to cut down a conversation about how to improfe the league. finnaly we talk about something useful and related to our league. thats nice, so let people talk, share ideas. it isnt essential something will be changed after this. but its essential to do this discussions, cause otherwise we stagnate.
that's fair, feel free to continue refining these Scheme Classes. I didn't want all discussions to stop completely.
My point was that even if an agreement or compromise happens, we don't even know if this overall idea is even better or worse, marginally or drastically.
Actually, Worms:A competitive side is so low populated compared to other online games that I wonder why we have such a hard time to test things out. Test new systems (or schemes) out for a season, if it doesn't work, well just change back. There is no money involved and the fame you get by winning a worms league nowadays has little to no impact since we all know who are the real champs if they would want to do it.
I mean seriously, what is the problem if MI is even offering us to test out all the different things we came up with already. It's really sad to see so many ideas fade away because "theoretically" it could be worse. Well "theoretically" these changes could prove to be a lot better, just test it, damnit! :p
Back in the days no League Admin actually said: Let's hear your opinion, I will code it!
-
Back in the days no League Admin actually said: Let's hear your opinion, I will code it!
HHC himself was a total dictator in WL.
-
If you guys are about ready to move on from debating Ropa's choice of words when defending the idea that T17 and Shopper belong in the same class, I was going to point out how the following actually sounds like it speaks in favour of the system he and Mab propose:
So yeh its 50/50, assuming both players are at decent level, the better defaulter has no greater advantage in shopper than the better roper as MOST of the default skills you learn in defaults are NOT translated into shopper, MINIMAL similarities in default skills are shared between defaults and shopper. Falling from your rope during a turn is game changing, picking up a flamethrower instead of a dynamite is game changing, starting first or second is game changing. Shopper does not require as many default skills as you seem to believe.
I would agree that Shopper, out of all the roping schemes requires the most "default" knowledge, however it is not the sort of knowledge that can only be discovered with years of default playing. To simplify, you can learn everything you need to know about shopper (in order to beat any player), by just playing shopper alone. There are no skills that you could not learn from just playing shopper alone as opposed to playing both schemes.
You'll notice that as the classes were proposed here on TUS, the five of them aren't just there to randomly group two schemes together, they deliberately do it in such a way that we have two ground scheme classes, two roping classes and the controversial T17/Shopper one in between.
The Artillery class: BnG and Hysteria.
The Default class: Elite and Intermediate.
The Shopping class: Team17 and Shopper.
The (Battle?) Roping class: WxW and Roper.
The (Pure?) Roping class: RR and TTRR (maybe Warmer someday too, if we're able to find a way to compete at it without judges).
The first five (four without Intermediate) schemes range from having nothing to do with roping (BnG, Hyst) to having a bit to do with it (Elite, Inter, T17). The second five (four if you don't count TTRR separately) go from requiring moderate roping skill (Shopper, maybe WxW) to requiring a lot of it (WxW on harder maps, Roper, RR). You can see the steady progression, right? The aim of this isn't so much to find schemes that are essentially the same*, but rather to cover all the skillsets that an all-around WA league should require of its players, while keeping things fair so that neither an expert defaulter nor a pro roper will have an advantage at the end of the day. With that balance in mind, doesn't the middle one of the classes feel like it belongs there to you? It does to me, after literally years of thinking about this.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not actually sure that this is the way to go for TUS. These ideas, when they were being discussed, came in package with a lot of other assumptions. Namely that there would be a set of perfect scheme files and rules for them that we'd be able to enforce, a way of ensuring fairness when it comes to maps, a good way of awarding players who keep their scheme picks balanced while also giving scheme specialists things to be proud of and so on. They are all things that would require not only a lot of work from the people running everything, but also a pretty damn high level of communication within the community, just so everyone taking part was on the same page regarding important matters. In essence, they are ideas meant for a slightly different WormNet than we're faced with today. I know MI intends to tackle some of that with TUS 2.0, but that only means he's going to have even less time and energy to try and make everything else fall into place perfectly. So I guess what I'm saying is, even if grouping league schemes in this way turns out not to be the solution for TUS for whatever reason, it is something that a significant portion of dedicated WA players believes in; don't knock it until you've really thought about it.
* When you put it like that, it's no surprise everyone's blood pressure went up.
-
Back in the days no League Admin actually said: Let's hear your opinion, I will code it!
HHC himself was a total dictator in WL.
so were you minus the tator :)