Quote from: Chicken23 on June 22, 2010, 01:53 AM
Ok
we had playoffs vs cfc and ran into a problem.
I know I'm in cfc and stuff but this has nothing to do with it.
I'm really unimpressed that whoever it was that decided it chose shopper to be a "rope" scheme.
Whoever it was I ask for him to argument why shopper is considered a rope scheme when it has much more to do with the usage of weapons than roping.
Because if we're going to put both WxW (which is basically a roper with an easier map and more fair crates) and shopper in the roper subgroup then that's a huge ass contradiction.
Seriously, why has this skipped past everyone? You seriously telling me that the better roper will win the shopper game as opposed to the better weapon user?
I'm afraid I need arguments...
Roping and rope knocking play as much a part in shopper as weapon usage does. Not all weps are that reliant on how you use them in shopper anyway, its only in odd circumstances that there may be a way to cause more damage by doing something more creatively. Shopper is a roping scheme.
+ Shopper blows, very boring. Its a good introduction scheme for people learning how to rope and use different weapons, but theres so little strategy and it rarely requires any ingenuity or skill. Picking it as a playoff game? pffff
Quote from: NAiL on July 24, 2011, 07:34 PM
Roping and rope knocking play as much a part in shopper as weapon usage does. Not all weps are that reliant on how you use them in shopper anyway, its only in odd circumstances that there may be a way to cause more damage by doing something more creatively. Shopper is a roping scheme.
+ Shopper blows, very boring. Its a good introduction scheme for people learning how to rope and use different weapons, but theres so little strategy and it rarely requires any ingenuity or skill. Picking it as a playoff game? pffff
sorry Nail but I'm afraid you've just not played shopper enough.
In a good map, with a good scheme it's probably the most creative scheme, and in the decisive actions, roping has little to do with anything.
imagine A and B, A has only played ropers in his life whilst B has only done elites in his life.
They're put face to face in a shopper.
The Elite will win. Trust me.
You could've countered his post with just one name, ropa: Guardian :)
oh ye Guardian haha he was vg in elite, and shoppa and not that good in roper.
missed him :( good friend ae
@Darkone, nah saying a nick wouldnt mean anything to me. Im also confident most players could beat "Guardian" in shopper considering shopper is won through consistency and luck as oppose to creativity and skill. Not that im downplaying consistency, but you can only be as creative in shopper as the crates and map allow you to be. Creativity is circumstantial in shopper whereas consistency is fundamental.
ropa: Nah I have played enough, ive probably played every scheme more than you have.
I see your point, yes selective weapon use is important but only when its an option. Creativity in shopper is circumstantial and dependant firstly on the map, and secondly on the situation. Creativity in shopper is MINIMAL. It goes like this, rope to crate, find worm to attack. Can you pile any worms? Hide.
As far as creativity with weapons goes, it stretches to this. Can I do any more damage with this grenade by placing it somewhere in particular as oppose to on his head? Can I dyna drop that worm into a plop? Can I knock that worm down and then drop a petrol just right so he cant move next turn? As far as creativity goes in shopper, thats it. To describe it as one of the most creative schemes (even on a good map) is ridiculous. Using weapons to their full potential is a basic skill. If you can find me any replays that show shopper to be the most creative scheme for worms ill change my mind. Shopper (on a high level) requires consistency far more than creativity. Consistency is the name of the game when it comes to shopper, not creativity.
The argument you raised is that shopper is not a roping scheme and I disagree. Yes roping is not that important (as long as you have basic rope skil), but roping IS required, Its a fundamental element of the scheme. Shopper NEEDS the rope in order to work, thats what makes it a roping scheme. Roping to crates and knocking worms is a huge part of the scheme, the scheme wouldnt work without the rope and that in my opinion makes it a roping scheme.
So my challenge to you: Find one replay where creativity won someone a shopper. Consistency and luck is what wins shopper on the top level, there is LITTLE room for creativity in comparison to other schemes.
Quote from: NAiL on July 24, 2011, 08:52 PM
Nah I have played enough, ive probably played every scheme more than you have.
Lol, how do you come to this conclusion?
As far as the rest goes, you're stating that getting the most damage out of a weapon is a basic skill. I can guarantee you that you'll be lucky to achieve max damage in any given turn ONCE in any random shopper match. Finding ways in which to achieve more damage than it's obvious I consider it creativity, you might think drawing BR maps is more so like it, let's just agree to disagree then.
Roping scheme is a scheme were roping is the most important aspect of the scheme. You need good rope skill to be a top elite player, yet no one calls elite a roping skill. I don't want to get carried away because quite frankly I have very solid thoughts about this game and you're not possibly adding anything fresh to this conversation. So let me go back to my example, A vs B, you still think the rope only guy would win?
No, I believe the better defaulter would win the game IF he was consistent. Your point about max damage is irrelevant. You could make the same point about any scheme where damaging worms is part of the gameplay, ANY scheme.
Now let me go back to my point, which is simple. REGARDLESS of how you use weapons and all that business, shopper doesnt work without the rope. Shopper is a roping scheme because without the rope the scheme is not playable. You also seem to not be considering the importance of rope knocks and the speed at which you can rope to a crate, pile and unpile worms, attack and then hide. Roping plays a HUGE part in shopper, rope knocking is vital, its a roping scheme!
Roper requires creativity with attacks, as does wxw, but that doesnt change the fact that they are roping schemes because the main emphasis of the gameplay is based on roping around the map!
+ I "get" this game better than you ever will, its in my blood.
Quote from: NAiL on July 24, 2011, 09:16 PM
No, I believe the better defaulter would win the game IF he was consistent. Your point about max damage is irrelevant. You could make the same point about any scheme where damaging worms is part of the gameplay, ANY scheme.
Now let me go back to my point, which is simple. REGARDLESS of how you use weapons and all that business, shopper doesnt work without the rope. Shopper is a roping scheme because without the rope the scheme is not playable. You also seem to not be considering the importance of rope knocks and the speed at which you can rope to a crate, pile and unpile worms, attack and then hide. Roping plays a HUGE part in shopper, rope knocking is vital, its a roping scheme!
Roper requires creativity with attacks, as does wxw, but that doesnt change the fact that they are roping schemes because the main emphasis of the gameplay is based on roping around the map!
Shopper without rope is more playable than shopper with weapons. What's your point? To make random statements that do not defend your point but mine?
Wxw has no room for creativity since in a good map you have only 1-5 seconds to attack. It's a roper scheme because now that's all about roping as opposed to shopper were roping is only like 10 seconds of the 30 you have.
on a sidenote, still curious as to how you could possibly think you've played more games than I have at any given scheme.... since when you only started playing worms I had already won like 50 clan leagues. however I obviously cannot argue with worms being in your blood. D1 is the one who could possibly help you out.
hahahahaha
[quote Im also confident most players could beat "Guardian" in shopper [/quote]
confident how? elaborate please, because Nail, I actually like you, well, used to, when you didn't type has as much bullshit per second, but why wold you ever be confident about most shopper players beating guardian? The guy was dedicated, and whilst I and others considered him a lick ass newbie he had an impressive shopper rating and he is a great example to use.
ropa you are ignoring my points and not responding to them. I responded to your points, so do me the same courtesy.
Shopper without the rope WOULD NOT WORK, FULL STOP. You wouldnt be able to reach crates that fell in certain places.
My point (very simple ye): shopper is a roping scheme as roping is a fundamental element of the scheme.
Your point: shopper is not a roping scheme cos u gotta be creative with weapons.
Seems we arent going to agree, so lets leave this argument here.
Also, ive been playing this game and only this game most days since 2005. You started before me, but you havent been active since I started playing. Its funny when oldschoolers like you come back and think that because they were active in 2002-2004 theyve played the game for 10 years.
I also beat you in every scheme.
Quote from: NAiL on July 24, 2011, 09:26 PM
Shopper without the rope WOULD NOT WORK, FULL STOP. You wouldnt be able to reach crates that fell in certain places.
It doesn't work without weapons either, you wouldn't be able to kill anything. So it's not a valid point because it can be used both ways (in fact, it works better to defend my point)
Quote
My point (very simple ye): shopper is a roping scheme as roping is a fundamental element of the scheme.
Weapons are
more fundamental
Quote
Your point: shopper is not a roping scheme cos u gotta be creative with weapons.
My point actually is that what you do with weapons is more important than what you do with rope. Thanks for coming along, now try to pay attention-.
as for the rest, I'm not going to get into a e-peen wars about worms with you nail you don't even have the facts right, 2002? try 1999. And yeah, you've been playing 24/7 for 5 years now, congratulations, do you know how many things I had achieved in WA in my first 5 years. No, of course you don't. edit: this last part, no, i'm not bragging about it, I am only rejoicing about proving nail wrong.
Hm, so you consider a scheme in which you rope around a map which basically was made for roping around, collecting crates in places you basically can mostly only reach with a rope, knocking your opponent's worms from the rope to get them where you want them to be, ultimately attacking them from rope to rope to the place where you want to hide your worm a default scheme? Can't help but doubt your sense of logic. :) Of course weapons play a role, they do also in wxw scheme and loads of other schemes, but essentially shopper is a rope scheme.
Quote from: ropa on July 24, 2011, 09:31 PM
It doesn't work without weapons either, you wouldn't be able to kill anything. So it's not a valid point because it can be used both ways (in fact, it works better to defend my point)
No, you are missing the point.
Elite still works (although not as well) without ninja ropes, because its a default scheme. Intermediate works without ninja ropes, because its a default scheme.
Roping schemes DONT work, without the rope. You see my point now? Very simple as I said so dont twist it into a new context that bares absolutely no relevance to the argument as you pointed out.
Quote from: ropa on July 24, 2011, 09:31 PM
My point actually is that what you do with weapons is more important than what you do with rope. Thanks for coming along, now try to pay attention-.
I already said, I AGREE the better defaulter would win. That has nothing to do with my argument that shopper IS a roping scheme, ya spastic.
Quote from: ropa on July 24, 2011, 09:31 PM
as for the rest, I'm not going to get into a e-peen wars about worms with you nail you don't even have the facts right, 2002? try 1999. And yeah, you've been playing 24/7 for 5 years now, congratulations, do you know how many things I had achieved in WA in my first 5 years. No, of course you don't. edit: this last part, no, i'm not bragging about it, I am only rejoicing about proving nail wrong.
I was using "2002-2004" as an EXAMPLE for oldschoolers who think that theyve played longer than they have because they started at a certain date.
+ What did you "achieve" rofl. Were you always rude and arrogant (I dislike your attitude when u came back to these forums) or is that something that took you 5 years of playing worms to achieve?
Thats my last post here, ill be nice and let you have the last word.
(you love it)
+ f@#! you motherf@#!er
++ ropa everyone knows you talk to people like shit, you have no respect, so ill return the favour, cocksucker.
...about your post that comes after this one, YOU WERE THE ONE WHO TOLD ME I NEEDED TO PLAY MORE SHOPPER!
You were the first to bring experience into the context of this argument, not me, dopey mug.
GGd.
(https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/Themes/default/images/warnwarn.gif)
You can call it an example or you can call it X. Fact remains you were using that statement to imply you have played more worms than me, which frankly, I find it hard to believe and I have no idea how it relates to the topic. But me being me I felt like proving you wrong nontheless since I had the chance.
You're the one who tried to use that as some sort of enhancement to your argument, as if you had more experience on what you're talking about, you then even claimed you beat me at all schemes, which I sincerly do not understand if you mean you have beaten me at least once in every scheme, that you would beat me now or that you're plain and simple better than me at all schemes.
I was only playing your game, and quite frankly, I was doing it better, because you have one weapon, your word, your claims of beating me at all schemes and therefore having more knowledge on the topic, your word has it's value, for you mostly, but I think actual records hold more weight when talking about experience, and whilst you have your word I have my records. I wouldn't be proud of having neither of them to be honest, but since you use one I counter you with the other.
edit: once more, I'll ask the mods here to show consistency, when I go about name calling at least I use it in context, this bro (that's the slang your people use right?) just throws random insults after a plus sign, come on now!
back on topic:
some of you seem to be struggling with one key aspect in this whole thing. Frequency of use shouldn't affect what you call a scheme, or at least, it shouldn't affect the way of Playoffs or rating. Shotgun is used frequently in elite but you wouldn't call it an accuracy scheme would you?
It's contradictory and incosistant. Let me explain you why:
what you're trying to do with these limitations in PO picks is make it so all-aroundness is encouraged (correct me if I'm wrong) and so say, two players can't abuse the system by becoming very good at only a small part of what the league offers in terms of schemes.
So it's fine if you don't want to agree with me and my arguments, but you did admit the defaulter would win, and that's all you really need. Because I doubt anyone reading would like to disagree with that precise statement? I'll gladly hear.
If we take that into account then quite obviously something is wrong with the way things work, because if you put shoppers in the rope category when you agree default skills play a bigger role in winning then you're only giving a handicap to ropers, because there's no penalty for playing elite-shopper-whatever...
Historically, you'll also find out that dedicated ropers struggled with shoppers whilst the dudes that used to play team17 and elite had no issues with it.
anyone would pick chicken over volrin in a shopper. anyone.
Long topic but interresting if you ignore the "I am the best" part :-).
As ropa pointed out. Using sg is not a key factor in elite.
I'd say, in shopper you have to be able to rope. It requiere skills but it's not that hard to get it. Exactly like sg in elite. If you want to do 25 you have to get some skills. With good skills you'll always do 25. But if you use your brain and see that you can bat him to the water, no matters if you missed a 25 hp shoot. As in elite, best players are the one who can do 25 hp shot and use their brain, in shopper that's the one who masterize rope knocking,blocking and the use of weapon.
After talking if roping is more important than the weapon.. I'd say you have to get a minimum skills of both.
Ropa, imagine volrin play against chicken in a giant tight map volrin who masterized rope would have won.
In the other case, on dogma map chicken would have won.
I'd say most of the shoppa map are easy ropable so chicken would win most of the time. But for a wxw I wouldn't say the same :)
Quote from: ropa on July 24, 2011, 10:18 PM
Historically, you'll also find out that dedicated ropers struggled with shoppers whilst the dudes that used to play team17 and elite had no issues with it.
anyone would pick chicken over volrin in a shopper. anyone.
I think you completely miss the point when you minimize roping abilities on being able to rope quickly and safely. If Chicken is able to rope safely through a shoppa map and he's able to rope knock worms safely in tough, narrow hides, commonly found on most shopper maps, he has some good roping skills, as simple as that. Kind of the same difference between roper and rr, quite different kind of roping required for those. I don't find the tactics to be different from other roping schemes either... it's mostly about piling the right worm and stuff like that. Totally common stuff. :)
I gotta admit, Both nail and ropa make excellent points and they are both pretty much right, but, to me Shopper is the odd one out, it's a hybrid it's not a roping scheme and it's not a default scheme yet at the same time it's a roping scheme and a default scheme, it's a "Hybrid" scheme, I believe classic should have a balance of Rope schemes/Default schemes and a few Hybrids.
Plus: A very good Roper and a very good Eliter will BOTH get annihilated by a very good Hybrid player ;)
And they actually only added Ninja Rope to Shopper to make it more "fun", if you played the previous Worms when Ninja Rope didn't exist, you would know that, so because of this fact, I agree with ropa, "Shopper" is the term used for collecting crates.
both ropa and NAiL made good points, I was kinda accepting shopper as default scheme, but then I read chakkman's post and now I can't decide!
Quote from: chakkman on July 24, 2011, 11:27 PM
it's mostly about piling the right worm and stuff like that. Totally common stuff. :)
Yup, totally common rope stuff. That's why it isn't a rope scheme, nor is elite.
I'm afraid the level of shopper is so low nowadays that people are unable to grasp the concept.
WxW
is a roper scheme, because most of the time you don't think what to do with the weapon, you only think about roping fast enough so you have enough time to attack with the first weapon that comes to mind. In shopper, most of your turn is dedicated to deciding what to do with the weapons you have, and you use roping as a mean to achieve the attack.
We have agreed that you require more default skill to win, yet you insist in calling it a roper scheme because rope is used often.
Then I guess Roper is a chute scheme, right?
chakkman: roping safely around a shopper map and being able to do simple knocks does not make Chicken (using the example not talking in stone) a good roper, the same way being able to navigate and knock through the map in intermediate doesn't make you a good roper either, the only difference concerning the rope between intermediate and shopper is that in one you have limited ropes and in the other you use them every time, but the skill needed is almost identical.
Chicken will win because he will know when and were to use the weapons to maximize their potential, which is what wins shoppers for people, being a super fast good roper doesn't guarantee you the win, in fact, it really doesn't affect the outcome, on the other hand, ability to use weapons DOES affect the outcome.
This website has done a good job at letting go a lot of people that could add actual insight to this topic, and if the same modus operandis continues to be used I'm afraid it will only drag them more away.
Well, I totally agree with ropa exept a point.
In inter, you can win without using a single rope whereas in shoppa if your skills are null in rope you cannot win.
For me shoppa is a rope scheme. Why ?
1) if you cannot rope you can't attack
2) I will always think of shoppa as the noob roper school :). Most of "new" people start with shoppa to learn roping.
Finally, if you're new to worms and know only the basic weapon skills. You'll be able to play any default game (elite,inter...) but you won't be able to play shoppa because you won't be able to rope. If you know only rope, you still can manage to get the create and attack for like 2hp. Still 2hp is more than 0.
I understand ropa point of view. For you who is a good roper, roping in shoppa only use 5% of your skills but for someone new, the big deal is to rope to the crate and attack in 30 sec. So that's what make it a rope scheme for me :)
The dynamic of the game is more similar to roper and WxW then it is to other schemes in TUS classic (though it does have some similarities to hysteria concerning piling). The fact that roping well is not as much an issue here does not detract from that.
If you're going to look at the skills required, then you'll find that T17 doesn't really fit in the same group as BnG. Hysteria doesn't quite fit in with elite either. You'd need 8 separate categories for all these schemes (though WxW and roper are most similar in the bunch and wouldn't require a separate niche).
In the end, it comes down to what system is workable. It's not a perfect divide, but then I don't think there is one. But if you still want to continue this train of thought, then perhaps we should introduce the great divide between ropers and non-ropers in the discussion too; after all, the rope is just one weapon out of plenty more. Why should the rope be so important for playoffs?
The current system is a compromise, no doubt. It has its fault, just like any other system, but it's a package deal. Try a new system and people will complain about the downsides of that system.
Quote from: ropa on July 25, 2011, 11:59 AM
This website has done a good job at letting go a lot of people that could add actual insight to this topic, and if the same modus operandis continues to be used I'm afraid it will only drag them more away.
Not sure what to make of this. You're making it sound as if MI fired them, but that would mean he hired them first, doesn't it? People come and go as they please. Don't blame other people for it, it's their own choice.
Quote from: DarkOne on July 25, 2011, 05:07 PM
The dynamic of the game is more similar to roper and WxW then it is to other schemes in TUS classic (though it does have some similarities to hysteria concerning piling). The fact that roping well is not as much an issue here does not detract from that.
It is not fair to put limiations on rating gains, and apply limitations on PO setup based on "dynamic of the game", that doesn't make any sense to me, and I doubt it makes any for you.
Quote
If you're going to look at the skills required, then you'll find that T17 doesn't really fit in the same group as BnG. Hysteria doesn't quite fit in with elite either. You'd need 8 separate categories for all these schemes (though WxW and roper are most similar in the bunch and wouldn't require a separate niche).
I don't think you're trying to justfy this by saying "well, these other things are wrong too", but that's how it sounded D1. There's a division in 4 groups that makes infinitely more sense, in fact, I'm pretty sure you should be aware of it?
Quote
In the end, it comes down to what system is workable. It's not a perfect divide, but then I don't think there is one.
there might be no perfect divide, but there's others much better than the current so I don't understand what you're trying to tell me with this.
Quote
But if you still want to continue this train of thought, then perhaps we should introduce the great divide between ropers and non-ropers in the discussion too; after all, the rope is just one weapon out of plenty more. Why should the rope be so important for playoffs?
because there's three schemes that majoritarily rely on the rope skill.
Quote
The current system is a compromise, no doubt. It has its fault, just like any other system, but it's a package deal. Try a new system and people will complain about the downsides of that system.
yes but I don't really care about "In practice" since I'm not running a league, I'm only highlighting what I think is wrong here, and it's up to the staff to listen or ask for feedback.
Quote from: ropa on July 25, 2011, 11:59 AM
This website has done a good job at letting go a lot of people that could add actual insight to this topic, and if the same modus operandis continues to be used I'm afraid it will only drag them more away.
Quote
Not sure what to make of this. You're making it sound as if MI fired them, but that would mean he hired them first, doesn't it? People come and go as they please. Don't blame other people for it, it's their own choice.
I didn't mean that, what I meant is that I believe that if you don't enforce a minimun quality of posting (and encourage it) eventually the more insightful members will leave, good job on the shout box though, it's like forums but for the special members. Don't want to generalize but I think that's mostly the case. Because if those people were still here adding to the discussion then it would probably be easier for sense to expand, since I wouldn't be alone, and quite frankly, we all know how many people are going to automaticly disagree with me just because they're jealous of by bigger dick.
who f@#!ing cares
Quote from: avirex on July 25, 2011, 05:35 PM
who f@#!ing cares
(http://i55.tinypic.com/jreagl.png)
Quote from: DarkOne on July 25, 2011, 05:07 PM
after all, the rope is just one weapon out of plenty more. Why should the rope be so important for playoffs?
What's the difference between t17 and shopper? The rope. You're the ones giving it such importance, not me. In fact, I'm trying to convince people that rope skill is as important in shopper as the ability to throw grenades in elite, you can't win without it, but elite is not bng, and shopper is not roper.
"In the Classic League, the first four games must include two rope based schemes (Rope Race, Roper, WxW, Shopper) and two normal schemes (BnG, Team17, Elite, Hysteria). The last game is picked by the higher ranked player and can be any of these schemes."
who decided on this rule anyway? it being there isn't even worth all this discussion on which schemes qualify under ROPE or DEFAULT. I'd just get rid of the rule and hope for the best.
only the top rated clans who often make the playoffs are affected anyway, so they could voice their opinion or maybe even vote on it.
I'm not a top rated player that would be affected by this rule for any singles, but I might be affected in clanner
In my opinion, going by playing experience and the 'best' shopper players, shopper is a default scheme if it has to be divided by rope/default classification.
I believe this because:
a) The better defaulter would make better use of the weapons and therefore would employ tactics that they wouldn't be able to achieve in roper (there are more than 3 attacking weapons, you don't know beforehand what weapon you will get). The roping element in shopper for any skilled player should also be a non-issue. It cannot be regarded as a skill to be able to collect a crate, and possibly knock in the given time limit. Roper scheme only allows half the time to achieve this and less worms to attack.
b) The best shoppers are better defaulters. Yes, sounds like a generalisation, but how else can you categorise the scheme? This point is massive in a playoff. The better rope player would never want to pick shopper. More like, the better defaulter would be delighted to be 2-2 with shopper as last scheme.
If you are using default/rope style schemes for the aid of playoff choices, shopper must surely be a default
Quote from: Ryan on July 25, 2011, 06:31 PM
I'm not a top rated player that would be affected by this rule for any singles, but I might be affected in clanner
In my opinion, going by playing experience and the 'best' shopper players, shopper is a default scheme if it has to be divided by rope/default classification.
I believe this because:
a) The better defaulter would make better use of the weapons and therefore would employ tactics that they wouldn't be able to achieve in roper (there are more than 3 attacking weapons, you don't know beforehand what weapon you will get). The roping element in shopper for any skilled player should also be a non-issue. It cannot be regarded as a skill to be able to collect a crate, and possibly knock in the given time limit. Roper scheme only allows half the time to achieve this and less worms to attack.
b) The best shoppers are better defaulters. Yes, sounds like a generalisation, but how else can you categorise the scheme? This point is massive in a playoff. The better rope player would never want to pick shopper. More like, the better defaulter would be delighted to be 2-2 with shopper as last scheme.
If you are using default/rope style schemes for the aid of playoff choices, shopper must surely be a default
welcome back Ryan :D
ropa, what the hell does my post count have to do with how silly this debate is...
i run a clan, a community, and have a strong need to bicker with komo under any circumstance, of course my post count is high.
but that does not make a debate about if shoppa scheme is more default, or more roper...
its f@#!ing both, komo said it best.. i dunno about calling it a "hybrid" scheme hahaha but its a f@#!in good combination of both roping, and weapon use...
nail is right, u are a f@#!ing pussy!
Quote from: avirex on July 25, 2011, 06:44 PM
i run a clan, a community,
then you amongst all people should care.
How exactly all of you agreed to discuss shopper on the condition of "Good map choice"? Is it a debate on how is shopper on "City Shopper"? Is that a standard shopper? With the huge variety of shopper maps nowadays, it is the map that decides shopper is a rope scheme or a default scheme.
Quote from: ropa on July 25, 2011, 11:59 AM
WxW is a roper scheme, because most of the time you don't think what to do with the weapon, you only think about roping fast enough so you have enough time to attack with the first weapon that comes to mind. In shopper, most of your turn is dedicated to deciding what to do with the weapons you have, and you use roping as a mean to achieve the attack.
Depends on the map really. On most w3w's or w4w's you have a lot of time to put up a strategy, at least for your next turns or for the turns after this as well. Actually i believe wxw and shopper is kinda the same thing apart from you have to additionally touch walls in wxw. :) On hard maps strategy is getting short and it depends more on what you would call typical rope stuff like being quick, being safe and so. But i dunno many guys who would host such a hard map that it mostly depends on who can do all walls and attack in the same turn (MonkeyIsland is one of those :)), and that's not what it's about imo. Strategy plays a big role in wxw also as in most of the other schemes (apart from rr maybe but well... can be tactics also if you wanna go flatout or do a safe run).
Anyway, maybe set up a poll to determine if shopper is more of a default or more of a rope scheme. That would be the most righteous thing i guess.
Edit: Just saw this:
Quote from: MonkeyIsland on July 25, 2011, 07:16 PM
How exactly all of you agreed to discuss shopper on the condition of "Good map choice"? Is it a debate on how is shopper on "City Shopper"? Is that a standard shopper? With the huge variety of shopper maps nowadays, it is the map that decides shopper is a rope scheme or a default scheme.
Very good point.
I think shopper can be played as with rope as without it. But nowadays only rope shopper is played and that would be really difficult to make people play shopper without rope and I dont see a real reason to make so radical changes. Maybe you wont be able to play it in leagues but you still can host shoppers without ropes, maybe someone will be interested in it. And also there's Team17 scheme where the crates are dropped each turn and there's only 1 rope. As for me it was always something like shopper without roping.
Quote from: ropa on July 24, 2011, 09:31 PM
Quote from: NAiL on July 24, 2011, 09:26 PM
Shopper without the rope WOULD NOT WORK, FULL STOP. You wouldnt be able to reach crates that fell in certain places.
It doesn't work without weapons either, you wouldn't be able to kill anything. So it's not a valid point because it can be used both ways (in fact, it works better to defend my point)
Maybe but... Roper and WxW also doesnt work without weapons, so if we go to this way we must say the only rope scheme is rrtt.
Quote from: Korydex on July 25, 2011, 08:30 PM
I think shopper can be played as with rope as without it. But nowadays only rope shopper is played and that would be really difficult to make people play shopper without rope and I dont see a real reason to make so radical changes. Maybe you wont be able to play it in leagues but you still can host shoppers without ropes, maybe someone will be interested in it. And also there's Team17 scheme where the crates are dropped each turn and there's only 1 rope. As for me it was always something like shopper without roping.
The problem is that shopper without rope completely lost the sense, for example shopper with jetpack... I mean ropeknocking and the chance to fail, since it is impossible to fall from jetpack, so JP Shopper is 100% luck of crates.
Quote from: avirex on July 25, 2011, 06:44 PM
ropa, what the hell does my post count have to do with how silly this debate is...
i run a clan, a community, and have a strong need to bicker with komo under any circumstance, of course my post count is high.
but that does not make a debate about if shoppa scheme is more default, or more roper...
its f@#!ing both, komo said it best.. i dunno about calling it a "hybrid" scheme hahaha but its a f@#!in good combination of both roping, and weapon use...
nail is right, u are a f@#!ing pussy!
:-*
Quote from: MonkeyIsland on July 25, 2011, 07:16 PM
How exactly all of you agreed to discuss shopper on the condition of "Good map choice"? Is it a debate on how is shopper on "City Shopper"? Is that a standard shopper? With the huge variety of shopper maps nowadays, it is the map that decides shopper is a rope scheme or a default scheme.
This is a valid point. When I theorycraft about schemes I always take into account that the best maps are always used.
why cant we agree that shopper is the rope scheme which is more comfortable to defaulters. even stats dont show the real skill in 100% u wont find defaulters when u look in the overall shopper top 10. they all are good rope players, i cant find any specialist ground players there but a lot of good allrounders.
shoppa is a tranny scheme porra!!!
nino do u have cassette deck??
Quote from: Peja on July 25, 2011, 11:39 PM
why cant we agree that shopper is the rope scheme which is more comfortable to defaulters. even stats dont show the real skill in 100% u wont find defaulters when u look in the overall shopper top 10. they all are good rope players, i cant find any specialist ground players there but a lot of good allrounders.
compare the shopper top 10 to the team17 top10...
oh?
I don't see why this is even a problem for Clanner Playoffs, Clans today consist of players skilled at different schemes, as an example, I am extremely good at BnG/Roper/Hysteria, pretty good at TTRR/Shopper/WxW, and around average at Elite/T17, other members are strong at schemes others are not, and usually cover all schemes for all clans.
When participating in PO all clans SHOULD have all members on standby as theres 8 legal schemes, so it shouldn't matter what rule there is for who picks what, I honestly feel that the most important thing about PO is who gets 1st pick, and the clan who put in most effort and played the best to win the Season deserves this.
Quote from: ropa on July 26, 2011, 06:32 AM
Quote from: Peja on July 25, 2011, 11:39 PM
why cant we agree that shopper is the rope scheme which is more comfortable to defaulters. even stats dont show the real skill in 100% u wont find defaulters when u look in the overall shopper top 10. they all are good rope players, i cant find any specialist ground players there but a lot of good allrounders.
compare the shopper top 10 to the team17 top10...
oh?
according to your theory dmitry should pawn Ray for example, whath i cant believe, but ok.
basicly its a matter of definition of a ropescheme.
Definition a)
A Ropescheme is a scheme where the better rope player wins against the defaulter.
(ropa) shoppa: no
Definition b) A Ropescheme is a scheme which is basicly played with the ninja rope.
(chakkman) shoppa. yes
ropa correct me pls if i misunderstood your point. (
oops useless, you will correct me anyway)
Well Definition a) is very unclear imo, cause:
-terms like better ropeplayer arent exact, and objective they are subjective attributions.
- usually the most constant player wins a match. According to shopper, more games are decided by fails instead of weapon creativity.
Definition b) -maybe too easy
Quote from: Peja on July 26, 2011, 09:18 AM
more games are decided by fails instead of weapon creativity.
Let's do an effort and debate with order. It's really non issue if being a better roper is a matter of subjectivty, since the topic of discussion here is if it's fair to limit playoffs and scheme rating gain in such way. By having shopper as a roper scheme you penalize ropers because it's them who should be having a handicap when playing shopper, roper and WxW (hence a limitation so the handicap isn't abused) but in reality it's the defaulters who are getting a double handicap in their favour.
Because elite-shopper-other default scheme is a possible combo, in which the better defaulter wins three times whilst the better roper can only win a maximun of 2 games (in virtual theory) and that's only if he picks first.
I don't think I can present my argument in a more simplified way, so I hope my posture is clear.
shoppa is both a roping, and default scheme... as a roper, i feel confident in going into that scheme and coming out with a win, and im sure defaulters feel the same way...
so whats is your arguement exactly?? you want everyone to say its a default scheme? thats not going to happen.. its a good mixture of both. as komo already said.
Quote from: avirex on July 26, 2011, 02:43 PM
shoppa is both a roping, and default scheme... as a roper, i feel confident in going into that scheme and coming out with a win, and im sure defaulters feel the same way...
so whats is your arguement exactly?? you want everyone to say its a default scheme? thats not going to happen.. its a good mixture of both. as komo already said.
actually, old avirex, who was actually a roper and basically non factor in other schemes wouldn't feel confident about winning a shopper.
you might now, but you don't exactly only play ropers anymore.
don't lie about yourself to make a point.
Quote from: Komito on July 26, 2011, 07:22 AM
I don't see why this is even a problem for Clanner Playoffs, Clans today consist of players skilled at different schemes, as an example, I am extremely good at BnG/Roper/Hysteria, pretty good at TTRR/Shopper/WxW, and around average at Elite/T17, other members are strong at schemes others are not, and usually cover all schemes for all clans.
When participating in PO all clans SHOULD have all members on standby as theres 8 legal schemes, so it shouldn't matter what rule there is for who picks what, I honestly feel that the most important thing about PO is who gets 1st pick, and the clan who put in most effort and played the best to win the Season deserves this.
I don't see an end to this discussion, and I'm left wondering if this rule is even needed. Again, I say just get rid of it.
I think it was rather unfair to say that i couldnt beat vorlin in roper! ::)
ok old "ropa" if you feel the need for everyone to just say shoppa is a default scheme, even though rope is the primary factor of the scheme... then sure, lets just say its default... happy? lol... ur reminding me of how komo used to be... no offense komo.
Quote from: avirex on July 27, 2011, 02:14 AM
ok old "ropa" if you feel the need for everyone to just say shoppa is a default scheme, even though rope is the primary factor of the scheme... then sure, lets just say its default... happy? lol... ur reminding me of how komo used to be... no offense komo.
I don't see why you needed to bring my name into it yet again lol, besides ropa isn't wrong, and neither are you, you are both right and you are basically arguing just because the other person has a different perspective.
I personally feel the Rope is not the primary factor of the scheme, Shoppers used to be played without "roping" skills, the original Shopper scheme that comes with WA only has 5 ropes, and was played in cavern maps, and before that Shoppers were played without rope at all on previous versions of the game before w2, I remember playing a Shopper style game on the game boy, I am sure it was called "crates" which is the exact same thing it was changed to Shopper to sound cooler.
Put it this way, if someone who never played WA before played Shopper and Shopper only against good Shopper players, they would very quickly notice people using the rope to knock worms around, and they would practise this, and soon get good at it, then they would play a Roper or TTRR or WxW and might not even reach the crate, the finish or all the walls.
Rope is an important part of Shopper now, and ONLY because people put Rope in it, it's because more popular, Rope makes most things more interesting, Shopper doesn't even need Rope if you play on cavern maps, we (the players) have edited the scheme adding infinite rope, more weapons, totally upgraded the maps to the extent that most people don't even know Shopper used to be nothing like it is now, it's evolved, it takes alot of default skill and rope skill to be a top player at Shopper, but picking Shopper is almost laughable today anyway.
I'm sticking with it's a Hybrid scheme, because:
hy·brid
[hahy-brid] Show IPA
–noun
1.
the offspring of two animals or plants of different breeds, varieties, species, or genera, especially as produced through human manipulation for specific genetic characteristics.
2.
a person or group of persons produced by the interaction or crossbreeding of two unlike cultures, traditions, etc.
3.
anything derived from heterogeneous sources, or composed of elements of different or incongruous kinds: a hybrid of the academic and business worlds.
Shoppers today = Roper(cba/afr)/T17(use what weps you get) on custom maps perfected over the years.
But, now someone will disagree with me, try to point out why I am wrong even though I am generally right, and what they say will probably be right, and I will admit this, and try to point out both opinions are valid, and probably still get yelled at...
Quote from: avirex on July 27, 2011, 02:14 AM
ok old "ropa" if you feel the need for everyone just to say
in what point of your process of thought did you come to the conclusion that I'm doing this based on a personal need?
Just because you often seek for the comfort of affirmation from other people (because you are extremely insecure) doesn't mean everyone is that way.
I'm doing this because it's wrong, and I want it fixed. Your first post in this thread was a joke attempt implying no one cares about this, you went a long way from not caring to becoming a topic regular. How about you are coherent with your first comments and actually leave if you have nothing valuable to add other than attack me personally because your insecurity only allows you to take things personally.
hahaha, yes im insecure... u have reached down to the depths of my personal issues through the internet, imagine the good you can do in real life? lol that may have been sarcastic...
and it was not saying it as a joke that "who f@#!ing cares" i was pretty serious :(
Quote from: avirex on July 27, 2011, 02:52 PM
and it was not saying it as a joke that "who f@#!ing cares" i was pretty serious :(
Which only shows the kind of agenda you have here. You don't care about a topic but you still go out of your way to let people know your feelings. Either you're a troll, or you really care about people knowing your feelings (insecurity).
So sorry for choosing the second option, I might've been wrong, you're probably just trolling.
Hope you're happy, both answers mean you're a douche.
Quote from: ropa on July 27, 2011, 06:33 PM
Quote from: avirex on July 27, 2011, 02:52 PM
and it was not saying it as a joke that "who f@#!ing cares" i was pretty serious :(
Which only shows the kind of agenda you have here. You don't care about a topic but you still go out of your way to let people know your feelings. Either you're a troll, or you really care about people knowing your feelings (insecurity).
So sorry for choosing the second option, I might've been wrong, you're probably just trolling.
Hope you're happy, both answers mean you're a douche.
its really funny seeing you masturbating on yourself ropa, but if you bash the guy, i want to masturbate on, we got a problem
is it possible that im an insecure troll, all mighty ropa? but if anyone is a deuche at these forums ropa, its you... no need to tell your feelings for people to know that.. pussy boy.
@franz,
I did get rid of it.
@others,
I think you are bored now. Locked.