Updating schemes/rules

[HHC]

Dunno about any schemes, except for T17 and Aerial. And all fixes there seem unnecessary or even damaging.

3 sec mines in Aerial are completely useless, because you can use your JP to fly by all mines that are anywhere close to your position and set them off. Likewise 0 sec is meh cause it'd be überfrustrating.
Removing crates.. *sigh* If you wanna destroy an important element of the game, sure.
SD? Also not needed. What's bad about a 40 min game every now and then? The longer the game takes the less land there is to fight on. I personally prefer these battles over the 'elite'-like setup with SD... that often end with the lucky player plopping the other guy first.

Why not remove all mines, remove crates and play on übercomplicated maps. You got yourself another lame ass bng-scheme that ends in a 'draw' every damn time.

T17-scheme works fine as is IMO, the only thing that could be discussed is limiting girders to 5 (although I dunno.. as you can read in my guide placings of girders is one of the most important strategic elements of the game. You don't want to limit them too much. Players will surely want to save at least 2 for SD, that leaves them only 3 for regular game. Too little to really get by with a strategy that is girder-intensive.
A free homing missile goes against the scheme's intentions. The idea is to collect random weaps in crates and fight the enemy with it. Add a homing missile and it will only encourage no-brain pro's to sit the entire game out on their side of the map. Without the missile players with no SD-crates will be forced to go on attack. No incentive anymore to do so if it's there.
How about decreasing HP's of worm, to say 80?
Or just play a little less... 'safe'.

Playing on open maps is meh too. What with the air attacks, or none available? What with ropes, how can you possible defend against it with a girder on an open map? How can you make 'zones'?

If it's not broken, don't fix it.

If taking every bit of non-predictable, 'random' elements from the game suits you.. play that shit-scheme called BnG.

The fun in worms is adapting to situations that you do not control. That's the challenge that makes it interesting.

Furthermore, why must EVERY league scheme only use ONE option in worms? We can alter pretty much every aspect of the game, yet ppl seem to only want to play 1 particular option in every damn scheme?? If you've got such a great element as crates or mines with different fuse times, why not make use of them, at least in 1 scheme?

Aerial without crates... I mean, seriously.. how uninteresting do you want a scheme to be?

[TheKomodo]

All I'm saying is that with a bit of tweaking the scheme would be BETTER but yeah lets not do it because the scheme is currently stands as a tactical masterpiece.

Better for who? Better for you maybe, but not for everyone else, this is what you fail to see.

The scheme as it stands is a masterpiece, but not a tactical masterpiece.

And Komo, seriously, if your best arguments come from a dictionary then just... dont start man. You do understand that even though a prodrace could be competitive also, it doesn't make it a f@#!ing masterpiece of a scheme now does it?

I wasn't arguing anything, you said Hysteria is broken and I was telling you that you were wrong, don't call it broken when it's not, it's LITERALLY NOT BROKEN, you can complain all you want about what you don't like about it.

Why the f@#! would we drive some shitty car when we could drive a Ferrari?

I'd never drive a Ferarri lol, total waste of money imo, I could use that money to do things that actually matter in the world.

[Sensei]

HHC - you should play some games with TUS aerial scheme and the one that was developed throughout last 1-2 years of playing it constantly. You would felt the difference and I'm pretty sure you'd like it. Just talking theoretically should not be taken for granted.

[Hurz]

aerial is broken, itself

[TheKomodo]

How is Aerial broken? I don't play so don't know :/

[TheWalrus]

How is Aerial broken? I don't play so don't know :/

Hurz is just expressing that he doesnt like playing the scheme

[Senator]

T17-scheme works fine as is IMO, the only thing that could be discussed is limiting girders to 5 (although I dunno.. as you can read in my guide placings of girders is one of the most important strategic elements of the game. You don't want to limit them too much. Players will surely want to save at least 2 for SD, that leaves them only 3 for regular game. Too little to really get by with a strategy that is girder-intensive.
A free homing missile goes against the scheme's intentions. The idea is to collect random weaps in crates and fight the enemy with it. Add a homing missile and it will only encourage no-brain pro's to sit the entire game out on their side of the map. Without the missile players with no SD-crates will be forced to go on attack. No incentive anymore to do so if it's there.
How about decreasing HP's of worm, to say 80?
Or just play a little less... 'safe'.

Playing on open maps is meh too. What with the air attacks, or none available? What with ropes, how can you possible defend against it with a girder on an open map? How can you make 'zones'?

If it's not broken, don't fix it.

If taking every bit of non-predictable, 'random' elements from the game suits you.. play that shit-scheme called BnG.

The fun in worms is adapting to situations that you do not control. That's the challenge that makes it interesting.

Your message seems to be directed more at the ideas of 1 x Missile, 5 x girder and open maps. Missile is listed there just as an option that was suggested recently and the other two I didn't even put on the list. Anyway Free was talking about dual layer cavern map without the border. The scheme plays almost like regular T17. You just don't need SD weaps to finish the game cos you can use the roof. Watch a replay if you haven't.

You should like equal crate probabilities more than tus scheme's probabilities because that way it's less predictable and more challenging. TUS scheme repeats a bunch of big bombs so you need less weapon knowledge and you don't need to deal with bad cards at any point. Isn't that boring?

You said these big bombs are needed because otherwise it's hard to make enough kills before SD. I don't think they make a difference. Having big bombs doesn't help if the opponent doesn't let you attack. You know the tus scheme gives a lot of bows and miniguns so you won't leave your 100HP worms in danger. You won't get more than 2 kills against a defensive player before SD, no matter how many holys you have. Worms may have less HP left but they are still alive. You still need 2 SD weaps or break through the defence.

With tus scheme you may not get any SD weap although you get most of the crates. Please show me replays where someone broke through the girders against a good player and won without SD weaps. "Play less safe" is your solution for draws? You can blame it on the players but draws happen and they are annoying. I've played 2 draws several times. SD weap probability should be higher unless we change some other variables such as round time, the number of girders or the number of select worms.

Besides, I think you should tell what was wrong with the scheme earlier. Why was the scheme fixed (by Ray?) if it wasn't broken? You could have just reduced the number of Bananas if they were too annoying and that's it.

[Free]

A free homing missile goes against the scheme's intentions. The idea is to collect random weaps in crates and fight the enemy with it. Add a homing missile and it will only encourage no-brain pro's to sit the entire game out on their side of the map. Without the missile players with no SD-crates will be forced to go on attack. No incentive anymore to do so if it's there.

The fun in worms is adapting to situations that you do not control. That's the challenge that makes it interesting.

So lets say I play "better" start and middle-game than you and I collect more crates and control more dropzones and we have even amount of worms/hp, ok? So I collect more crates than you overall but I can't beat you because you lucked out and got couple of SD weps meanwhile I got 0, even though I've played better than you. Get it? It's RIDICILOUS and most importantly it is totally UNNECESSARY.

Also, how would missile go against scheme's intentions? Saying things like this are cringy assumptions and acting like no scheme has evolved over the times. Roping for example was developed by the community. Best things in WA have been developed by community. It's a normal step to evolve the schemes.

Also, how adding a homing missile would encourage sitting in the corner? It depends totally on the situation what one is smart to do. The point of adding homing missile is to make the scheme more balanced, less luck-based. See the example above. I do agree with you that the spice of T17 is the unpredictability of crates and working with what you got but can you give me a solid reason why adding a homing would destroy the scheme? No, sitting on the corner example wont work because it totally depends on the situation.

Also, I would also like to add into discussion "Intermediate" - score every round? I don't see why not (we dont support Double or Nothing anyways)  and it's kinda meh in worst case scenario to play 3 rounds just to get score of 1 game.

[Free]

one that was developed throughout last 1-2 years of playing it constantly

This. This is what evolves things.

[HHC]

Are the changes justified?

To me, none of the schemes mentioned are really broken.

And the suggestions made are up for discussion, I personally don't agree with them as is obvious 

Is it worth going through the trouble of changing the basic schemes (it will be hard to change back after) + everyone would need to update their league schemes - for changes that only have a 'mild' effect on the game and that supposedly fix a scheme that IMO isn't broken, at all.

And are we settled then? To me, what Senator's post seem to indicate is a work-in-progress. If we enable those changes now (about which he himself is still in doubt) I'm sure we'll be facing a new thread like this in 2 weeks time with yet even more suggested changes.
It's good as it is. :x

[Free]

Im not a huge fan of IMO style of without providing any arguments.. It's kinda Komo

[HHC]

I don't need no arguments, I am the POTUS!

[Free]

I don't need no arguments, I am the POTUS!

I know U dont play leagues but some of us actually take it somewhat serious.

[HHC]

Just a joke, once in a while? 

How could I prove that a scheme is not broken? It's a matter of personal perception.
If you want arguments: T17 has been like this since the birth of TUS, thousands of games have been played in the scheme, not big trouble so far, other than a few too many drawn games in Senator's opinion (if thats the worst..)
Same with Aerial, popular free league scheme, popular cup scheme, never had any problems with rulebreaking or even lame/cheap play like in hyst.

Now you can give me arguments why these schemes are fundamentally broken.

[Senator]

HHC, you act like tus scheme was the original scheme and it shouldn't be touched. It's not even the standard T17 since HB scheme is different and some people have been using different variants in tus games.

You still haven't told how T17 was broken before the tus scheme and how tus scheme fixed said problems. Too many bananas? Ok, that's easily fixed. Look at the crate probabilities of tus scheme:

How do you justify 5.3% chance for bow and 6.2% for holy? How do you justify 0.6% for bat and 3.1% for cluster? These numbers are arbitrary.

IMO these changes made in the tus scheme didn't really fix anything but damaged the scheme (takes less skill) and caused new problems (more draws). We would have much less draws if we just moved back to equal numbers (except for cow and maybe banana). Other changes are arguable and need testing.