Forums
March 28, 2024, 10:07 PM

Author Topic: Updating schemes/rules  (Read 3841 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Senator

Updating schemes/rules
« on: June 29, 2017, 07:45 PM »
Many scheme change requests lately so I'll list everything here and soon we will publish the changes.

Big RR
- remove banana bomb
- add a rule to prevent draws: if you finish on the same turn, the remaining time on the clock decides

BnG
- replace the minimum distance rule with "Stay on your half of the map"
- are the rules regarding 5s and 1s nades and straight bazooka shots necessary?

Aerial
- replace the current scheme with Sensei's scheme (3s mines etc)
- should crates be removed?

Intermediate
- add a rule: "You can request Bo1 but in that case the opponent gets to start."

Team17
- lots of draws with the current scheme. See Mablak's old post:
7 girders is a big improvement in pretty much every way, and I'd actually like to see how the scheme would work with fewer. Because with 7, you still never see a game where someone runs out, I don't think I've seen a single match where this has happened. And this is partly because people are forced to conserve their girders, but it would be nice to try say, 5 girders, because at that point you actually will see people breaking through their opponent's defenses.

And it would definitely make more games less likely to reach SD. The TUS scheme as it is suffers due to its crate probabilities, almost every Team17 I've played with it results in a tie due to lack of aqua sheep. If you wanted to keep these crate probabilities the same, lowering the number of girders would probably be the only way to even out games. Because people are definitely still having to rely on the (even scarcer than before) SD weaps, simply waiting it out on each side, and often tying.

I'm assuming the rationale for the TUS scheme's lower SD weap probability is to force players to fight each other head on, but it simply hasn't worked. The moment one team is at a noticeable disadvantage and faces defeat by regular weaps, they will take to one side as usual, and SD weaps will mostly determine the game, 7 girders is still just enough to defend. But unlike the FB scheme, games rarely come to a close this way, and there are tons of ties since often times no one has anything. Games that are 30-45 minutes long should rarely, rarely be ties, we should simply eliminate that possibility as much as possible.

Pretty much all the weaps collected in a T17 go unused since people are mostly trying to get SD weaps, and that strikes me as silly. If we tried 5 girders, I imagine people would actually have a reason to destroy girders and break through, knowing they can't be held off all game, and those excess weapons would get some use. I'd just prefer the FB scheme with 7 girders, or the newer one with fewer.
- replace the current scheme with a scheme that has higher SD weap probability? Perhaps use FB league's scheme (equal crate probabilities except for Mad Cow) just with lower probability for Banana Bombs.
- should 1 or 2 Select Worms be reintroduced to the scheme? Select Worms help against darksiding.
- should 1 x Homing Missile be added to the starting inventory as Free suggested? This way your ability to finish the opponent doesn't depend on crate luck.

Shopper & WxW
- In FB league's Shopper scheme the probability of Select Worm is lowered to 0.2% so that it would never occur. TUS scheme has much less weapons and as a result Select Worm probability is 1.2%. Whenever Select Worm occurs, it can be game changing. For example the 2nd player may have utilized turn order advantage and piled all the worms. Then the 1st player uses his Select Worm and gets to attack a worm without hitting his own worm.
- lower the probability to 0.5% with scheme editor OR add infinite Select Worm and infinite delay?
« Last Edit: June 29, 2017, 08:33 PM by Senator »

Offline Free

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2017, 08:11 PM »
Funny how my suggestion didn't make the list.

Offline Senator

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2017, 08:12 PM »
Funny how my suggestion didn't make the list.

Oh I can add it.

Offline Free

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2017, 08:17 PM »
Yeah, a lot of thought must have been put into it I can tell.


Offline Senator

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2017, 08:32 PM »
Happy now? :D

Offline Free

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2017, 08:53 PM »
Yeah, I'm over the top.

Who are the people behind making these scheme and rule decisions by the way?

---------------------

Intermediate - bo1 rule is good but in bo3/bo5 why not score every round? I don't see any reason why not, works in ONL.

Also, I can't believe there's nothing done with hysteria. Just watch top hysteria players games, just watch them, the proof is in the pudding. You don't see nothing but plop and side zooka tactics from the start nowadays. It's probably the most broken scheme and it doesn't even get into discussion?



Offline Senator

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2017, 09:20 PM »
Who are the people behind making these scheme and rule decisions by the way?

These proposals are picked up from recent threads. I've talked with MI and he gave a green light at least to Big RR, BnG, Aerial, Intermediate. As for T17 and Shopper I've also consulted KRD. If people don't agree on some change, it won't happen.

Offline TheKaren

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2017, 11:12 PM »
Free, for the last time, seriously.

HYSTERIA IS NOT BROKEN - YOU JUST DON'T LIKE IT - THIS IS A FACT BASED ON WHAT THE WORD "BROKEN" MEANS!!!!

I find it weird how every Hysteria you watch, that happens, but it doesn't happen too often in the games I play/watch... And i'm sure I've watched/played more Hysteria than you, i'm not saying that to be a dick btw, please don't reply in anger, I just know you are wrong...

It does happen, but it's a tactic/strategy, who cares if you think it's lame or not, it's not broken, it never has been and never will be, just learn to tolerate it just like people tolerate gay people(I say that because there is nothing wrong with gay people even though millions think there is.)


Offline WTF-8

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2017, 11:24 PM »
Quote
Free, for the last time, seriously.

YOUR WORDS HURT MY EGO SO MUCH THAT I NEED TO TYPE RANDOM BULLSHIT IN CAPS TO PROVE MYSELF I'M RIGHT



btw good job comparing Hysteria tactics to gay people, that speaks of the scheme very well
The manual in the installation folder is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural

Offline TheKaren

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2017, 11:25 PM »
I'm not interested in your lack of understanding.

My ego has nothing to do with him saying things that are literally wrong.

Say it sucks, say it's the worst thing to ever happen to humanity I don't care, but don't f**king lie about it.

Offline Ytrojan

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #10 on: June 29, 2017, 11:58 PM »
I'm not interested in your lack of understanding.

My ego has nothing to do with him saying things that are literally wrong.

Say it sucks, say it's the worst thing to ever happen to humanity I don't care, but don't f**king lie about it.
And remember: the TRUE worst scheme is Awful. Yes, that's what it's called.
Imagine What a Buck Could Do!


I now declare a brand new league (and the successor to the failed Ultra League): WormsRF!


Offline Sensei

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #11 on: June 30, 2017, 01:01 AM »
Thanks for the post Senator.
Yes, Big RR sounds pretty reasonable without nana and with the time counting rule. Cause lots of games ends with "draw" even if 99% of them actually don't.

For BnG would be probably best to use a2b set of rules. But many ppl here dislike mentioned scheme, would dislike it even more in that case.

As a big Aerial fan, don't think crates should be removed. They make it more fun to play. After all, it's just a Free league.. No need to get so strict about it!? Maybe bo3 mandatory should be applied, because SD games don't go above 15 mins. Bo1 can get pretty unfair if positions are f@#!ed for one player.


Offline TheWalrus

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #12 on: June 30, 2017, 04:34 AM »
Team17
- lots of draws with the current scheme. See Mablak's old post:
7 girders is a big improvement in pretty much every way, and I'd actually like to see how the scheme would work with fewer. Because with 7, you still never see a game where someone runs out, I don't think I've seen a single match where this has happened. And this is partly because people are forced to conserve their girders, but it would be nice to try say, 5 girders, because at that point you actually will see people breaking through their opponent's defenses.

And it would definitely make more games less likely to reach SD. The TUS scheme as it is suffers due to its crate probabilities, almost every Team17 I've played with it results in a tie due to lack of aqua sheep. If you wanted to keep these crate probabilities the same, lowering the number of girders would probably be the only way to even out games. Because people are definitely still having to rely on the (even scarcer than before) SD weaps, simply waiting it out on each side, and often tying.

I'm assuming the rationale for the TUS scheme's lower SD weap probability is to force players to fight each other head on, but it simply hasn't worked. The moment one team is at a noticeable disadvantage and faces defeat by regular weaps, they will take to one side as usual, and SD weaps will mostly determine the game, 7 girders is still just enough to defend. But unlike the FB scheme, games rarely come to a close this way, and there are tons of ties since often times no one has anything. Games that are 30-45 minutes long should rarely, rarely be ties, we should simply eliminate that possibility as much as possible.

Pretty much all the weaps collected in a T17 go unused since people are mostly trying to get SD weaps, and that strikes me as silly. If we tried 5 girders, I imagine people would actually have a reason to destroy girders and break through, knowing they can't be held off all game, and those excess weapons would get some use. I'd just prefer the FB scheme with 7 girders, or the newer one with fewer.
- replace the current scheme with a scheme that has higher SD weap probability? Perhaps use FB league's scheme (equal crate probabilities except for Mad Cow) just with lower probability for Banana Bombs.
- should 1 or 2 Select Worms be reintroduced to the scheme? Select Worms help against darksiding.
- should 1 x Homing Missile be added to the starting inventory as Free suggested? This way your ability to finish the opponent doesn't depend on crate luck.
I'd like to speak a few words about t17, most people know i really don't like the scheme, probably one of shopper and t17 being the most hated.  I used to be a really big fan of t17, the first 3 years i played worms i mostly rope, battlerace, and t17.  The scheme was a lot faster then, people played a more freewheeling style, the biggest difference being more people played open roof maps and not these tight maps that people play on now with 10 separated chambers in a dual cave map.  These kind of maps, along with the ''turtle and hope to get sd weap" mentality leads me to side with free on the rules.  Too often clever early game play is thwarted by it being unrewarded when not gifted with SD weapons while your opponent picks up an aqua sheep and a bird.  gg.  This kind of ''drag it out'' strategy has made the mid to late game a boring mess of digging to the top and girdering and regirdering.  It's unlikely that this will change all that much, but at least poor crateluck doesn't need to be a large determinant of the result.  T17 doesn't need a 1x homing, it needed it 10 years ago.  I had it in a scheme of mine for many years (before i stopped playing except in tus games).  I say throw the select worm in there as well, shake it up, this scheme needs a kick in the ass.

Big RR
- remove banana bomb
- add a rule to prevent draws: if you finish on the same turn, the remaining time on the clock decides
Banana bomb is pretty useless, unsure why it was ever included.  Remaining time is a great idea to prevent draws, which happen quite a bit.  Not many want to play many big rr's to get a decision.

BnG
- replace the minimum distance rule with "Stay on your half of the map"
- are the rules regarding 5s and 1s nades and straight bazooka shots necessary?
5 sec nades would be a bad idea, they can be easily abused, this detracts from the essence of bng being a shotmaker's game.  I really don't have a feeling one way or another on the ''ýour side of map'' rule, I do see merit in not allowing people to hide middle and force the opponent back to a quarter of the map, though.  I'm on the fence on this one.  As for 1 sec nades and straight bazooka shots, I wouldn't mind them being legal, if you are hiding where you can be 1 sec naded or straight zooked you deserve to lose anyways.  A rule that never really gets broken because there is no opportunity to do so, is just an extra useless rule to feed the 'bng has too many rules' narrative.  People are right, there are too many silly rules like 1 sec & straight zook, better to remove them entirely

\
Aerial
- replace the current scheme with Sensei's scheme (3s mines etc)
- should crates be removed?
Sensei's scheme is the best scheme out there, aerial needed sudden death
Crates to me serve no purpose but add novelty.  If it is to be considered as a genuine competitive scheme, the crates have to go.  I like the fun randomness of it, but the scheme would probably be better served to take it out.

Intermediate
- add a rule: "You can request Bo1 but in that case the opponent gets to start."
Seems much more than fair. 

Also, I can't believe there's nothing done with hysteria. Just watch top hysteria players games, just watch them, the proof is in the pudding. You don't see nothing but plop and side zooka tactics from the start nowadays. It's probably the most broken scheme and it doesn't even get into discussion?
I think it is bad strategy tbh, I've beat better players more often using 2 worm strategies against side hides.  Side zooka strategies can be defeated by a response that almost no players use.  You can take a good hide on the top that is unhittable by bazooka and simply force SD by running out turn time.  This forces the opponent to move, and take an upper hide, most of the time allowing the SD forcing worm or worms to have the first shot once the side zooker moves up.

Much of the time this is better strategy than throwing petrol from a hittable position and hoping for good wind to take out the side zooker.  The side zooker will always be limited to what they are offered by the opposing player.

Hysteria isn't broken, it just requires strict adherence to its strange metagame principles.  It will always be a turnwhoring plopfest, but some people like the schemeas it is, warts and all. 
« Last Edit: June 30, 2017, 04:49 AM by TheWalrus »

Offline WTF-8

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #13 on: June 30, 2017, 08:17 AM »
You can take a good hide on the top that is unhittable by bazooka
... is that even possible?  leaving a blind/unhittable spot sounds like a huge fault on sidezooker's side, which is difficult to imagine for me
The manual in the installation folder is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural

Offline Free

Re: Updating schemes/rules
« Reply #14 on: June 30, 2017, 09:08 AM »
Yeah breaking down deep Hysteria tactics, yay! 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.

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?

Talking about how easy it is to prevent side zookas with petrols? Umm no it isn't easy and it depends on the map also. One of the easiest ways to counter petrols is to make a blowtorch hole to the side hide you are using so if a petrol hits, you only get hit for few hp's and get pushed to safety.

IF you get a top position on map and force SD it really ain't over yet. One could miss on a critical spot because there are always some hides left on the map. One could teleport to top with +50hp worm with a good timing so even if you hit, you are still in danger yourself.

In a nutshell, I'm not saying that scrap the scheme but make it better because it's totally possible! Why the f@#! would we drive some shitty car when we could drive a Ferrari?

Team17 can be improved by HUGE leaps if we give it a good try. I'm all for roofless, which seems to be what Wally means with open roof map also. It solves so many problems while still making sure that the player who has deeper tactical eye actually gets a reward for all the hard work he has put into developing it, instead getting handicapped by unnecessary scheme rule/mechanic.

Anywho it seems like too big of a chance for the community so my 2nd suggestion was to make current T17 scheme better, add the homing so you are not on mercy of cr8luck alone, it makes the scheme more skilled because you have more options to attack/defense. Select worm might work, but just 1, definately not two. Also +1 from here to limit girders, 7 is usually too much to push through.

I'm not angry, I'm passionate.