Updating schemes/rules

[Free]

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

I already gave a perfect example, but you didn't bother to answer.

[Korydex]

- 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 would allow every option upon agreement. Like it's still allowed to pick a different scheme for WxW upon agreement. Those who care will all be happy =)

[WTF-8]

hey HHC, did Komo bite you and you're now becoming a Komo yourself? You're not making sense, at all.
It takes a single game of the opponent having a SD weapon and you having no SD weapons to realize how awful the current roofed scheme is and how utterly impossible it is to counter cornering when you have no SD weapons - and since whether a SD weapon is acquired is decided solely by RNG, the scheme becomes full time luckering. Unnecessarily long and boring luckering, at that. And that's what we're trying to avoid. In a league, skill should be valued above luck.

Korydex, it's been said a number of times, even a minor change can have a big impact. And adding/removing a very important weapon to the starter inventory isn't even close to a minor change. What'd you say, should this big variety be allowed, if it can be easily abused by less skilled players picking certain settings to make the game more luck-based in order to increase their win chances out of nowhere?

[Korydex]

Korydex, it's been said a number of times, even a minor change can have a big impact. And adding/removing a very important weapon to the starter inventory isn't even close to a minor change. What'd you say, should this big variety be allowed, if it can be easily abused by less skilled players picking certain settings to make the game more luck-based in order to increase their win chances out of nowhere?

I said it should only be allowed under agreement. In your case the other player could disagree or complain

[WTF-8]

I said it should only be allowed under agreement. In your case the other player could disagree or complain

And in that case noone would ever agree to play a shittier version of the scheme, so the option picking rule wouldn't get to take an effect, raising the question of necessity of the rule.

[Korydex]

I said it should only be allowed under agreement. In your case the other player could disagree or complain

And in that case noone would ever agree to play a shittier version of the scheme, so the option picking rule wouldn't get to take an effect, raising the question of necessity of the rule.

Are you sure that you know what you're talking about? For example I already played roofless and other versions of t17 for tus. Some other people did too. Unofficially, it's already allowed.
Now it's time to make it official like there for WxW: https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/announcements/experimental-season-result-21097/msg171072/#msg171072

[WTF-8]

For example I already played roofless and other versions of t17 for tus. Some other people did too. Unofficially, it's already allowed.
Now it's time to make it official like there for WxW: https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/announcements/experimental-season-result-21097/msg171072/#msg171072

My point at Team17 was that you sounded like you suggested not Roofless scheme as an option, but exactly those small changes you quoted - and those ones were very debatable. If you wanted just Roofless Team17 as an option, that's alright, though I'm not sure if such big variance in scheme versions is welcome in a serious league.

BTW I don't see alternate WxW version being mentioned https://www.tus-wa.com/leagues/ here, nor in default WxW's description. Is that even allowed anymore?
(Edit) speaking of the link above, it doesn't even mention the new leagues...

[Sensei]

Just remembered one change that's quite needed. But not lots of ppl play that scheme (for some unknown reason).

Boom race should be played with rubber commands: /sdet & /ldet.
Lot faster, more fun, more interesting.. and what's most important - much more demanding in skillwise.

Hit me up in #ag if anyone wanna try. I have 1 more hour of free time.

[Hurz]

Just remembered one change that's quite needed. But not lots of ppl play that scheme (for some unknown reason).

Boom race should be played with rubber commands: /sdet & /ldet.
Lot faster, more fun, more interesting.. and what's most important - much more demanding in skillwise.

Supporting this. Should be at least added as option/optional scheme.

Btw battlerace tfl scheme should be changed to wallies imo.

[TheKomodo]

None of the schemes are broken, it's just the most popular/well known players trying to mould their own perfect version of each scheme.

I like the BnG changes proposed, but i'm happy with whatever in BnG tbh...

[Korydex]

Just remembered one change that's quite needed. But not lots of ppl play that scheme (for some unknown reason).

Boom race should be played with rubber commands: /sdet & /ldet.
Lot faster, more fun, more interesting.. and what's most important - much more demanding in skillwise.

Supporting this. Should be at least added as option/optional scheme.

Btw battlerace tfl scheme should be changed to wallies imo.

+1

[zippeurfou]

Bng:
Define a stroke size (8 maybe) to break the map in two parts. And only play on such maps. Make game voidable if not played on such map. So it become the new norm and it is easy to know which side is yours.
Suggestions:
- Allow more time to place your worms
- Add petrol (I know it goes against the name bng but petrol add a whole new layer of game play/strategy and is good against people that darkside. It also make games quicker and with proper power could be a fine weapon that do not get abused).

[Senator]

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.

Are 5s nades that bad if they are not sitters (compared to 4s)?

[Sensei]

Actually, 5s roller would be lot harder to throw than 4s
Lot of lamers would lose their hp due to sitter nades.

[TheWalrus]

My argument against 5s revolves around the idea of throwing angle.  Currently 4 sec must be thrown at a low angle to allow it to settle, making it impossible or nearly impossible to roller a good hide.  5 sec would allow nades to be thrown at the same angle that you would throw a 3 sec, making it easier to hit the same hide.  5 sec nades would make contact nades to open hides mostly redundant, and I regard opening hides an important part of the bng meta game.

On first review, this might seem like it favors the lamers, but I think the top players would benefit more from 5 secs, and I don't think the scheme needs more division between the top players and the newer players, bng has a very steep learning curve, one of the hardest outside of ttrr.  Then again, 5 sec could make the scheme more fair in that a map with one side with better hides than the other would be more or less negated because more hides would be reachable with 5sec nades.

It would be advisable to test before changing the rules here, I feel allowing 5secs would be more drastic than some of the other changes suggested here.