Comparison of T17 schemes (for MI)

[MonkeyIsland]

I don't have a problem with that. It's you guys who have a problem. You want to "control" every event in the game as much as you can. Less surprises would mean less luck involved. I'm proposing to look at Team17 from another point of skill-views. It's the improvising moves. You don't know what your next move would be? you play in the moment. You're simply making a list of good and bad weapons and you don't care how these crates are collected in the game.

PSS: MI, you can't control every crates your opponent collect.
If it's his turn, a crate appears, he collects the crate containing a SS: then you can do nothing.
Except maybe blocking all of his worms everytime, but should I remind you how lame it is ?

You can't control the very next crate which is dropped after your turn.

Moreover, should I remind you a T17 where you got angry 'cause I picked only super weapons (while only revolvers for you), and you died in like ... 4 turns ?
All this without being able to do anything ?

Please do. I'd love to see my "anger". Also it gives me another review where I went wrong in that game, not to mention that I like the angry part, it means that I care for my game result.

As it can happen that your opponent collect good super weapons (like albino did in that game), it also can happen in a balancing way. Your opponent can collect 2 bows while you get a uzi and suicide bomber. Your opponent attacks and gets 200hp from you. Now a ming for you could even things out. Although lowering super weapons seems reducing luck, but it although can result in an opposite way. This game salvation army helps me even things out.

When there are scheme changing debates, it's always good to point us to a game which you think things go wrong there.

In addition, why did we put some schemes in the "free league" ? 'Cause they had luck involved (yep, just remember of inter).
So if it's fine for you to get a league with luck-based scheme, I ask for the other schemes to be add in the classic league (Bungee & Battle Race ftw !).

We created free league to give other schemes a chance to raise their skill-level and get more active/popular. Are you calling Intermediate a lucky scheme?
Since when bungee race and battle race are lucky schemes? Or did I got you all wrong?

@ShyGuy,
I do agree with "no attack" or "no explosion" rule in the first turn of Team17.

@HHC,
You're misusing the word "fun". Fun is when nanas fly in the sky and does random explosions and worms fly in the sky like fireworks. When you say Team17 is fun, you make people confuse.

@Abnaxus,
If your PSSS was pointing at me, I didn't get it mate.

[Peja]

I
@ShyGuy,
I do agree with "no attack" or "no explosion" rule in the first turn of Team17.

just a scenario: you got 2 worms down, surrounded by 2 opponent worms, they collect their explosion crate.

a no atatck  rule in first turn dont solve those plops

[ShyGuy]

As it can happen that your opponent collect good super weapons (like albino did in that game), it also can happen in a balancing way. Your opponent can collect 2 bows while you get a uzi and suicide bomber. Your opponent attacks and gets 200hp from you. Now a ming for you could even things out. Although lowering super weapons seems reducing luck, but it although can result in an opposite way. This game salvation army helps me even things out.

Or your opponent could get a Ming and make things worse.  These anecdotal situations can work both ways.

[ShyGuy]

I
@ShyGuy,
I do agree with "no attack" or "no explosion" rule in the first turn of Team17.

just a scenario: you got 2 worms down, surrounded by 2 opponent worms, they collect their explosion crate.

a no atatck  rule in first turn dont solve those plops

Yes it does.  They can't attack first turn and next turn you move one of them and girder protect the other.

[Peja]

I
@ShyGuy,
I do agree with "no attack" or "no explosion" rule in the first turn of Team17.

just a scenario: you got 2 worms down, surrounded by 2 opponent worms, they collect their explosion crate.

a no atatck  rule in first turn dont solve those plops

Yes it does.  They can't attack first turn and next turn you move one of them and girder protect the other.

lol not possible, if your second to start, you can only save 1.
dont get wrong thats no statement about a possible "no atatck in first turn" rule. just wanted to point out you can still have an unlucky start.

btw is there any t17 game, where someone killed a whole team in first round with a nana or something like that? i would love to see a repaly of that.

[ShyGuy]

I
@ShyGuy,
I do agree with "no attack" or "no explosion" rule in the first turn of Team17.

just a scenario: you got 2 worms down, surrounded by 2 opponent worms, they collect their explosion crate.

a no atatck  rule in first turn dont solve those plops

Yes it does.  They can't attack first turn and next turn you move one of them and girder protect the other.

lol not possible, if your second to start, you can only save 1.
dont get wrong thats no statement about a possible "no atatck in first turn" rule. just wanted to point out you can still have an unlucky start.

btw is there any t17 game, where someone killed a whole team in first round with a nana or something like that? i would love to see a repaly of that.

? You move one of your worms, as in walk somewhere, and girder protect the other. I don't mean waste a turn by teleporting away and girdering.

[Abnaxus]

I neither have a problem with it, I don't even play anymore ftm.
And I used to play this T17 scheme and will in the future.
It's just that Shy is right, and if you want a non luck-based T17, there are many changes which can be done in this direction.

Please do. I'd love to see my "anger". Also it gives me another review where I went wrong in that game, not to mention that I like the angry part, it means that I care for my game result.

Rofl, I really expected that you remembered it. -.-
It's so much work to find it replays...
You didn't get "angry", but pissed of the situation (is the same on this context).

As it can happen that your opponent collect good super weapons (like albino did in that game), it also can happen in a balancing way. Your opponent can collect 2 bows while you get a uzi and suicide bomber. Your opponent attacks and gets 200hp from you. Now a ming for you could even things out. Although lowering super weapons seems reducing luck, but it although can result in an opposite way. This game salvation army helps me even things out.

We can balance it everytime, why don't we do ? You're letting the balance to the luck.

We created free league to give other schemes a chance to raise their skill-level and get more active/popular. Are you calling Intermediate a lucky scheme?
Since when bungee race and battle race are lucky schemes? Or did I got you all wrong?

You really mean this ? -.-
Putting some schemes in this free league is like putting them in the garbage.
If you really want them to be more active, then put them in classic league, so everybody will have to play them if their opponent pick it.
Free league isn't as well seen as Classic one.

About intermediate, yeah it's a bit lucky since there is auto placement.
But except in really rare cases, you can take the game back if you play well (but there are handicaps !).

Bungee and Battle Race aren't luck scheme, that's why I love them.
And if I said "Bungee & Battle Race ftw !", it's just cause I love them and I'd like to get them in classic league.
Nothing with the luck based argumentation.

About the expression, yeah it was for you, but I really don't know how to express it more than I did. <.<
It's an expression easy to say, but impossible to apply.
A says: I didn't do it on purpose ! (ex: I didn't broke the ming on purpose.)
B answers: So/then, deliberately don't do it. (ex: Then, deliberatly don't break the ming.)
It's impossible to not do it deliberatly, since it wasn't on purpose. Get the thing ?

[Chicken23]

Or maybe we can work towards an official variant that takes the best out of both schemes ? (although I guess it's a matter of opinion).

The best thing said in this thread sofar.

I think decreasing the amount of SD weapons in HHC's and reducing the amount of 'BIG' super weapons in TUS (holys,cows, etc) as HHC said in his first post is the prefect solution.

Oh, and having unlimited griders.... 

[MonkeyIsland]

HHC has modified his scheme recently. Gotta play it to see how balanced it is.

[HHC]

Yeah I have MI. It's more of a compromise now 

I haven't tested it myself really, maybe only played it in 1 game I wonder what you think of it.

[Hussar]

Oh, and having unlimited griders.... 

infinite girder sux, its more hard when u have to not wasting them on every turn to just block ur opponent

[Crazy]

Oh, and having unlimited griders.... 

Infinite FTW

[ShyGuy]

I still stand by my suggestions, but if we can't agree on those, please, PLEASE, remove magic bullet from the scheme... If a fancy scheme editor can't disable them, then if someone gets one there should be a rule that you are not allowed to use it.

When your opponent gets a bullet, there is absolutely little point to trying to position your worm safely... you just can't hide from a bullet the same way you can from a supersheep, EQ, nuke, etc.  It's like a 90 damage, near perfect homing missile with the explosion radius of a HHG (i think).  There is very little skill in clicking on a worm and shooting the bullet (unless you count not hitting yourself at launch skill) and there is no amount of skill you can use to avoid being f@#!ed by one at sudden death.  The weapon just breaks the scheme completely.

I can understand when you say you want to keep the scheme fun, fine.  I can compromise and handle having bananas and vases in the scheme, but for the love of god, do something against the magic bullet please

[HHC]

Reminds me of the semi-final I played against Csongi in worm olympics Shyguy.

 2012-01-01 14.01.54 [Online] `dP---Csongi`rM, @xTdC`HHC, mm`RoladuraDoce.WAgame (200.84 kB - downloaded 24 times.)
@29.08

It's a miracle I survived that one haha. 

[ShyGuy]

yeah, there is always going to be a fluke sometimes.  You don't see bullets f@#!ing up as bad as that one for no apparent reason.  up top was a sure kill i think tho