the logic in your argumentation is partial, ergo, not logic at all.
zook first is there to give the player going second a higher chance of avoiding full damage by taking a hard hide (which should be easy if we trust you when you say maps are harder now)
Removing this factor makes going first even safer (that's bad for the competitiveness of the scheme)
zook first is there to give the player going second a higher chance of avoiding full damage by taking a hard hide (which should be easy if we trust you when you say maps are harder now)
Removing this factor makes going first even safer (that's bad for the competitiveness of the scheme)
The changes made to W:A roper like CBA made bazooka first a significant disadvantage for the 2nd player.
If you allow the player going first the chance to use mine/grenade those stats would be worse, player one would have nearly 100% successful attack leaving player two 70hp behind with a chance of a harder crate.
Down mid? that's terrible. Dunno if you rope but going up from down mid to a far side takes about the same time than going up from a far side to the opposite far side, assuming a normal rope map. You can't just ignore momentum or have a discussion about roping without considering how roping works. Also having to knock a worm eliminates the handicap of starting from the top because it takes around 3 seconds off the timer.
"there's a high chance the 2nd player can't attack at all" - this is made up nonsense, can you elaborate, specially on the "high chance" part?
zook provides more variation (assuming target is in a hard hide), and when there's more variation there are more chances for the better player to come on top: there's many different ways to shoot, there's wind, there's an usual requirement to knock etc...
I don't understand why it is lame to not hide if I gain a lead.It's not lame. People just make up excuses when they lose and try to shift the blame on the scheme or the rules, that's all.
Why should I allow the opponent the chance to beat me if the aim is to win?
I don't understand why it is lame to not hide if I gain a lead.It's not lame. People just make up excuses when they lose and try to shift the blame on the scheme or the rules, that's all.
Why should I allow the opponent the chance to beat me if the aim is to win?
I don't understand why it is lame to not hide if I gain a lead.It's not lame. People just make up excuses when they lose and try to shift the blame on the scheme or the rules, that's all.
Why should I allow the opponent the chance to beat me if the aim is to win?
It depends how u gained the lead. Let's say u get 2 easy crates while the opponent gets 2 very hard/impossible crates. Then u hide at mid/top to make your further crates easy for u. In other words u don't let crate luck balance and u win by luck.
I also think that SD should be eliminated completely from the scheme. w2w is dumb, especially on certain maps. I say let the game continue on without SD until a winner emerges.
This is no problem in ZAR, bazooka every turn ;)
@ Skunk: I feel you are very bigoted to the idea that Sudden Death ''can'' work as a finale phase of a game, to assist the annihilation of opposing teams. I think Sudden Death is not there to annoy you, it is a transition to a new strategy. This is evidential in scheme such as Intermediate, Elite, and Team17.
Also, 4 star bazooka alone gives player 1 a bigger advantage especially when they get a successful attack first turn.
so plz dont mess with the roper as i play it 15 years without any changes
so plz dont mess with the roper as i play it 15 years without any changes
Guess you don't remember when they removed the 1x Dynamite that came with the scheme then. The one weapon that gave the scheme another layer of tactical depth, even if barely.
I dont remember many things, i didint play w2 online, when was that? I dont remember any dyna since wwp
I mean, if you're going to propose a change why not go the whole way?
- Only the worm going first needs to zook first turn.
speaking of that.... "zook first" was adopted from worms2 rope scheme, but there was a reason for it.... it was because there was random placement, there was no tele placement on worms2...
so parachute was disabled (so you could not knock if your worm was placed on top) and zook was in first turn, so there was less chance to get fd.
whats the purpose of zook first in w:a? just gives the first player a big advantage, and adds (even more) factor of luck, due to wind...
maybe we should change roper scheme to all weaps first turn???...
*bump*I mean, if you're going to propose a change why not go the whole way?
- Only the worm going first needs to zook first turn.
Now that I think about it, this rule wouldn't be that bad (Anubis suggested that too). Even if the 1st player couldn't attack with bazooka (because of too good bazooka hide) while the 2nd player could attack with a mine/nade, the game would be going to be a draw. Not that unfair, is it?
I mean, if you're going to propose a change why not go the whole way?
- Only the worm going first needs to zook first turn.
Now that I think about it, this rule wouldn't be that bad (Anubis suggested that too). Even if the 1st player couldn't attack with bazooka (because of too good bazooka hide) while the 2nd player could attack with a mine/nade, the game would be going to be a draw. Not that unfair, is it?
You will always be able to do some damage as decent roper player, regardless of wind/hide. I am not speaking of 40+ attacks. But 20+ is doable with ANY wind in any hide.
This is life, if u are first u get advantage its all about luck
What less time are u talking about? Its all about crates, 2nd player may get a crate that will easily give him a time to attack.
Maybe but still when u are first u might get a crate that wont give u enough time to knock so u have to be good at shooting zooka from rope and 2nd player usually gets crate that is easy to get and still have enough time to come back and put mine right on ur head if hide is not sneaky...