Tus schemes?

[HHC]

No AFR in Shopper makes the scheme so much better. I still don't know how it even ended up in the rule set. HHC, a hit from the ground almost always means a worse hide. If I can do more damage or kill a worm from the ground but I'll have a worse hide then it's something to think about and adds a little bit more complexity to the scheme imo.

A 'hide on the ground' sounds like a really dumb thing when you call it that. There's almost always a place nearby that is both a hide ánd has an opportunity to shoot the enemy AFG. So in a lot of cases you can do 45 dmg compared to 0, while the only disadvantage is the unability to pile and being forced to hide nearby. That's definitely a good choice.
This goes for zooks, as well as for even better weapons like sheepshooters or pidgeons which are also easier to aim/shoot attacking from the ground.

And shopper is a rope game.

@ropa: I don't do vendetta's. I just post when I disagree with something.

[darKz]

but I doubt any changes would ever be made since shopper has always worked this way

Funny because it hasn't. Shopper had no AFR rule until... I don't even know, until when? XTC league? Some idiotguy included it into the rules, followed by many discussions about it and it never got changed back. Sadly.

[Aerox]

but I doubt any changes would ever be made since shopper has always worked this way

Funny because it hasn't. Shopper had no AFR rule until... I don't even know, until when? XTC league? Some idiotguy included it into the rules, followed by many discussions about it and it never got changed back. Sadly.

There was no AFR in XTC nor in any league after FB until now.

On a side note, why do you always seem so pissed? :|

 because you're reading my posts in the wrong tone

[ShyGuy]

I support no afr in shoppa for the reasons mentioned in this thread

[MonkeyIsland]

We've had this discussion before. The problem mostly lies on your view of maps. ropa your taste in shopper maps is different. On a dogma city shopper, yes AFR doesn't matter much. This is your clan's most recent shopper maps:

https://www.tus-wa.com/groups/cFc/maps-choices/?id_scheme=141

Actually cFc is known for making shopper maps out of caves. Look at this one, it is harder to AFR and if you attack from the ground, you can find good hides after by walking. That is what HHC is talking about. Now same scenario and put it on city shopper and that is what you are talking about. Today's shopper has moved more into roping maps, it is you who hasn't comprehend the concept of time over this game.

[Aerox]

We've had this discussion before. The problem mostly lies on your view of maps. ropa your taste in shopper maps is different. On a dogma city shopper, yes AFR doesn't matter much. This is your clan's most recent shopper maps:

https://www.tus-wa.com/groups/cFc/maps-choices/?id_scheme=141

Actually cFc is known for making shopper maps out of caves. Look at this one, it is harder to AFR and if you attack from the ground, you can find good hides after by walking. That is what HHC is talking about. Now same scenario and put it on city shopper and that is what you are talking about. Today's shopper has moved more into roping maps, it is you who hasn't comprehend the concept of time over this game.

What? You're completely lost here's the memo:

I was playing shopper cave maps before you where playing shoppers.

I was one of the most if not the most vocal defender of cave maps back in FB. It was thanks to me, amongst others, that they were introduced and that you're using them now. Not taking any credits mind, someone else would have done it if I didn't.

Thanks to said discussions (i like to believe) people started to take the scheme more seriously and some clans became really good at it in good shopper maps (if you need reference on what a good shopper map is check http://wmdb.org/users/FFIE). Note this was back in the day when people liked to discuss in forums and took said discussions seriously as opposed to... today.

On the topic at hand... I'd love to argue the in and outs of the shopper scheme but you're doing judgmental mistakes that are leading me to believe you're clueless on how the scheme actually works. Either that, or you're not reading anything I write:

Look at this one, it is harder to AFR and if you attack from the ground, you can find good hides after by walking

Piling gives much more advantage than hiding. If you can attack from the ground and pile your opponent did something wrong, and if you can't pile, then you're in a risk-reward situation and you're in front of a choice.

And good job at letting the community (including my clan) turn Shopping into non linear WxW (cfc has great wxw players, coincidence?). It's up to you if you want schemes to keep an identity and a skill differentiation between them or you can call the democracy card and just blame it on the people wanting it that way. Or you could actually start leading and start making decisions on the basis of common sense and not on the basis of certain clan, in which I'm in, abusing the system to make a scheme play just like another scheme they're great at.


Shopper is not a roping scheme, some people make maps to make it all about the rope, said people are better ropers than they're defaulters. They're abusing the system. Call it evolution if you must. I'll laugh from a corner.

edit: I'll raise a question not because I want an answer but in hopes you actually think about it and come to sense:

if shopper is played in maps such as the one linked by MI, don't we  have two schemes that play essentially the same in WxW and Shopper. What are the gameplay differences? Do we accept getting crate raped in Shopper?

Might as well add infinite ropes to BnG and call everything WxW.

[HHC]

Piling gives much more advantage than hiding.

Hide > piles under normal circumstances any time.

In shopper, unlike roper, every spot on the map is usually reachable. When both teams have an equal amount of worms there's always 1 worm singled out the enemy can hit, whether all of your worms are piled or not (all 4 worms are piled at the start of the turn, 1 enemy worm takes the turn, unpiling the worm he's with).
If you fail to pile the other guy can hit 1 out of 2 worms, instead of 1 out of 1 worm. Result is the same, 1 worm gets hit.

Piling in shoppers is really only beneficiary if you're outnumbered or when there's a severe discrepancy between worm's healths on one of the teams. In all other circumstances, it doesn't really matter. Piling isn't a necessary thing.

if shopper is played in maps such as the one linked by MI, don't we  have two schemes that play essentially the same in WxW and Shopper. What are the gameplay differences? Do we accept getting crate raped in Shopper?

Wxw would still be different cause shopping rules don't have a touch this thing-first rule (other than crate).

I don't really see the issue here. If CFC wants a hard, crate-rape map, then yeah... np with me. The other team can always protest and get the map changed.
A rule against hard maps would also cause quite some confusion / disputes. Surely dogma city isn't hard, but the boundary is hard to set.
People should be free to set a map of their preferred difficulty-level, as long as they are a little forgiving when the other squad asks for a different one.

[darKz]

What you're saying is correct as long as you have 4 worms with equal health. Now what if you got one with a lot less than the others? Wouldn't it be good to have it killed off for obvious reasons? That's why you pile, to force your enemy to attack a certain worm and not whichever he likes. And that's why competitive players pile in Shopper whenever possible, to create situations like this. And they will occur 95% of the times.

[Aerox]

Piling is not only useful when you have worm advantage, piling is what leads you to worms disadvantage whilst maintaining a health advantage. You force your opponent to attack certain worms. You keep your low health worms alive, and unpiled (by piling, with other worms, and creating those turn combos), forcing him to attack his own not to give an early worm disadvantage.

Clanners 101

[Aerox]

Wxw would still be different cause shopping rules don't have a touch this thing-first rule (other than crate).

And yet Fly shoppers are shoppers. You can be pedantic all you want "oh you have to touch walls", it's the same principle complex cave shoppers, you're just giving more importance to roping skill and leaving so little turn to knock around and create turn combos or big picture strategies that you're essentially turning one scheme into another.

Doesn't take a genius to see this, just takes an open mind and the ability to agree with someone you don't like. You'll learn many of this, when you actually make the step to the real world.

[ShyGuy]

Ropa, I love how you are vocal and passionate on a lot of these worms issues and you're right on pretty much all of them, but it's useless arguing in such a condescending tone that practically dares the opposition to hold their ground.  Perhaps you could try a different approach

[HHC]

What you're saying is correct as long as you have 4 worms with equal health. Now what if you got one with a lot less than the others? Wouldn't it be good to have it killed off for obvious reasons? That's why you pile, to force your enemy to attack a certain worm and not whichever he likes. And that's why competitive players pile in Shopper whenever possible, to create situations like this. And they will occur 95% of the times.

In 100% of the games there's 4 worms on both sides with equal health 

It's standard. A non-standard situation arises only when a player drowns a worm early on or does major damage to one. Which happens in about 50% of the games, at most, and not in 95%. And as my previous statement indicated: even in those games the 4 worm-scenario exists for some time.

The weak worm-scenario happens only when you allow it to happen. Damaging an enemy worm to the point where he only has like 40 left is never smart. And even then, you can usually correct those situations to a certain extent by unpiling with simple knocks or throwing big weapons on the bigger worms.

I don't think it's possible for players to force themselves into a beneficial scenario of having a weak worm on their team, unless they damage the worm on purpose himself (which makes the whole set up a pretty big risk) (drowning one of your worms on the very first turn can be strategic as well, but is it worth the risk?). The weak worm thing happens almost exclusively because your opponent made it happen by going for 1 worm too often. It's not something you can force by simple piling.

[Aerox]

Ropa, I love how you are vocal and passionate on a lot of these worms issues and you're right on pretty much all of them, but it's useless arguing in such a condescending tone that practically dares the opposition to hold their ground.  Perhaps you could try a different approach

But Shy, I want them to hold their ground, that way, once convinced, it will be forever.

You're right though, but with HHC here... well, someone has to think of the children... I mean... besides him.

[HHC]

I'm discussing stuff with darkz.

Can you stop the child molestor thing btw? May seem tough and cool to you to accuse people of that, but yeah, I know how it turned out with Colon... it sticks, cause some people are just dumb and believe everything people say.

Don't make me Colon2.

[Aerox]

I'm discussing stuff with darkz.

I expect great good to come out of this. Don't disappoint me.