The Ultimate Site of Worms Armageddon
One-Boards => Schemes => Topic started by: Conny on November 09, 2012, 10:31 PM
-
I don't get what scheme to get. When I go to the schemes page, there's craploads of schemes. I dunno which one is the right one to use.
Is there some list that I can't manage to find?
-
here (https://www.tus-wa.com/schemes/?leagues)
-
:-*
-
Why does the shopper scheme have an AFR rule?
Even worse, why is there a mention of AFC in its rules?
-
Why does the shopper scheme have an AFR rule?
Even worse, why is there a mention of AFC in its rules?
because afr is part of tus shopper rules
because afc is worth to mention?
-
Why does the shopper scheme have an AFR rule?
Even worse, why is there a mention of AFC in its rules?
because afr is part of tus shopper rules
because afc is worth to mention?
Good job Husk, you provided two answers but managed to answer nothing.
I'll be less subtle:
Who decided to add AFR to shopper and why? Is there any logic behind having an irrelevant rule that does nothing? There was no AFR in FB, arguably the league in which shopper was played most competitively.
There's a reason why there's AFR in a scheme like roper, because it's balance around having just enough time to attack and to avoid making hard hides irrelevant by the use of straight zooks from the ground.
However, it makes no sense in Shopper. Shopper isn't a roping scheme. It's a scheme in which strategy is much more important than skill. And you're hurting strategy by limiting choices. Forcing people to attack in a certain way limits choices and therefore creativity and strategy. Plus with such long turn times (enough time to knock) and such big arsenal of weapons hard hides are already irrelevant. You'll never be worse off because your opponent didn't attack from rope, if you were hiding in a place where he could attack you from the ground, with ease, then you aren't in a hard hide by shopper standards to begin with.
AFR adds nothing to shopper, it limits the scheme, it makes it worse.
I know you just added it because Wooka's scheme was like that and because noobs like this rule because they think attacking from the rope with so much time is a skill, it shouldn't be considered a skill in competitive shopper games, it's not.
If I pile a worm perfectly, in order to be able to drop a nade inside him and predict his landing, why force me to spend 0.3 more seconds to press f8 space f2 enter?. What a redundancy don't you think?
Just change it already
-
maybe something we could try in trl before making the changes to tus shopper?
-
i feel loved... lol how many times will it take for u to understand that the shopper scheme/rules hasnt had anything to do with me for over 3 years ::)
it was voted on originally, i also prefer no afr... the community wanted it
-
Plus with such long turn times (enough time to knock) and such big arsenal of weapons hard hides are already irrelevant. You'll never be worse off because your opponent didn't attack from rope, if you were hiding in a place where he could attack you from the ground, with ease, then you aren't in a hard hide by shopper standards to begin with.
Not really, a lot of hides in shopper maps are really hard to attack zooking from the rope. Or even knocking into. It would be really easy to attack those hides from the grounds, definitely worth giving up your retreat for.
Also, a hit from the ground almost always does 100% of the damage. It's a bit harder releasing weaps from the rope, especially in hard spots (see above).
It's good as it is.
-
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. But this is gonna be just like Hysteria, once included it'll never disappear because there's always tons of people who "like it the way it is".
-
Plus with such long turn times (enough time to knock) and such big arsenal of weapons hard hides are already irrelevant. You'll never be worse off because your opponent didn't attack from rope, if you were hiding in a place where he could attack you from the ground, with ease, then you aren't in a hard hide by shopper standards to begin with.
Not really, a lot of hides in shopper maps are really hard to attack zooking from the rope.
Who cares? Do you only have zooks? You don't have enough time to grab a crate and knock? The scheme is balanced around many weapons and long turn times to knock, that's why piling is key, and that's why attacking from the ground is a risk-reward choice, in which you could potentially give up the most important aspect of a turn, the piling, just to get a shot in.
It would be really easy to attack those hides from the grounds, definitely worth giving up your retreat for.
Giving up retreat time and a pile for 50 damage tops? You're full of it, come back to earth.
Also, a hit from the ground almost always does 100% of the damage. It's a bit harder releasing weaps from the rope, especially in hard spots (see above).
Strictly depends on the weapon and the hide. You speak as if Shopper only used bazookas and mortars.
HHC, you will automatically put down anything that comes from my username, many times, looking completely naive in the process, for someone with such an experience in this game it would help you long ways if you started listening as opposed to confronting anything that comes from players striving for competition just because you have a different understanding of competition.
The only justification for AFR, the one you used, which is, removing it makes the game easier, is bullocks, like I said, attacking from the ground will result in a disadvantage for the attacker unless he knows what he is doing. It's a choice that adds to the strategy. It's a pointless rule, it has no thought behind it, the only reason it's imposed it's because this league got schemes from public games as opposed to previous league, with all the previous work put into them.
AFR was firstly removed in FB based on this arguments. You want to add them again on what basis? That no AFR makes shopper easier?
My respect for you HHC steadily decreases every time you make a post in this forum. You've played this game for 14 years and cannot even get your head around a scheme like Shopper. Seems as if you don't even fully comprehend it. Either that, or bias ain't letting you sound anything other than naive, for the lack of a better non offensive term.
edit: really hard to attack zooking from the rope. Or even knocking into.
I'd love to see examples of this. Of both these things in one hide. So i can load up a replay of me getting a crate, knocking and attacking in less than half the time I normally have in a Shopper.
-
Hm.. this escalated quickly..
-
Ropa makes some valid points here, and it's a bit odd how quickly his suggestions and questions for debate are being turned down. While we're at it, we could simply reinforce the rules in Elite predate FB as well.
-
why is rope knocking illegal in elite and t17???????
-
I actually do agree with ropa to some extent but I doubt any changes would ever be made since shopper has always worked this way. However, considering it's a good point it might be a good idea to introduce an alternative to this scheme where this rule is removed? I personally enjoy the AFR rule but I can see the fun in not having the rule. Go with both?
On a side note, why do you always seem so pissed? :|
-
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.
-
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. :(
-
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
-
I support no afr in shoppa for the reasons mentioned in this thread
-
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 (https://www.tus-wa.com/leagues/game-110892/), 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.
-
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 (https://www.tus-wa.com/leagues/game-110892/), 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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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
-
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 :D
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
I'm discussing stuff with darkz.
I expect great good to come out of this. Don't disappoint me.
-
In 100% of the games there's 4 worms on both sides with equal health :D
Yeah, for the first 30 seconds usually. :P You gotta count in different damage through weapons (Dynamite > Bazooka > Firepunch) and most importantly failed turns/attacks. No matter who's failing an attack, there's gonna be your difference in health. And it happens frequently even in an easy scheme like Shopper. You won't ever have a game with completely leveled health on all worms, that's why piling is important.
I'd very (very) likely win a Shopper game by piling every turn against someone who doesn't pile but only hides.
Anyway this went slightly off-topic. Shopper with AFR as a basic rule, why is that? I still have no idea. :D
-
Yeah, for the first 30 seconds usually. :P You gotta count in different damage through weapons (Dynamite > Bazooka > Firepunch) and most importantly failed turns/attacks. No matter who's failing an attack, there's gonna be your difference in health. And it happens frequently even in an easy scheme like Shopper. You won't ever have a game with completely leveled health on all worms, that's why piling is important.
O no no, but as long as the differences are reasonable there's no issue. Like I said, you can fix it by dropping bigger weaps on bigger worms to the point where the HP's are fairly evenly distributed again. A worm of 110, one of 134, one of 172 and one of a 100 is no problem. You can get away with skipping a pile then, no probs!
Skipping them the whole game, thats a different issue. But against a worm in a bad hide that is much easier to hit AFG, yeah.. 1 out of 4 turns a no-pile shouldn't get you in too much of a difficulty if you don't make bad errors.
-
You're forgetting that you get 1 crate per turn and the only unlimited weapon in Shopper is Pneumatic Drill. You can't be too picky as to which weapon to throw at which worm. But let's get back on topic shall we? :)
-
I love how U 3 are playing the game of Shopper with words through your posts.. It's a high-level Shop, maybe make a Cup out of it? ;x :-*
-
and definitely make a worms movie out of ur best
moves... posts.