The Ultimate Site of Worms Armageddon
All About TUS => TUS Discussion => Topic started by: TheKomodo on September 02, 2020, 01:43 PM
-
I was just in a game with Sensei & SiD talking about scheme changes and I was asking if they knew why Anti-lock was added to BnG but not all other schemes, it was suggested I should make a post, which almost gave me a heart attack :D
Was this rule added to BnG without asking the community 1st? And all the other added rules in general?
TL;DR - Implementing this rule gives players who use notching to aim a HUGE advantage, they can hit anywhere on the map using math, especially with any wind power using full power shots, and full power grenades, everyone knows how easy it is to do full power shots.
3s grenades, and 5s low gravity grenades are also easy to hit because of the specific position the power is released has visual cues with the cursor making those easy as well, there is a reason why these are the most common shots in BnG.
People who don't use notching, have to guess every time.
Detailed explanation:
To put it simply, this rule helps notchers, and is something we've tried to prevent for as long as I can remember, so i'm completely baffled as to why we are doing the opposite now, which is helping notchers by giving them an advantage over players who don't notch and pretty much guess where to shoot, then adjust it.
1st off let's define what notching is, not to be confused with another method I know a few players used called steps(using the different sprite positions in the same way notching works).
A "notch" is the smallest movement possible by tapping the arrow key very quickly, depending on what keyboard you have, your own reflexes, and the sensitivity, sometimes it will move the distance of 2 or more notches with each press, but it's really easy to find a cheap keyboard which has low sensitivity making people able to go "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, etc", counting out these shots.
1st off, let's begin by explaining how easy it is to achieve a full power shot(FP for short), you basically hold down the fire button and don't let go until it automatically fires because it reached maximum power, this makes it impossible to miss 100% power shots.
Let's also take into account what was said in the TL;DR section with the visual cues for 3s and 5s LG shots.
Ok, now, "notching" is using this information, specific resolutions, and mathematics to ensure pixel perfect accuracy, especially with 4 second full power grenades which are the easiest shot in the game because of this method, and is a massive reason why repeating shots and generally using 4s full power grenades were sort of looked at as "cheap" in the first place. Notching can be used for almost every type of shot, with and without low gravity, including:
4s FP / 3s / Banks / Transfers / 4s & 5s FP Floorbanks / 5s LG / 4s LG / Bunnyhops / Etc.
People who know notching know how to count out their shots from a perfectly vertical 0 degree aim, so for them anti-lock doesn't prevent this at all, if anything it can help as it always starts from 0/90 degree angles.
Notching also includes knowing exactly where a bazooka will explode by aiming straight up, full power, for every wind power possible, and knowing how many "notches" to adjust it by from 0 degrees to make it hit anywhere, which makes it possible to even shoot through small gaps because they know the math and have the experience of knowing the path the bazooka will follow with each level of wind power aimed straight up with full power.
People who don't know how to use notching, basically people who aren't using math, and rely on adjusting their aim using natural methods like some people use girders to measure distance between kamikazi's and stuff, knowing exactly where to stand on a worms head to place a mine/dynamite by carefully memorizing sprite positions, in BnG people can use a combination of the background, placing their finger over the cursor, land objects and destroyed land, to reset their aim and adjust their shot carefully.
I understand the nature behind the decision to use anti-lock, in theory, it's a fair move, in practise, it opens up a massive advantage for people who are notching.
I hope you can reconsider and remove the anti-lock rule.
-
Despite the good faith, anti-lock will only make notching easier if you really know how to notch.
As someone who played side by side with you against notchers, I had to create my own method of notching to be competitive. I can't recall everything perfectly, so I might make some mistakes but let me explain myself:
As you mention, every step or notch equals certain distance in the map, you can call this distance from your own worm 1, 2, 3, 4 and so on. If I set the cross aim completely vertical I can move notch by notch reaching the number I want and throw a 4FP which I know exactly where it will go. Going down 11 notches will impact in the 11th space in the map, if in the next turn you move to 7 I can stay in the 11th notch and just increase the power until it touches the cross aim and release a 3s nade and I know it will land perfectly. When you know the basics of notching you can master 3s, 4sFP, any wind and so on. Now you can prepare a nice spreadsheet in Excel and share it with your mates! (Hi CF, hi DT).
If there's an anti-lock rule implemented you're making it easier for someone like me. You go to the space 12, I walk to the precise distance I know that I shoot and will land right in your worm. It will be just harder for people that go with the flow and throw anything they think it's right.
Ironically, if we keep worms anchored you have better chances against a notcher because it's harder to blow up the space between -let's say- 10 and 11 space. So if you put your worm right in the middle of these spaces in the map you get the upper hand against me for example.
Having this knowledge, the best way to level the skill gap it's to reveal the notching secrets and techniques to everyone. Maybe, Mablak reached the same conclusion and that's the reason he wrote an extensive guideline of notching allowing anyone to learn it, and Anubis published a map with these spaces marked in the map allowing you to practise it and master a wide array of shots.
Anyhow, the reality is that competition is dead and BnG is already six feet under. Notching outside a competitive environment has no place or meaning.
-
I mean, even with anti-lock you can still re-aim with your finger on screen anyway.
It's a pointless rule.
-
I mean if you go back far enough petrol bombs were also part of BnG for a period of time along with clusters and 20 sec turn time. Like everything evolution of the game, I am not the biggest fan of ant-locked worming, but it serves it purposes.
-
@lalo, JayP
We are talking about anti-lock aim that resets your aim between turns. Intended to make repeat shots more challenging as the description says.
Was this rule added to BnG without asking the community 1st? And all the other added rules in general?
Reaiming before every shot was already in the rules and that's obviously the motive for enabling this scheme setting. It makes you follow that rule automatically. Likewise rope knocking and glitches OFF make you follow already existing rules automatically. The zero wind feature for RR was desired I think.
Korydex and Kaleu uploaded these scheme files for 3.8. I consulted KRD about the anti-lock aim feature for BnG. Then I asked MI if I can update the scheme files. So yeah, I was lazy to open threads for these.
Of course these changes can be reverted if they turn out to be bad. We've done it before with anti-lock power for BnG etc.
People who don't know how to use notching, basically people who aren't using math, and rely on adjusting their aim using natural methods like some people use girders to measure distance between kamikazi's and stuff, knowing exactly where to stand on a worms head to place a mine/dynamite by carefully memorizing sprite positions, in BnG people can use a combination of the background, placing their finger over the cursor, land objects and destroyed land, to reset their aim and adjust their shot carefully.
Not all use external visual aids (thumb, ruler or whatever), though. You can't compare them to memorizing - you don't need to memorize because of them.
-
What if anti-lock aim would randomize the angle instead of pinning to 0/90?
Problem solved.
(As a matter of fact, you have probably noticed there are two anti-lock aim options: the base game one resets to nearest, so 0 or 90, while RubberWorm anti-lock aim always resets to horizontal 0 degrees).
-
Was this rule added to BnG without asking the community 1st? And all the other added rules in general?
Korydex and Kaleu uploaded these scheme files for 3.8. I consulted KRD about the anti-lock aim feature for BnG. Then I asked MI if I can update the scheme files. So yeah, I was lazy to open threads for these.
I don't believe that was a good choice, not just for BnG, but for all the schemes, I don't think it's right to just change things in private like this, personally it's about as frustrating to me as how governments pass laws when everyone is distracted.
People who don't know how to use notching, basically people who aren't using math, and rely on adjusting their aim using natural methods like some people use girders to measure distance between kamikazi's and stuff, knowing exactly where to stand on a worms head to place a mine/dynamite by carefully memorizing sprite positions, in BnG people can use a combination of the background, placing their finger over the cursor, land objects and destroyed land, to reset their aim and adjust their shot carefully.
Not all use external visual aids (thumb, ruler or whatever), though. You can't compare them to memorizing - you don't need to memorize because of them.
There isn't really any impact in your point here, I don't believe it is at all difficult to memorize any of that stuff, pretty much anyone who is passionate about any those schemes will learn whatever they need to, I for example don't have the slightest clue how to use pixel perfect dynamite placements, or use girder to judge kami distance, because i've never been interested enough to bother, but if I had any passion for those schemes i'm sure i'd have it memorized very quickly.
Even notching itself, is in my opinion extremely easy to become very good at, and the only reason we haven't seen more "barmans" is because BnG isn't a very popular scheme.
Another reminder, when I 1st got into BnG it's because M3ntal showed me how to notch 4s full power grenades, low wind bazookas, and 3s grenades, at that time LG wasn't even a thing in BnG schemes, unless you played with dw33b and Bamf etc, less than a week after he showed me notching I absolutely destroyed everyone in a 1v1 BnG tournament, I only missed like 3 shots that entire tournament, and in the following month or so went on to destroy the best BnG players that were around at the time, people who had been playing for years, this is what happens when someone is determined and passionate enough.
I soon realized that by employing notching, it had made me a very boring player, and was a display of poor sportsmanship, I received multiple complaints from people claiming I was cheating and it was unfair, so I never used notching in a league match ever again.
The point I am making, currently notching is legal, it's not against the rules as far as i'm aware, regardless how people feel about that, that is a fact.
The notchers lose nothing, the only way they can miss is by releasing the power wrong, either that or they aren't using the correct math.
The non-notchers lose the ability to adjust their aim quickly and accurately, even though it's still possible to re-aim using your thumb on screen with anti-lock enabled, you have to use cam-lock and keep your thumb on the screen between turns.
We should be taking steps in the direction to make it a more even playing field for everyone, this rule makes worse for non-notchers.
What if anti-lock aim would randomize the angle instead of pinning to 0/90?
Problem solved.
As said above, notchers can just aim straight up and start counting, non-notchers still have to guess every time.
I think the only solution is to somehow remove the ability to notch, and I don't know how that's possible with the current game options.
-
@lalo, JayP
We are talking about anti-lock aim that resets your aim between turns. Intended to make repeat shots more challenging as the description says.
Sorry, read quickly without seeing that description.
Anyways, you are not preventing any notcher from doing his work with your solution. This auto aim moves to 0 degree in your turn? Ok, the cross aim consists of let's say 10 notches and from that you calculate your shot. Moves to 90? Even easier.
Now a randomized auto aim makes it a bit harder but not really because I might not be able to notch my first shot but I can just stick my finger and do it the second time or use visual clues, or even better just select torch and from that aim notch in my very first turn rofl.
Are you preventing anyone from notching? Not at all
Are you making BnG simpler for people without much experience? No, you are adding more rules to an already hard to digest scheme.
Is notching a current problem in the league? No
Is BnG even played in the league? No
Is this league active anyways? No, it's just dibz against a random player
Is notching the biggest or even a decent issue to fix in this league? God dammit no!
Komo wants to push a more honorable way to play BnG and I applaud him, he cares for this game and has done a lot for it. If you think twice he has already implemented the best solution: put real effort and build a community from the ground, teach people and praise them for their improvement, make them feel proud of being a part of something great as he did with b2b instead of writing some clown rules ruining it more and ignoring the main problem as a politician does.
Now imagine the best set of rules preventing Mablak, Random, Barman, SPW and all the good notchers to notch. You think that will prevent them from beating anyone ass? No because notchers are usually competitive players leagues above the common one and notching is just an efficient way to win faster.
-
I saw you blaming someone for an unsolved problem that is actually a problem of the game and no rules can solve it.
The best solution is remove that boring scheme as it causes too much controversy.
Was this rule added to BnG without asking the community 1st? And all the other added rules in general?
Korydex and Kaleu uploaded these scheme files for 3.8. I consulted KRD about the anti-lock aim feature for BnG. Then I asked MI if I can update the scheme files. So yeah, I was lazy to open threads for these.
I don't believe that was a good choice, not just for BnG, but for all the schemes, I don't think it's right to just change things in private like this, personally it's about as frustrating to me as how governments pass laws when everyone is distracted.
And yet this shocks a total of zero people because it were just rules embedded to schemes that were already very clear throughtout the years. In fact it improved all the schemes because people can't use any excuses anymore after abusing of glitches and other unwanted forbidden moves like knocks.
Furthermore, this change was not in private, even if it was, there is not an announcement forcing people to download and play with updated schemes.
https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/announcements/tus-now-supports-v3-8-schemes-32874/msg276577/#msg276577
You guys want to fix something? Put your asses in wormnet and make this game alive again.
Is it one of those "do as I say, not as I do" ? Cause I don't see you online for ages, unless you are under multiple aliases. :D :D
-
I saw you blaming someone for an unsolved problem that is actually a problem of the game and no rules can solve it.
The best solution is remove that boring scheme as it causes too much controversy.
Who blamed who for what now?
To be honest, I don't disagree, maybe removing BnG would be a step forward, at least until we can figure out a way to prevent notching.
And yet this shocks a total of zero people because it were just rules embedded to schemes that were already very clear throughtout the years. In fact it improved all the schemes because people can't use any excuses anymore after abusing of glitches and other unwanted forbidden moves like knocks.
1. I'm shocked so saying 0 is already wrong, also, you are not psychic, you cannot possibly know how many people this bothers, granted I don't think the numbers are very high, but minorities should not be ignored when their concerns are legit.
2. In your opinion, it improved all the schemes, in my opinion it didn't, would you bet your life that everyone agrees with you?
Furthermore, this change was not in private, even if it was, there is not an announcement forcing people to download and play with updated schemes.
https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/announcements/tus-now-supports-v3-8-schemes-32874/msg276577/#msg276577
Senator said he consulted KRD, I see no record of this in public unless it was on discord on irc or something?
-
I saw you blaming someone for an unsolved problem that is actually a problem of the game and no rules can solve it.
The best solution is remove that boring scheme as it causes too much controversy.
Who blamed who for what now?
To be honest, I don't disagree, maybe removing BnG would be a step forward, at least until we can figure out a way to prevent notching.
And yet this shocks a total of zero people because it were just rules embedded to schemes that were already very clear throughtout the years. In fact it improved all the schemes because people can't use any excuses anymore after abusing of glitches and other unwanted forbidden moves like knocks.
1. I'm shocked so saying 0 is already wrong, also, you are not psychic, you cannot possibly know how many people this bothers, granted I don't think the numbers are very high, but minorities should not be ignored when their concerns are legit.
Funny you said that, I'd argue that you are a person, to me you are a living puppet, always ranting on unnecessary sujects, so zero is pretty precise at the moment.
Would you bet your life that I am the only one that thinks that?
League is very inactive, closer to death and the people active that actually plays daily like dibz, aladdin, albus didn't bother so why should we? To be honest it's much more up to them.
Senator said he consulted KRD, I see no record of this in public unless it was on discord on irc or something?
I don't think that MI or Senator need to give satisfactions or warn people for every decision they make, in fact it was never clear that this site was a democracy, if you are not satisfied stop going here and make your own website. We don't pay for this and we get so much.
-
Ok, i'll move past all those ridiculously childish statements you just made and focus on the things related to this league.
I asked you a question - "Who blamed who for what now?" - You just threw out an accusation at someone and didn't even bother to say who, what's that all about?
"always ranting on unnecessary sujects" - I've literally played between 10k and 20k hours of BnG since 2004, in peak times I spent 10+ hours a day, every day, every month, playing this scheme, hosting tournaments, created an amazing community which quite frankly were some of the best times of my life, created a league that was successful for BnG fans, played thousands of competitive singles & clanners spread across a2b/FB/TUS/WO and tournaments, I was literally in love with this scheme for a massive chunk of my life and spent a lot of time teaching others how to play as well, I always had time for other people no matter what and never ignored anyone no matter how good or bad they were at the game I was always willing to help, even if they hated me and insulted me.
I believe i've earned the right to have my opinion at least heard when it comes to BnG, you don't have to agree with me, and if you want to act hostile that's up to you, I will always respond to the facts instead of trying to attack the person and their personality.
At the end of the day if I don't like the changes that are made, I simply won't play, but you can be damn sure i'm going to try and convince them otherwise, why wouldn't I? Nothing worth having in life comes easy and if you don't try, if you don't ask, you'll never achieve it.
Personally, I only stopped playing because as i've said before, I went homeless for a while and had to put all my stuff into storage back in February 2019, now i've got stuff back last week I can play again, i've always been around though watching the forums and sometimes commenting on things, waiting and hoping there might be an active league again, i've been thinking about joining a clan and trying to get some clanners happening, but this rule is an issue that stands in my way right now.
Yes, you are absolutely correct, MonkeyIsland and Senator don't need to warn people for every decision they make, MonkeyIsland could delete this entire website if he wanted and we wouldn't be able to do anything about it.
Ask yourself though, did MonkeyIsland make this website for himself, did he make this website so he can dictate things and make himself feel special, or did he make it for people who are incredibly passionate about this game and want a place to feel like a community and play at a professional level? And has he always taken into consideration the opinions of scheme masters and active players?
I also agreed it could be a step forward to remove BnG, since all it does it cause arguements, i'm willing to change and adapt and move forward, are you?
-
Anyways, you are not preventing any notcher from doing his work with your solution. This auto aim moves to 0 degree in your turn? Ok, the cross aim consists of let's say 10 notches and from that you calculate your shot. Moves to 90? Even easier.
Now a randomized auto aim makes it a bit harder but not really because I might not be able to notch my first shot but I can just stick my finger and do it the second time or use visual clues, or even better just select torch and from that aim notch in my very first turn rofl.
Are you preventing anyone from notching? Not at all
Are you making BnG simpler for people without much experience? No, you are adding more rules to an already hard to digest scheme.
You need to read again. :D This scheme setting has nothing to do with notching and is not an attempt to prevent notching in any way. It's just Komo talking about notching. Because notchers are allowed to notch, he thinks that he should be allowed to use his own method where he puts his thumb on the screen. This scheme setting is preventing him to do that while not affecting notchers.
Komo's method is actually questionable because it directly allows you to bypass the rule "re-aim before every shot". You can put your thumb on the screen, move crosshair 45 degrees and back exactly to the same position and then repeat your previous shot (or make slight adjustments if the previous shot was unsuccessful). Komo should be arguing for the removal of "re-aim before every shot" rule.
And no, we didn't add any rule or make things more complicated. This scheme setting means that you don't need to manually move your crosshair 45 degrees before every shot. It actually makes things simplier for new players because they don't even need to be aware of the rule (re-aim before every shot).
-
So it's just a script that automatically moves the cross aim as the rules state without the need to do anything? Lol sorry for my ignorant rant, with all the fuss I got a bit confused haha.
-
If my method, which is using my thumb as a visual que is questionable then let me ask something.
Why is it "questionable" when I use visual ques, but not when other people use them?
Why is it "impressive" and "awesome" when default type players use worm sprites and positions to judge EXACTLY where a shot will go down to the pixel, but people think it's "lame" and "questionable" when I use a visual que simply to save time from something i've already done before 100% instinctually?
And if your answer is "they are using game mechanics" then I ask this:
Why is it ok for people to mod/adjust/upgrade their hardware/software and use physical methods such as fingerrolling to gain an "advantage" in Worms, but it's "lame" and "questionable" if I do something as simple as put my thumb on the screen?
I've always said the re-aim rule is pointless, this next statement is purely opinion but I like having the re-aim rule purely because it looks better, personally I would like to remove this rule, but i'm not asking to.
My problem is players who are using math to play the scheme in a way where they know they will achieve 100% accuracy so long as they release power accurately enough, not to mention the dozens of shots you can achieve with full power, and the advantage they are gaining from this added scheme rule, and if it isn't a rule, does that mean we don't have to use it? Are you saying it's optional? Because if it's mandatory, then by definition, it is indeed an added rule.
-
Komo, the difference between what Intermediate players do (count the steps from the edge of a worm's head to align their mine/dyna drops) and placing your thumb on the screen is that one really is just paying attention to visual cues from the game, while the other is more than that, and requires physical access to and contact with a part of hardware that (unlike the keyboard and mouse) might not actually be physically accessible in an environment such as a live LAN tournament or other event. While I don't personally think thumbing is a form of cheating anywhere near comparable to using physical rulers and such, I do think live events would very likely prohibit both. And if they had any sense in them, they almost certainly wouldn't prohibit walking on top of a worm's head one half-pixel at a time, or the BnG equivalent of it, so notching (without visual aids). Would you roughly agree with that, or do you feel thumbing doesn't look ridiculous enough that in-person events would want to keep spectators from having to endure watching it? :D
On the more immediately relevant issue of the new "anti-lock aim" extended scheme option for BnG, I am actually in agreement with your sentiment that, in a perfect world at least, manual reaiming is a better solution than having the game reaim for us, because a slight bit of the scheme's nuance is actually lost this way. Namely, there are some very complex bounce shots out there that likely wouldn't even make sense to go for anymore if you couldn't somewhat reliably bypass the spirit of the reaim rule by using visual cues such as edges of terrain or the terrain texture (but not thumbs!) to get back to your crosshair position from your previous attempt at that shot. Instead, if doing this meant having to rely on thumbing or coming up with some other even more cheaty solution to (sometimes) finding your previous angle again, I think these already risky and difficult to justify bounce shots would likely completely disappear from the repertoire of competitive BnG players, in favour of just rolling near-sitters into easy hides. And that would be a shame, even if currently nobody playing TUS BnG would ever even consider going for these shots anyway... which is probably why the simple solution of just reaiming for people automatically was the chosen preference, when Senator was discussing this with us on IRC/Discord.
-
What if anti-lock aim would randomize the angle instead of pinning to 0/90?
Problem solved.
As said above, notchers can just aim straight up and start counting, non-notchers still have to guess every time.
Nope, we still have Circular Aiming, which although doesn't fully prevent it, makes it much harder. Also it is very obvious what people are trying to do when it happens, which should discourage them from doing it.
Changes to the engine to prevent discrete aiming steps are possible and have been considered (so no single tap of an arrow key is the same, and counts fractions of a frame/pixels), as well as programmatic rotation of the crosshair graphic.
-
"while the other is more than that, and requires physical access to and contact with a part of hardware that might not actually be physically accessible in an environment such as a live LAN tournament or other event"
I fail to see how you would not have physical access to the monitor sitting directly in front of you, I have watched a fair number of professional gaming events live and yet to see one where the monitor is not within arms reach.
The only valid reason I can possibly think to prohibit using your fingers as visual aids is to prevent the screen from getting marked, however this can be countered as long as the screen is maintained and cleaned properly.
What I do, and what they do, no matter how you approach it, in basic form is described as using visual cues/aids.
They are using the same basic peripherals, what they see on the screen and using their body to get the right aim.
I am using the same basic peripherals, what I see on the screen and my body to get the right aim.
The point I am making is that you are using your own body and nothing but your own body and any connected peripherals to play the game, it is 100% natural, I have seen people make a living on Twitch from doing speedruns using Dance Dance Revolution pads, saw people literally playing games using their feet to control the gamepads(heck even Anubis experimented with this in roping lol), and while some people find that ridiculous, I do not, so to answer your question, I do not think that it would look ridiculous enough that live events would want to keep spectators from having to endure watching it, as long as they are using the same equipment, it is fair in my opinion.
I also do not think taking the opinions of some people that they personally think something looks ridiculous should be used as good judgement for making rules, so long as you are not hurting anyone directly.
Also, I would like to see anybody play without "physical access" and "contact" with their monitor, our eyes are physical and make eye contact with the screens, our brains are physical too, and they relay information and actions throughout our body.
That might come across as annoying, or frustrating, or even condescending but in all honesty I like to be specific(and realize people hate me for it), and yet we still discuss these things based on opinions as there is no law for it, and my opinion is that I do not see an unfair difference in using the full extent of your physical body while playing a video game, it is the actions inside the game that matter.
I also acknowledge, and always have, that with that statement people could say:
"But isn't notching using the full extent of your physical body as well?"
The answer is yes, as depending on your belief, math is universal and exists as a natural state that exists before mankind did, however my problem with that is specifically counting and using math to achieve 100% angle accuracy without fail, and when it comes down to it, that is because in my opinion it is boring and ruins the fun.
Does that sound selfish to you? It sounds selfish to me, but that is how all man-made rules and laws are created through belief, opinion and/or agreement, which is a massive discussion alone, but let us not go there.
There are many examples we could discuss where using the full extent of your body is allowed, but you must resist the temptation to do specific things inside the game itself because they are rules.
I also did notice your careful selection of words here:
"While I don't personally think thumbing is a form of cheating anywhere near comparable to using physical rulers and such"
Which does not rule out the possibility that you still personally think it is cheating, it could come across as you suggesting it is still cheating, just not as much as using physical rulers and such.
Personally I don't believe in distinguishing between minor cheating and major cheating, cheating is cheating, if you break the rules you break the rules.
As for the entirety of your 2nd paragraph, I did not read anything that convinces me adding Anti-Lock to BnG with the already existing rules is a good decision, and I already explained why.
Now I want to elaborate a bit on my opinion between using your hand as a visual aid and notching.
One of the differences between using your hand as a visual aid and using notching/math/charts/rulers etc to play BnG, in my opinion, is that you learn everything on your own, everything you do, even adjustments are still a guess as opposed to already knowing if it is the right angle because you used math and the fact the aim moves exact distances with each notch.
If you knew everything that is going to happen in your life, do you think you would find it as fun?
Granted I did learn 3s grenades 4s full power grenades and some low wind bazookas from M3ntal when I 1st started but then had to re-learn doing absolutely everything again without using math and moving notch by notch and counting to myself.
Let us discuss the re-aim rule as well since Senator mentioned it.
Why was it added in the 1st place? Was it not to stop players repeating the same shot over and over? Other than that and phrases similar to, "It looks better", I have never been told any other reason.
Is this not why we have the no repeat shots rule, in order to force a variation of shots after successful hits rendering this rule almost entirely obsolete, which is influenced based on the factors of the repeat rule you are using.
So, I now find myself asking, why do we even need the re-aim rule? Should we just get rid of it?
StepS - Yes, we have circular aiming, but you did not say that the 1st time.
I also discussed this with M3ntal yesterday about changes to the game engine which would give us real-time aiming instead of it being limited to what it is, so your aim would change for the time the aim button was pressed, it would also make it possible to now aim inbetween the current notches available making BnG even more accurate! I would be ridiculously happy if this was implemented, once and for all get rid of notching and in turn giving a real possibility of reviving the scheme in ways never before thought possible :)
Either way, I think the hardest challenge in BnG is the fact that so many people have different opinions, at the end of the day we do not have any official professional way of deciding rules for schemes, we don't have a legitimate and trustworthy board of people who can represent the best interests of the entire community.
This issue alone, has the power to destroy friendships, I for one will never forget the pain and depression felt for years due to the issues this has caused, it has created hatred amongst people and countless arguements over the years, no wonder it's becoming an extinct scheme, nobody wants that negativity anymore.
-
Maybe the best anti-notch solution is to decrease the turn time so much that there wouldn't be enough time for counting. (combining it with anti-lock and circular aiming to make it harder) *cough* hysteria *cough*
-
Well that's all sorts of awful and is equivalent to saying that (real) BnG shouldn't be a competitively played scheme. Which, yeah, understandable sentiment on the forum of a league that has been haunted by notcher paranoia for a decade. But still completely awful and upsetting to people who know BnG has the potential to be not only competitive but fun and engaging to watch as well.
-
I think at that point MonkeyIsland, it's going to be a different type of BnG.
I've always personally thought of Worms as having 3 different genres of schemes, everything else is a sub-genre.
Artillery - This includes everything where the main focus/skill of the scheme is accuracy with firing weapons at other worms, e.g, BnG, Hysteria, Aerial, Boom Race, Golf, Fort, etc.
Strategic - This includes everything where the main focus/skill of the scheme is strategic planning, adaptation and execution, trying to out-think your opponent, e.g, Team17, Elite, Intermediate, Abnormal, Mole Shopper etc.
Physical - This includes everything where the main focus/skill of the scheme is a players physical ability, e.g, Roper, Wascar, Big RR, Tower Race, Bungee Race, TTRR, WxW, Darts, Warmer etc.
With that being said, implementing circular aiming, anti-lock, and possibly other things into BnG, in my opinion would change it enough to consider that a seperate scheme, because it requires a different approach and new way of processing your thoughts when taking turns, just like Hysteria and Aerial are similar in a lot of ways, but still very different in a lot of other ways, and I believe these schemes originated as ways to enjoy artillery schemes such as BnG, but without the hassle of things like notching.
-
That's well said, though I think the main hassle was still following written, and attempting to follow unwritten, rules. That's historically been the main, and possibly only real problem that BnG has faced as a competitive way of playing WA. Whether fixing the rules would save BnG without even attempting to address (real or imagined) anti-notcher sentiment in the community remains to be seen, though. I don't think an honest, carefully considered and implemented effort has so far happened in that direction, so we just don't know.
-
This is more of a fun conversation rather than a dispute at this point, which is nice.
Hence why BnG has been referred to by many as "The gentlemen's scheme", as you had to trust your opponents were not doing anything considered unfair or "lame", and generally speaking, many of us did share that trust and respect for each other.
From my perspective, I consider the most interesting peak of BnG being a period of time about 3 to 5 years long, starting before, and including when b2b was at peak activity and engagement, funners, leagues and tournaments were booming, there was a healthy amount of enthusiasm for BnG, and in general people had a higher level of trust for each other, once that trust faded and disappeared, so did a massive amount of interest for the scheme.
I was unfortunately not into BnG between 1999-2004 back when players like Psydome were dominating, but i'd consider that era a peak as well, but i'll never know that experience. :(
So far, the only ways I know of to prevent notching in BnG, pretty much ruins BnG for many players, or rather doesn't improve it for enough players, because it changes the scheme too much.
MonkeyIsland just described one of them, reduce the time so it's impossible for notchers to count out their shots, but on the other hand, where does that leave people who take the time to adjust their aim naturally and visually imagine the path of their shot a few times before actually taking the shot?
Changing turn time, adding weapons, removing weapons, implementing rubberworm, adding and removing rules for various leagues, it has pretty much all been discussed and experimented with.
Heck, one day I even became excited when fantasizing about a continuously rotating aim which you have no control over except firing once selecting the weapon and/or fuse, and you press space when you think it is at the right angle to fire, but then with haste I found myself thinking of ways that would put me off:
How fast is the rotation? Too fast and it is more difficult than it needs to be, too slow and if you miss your opportunity to fire, you might run out of time before it reaches that angle again. However I did think of a solution to this by adding the ability to press left/right to switch rotation between clockwise and anti-clockwise.
It already takes people a long time to become good at BnG, with this in place the learning curve would be even bigger and take longer, because of this the average game would take forever, even I believe there would be struggle to hit accurately at a comfortable rate for myself, even more so if people hide in "evil" positions.
Not to mention it would totally take away the freestyle side of BnG where people like to attempt the same trick shot with multiple bounces many times over, imagine how many attempts it would take with auto-rotation implemented? You would probably have to go to get ready for work the next day and go to sleep before you even hit anyone...
-
Why was it added in the 1st place? Was it not to stop players repeating the same shot over and over? Other than that and phrases similar to, "It looks better", I have never been told any other reason.
Is this not why we have the no repeat shots rule, in order to force a variation of shots after successful hits rendering this rule almost entirely obsolete, which is influenced based on the factors of the repeat rule you are using.
So, I now find myself asking, why do we even need the re-aim rule? Should we just get rid of it?
According to KRD, the rule is also about "not just taking your new shot from the position where your previous one was. It's a matter of literally reaiming (the crosshair)."
Manual re-aim means you can get back to your previous aim angle by memorizing the crosshair position just before re-aiming. Then you can repeat the previous shot or adjust the aim based on the previous shot. So you can basically do exactly what the rule is supposed to prevent.
Now auto re-aim makes it a bit harder to bypass the rule but can also make people "cheat harder" as KRD said.
I'll agree that we need wider acceptance for the auto re-aim feature because it changes the way people have been playing all these years.
-
Senator, the reason why it's encouraged to "re-aim" in the 1st place though is to prevent people from repeating shots.
And using your thumb to re-aim is not breaking the rules, because you are still re-aiming.
-
I think the only solution is to somehow remove the ability to notch, and I don't know how that's possible with the current game options.
Just remove 4s nades and use shorter maps ?
Or add rule that full power shots are illegal.
-
Or add rule that full power shots are illegal.
...good idea though, but it could cause in-game arguing between players trying to prove some guy made a full power shot or not, so it'd be good to have this as a future game feature, but at the second thought it would be hard to explain to the community, and what should be the changed max power value, or should it vary, plus ability to set 0-100% in the scheme options, but after all it seems like an additional confusion...
Regards... :)
-
Changes to the engine to prevent discrete aiming steps are possible and have been considered (so no single tap of an arrow key is the same, and counts fractions of a frame/pixels), as well as programmatic rotation of the crosshair graphic.
I think this, combined with auto re-aiming, would be the best solution. BnG to me is about relying on your judgment/intuition, not calculation and counting taps. Notching in all of its forms is lame in my opinion.
-
The equivalent of notching in one of the greatest eSports game of all time (CS) is aligning your grenade throws to visual in-game clues like this:
I personally think that BnG itself would never become a competitive scheme with wide appeal just because there are so many ways to exploit the game engine, it is easily abused. It doesn't really matter if you use a physical visual cue or an in-game cue. Both ways are intended to remove skill and have higher hit chance. It would just not be interesting to watch a game where there are so many systems in place that let the players abuse the spirit of the scheme. BnG is a game of memory, which means the skill ceiling is lower compared to other facets of worms, it's extremely static and predictable (hence notching exists in the first place). In a static environment it's intuitive to just memorize the possible outcomes especially when they are limited by physics itself, it's a 360° circle of which you only need to use roughly 90° (of which 45° are mirrored so it's just a copy to memorize). You can shoot below your worm but it really is just a fancy way to use LG. Besides that, again, you can still apply the 90° you learned from "up there" and divide that by 2 because it's a mirror. The enemy is 99,9% placed in a position that is easily reachable within these 90°.
Notches are set ° angles, I forgot what it was but I think a notch is roughly 3-4° per "tic". These tics then get visual clues (worm animation) at 5, 9, 13, 16 (roughly 45°), 19 etc. So if we removed these static tics we would just up the possible angles by a measly factor of 3x. Now that might sound like a lot to you, but really it isn't because of the way we play BnG and how the physics in-game work and our rather small maps, we usually operate in a narrow angle. We would extend the range of shots to 45 possible shot angles instead of 16 (remember the mirror, and tics). I don't believe the engine can simulate endless amounts of ° aka 3,7° or even 3,52124°. Even if it did, it would also make the game extremely random because good luck trying to hit exactly 40° with a key press when the game allows decimals.
To conclude, I think a possible solution would be to try to implement wider range of angles, why not re-design the maps entirely and have full (or close to) 360° of viable angles. In a way worms2 BnG with these cups was way more skillful than our narrow W:A BnG we have established. We should look at W2 BnG and learn from ancient ways of artillery. More angles, more targets all make notching harder and enhance the strategy layer. If both teams have 4 worms and you can place 1 worm on top of the map he would be the most valuable worm because he has the easiest shots (notching), then you would have lower levels where you can't really do full power shots and have obstacles in your way etc. I tried googling some old maps but found none but I hope some of you remember these old w2 maps and know what I am referring to. xD
-
The equivalent of notching in one of the greatest eSports game of all time (CS)
...sorry for continuing the off-topic course, but referring to cs:go... The fact it was cheap before and now it's free-to-play made servers flooded by kids and cheaters, while micro-transactions, childish colorful skins, and gambling with some treasure chests, changed the purpose of this game totally (I don't mean eSports while it's approach is different). I don't play much lately, but as you can see at my profile I was a big fan of cs:s (also configured some populated servers), and cs1.6 before I started to use the Steam:
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197995879779/games/?tab=all
Regards... :)
-
Kai, I disagree about bng having a lower skill ceiling, if we are talking about notching, obviously yes, if we are talking learning everything naturally, hell no.
Plus, correct me if I am wrong, not trying to be rude but I don't think you ever took bng to the extent some other people did, I know you were a great league player but from what I saw you only ever learned the more basic and common shots, and a few simple trick shots like floorbanks.
For me personally, roping came easier than bng did if you are physically capable, I done drumming in school so I had pretty fast reactions hence why at my peak my double handed scrolling was f**king ridiculous, although I suck at them both schemes now, at the highest level bng requires pixel perfect accuracy for many shots, pushing players to specific spots, purposely and strategically destroying land, proper rotation and variation of shots, most roping just needs to be accurate enough, if you mess up a trick you can usually save it because in general roping is a bit loose and has a bit of leeway, there is more room for error, there is a limit in rope schemes because once you are so good, being better than that won't make a difference, paths are determined and because maps are either too easy or too hard.
Plus, as fun as I find roping and as much as I love it, it is indeed incredibly straight-forward to the point you don't even have to think at all, if you put in the time practising it eventually becomes 2nd nature like breathing, but that's why I love it so much, it's the most competitive type of scheme in my opinion because of how much practise it requires to remain constant in, pretty much all other schemes require more of a great memory as the physical tasks are easy enough to execute.
With bng, at least for me, there was always that excitement of getting the perfect shot off every single turn and achieving perfect games, trying to guess correctly of what my opponent was going to do, what shots are they good at, what shots are they bad at, how can I trick them into using specific angles and shots I know they aren't good at, and much much more.
That's just my opinion by the way, i'm not stating this as a fact or something anyone has to agree with, it's one of the reasons why I got into bng because at the time i'd seen everything you could do with rope, but I had never seen anyone doing the things I(and others) eventually done with bng before.
Anyway, I reckon the highest skill ceiling is probably schemes like Elite and Intermediate as those require strategic thinking and you are constantly trying to outsmart your opponent, with bng and rope/ttrr/bigrr/wxw it's all physical and eventually becomes 2nd nature because of the limitations of the scheme, Elite in my opinion is the ultimate chess scheme, I wish Elite would become the most popular strategic scheme again.
Anyway, the point of this post I suppose is this is the best f**king game of all time because of everything it has to offer, there is a scheme that will suit everyone.
Plus you know me, I like to talk about things I like lol.
Edit - Plus, if these new game physics DeadCode was talking about are actually implemented, BnG will become impossible to notch in and i'll be ALL over that! So that's kinda my personal dream in Worms Armageddon atm, hoping that day actually happens and I live to see it! Even if i'm a 60 year old fart i'll make the biggest comeback you've ever seen!
-
Nah, I had all the shots you could think of notched to perfection, written down, just that it happened way before notching was famous. I already notched BnG in WWP and even knew the slight difference in gravity compared to W:A. :) I remember notching in iP, SacKem, MASH, ToP clans. Around 2004 is when I discovered BnG is an easily solved math problem. xD
My old screen had 100s of numbers written on the sides for all the angles and easy access. In fact I took it further than most, to extremes I don't think anyone did. I simply stopped BnG before notching was even that known.
-
Yeah but can you prove it?
-
Ask yourself what I have to gain from saying "I knew how to notch as early as 2004"? What would my motive even be? Bragging rights? For a game I stopped playing and consider dead?
How do you want me to provide proof? I couldn't even prove that I was a good roper from that time.
-
shouldn't we just make a tourney with all of these settings just like Island T17 and see how people behave?
-
It just doesn't add up to me Kai... I'm not calling you a liar dude, i'm just asking you to try and prove it, because i'm actually that interested, don't you think i'd love to have an accurate depiction of the history of the scheme I was addicted to for over 10 years?
Replays were initiated on the 9th of February, 2004.
I started playing BnG in 2004, I literally sat in AG for years, 8+ hours a day(even when working, only taking the odd day here and there for mates and dates), and playing everyone who was online, i'd work, bng, sleep, repeat, but for many years I didn't have a job and playing 16+ hours a day for me was a regular occurance as I didn't want to do anything else apart from play Clanners and do Tournaments and practise with friends, I genuinely have 10k+ hours of experience playing BnG alone, probably even closer to 15k between 2004-2019.
Yes, i'm a lonely nerd that spent most of my his adult life playing BnG, and although I wish I could have that same passion for something else now, i'm still grateful for having that amount of passion for something for so long in my life.
Anyway, when I started playing BnG, to my experience, nobody, except GiT, were using low gravity for their shots, they are the reason I started using them, and I started using them successfully in league matches, and that's a massive reason why it started becoming a standard thing.
Eldarworm, from EiF, was one of the best BnG players around at the time, and he was the first person I enjoyed BnG with before playing with M3ntal, he told me stories about the best players who were around at the time, especially Psydome, who unfortunately I never had the pleasure of playing with, he showed me BnG on the map with weird cups as well, I thought it was boring but yeah I played it.
Unless you done all this in private on your own and kept it a secret, if you knew how to notch "all the shots you could think of notched to perfection", i'm sure at least a handful of people would have mentioned it, there would be evidence in the form of replays somewhere.
Nobody gets THAT good at something, even notching, without it becoming a big deal and people talking about it, especially back in those days when it was like witchcraft.
Your name always comes up when we talk about who the best Warmer player ever was, because you are definitely in the top 3 in my opinion, you always were and always will be one of my best friends on WA from that ERA of Worms, we spent countless hours around at some point between 2001-2004 playing Warmers.
There are still a bunch of people, even active now, who know and recognize your roping skills, and can openly vouch for you, if you don't have replays or statistics or anything, surely you know a few people who could vouch for you?
Otherwise i'd have to just believe you, and to be honest, that seems sketchy to me.
I'm actually begging you to prove me wrong, please! It would genuinely fascinate me and make my day!
-
I hard vouch anubis on warmers :D ;D
-
There's not much to do other than hoping someone has replays from 16 years ago, I certainly have none and I don't really expect anyone from that era to read this, let alone have replays of BnG saved for whatever reason. al2cane, dw33b would be the best persons to ask because I was in the best BnG clan at that time SACKEM, if you know how to contact them then feel free to do so. The only wormer I still have contact with, besides TUS ppl, are DarK and ropa. DarK could confirm I knew how to notch when I joined him in sCa, which would be 2005 or something?
Another wormer that met me at home IRL was Rebel, from BkM clan, he saw my monitor that was filled with numbers I had written down on the edge and bottom of the screen. Haven't spoken/seen him in a decade tho. I understand that it might sound unbelievable to you, but just like KB modding I kept it a secret for a long time, having that edge was immense. Not many highly competitive people spoil their secrets, I am not claiming to be the first ever notcher, but I knew and used it way before Mablak and barman appeared to notch. Also, I figured out the 5,9,13,16 etc. animations fairly early which meant my notching seemed "normal" because I didn't need to count every single notch. I checked distance and then saw the number, let's say 10, on the bottom of the screen. I would move to 9 and then add one notch. Doesn't look too suspicious.
You are right in that regard that I didn't notch all the fancy LG shots at the beginning, mostly because most bng schemes didn't even have LG to begin with. LG was not always a staple of the scheme it got popular later down the line.
If you can find a BnG replay 2004+ onwards of me BnGin' I am 100% certain you would see me counting notches.
Btw Komo, now I know how you feel when certain people claimed you never were good at roping lol. It sucks that some things will just be lost in time and can't really be proven. But it is what it is. In the end only our memories will have the truth.
-
Ahhh al2cane! That is the other name I was thinking of! He was sound, great player, also !3amf was in my opinion the greatest freestyle BnG player of that early era, that guy pretty much single handedly inspired me to become a trickshot player.
I actually heard about you using numbers and stuff, and I always knew you were a good notcher in a league match style, I actually recall quite a number of people using the "steps" technique, and yeah, if you are claiming to be one of the 1st players to figure out your basic league shots via notching, sure, I already knew that :)
When you said you can notch every shot I can think of it made me automatically think, naaaaaaaaah that is well exaggerated and would never believe it for a few reasons.
First reason being, I have never saw you, or heard anyone else talk about you doing any kind of complex trick shot, and although they are all technically mathematically possible, they are incredibly far too complex to be useful in a game, you would simply run out of time calculating these in your head.
Second reason being, if you know how to notch double/triple and quadruple banks with 100% accuracy, which then go on to do single or multiple called in advance bounces like backbounce, transfer, bank, bunnyhop etc, I would be impressed more than anything I have ever been impressed by in this game, ever.
However, I would actually put money on it that you do not, and if you do, heck, I would personally consider you the greatest mathematical genius this game has ever seen, simply being able to recognize the exact distance that kind of shot uses based on your position, where each bounce will touch, and actually do it all mathematically with 100% accuracy would literally be genius and I think you would be the only person to ever achieve this.
Those are the kind of shots some of the amazing players in b2b were able to do instinctually, and often enough on 1st attempt.
You are talking about not just calculating and firing direct shots, using at maxiumum, 1 bounce off the wall or the floor using the distance between each notch, you are talking about being able to measure and calculate the distance between any physical land in multiple bounces and the angles they would take after each bounce knowing exactly where the next bounce would go, and knowing exactly where a variation of aims would eventually land, then feeding that information into a chart or whatever, which would then feed you back how many notches to use and what power to use.
I actually believe nobody can notch these types of shots, at least not in 15 seconds, because the way they become available in terms of physical parameters, shape and distance affects each bounce dramatically, you would need some sort of measuring tool or the best and most reliable set of eyes humanity has ever seen.
This is all based on you saying, these exact words - "all the shots you could think of notched to perfection" - you are literally saying you know how to notch absolutely anything.
Also, thanks for taking this seriously, it is fun to talk about this stuff :-*
-
Yeah, I suppose to me every possible shot was more in line with shots that actually make sense in a serious match, lol. Not 3 banks and 2 bounces with lg. That is in fact impossible to notch.
Things I could notch were: 3 sec, 4sec fp, 4sec lg, 5sec lg, 4sec lg ground bounce, 5sec lg ground bounce, 3sec wall bounce, 4sec wall bounce lg, bazooka from 0-9 winds both directions. Bazooka lg 0-5 both directions (6-9 didn't make a lot of practical sense). So it was a broad range but not literally every shot that you could do, to me that was basically every shot you will ever need in a match.
-
Yeah, you missed a fair few there, but yeah, that seems normal :)
-
Yeah, I suppose to me every possible shot was more in line with shots that actually make sense in a serious match, lol. Not 3 banks and 2 bounces with lg. That is in fact impossible to notch.
Things I could notch were: 3 sec, 4sec fp, 4sec lg, 5sec lg, 4sec lg ground bounce, 5sec lg ground bounce, 3sec wall bounce, 4sec wall bounce lg, bazooka from 0-9 winds both directions. Bazooka lg 0-5 both directions (6-9 didn't make a lot of practical sense). So it was a broad range but not literally every shot that you could do, to me that was basically every shot you will ever need in a match.
i respect your hustle but that much notching just sounds boring
My add could never handle that
My take is let the notchers notch, the rest of us can just play, not like we are losing out on cash prizes. If people want to play the game that way let them.
-
My take is let the notchers notch, the rest of us can just play, not like we are losing out on cash prizes. If people want to play the game that way let them.
...well said - some people just need a perspective and chill :)
-
Yeah, I suppose to me every possible shot was more in line with shots that actually make sense in a serious match, lol. Not 3 banks and 2 bounces with lg. That is in fact impossible to notch.
Things I could notch were: 3 sec, 4sec fp, 4sec lg, 5sec lg, 4sec lg ground bounce, 5sec lg ground bounce, 3sec wall bounce, 4sec wall bounce lg, bazooka from 0-9 winds both directions. Bazooka lg 0-5 both directions (6-9 didn't make a lot of practical sense). So it was a broad range but not literally every shot that you could do, to me that was basically every shot you will ever need in a match.
i respect your hustle but that much notching just sounds boring
My add could never handle that
My take is let the notchers notch, the rest of us can just play, not like we are losing out on cash prizes. If people want to play the game that way let them.
BnG was never a very fun scheme for me to begin with, it was entirely a requirement to play for clanners, similar to elite. My passion, as you are aware was always roping. I learned the other schemes out of necessity because of my competitive drive. The fun in BnG was based on winning rather than playing. :)
-
My take is let the notchers notch, the rest of us can just play, not like we are losing out on cash prizes. If people want to play the game that way let them.
I mean, yes, you are absolutely 100% correct really, and that's pretty much what happened, and that's pretty much why bng is dead, I notice a number of people who used to argue against notching now seem to support it, do you know how depressing that is?
It reminds me of my old job when people were doing dodgy things and if you complain about it you are literally told "That's just the way it is", do you know how soulcrushing it feels when people literally give up like that when it's something you really care about?
Look at it from another perspective?
Imagine if the entirety of worms was as predictable as bng is when you are notching, imagine you don't just play the game naturally, instead of roping, players are programming TAS bots to take their turns, how long do you think it would take before that got boring?
My problem hasn't even ever been that notching exists, or people even knowing how to do it, it's that notching and non-notching should be considered different matchups, kinda like how in speedrunning you have Any% and Glitchless categories, but the problem is people found ways around it being visually obvious they are notching and there are a lot of things they can do which are impossible to tell if they are actually using mathematics to play.
You know what, that was pretty much my whole problem with school education system in the first place, they took the fun out of learning things in a way that works for you naturally and forced you to do it one way that suits them.
-
I disabled the auto re-aim feature in the official scheme file for now. If the feature gets more support, we can perhaps enable it again.
Thanks Komo for bringing this up. :)
-
*Fingers crossed we get that thing we were talking about*
Now just need to join a clan and miraculously make those active again. :D
-
I disabled the auto re-aim feature in the official scheme file for now. If the feature gets more support, we can perhaps enable it again.
Thanks Komo for bringing this up. :)
Can you fix the scheme downloads when downloading the bundle of classic schemes? Especifically the Team17 scheme, right now it's downloading some other version.
-
Can you fix the scheme downloads when downloading the bundle of classic schemes? Especifically the Team17 scheme, right now it's downloading some other version.
It's fixed now by MI.
-
TL;DR: The anti-lock aim doesn't give advantage to notchers per se. Instead, this may be seen as disadvantage to non-notchers, yet this disadvantage is very subjective.
The anti-lock aim feature was introduced in W:A 3.8, around the time when this thread was opened. However, the notion of the scheme rule (enforced by players) is different from the scheme feature/option (enforced by the game), and this distinction is not clear in the OP.
The conclusion by the OP that "implementing this rule gives players who use notching to aim a HUGE advantage" is misleading and exaggerated. I don't see how this option can give advantage to notchers, because they can notch anyway, they can always go back to 90 degrees, with or without this option.
However, the addition of this option may be interpreted as giving disadvantage to non-notchers, but this disadvantage is very subjective. If you use visual aids, then restoring the aim is not difficult even with this option enabled. Moreover, my personal opinion is that those people who rely mostly on intuition won't even bother with having this option enabled, especially when this alleviates or even removes the need for the re-aim rule.
The misleading assumption and conclusion made this thread quite convoluted to follow, and due to this, it's likely that people in this thread weren't on the same page to begin with. These are important distinctions to take in mind when deciding whether to add this option to the scheme. Taking this into account, I don't see any substantial reason not to add this option to the BnG scheme, especially when some moderators and admins already felt like this is a no-brainer decision, so this explains the reason why they felt like this doesn't even deserve a discussion. I support having an open discussion in either case, mind you.
Not that this would change anything anyways, but I felt like I had to make this clear. :D
-
Saying it's misleading and exaggerated is extremely ignorant. It is not misleading because it is the truth based on facts and experience.
I am talking from experience of way over 10,000 hours in BnG alone. I'm the only person in the entire history of the game who mastered both notching and instinctual BnG, as a league player and a trick shot player, in multiple Leagues with various rules and settings as well as different map styles. My BnG statistics are insane.
As much as it might look like it, I'm not saying this to brag, I'm saying to this make people understand that I am talking from a massive history of experience that nobody else in the history of this game comes close to having and I have the evidence and recorded statistics to back it up. So people can feel comfortable trusting me when I speak passionately about BnG, especially when I'm trying to help instinctual players!
I spent a lot of time writing factul reasons why Anti-Lock in BnG gives notchers a clear advantage.
If you genuinely understood notching, as in the method of aiming and shooting using math which means 100% of your shots you shoot will hit exactly where you want them to, non-notchers are even easier to beat with Anti-Lock in place.
I don't mind if your "opinion" is different and you write that you have opinions that differ, that's fine... You don't need to fully understand what you are talking about to have an opinion.
However, when you try and influence the decision other people might make by writing what I wrote is "misleading and exaggerated" as a fact without any evidence whatsoever to back that up. You're being ignorant and not helping anyone.
Of course you can't see how this option can give an advantage to notchers, because you haven't ever mastered it.
Notchers count out their angles from a vertical or horizontal position, they use math to make sure their attacks always hit, with almost every type of shot. Auto-Lock changes absolutely nothing for them when they just count out from vertical and horizontal positions anyway.
You cannot do this with instinctual aiming, you need to rely on being good enough to hit from instinctual practise alone, and if you miss, the ability and skill to re-adjust your shot. The error margin for doing this without notching is far greater than doing it with notching, it's not even close. You rely on it "looking accurate" rather than being 100% sure it IS accurate. It's even more of an advantage for people who may use macros or programs that aim for them!
I'm trying to help people who actually don't notch! If you want to use this against notchers go ahead, you'll get annihilated even faster lol.
-
You are being very dismissive about my opinion, especially when you put the word "opinion" in quotes. Whatever this is supposed to mean. :)
The one who will decide what is truth or not is not us, but readers of this thread. You can base your explanation on facts and experience, but they can still be misleading to the wider audience. That's how manipulative propaganda works, by the way. I don't imply that you do this on purpose, though.
Even then, I don't necessarily disagree with you here, no need to go all defensive. My message is more about your way of framing this problem. This requires logical reasoning applied to your conclusion only, and your conclusion is misleading and exaggerated, and I explained why. Therefore, I provided my perspective on how to untangle the unrevealed assumptions that are made in the OP, but I also covered the problem itself. However, if my explanation is not enough for you to understand, then read on.
I perfectly know what notching is, especially when you've defined this in the OP. Also, whether someone is able to notch is completely irrelevant to being able to understand what notching is all about. It's also absolutely not necessary to have an inordinate amount of playing hours to master notching just to understand what kind of advantage notchers have over non-notchers. Moreover, since we're talking about our experiences, I'm a game developer, and if you say that I didn't "genuinely understood notching", then you dismiss my own experience, expertise, and you frankly insult my intelligence this way. The hell, we're both in a2b (https://www.tus-wa.com/groups/a2b/) community! :D
I hope you'll agree that notching is advantageous both with and without the anti-lock aim option. More so, you could actually have this kind of discussion even prior to introducing the anti-lock aim feature in W:A 3.8. I also totally agree that having notching skills is a huge advantage over non-notchers. But again, this advantage is huge only with respect to notching itself, and not the anti-lock aim feature. So, the way you labeled this advantage as "huge" with the addition of the anti-lock aim feature is in fact exaggerated, because this advantage has been there all the time.
Just to convey the idea. Here's the advantage that notchers have over non-notchers, using the 0-to-10 scale (I base this solely upon your conclusion, not mine):
- Without the anti-lock aim option enabled: 7/10.
- With the anti-lock aim option enabled: 8/10.
If you follow this scale, then clearly, notching is a much serious problem in BnG to talk about in the first place, but instead of addressing the anti-lock aim option, you fixate on the notching problem itself. Basically, you substitute the topic of discussion here, as if the problem is about the anti-lock aim option that creates a "huge" advantage for notchers, while in fact the problem is more about notching itself, which is already huge. I feel like what prompted you to create this thread was not about the fact that the anti-lock aim option was added to the scheme, but the fact that notching was already problematic aspect of BnG in the first place, and this addition was like the straw that broke camel's back for you.
Also, perhaps the way you framed this problem may signify that you have a personal issue with enabling the anti-lock aim option that would cause you to be at a disadvantage, perhaps for some specific shots that may be more challenging for you to perform that you have already mastered, but I can only guess here, you'd never tell this if you ever have a hidden agenda. Excuse me for not assuming positive intentions here, but given your reaction to my reply, I have to cover this possibility as well.
Let me reiterate: the anti-lock aim feature does not create a huge advantage for notchers. However, one can argue whether non-notchers are put at a disadvantage while having this option enabled, as they mostly rely on intuition. In contrast, the way you framed this problem implies that enabling the anti-lock feature gives a huge advantage to notchers, which is false. Do you understand this distinction? If not, feel free to ask questions. Otherwise, this will be my final reply to you in this thread.
Speaking of myself, as an instinctual player, I assert with confidence that the anti-lock aim feature doesn't impact my ability to use my intuition to adjust the shot in BnG, especially when there are enough of visual aids to help with this process. In fact, it only removes the need to constantly re-aim, as required by BnG rules. Less rules means more adoption of BnG by novices. Having more rules is always off-putting.
-
You have completely missed the point Xrayez. You come here saying the things I said are "misleading" and "exaggerated" yet you haven't actually said anything factual which disproves anything I said. To say I am using manipulative propoganda is hilarious though. Considering I've mastered both techniques more than anyone else in the history of the game why on earth would I be trying to create an argument in my favour? What do I have to benefit when everything is already in my favour regardless what rules and settings anyone uses... :D
The window of advantage is greater when Anti-Lock is applied, as I explained why in the thread.
Notchers already have an advantage, with the addition of Anti-Lock, this advantage is increased. That's why they have a huge advantage, they can count out their shots every turn from reset angles by moving the cursor in 1 or 2 notch increments. When you play instinctually with Anti-Lock enabled, you've got to literally just guess every turn in most cases. It is much more challenging to instinctual players to bring their aim back to the place it was in the previous turn when it gets reset every turn.
Re-aim with Anti-Lock enabled introduces a higher margin of human error based on "what looks right" as opposed to notching which is counted out and has a much lower window of error.
We can prove this in a live match by doing the following...
Using notching:
Without Anti-Lock enabled - Do 20 shots notched at the exact same angle with full power, this can be done with various bazooka winds and grenades with max bounce and/or low gravity.
With Anti-Lock enabled - Do 20 shots notched at the exact same angle with full power, this can be done with various bazooka winds and grenades with max bounce and/or low gravity.
Using instinctual aiming:
Without Anti-Lock enabled - Do 20 shots aimed instinctively, re-aiming at the exact same angle with full power, this can be done with various bazooka winds and grenades with max bounce and/or low gravity.
With Anti-Lock enabled - Do 20 shots aimed instinctively, with your angle being reset every shot, at the exact same angle with full power, this can be done with various bazooka winds and grenades with max bounce and/or low gravity.
This becomes increasingly more challenging the further distance between worms.
I promise you, using notching I will not miss, any player who has mastered notching, will not miss. Though with Anti-Lock enabled it's much more challenging to get your aim back to where you shot the previous turn, this is where the margin of error comes in. This is where the huge advantage comes into play for notchers.
As far as I'm concerned everything you've wrote so far has zero substantial information whatsoever and does not disprove anything I've said so far in this thread.
-
Honestly I don't know what this feature is or if I used the correct scheme for my cup game, let me know if ledan and I should replay our bng game komo
EDIT: wrong thread for this perhaps
IMO even if this thing makes you reaim and you can't use fingernail reaim, there are sprite cues that make reaiming not difficult, I think resetting the aim doesn't move the needle that much, especially for top players. Those of us that play bng a bit have realized fingernail is pretty unnecessary to get the correct reaim. There is literally a different sprite every 2 notches, so its easy to spot.
2ND EDIT: I actually read the thread this time, and a lot of what I said aligns with what komo said. People who notch or have a lot of knowledge about how aiming works in bng would have an advantage. It is really easy for me to reaim compared to someone else, given we both have to reset at turn end. Also, you actually have more time to notch without having to do the useless "aim up and down to show opponent you have reaimed" thing. With the amount of time I've poured into bng, I could have learned how to notch by now, and even had the dt paint document guidebook thing at one point, but I truly didn't want to put the time into something like that, as well as it seemed a little skeevy.
Honestly its really obvious when someone notches, and I really don't see it that much, but then again I haven't played much at all since 2019
-
Yes, as I said, I don't necessarily disagree with TheKomodo here, but the more I reply to him, the more he makes strawman arguments against what I said, being too defensive about what I said. :D
My intention was not to disprove what he said, but rather to clarify the difference between the following propositions:
- Anti-lock gives advantage to notchers.
- Anti-lock puts non-notchers (the guys who rely on intuition) at disadvantage.
This is a really important distinction to make if you want the discussion to be focused on the core problem, but TheKomodo apparently insists on the former proposition more than needed, which makes it look like the anti-lock feature is so evil when combined with notching, while notchers will always be notchers with or without this. I actually had to re-read the OP multiple times just to able to understand what TheKomodo really meant to say.
Instead, I suggested TheKomodo to focus on the latter proposition, which is the core problem which he attempts to uncover in this thread.
-
As I said to you on Discord.
If a disadvantage is created for one side, it gives the other an advantage. So while Anti-Lock gives an effective disadvantage to non-notchers, it's the very see-saw effect that gives notchers the advantage.
You're not bringing anything new to the table, 6 of 1 - Half dozen of the other.
Everyone who knows what notching is already knows it would exist with or without Anti-Lock, that isn't the point, so you are wasting your time by mentioning this.
The mistake you are making is, seemingly, not seeing the bigger picture that if notching didn't exist, Anti-Lock wouldn't be an issue whatsoever. This is why it's directly related to making BnG worse for instinctual players because it gives notchers an advantage over non-notchers. It's the very point I've been making the entire time.
You accuse me of exaggerating and being misleading to people, then said I was using manipulative propaganda. You can't attack someone like that and expect them to just sit back and accept something that isn't true.
-
why dont we just make it as simple as it can be? scream like devil and shoot the zook and throw the grenades !!
do you really think the putin´s army has time to notch ou anti-lock?? WAR is WAR!! lets talk serious here!!! :D :D :D
-
If a disadvantage is created for one side, it gives the other an advantage. So while Anti-Lock gives an effective disadvantage to non-notchers, it's the very see-saw effect that gives notchers the advantage.
You're not bringing anything new to the table, 6 of 1 - Half dozen of the other.
What I wanted you to acknowledge is similar to what you just said. However, it is important to note that this distinction is significant as it can affect the direction of the discussion. If you had initially presented your point in this manner and maintained clarity throughout the conversation, I wouldn't need to bring this up. Additionally, if the distinction had been made clear from the beginning of the discussion, some of the participants, such as lalo, would not have felt confused.
-
What I wanted you to acknowledge is similar to what you just said. However, it is important to note that this distinction is significant as it can affect the direction of the discussion. If you had initially presented your point in this manner and maintained clarity throughout the conversation, I wouldn't need to bring this up.
If that is case, why didn't you just ask me to clarify if you didn't understand it fully in the first place? What I said at the start still ties into what I said in the last few posts, nothing has changed.
It's not my fault you couldn't connect the dots.
Same story, different words. / Same destination, different path. / 6 of 1, half dozen of the other.
Additionally, if the distinction had been made clear from the beginning of the discussion, some of the participants, such as lalo, would not have felt confused.
lalo still understood what was going on, he just missed the "intended purpose".
-
What I wanted you to acknowledge is similar to what you just said. However, it is important to note that this distinction is significant as it can affect the direction of the discussion. If you had initially presented your point in this manner and maintained clarity throughout the conversation, I wouldn't need to bring this up.
If that is case, why didn't you just ask me to clarify if you didn't understand it fully in the first place? What I said at the start still ties into what I said in the last few posts, nothing has changed.
It's not my fault you couldn't connect the dots.
Your question is loaded. I did not say that I do not understand the problem. I managed to understand the problem on my own (before your first reply to me), although it was not without difficulty. As I said in my first reply in this thread, I felt like I had to clarify this, given the confusion of other participants, including my own confusion.
Also, remember when you said to me at Discord that it's impossible to understand something "fully"? (rhetorical question) ;)
This is my final reply to you. Alas, I cannot prevent you from putting your words into my mouth, so if you feel like I'm in total opposition to you (even when I'm not, I still agree with most things that you've said), let's agree to disagree...
-
Your question is loaded. I did not say that I do not understand the problem. I managed to understand the problem on my own (before your first reply to me), although it was not without difficulty.
I don't see anyone in this thread who didn't understand what was going on, nobody said they didn't understand the issue or the points being made.
I saw some trolling and arguing, though that's to be expected in Worms Armageddon communities. :D
Perhaps you should have more faith in the intellectual abilities of other people?
Also, remember when you said to me at Discord that it's impossible to understand something "fully"? (rhetorical question) ;)
I did not say it's impossible to understand something fully.
Keep in mind our conversation is still there as evidence, what I said was:
It surprises me when you say "If you don't understand the conflict between our nations fully, please, don't try to reconcile us" because the literal truth is, absolutely nobody knows the FULL conflict.
It's impossible for anyone to know the absolute truth, even more so with all the misinformation, propaganda etc going around.
I have also said in the past that it's impossible to judge another person 100% unless you have literally experienced every moment of their life.
My intention isn't to bring a discussion about that stuff from Discord on to the TUS forums. However it's relevant when you misquote me using said discussion on Discord.
if you feel like I'm in total opposition to you (even when I'm not, I still agree with most things that you've said), let's agree to disagree...
You specifically said:
The misleading assumption and conclusion made this thread quite convoluted to follow, and due to this, it's likely that people in this thread weren't on the same page to begin with. These are important distinctions to take in mind when deciding whether to add this option to the scheme. Taking this into account, I don't see any substantial reason not to add this option to the BnG scheme, especially when some moderators and admins already felt like this is a no-brainer decision, so this explains the reason why they felt like this doesn't even deserve a discussion. I support having an open discussion in either case, mind you.
To begin with, it was not a misleading assumption. I would take your side though when you say that people in this thread weren't on the same page to begin with though due to their lack of experience and knowledge when it comes to BnG & notching, especially when combined with the Anti-Lock feature, hence why I had to explain it in the first place.
Not only did it deserve a discussion, that discussion lead to the inevitable removal of Anti-Lock from BnG due to the advantage that it gives notchers against non-notchers. Which makes it crystal clear to me that everyone DID understand what was said in the thread(at least those who need to), contrary to your wild claims here.
-
5 pages of discussion and nobody said that Anti-lock power is not the same thing as Reaim feature or Circular Aim?
this is Anti-lock power:
(https://worms2d.info/images/a/a8/Floating-weapon-glitch_C.gif)
And by the way there are TWO reaim features (the RubberWorm one and the new one from 3.8 ). One always reset the aim to zero degrees (useful in schemes such as Snorkel (https://worms2d.info/Space_Race#Snorkel)) and the other forces the aim to always reset to a random position.
Komo is probably talking about reaim feature, or maybe the RubberWorm CIRA feature (circular aim) that the aim goes beyond the 90° angle (without stopping there), since the beginning of this thread. I don't know the others.
My opinion about this is below. I didn't reply in 2020 because I had no idea what notching was. Now I know.
About reaim:
Reaim feature can benefit notchers, yes. But I think it's cool to have a feature that doesn't require rules. People created a coded feature that is interesting, why use manual rules? Ban notching and not reaim feature.
About Anti-lock power:
This feature make the shots more challenging in BnG and difficult notching. However, my experience using this feature either as TestStuff or in 3.8 is that many players hate this feature, people like to be sure that the shot will be at max power. I like this feature, but sometimes you forget about it and it can be annoying occasionally.
About Circular Aim:
This feature makes shots more challenging and might give advantage to notchers because who aims without notching doesn't have the 90° angle to help. I believe that using blowtorch to set an specific angle might help people, though. I think this feature is cool to BnG. I still think the issue is the notching thing that can be banned as a rule or simply accepted as part of the game.
-
Hi FoxHound, thanks for the post!
We're talking about Anti-Lock Aim, not Anti-Lock Power, apologies, we should have mentioned this.
Circular aiming was mentioned by Steps, it doesn't stop notching though as players can still use sprites and blowtorch etc to put their aim into position.
In short, the only way to prevent notching is to change the game engine in the way discussed earlier in the thread.
-
TL;DR: The reaim (anti-lock aim) feature may be beneficial for notchers because it saves them a few seconds of resetting their aim. However, this benefit is very insignificant and can be achieved without the reaim feature. There are no other benefits for notchers with this feature. Non-notchers may be disadvantaged because they rely on intuition to shoot, but this does not change the fact that all players end up resetting their previous shot either due to the reaim feature or the reaim rule anyway. Skilled instinctual players are not affected by the reaim feature, but less skilled players may be affected. However, this advantage/disadvantage is not significant, and it can be mitigated by adjusting shots with respect to the in-game sprites.
About reaim:
Reaim feature can benefit notchers, yes.
Reaim feature can only benefit notchers in a sense that this technically saves them a few seconds to reset the aim back to 90 degrees position, so we can consider this benefit to be really negligible, especially when this can be achieved without the reaim feature enabled. Other than that, there's no other intrinsic benefit behind this feature for notchers (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here, namely whether you see any other intrinsic benefit for notchers specifically with the reaim feature enabled, not for any other type of players).
However, it is non-notchers specifically that can be put at disadvantage due to the fact they rely mostly on intutition to shoot, but this is a conjecture which has to be proven. Regardless of whether this feature is enabled, the reaim rule (as a game rule, not as an option) makes all players to re-aim, not adjust, which makes everyone "equal" (but not equal in relation to notching itself, of course, because notching still remains a major advantage regardless of whether the reaim feature is enabled).
Therefore, the addition of the reaim feature into the scheme changes mostly nothing for skillful instinctual players, but I also realize that this may affect those who are less skilled to do instinctual shots (those kind of shots which are based on intuition alone). Regardless of whether we consider this kind of disadvantage to be real or not, this advantage/disadvantage gap is definitely not huge, and this perceived advantage/disadvantage will be mitigated or even eliminated completely if players learn to adjust their shots with respect to the in-game sprites.
Do I have to repeat that notching itself still remains a major advantage? :D
I still think the issue is the notching thing that can be banned as a rule or simply accepted as part of the game.
And what I've described above is an insignificant problem in contrast to notching itself, that's why notching is a more serious problem in contrast to the combination of notching + reaim feature. Note, I do realize that the reaim feature is not a problem in and of itself.
In other words, the biggest flaw of the BnG scheme is still notching. But even this kind of perspective may be subjective for those who consider themselves notchers and don't see any problem with notching. ;)
But I think it's cool to have a feature that doesn't require rules. People created a coded feature that is interesting, why use manual rules? Ban notching and not reaim feature.
For rules like sitters, this can be enforced because this has a concrete metric, you can check whether a grenade is a sitter by playing back the replay file which shows the internal grenade's fuse. In contrast, notching cannot be banned, as violations of a "anti-notch" rule would be very difficult to detect with certainty.
Therefore:
- Those people who prefer notching will do notching, and nothing is going to stop them (notice the potential pun here). :D
- Those people who prefer to rely on their intuition, aka instinctual players, they will have to become even more skillful to do shots while relying on intuition alone, and they will become masterful instinctual players by doing so! This is the spirit of BnG!
Given above, that's why I'd vote for enabling this feature. :)
-
Skilled instinctual players are not affected by the reaim feature
Yes, they are. Don't write things that are literally incorrect. If it had no effect or didn't change anything then it wouldn't even be a feature.
I'd bet I've played more instinctual BnG than anyone in this game and I know for a fact it affects me.
Therefore, the addition of the reaim feature into the scheme changes mostly nothing for skillful instinctual players
So first of all, you said they aren't affected, now you are saying it changes "mostly nothing" which is completely different from having no affect at all.
You are literally contradicting yourself, or perhaps even more amusingly, can't even make up your own mind.
the biggest flaw of the BnG scheme is still notching
As far as I'm concerned, the only inherent flaw of BnG is notching. Everything else is subjective preference based on rules and settings.
-
Therefore, the addition of the reaim feature into the scheme changes mostly nothing for skillful instinctual players
So first of all, you said they aren't affected, not you are saying it changes "mostly nothing" which is completely different from having no affect at all.
You are literally contradicting yourself, or perhaps even more amusingly, can't even make up your own mind.
My two statements are:
- Skilled instinctual players are not affected by the reaim feature, but less skilled players may be affected.
- Therefore, the addition of the reaim feature into the scheme changes mostly nothing for skillful instinctual players, but I also realize that this may affect those who are less skilled to do instinctual shots.
The first statement is from the TL;DR version of my explanation, while the other is from the complete explanation.
My two statements are not contradictory, as they do not oppose each other. The first statement suggests that skilled players are not affected by the feature, and the second statement simply follows up by stating that adding the feature will not change much for these skilled players.
Therefore, the second statement could be classified as complementary or more elaborate version of the first one. The first statement is saying that skilled players are not affected by the feature, the second is explaining the consequence - that the addition of the feature won't change much for skilled players. The two statements are working together to provide a more complete picture of the situation.
Moreover, the fact that you're nitpicking non-existing contradictions between a TL;DR and a complete answer, this doesn't constitute a contradiction either.
Don't you think so?
P.S. Note that if you try to semantically shift the "contradiction" word itself in an attempt to win an argument or to avoid admitting that you have a misconception about it, I definitely end the discussion here. ;D
P.P.S. Please, don't tell me that I don't know English. :D
-
My two statements are:
- Skilled instinctual players are not affected by the reaim feature, but less skilled players may be affected.
- Therefore, the addition of the reaim feature into the scheme changes mostly nothing for skillful instinctual players, but I also realize that this may affect those who are less skilled to do instinctual shots.
Exactly.
The 1st one says skilled instinctual players are not affected by the reaim feature.
The second one says skilled instinctual players are affected by the reaim feature.
Those 2 statements directly conflict with each other, so make up your mind, they either are or aren't affected.
Even though regardless what your opinion is, the fact is that they definitely are affected. I know this at the very least based on firsthand and personal experience. Not to mention there are others who know the same as I.
Not sure what you are trying to achieve here except look like you have no idea what you're talking about.
-
The 1st one says skilled instinctual players are not affected by the reaim feature.
The second one says skilled instinctual players are affected by the reaim feature.
Looks like you followed request:
- You haven't semantically shifted the "contradiction" word itself.
- You haven't accused me for not knowing English.
Yet, you literally rewrote my two statements in order to misrepresent and misinterpret my argument. I'm looking at you, the strawman! :D
Not sure what you are trying to achieve here except look like you have no idea what you're talking about.
Congratulations! What a beautiful projection right here. :D
I'm done. :)
-
Yet, you literally rewrote my two statements in order to misrepresent and misinterpret my argument. I'm looking at you, the strawman! :D
My two statements are:
- Skilled instinctual players are not affected by the reaim feature, but less skilled players may be affected.
- Therefore, the addition of the reaim feature into the scheme changes mostly nothing for skillful instinctual players, but I also realize that this may affect those who are less skilled to do instinctual shots.
Saying that something is not affected, means it is absolutely not affected, as in unaffected, as in nothing changes, there is no difference, nothing.
Then you contradicted that by saying that "the addition of the reaim feature into the scheme changes mostly nothing for skillful instinctual players".
"mostly nothing" is not the same as "absolutely nothing", it means majority, as in there is actually a change for skillful instinctual players.
If there is even the slightest change, even 0.000000000000000000000001%, it's still different from absolutely nothing, that is still an affect!
So again, make up your mind, you either think it does have an affect, or it doesn't, regardless of how minor or major that change is that you personally believe.
I'm not misrepresenting or misinterpreting your words. If that conclusion wasn't your intention, then you need to be more careful how you word things. You made the same mistake while going on about "propaganda".
Edit:
Let me put this into further perspective for you...
You've seen "Aliens" right? Remember the famous line by Newt?
And they mostly come at night... Mostly...
If you used your own logic while on LV-426, if you thought you were safe walking around during the day time, you'd be gravely mistaken.
(https://i.imgur.com/fIdZwuU.png)
-
So, my suggestion is to play BnG with notching since there's no way to forbidden it properly. I bet notchers will have trouble to notch dealing with Anti-lock power every turn.
All new features for BnG are cool, just update the scheme and play with the smallest possible number of rules. That's what I think.
People say that players who try to put rules in hysteria are dumb, but I think it's not too different from notching in BnG. It's hard/impossible to implement a rule "no telecow" efficiently in hysteria, the same way it's hard/impossible to implement the rule "no notching" efficiently in BnG.
-
So, my suggestion is to play BnG with notching since there's no way to forbidden it properly. I bet notchers will have trouble to notch dealing with Anti-lock power every turn.
Anti-Lock power makes it an actual challenge to shoot full power, the difficulty of course depends on the players skill.
This would at least make it more challenging for players who rely on basic notching skills to own noobs by throwing 4s full power, and full power zook shots.
However, advanced notchers will still be very successful at notching since they will also be good with 5s lg, 3s, 4s lg, floorbanks, as well as still being very good with bazooka.
People say that players who try to put rules in hysteria are dumb, but I think it's not do different for notching in BnG. It's hard/impossible to implement a rule "no telecow" efficiently in hysteria, the same way it's hard/impossible to implement the rule "no notching" efficiently in BnG.
I don't think it's dumb for people to put their own house rules in Hysteria, I do think it's dumb to yell "TELECOW!" in a TUS Hysteria because "cow" means to break the rules, and in TUS Hysteria there are no rules.
Also, implementing a rule "no telecow" is straight forward and simple because a telecow is when you pile with teleport. It's obvious when someone does it.
It's impossible to implement a rule for notching effectively because you have no evidence when people are notching.