It's this time of the... decade, again. That is, time for Worms Scheme Contest!
In 2010, I thought about a system. It worked out fine, but it wasn't good enough. So this year, things are about to change. We're placing the scheme ratings into the hands of you - the player. You can vote on schemes, you can write about them, criticizing every detail if you so desire, so that ultimately, the community will choose its victor.
If you're new to WSC, you may wonder: "What is this? Why is this? How is this?" Or something like that.
As for the "what" part, it's a contest in which players can make and submit new schemes, and aim for the top. There will be winners, and not-so-winners.
"Why?" Because why not. The WA community is clearly the most creative AND active Worms community, and that results in great maps, schemes, and other things. So why not add a little competitive touch to this creativity, and see what people can come up with if they are trying to impress the playerbase.
And "how"? Well, let me explain the rules then.
For the most part we're using the rules we did in 2010, with a few changes that ended up necessary.
Entry Conditions
- The deadline for sending in your entries is whenever Worm Olympics 2014 starts.
- Maximum two entry per person. Pairs or groups can enter as well, maximum two entry per group. And yes, you can submit a scheme individually, and another in a group, but you can still only submit two.
- The entry can not be modified, once submitted.
- You need to write your application, description, etc. in English.
- The scheme has to be either entirely new, or a new variant of an already existing scheme. In the latter case, the criteria determining the originality of the variant will be stricter than in the case of a newly invented scheme.
- The scheme has to have a name, or in case of a variant, a name that obviously differentiates it from the original, while still showing its connection. (See WFW ยป FFW.)
- The scheme can utilise RubberWorm, but at this point, it can NOT utilise Project X and other, game-modifying, external "applications".
What to Enclose
- Send detailed description of the gameplay, set of rules and corresponding penalties, optimal player/worm numbers (a scheme with several possibilities regarding player count and team games is preferred but not required). A nice setting story can add to the originality factor, but is also not required.
- Give a general map description (ie. random cavern maps, open island maps, Shopper maps), and in case of custom maps being required, enclose at least 1 example map that you believe plays well (doesn't have to be pretty, only functional).
- Enclose at least 1 example replay. The more, the better.
Additional rules may be added as the competition progresses, and while these are probably going to be retroactively applied to already submitted entries, we're going to do everything we can in order to be fair. So no "hey, you submitted this 2 months ago, but now we must tell you that it breaks a newly added rule".
What will happen after you've submitted your entry? Well, until I set the forum up, nothing. I plan to do it before April, as my time permits. But *after* I have it set up, players will be able to register there, and I will add entries as they are submitted. Voting will be disabled until the end of the submission period, but after that, everyone will be able to vote for schemes based on a few factors. These factors aren't decided yet, but here's the list of them from 2010. If anything, these are good indicators of what to expect.
- Scheme file: Everything that has to do with the scheme file itself.
- Game and weapon settings: Balanced armoury, ideal turn and round times, and so on.
- Originality: Well... it's kinda self-explanatory, isn't it?
- Over-all gameplay: Strategic possibilities, rules and punishments, and the like.
- Casual fun: Indicator of how the scheme would work out in non-competitive games.
- Competitive fun: Indicator of how the scheme would work out in competitive games.
This is obviously subject to change.
There will be rules to filter out most fake votes and trolls, but nothing too complicated for you guys. It's mostly gonna be complicated on my end, but hey. :P
So yeah, this is pretty much it for now. Go start writing down concepts and ideas. Don't be shy: even if you think your scheme isn't good, others may - and probably will - think different. ;)
I will post the forum's link as soon as I set it up, as well as the email address to which you can send your submissions.
Until next time, then! :)
yea! good to hear wsc is coming back!
i'm looking forward to all the new exciting, good, strange and also the crappy schemes. :D
Just great. :) I'm curious what the community will come up with this time around.
Nice, but what was wrong with jury the last time? Other than not picking my scheme as the bestest of course...
Yeah, Balee, what's wrong with the previous jury? ;D
I don't know, some guy named DorkOne was being silly about things if I remember correctly.
:P
Seriously, though, it was hard to organise jury games. I don't want to do that anymore.
Why no PX? It's the most untapped source of possibilities by far.
I got a rough idea for a PX scheme: Fastswim obstacle race.
Your worm uses fastswim to launch up and over obstacles. Certain obstacles require low grav, hang glider, parachute, or other creativity. If a user tries to swim past an obstacle, or his worm drowns, or turntime ends, his worm is tele'd back to the last checkpoint and the turn ends.
Played on a long horizontal map.
PX is pretty old, kludgy and buggy, and completely changes the game? That's what would come to my mind right now as suppositions, anyway.
PX isn't kludgy if your computer can handle it.
The only bug I ever encounter is the weird visual glitch "borders" around certain sprites.
And occasionally the weapon "stealing" will stop working correctly in Highlander.
It's actually pretty mature now with all the stuff that has been developed for it. The Pros far outweigh the Cons IMO. I just wish it had more exposure and players, so this would be a good way to raise some awareness for it!
The contest would also be a good atmosphere for testing the scheme on many different platforms, before the scheme is finalized, to iron any out any unforeseen PX quirks.
I doubt whether any new scheme made for standard W:A will be that groundbreaking.. surely most of the good ideas have been thought of by now? Prove me wrong I guess..
Nobody is stopping you from doing stuff to promote the possibilities of PX. There's a couple of things you could do - cups and tourneys for example.
Well, PX inevitably can get to interfere with non-PX gameplay, even if it's "turned off": the bug is detailed on WKB's PX article, I think. Therefore I meant "kludgy" as in it's a real kludge to remove it every time you're going to play non-PX games and then add it again for PX games, because of that.
And that's without mentioning that PX is so gameplay-changing that it sounds like it can't compete with non-PX schemes, imho. Edit: However, what DarkOne said.
First of all, if you're reinstalling PX and then removing it every time you use it, you're doing it wrong. Simply install 2 copies of W:A -- one with PX and one without.
Secondly, I am too lazy/busy to promote PX myself, aside from random forum posts.
Thirdly:
Quote from: LeTotalKillerPX is so gameplay-changing that it sounds like it can't compete with non-PX schemes, imho.
it sounds like"?? have you even tried PX? (i think we've played PX together before, so this statement confuses me). how gameplay-changing or not-gameplay-changing PX is depends on the settings used! PX could be enabled just for a single feature, such as fastswim. there is a learning curve associated with the new weapons for sure. IMHO if you'd tried Highlander you'd be at least open to the idea that PX can open W:A up in a very good way to new strategic gametypes.
Fourthly: PX can indeed interfere with non-PX games. I think the bug has to do with the longbow. Easy solution: don't use your PX copy of W:A for non-PX games. the host can easily verify people's versions before the game starts.
Quote from: j0e on March 22, 2014, 11:33 PM
Fourthly: PX can indeed interfere with non-PX games. I think the bug has to do with the longbow. Easy solution: don't use your PX copy of W:A for non-PX games. the host can easily verify people's versions before the game starts.
not only longbows, but also moles digging external girders. It's due to the land mask that remains unchanged for the rest of the gameplay. More details (http://worms2d.info/Project_X#Cross-compatibility_issues).
Quote from: j0e on March 22, 2014, 11:33 PM
Secondly, I am too lazy/busy to promote PX myself, aside from random forum posts.
Then I propose we get back to the actual topic of WSC so we don't unnecessarily take you away from your precious time :P
Quote from: j0e on March 22, 2014, 11:33 PM
Thirdly: Quote from: LeTotalKillerPX is so gameplay-changing that it sounds like it can't compete with non-PX schemes, imho.
it sounds like"?? have you even tried PX? (i think we've played PX together before, so this statement confuses me). how gameplay-changing or not-gameplay-changing PX is depends on the settings used! PX could be enabled just for a single feature, such as fastswim. there is a learning curve associated with the new weapons for sure. IMHO if you'd tried Highlander you'd be at least open to the idea that PX can open W:A up in a very good way to new strategic gametypes.
You didn't get me. <_< I just meant that it's sounds like you're trying to make 2 different games compete on the same playground. And sorry if I happened to be put off by brief PX experiences, I was pretty sure freedom of opinion existed.
But yeah, anyway, looking forward to WSC '14. ;) I really hope I can come up with imaginative ideas, for once.
Alright, sorry, I came across as too argumentative/confrontational in my previous posts, which made people get defensive and this conversation is falling apart now. I'm just gonna try to explain my position a little better and then I'll STFU after this post ;)
I hope that Balee will consider allowing PX schemes, because I feel there is a lot more untapped potential there. PX isn't necessarily a "different game", it just simply opens up new possibilities. You don't have to put the new weapons, multiple crate spawns, etc, into your scheme. PX can have as big or as little an impact on the game as you want. For example it could be used to add a single new or modified weapon, slightly tweak a single piece of game logic, etc.
I too have seen "off-putting" elements of PX. Cheap-looking sprites, weird physics on things like the bowling ball and trampoline, error messages when you try to kamikaze, etc. The "portal gun" video seemed just a bit too radical at first, but when it's not being shown off like that (in rapid-fire) it's a really useful and cool utility. And there were big (crippling) performance issues on my old Pentium 4 computer.
At first these elements gave me the impression that PX as a whole was a kludgy and unprofessional hack-job. But now, having come to know PX, I realize it is actually very polished and user-friendly, in its main schemes at least. And the possibilities allow for some great new schemes with novel strategic gameplay to be developed. For a scheme to win this contest, it would have to be polished and user-friendly.
I would tentatively say that the most creative bunch of people active in the W:A community are those who are involved in creating stuff for PX. These people and their work could use some exposure and recognition... if not just to boost the player count of PX games a bit.
The fact that there might be difficulty comparing PX schemes with non-PX schemes is just an "apples and oranges" problem for the judges, which makes no difference to the player. But the result will be more competition and better, more varied schemes overall. Which is the whole point, right?
Anyway I'll stop talking now. If this post also came across as argumentative and confrontational, it wasn't meant that way. This is how they teach you to write stuff in High School and I never learned anything different :P
I have a PX Elite scheme, if you allow that, I'll sumbit that. Unless more work is required.
The reason I don't plan to allow PX submissions is that it interferes with the game way too much for my taste.
I also never managed to set it up and it made me go sour about it. I'm an angry bastard like that. :P
Okay, after a long hiatus mainly due to work and exams, I have finally set up an email address, since the last one wasn't working for some reason. Here you go.
wormsschemecontest@gmail.com
Again, the deadline is the first day of Worm Olympics, so make sure to check that site out too from time to time. :)