my tus scheme rules

Quote from: Korydex on March 14, 2015, 07:39 PM
what about inter in classic? has it also been removed from Classic cuz too long or sth? ONL players are perfectly fine with how long it takes, they even mostly prefer it best of 5 xd

this should go into the scheme thread but a really good point and brings it back to the argument that if you enjoy the scheme you won't care how long it takes.

I used to enjoy br but sometimes they would take over an hour, i also have really enjoyed inter as a competitive league scheme in nnnl and cwt. But there is a point of finding the balance for it in classic league.

i always find avi brings the most logic to these debates and brilliant summaries.

we are just going to go round and round in circles and people are making points which are good but we need some actions. At work in meetings we have a lot of debates but then we make decisions and actions and usually it involves doing some research to justify those actions.

My suggested actions after this thread.

1) remove ts from bng rules.

Although Lukz is saying that only 3-4 players want this removed, so far only Chelsea and someone from che have argued for ts. There is more evidence for the removal of ts from bng from the community and i did some research and presented the games i played where my opponents were happy to play classic bng rules with no ts. Based on this action, Komo would probably be happy to go and find all the bngs since season whatever (when the experimental changes) came into play and watch those bng games and see how many used ts, or how many players have requested ts. Maybe since i got active again i've reintroduced classic bng into tus picks, who knows, but i think the majority want ts out of classic bng and this can be backed up by people posting in this thread as its more than 3-4 players and recent tus bng matches over the past couple of seasons.

2) investigate grider for protection rule

This rule was introduced due to the apparent number of complaints around using a grider, i understand the rule does make less complaints and there are arguments for destroying a grider but in my opinion and a few other bngers its not a great rule. However some players like it and there isn't such a clear case of removing this rule from classic tus bng rules. Ropa brings up a valid point of asking how many bng complaints involved a grider. Therefore why don't we set an action for ropa to research how many bng complaints involved a grider and based on this statistics we can look at next steps to see if we should reconsider this rule? I personally think the number of complaints will be low and this is something that historically mods can usually deal with seeing if the grider was being used to bank a nade. Personally if you use a grider to bounce a grenade of then i see it as legal even if that grider does provide some protection, its just a cheap tactic but not a tactic that breaks the rules.

3) Deciding scheme variations

A separate thread should be created with this thread as a reference where we decide the pros and cons of allowing a league system where certain scheme variations can legally be picked by all players in tus and counted as a league game regardless of players agreeing to the scheme variation. We could go through each scheme, based off the research that KRD did some months ago and decide as a community, even vote on the different scheme variations if we'll legally accept them as a classic game. For example we could go through and list all the difference versions of t17 that we are happy to be accepted, or the difference versions of bng that we are happy to be accepted, but this is a huge task. I for one would not vote in nrbng as an acceptable scheme for bng classic, and MI may not be happy to accept t17 with unlimited griders as a classic version of t17. This is because players have opinions about how much these scheme variations effect the dynamic of the game, and some changes can have a big impact on the style and tactics involved in that scheme. But we should talk about that in another thread and first decide as a community if we are happy for the pick debate to be accepted before we even decide what versions of schemes will be allowed.

i actually think avi has a point.

there are arguments to say that people will pick scheme variations which give them an advantage..  which could be an issue when certain players earn a huge rating in a scheme and then risk losing a those points if they have to play.. nrbng for example.

If you could agree a set of different scheme styles for classic schemes that were accepted i think that would be fair.

I also think the way in which players pick in todays era is totally unfair and a huge advantage to whoever picks second, now a days the picks arn't confirmed before the first game starts and the second picker usually picks after the result of the first game which influences their pick.

If both players pick whatever scheme type/style they want before the first game starts this could be fair. If you refuse that person's pick before the first game starts you just look for another tus.

The community would have to agree to acceptable scheme variations.
for example

ttrr
5 worms
3 worms

roper
20 hp cr8s
25 hp cr8s
differences in time until sudden death.

elite
its amazing and everyone agrees the rules and never to allow rope knocking

t17
unlimited girders
7 girders
fb scheme with all equal weapons
tus cr8 percentages
my t17 scheme with more equal cr8 chances but less sd weapons/nanas/cows.

shopper
no afr
afr
cr8 probabilities - (my shopper scheme) allow certain scheme types to include axe, bow (15), homing missle and couple of other weapons.
power on clusters

wxw
similar to above


But back on track, lets just go all agree to classic bng again for next season?? only position is Chelsea and no one can find a complaint around griders

thank you for the reply MI. I think there is more than 5 active bngers requesting the change and like peja says most people agree to classic rules in games. However its more popular than tus bng rules and frustrating when new players think this is the correct bng scheme. Also in clanner playoffs (althought cfc agreed to classic rules), someone like chelsea who uses the new tus rules to their advantage but isn't a natural bnger is at an advantage.

I think there is enough people in favour of going back to classic bng for tus rules, and if people want to use ts and grider protection they can agree to that, but if not classic should be the preset, especially when some players refuse classic bng rules to avoid a game or won't accept in a playoff match.

Quote from: daiNa on March 05, 2015, 07:41 PM

Quote from: Chicken23 on March 04, 2015, 11:48 AM
we need to arrange a data with cfc and turn up....

we've played them plenty over the season but would like an evening where we can get more players on.

Ckc lets do it, this saturday 20 gtm?

i can't this saturday but could ask clan mates about sunday

Quote from: Lukz on March 04, 2015, 03:26 PM
i dont like the new rules, but that are the current rules, i am not criying coz we are playing ttrr with 5 worms (sux too xD) or t17 with 7girders

i'm not even an rr'er and think we should go back to only 3 worms in ttrr. - lets start another thread for that one?

we need to arrange a data with cfc and turn up....

we've played them plenty over the season but would like an evening where we can get more players on.

I think MI and Darkone need to provide input to restoring to classic bng rules as experimental season hasn't provided any benefits expect an excuse for lamer bngs and non bng players to force the game into a cheap standard that benefits them, not the people who enjoyed bng as a competitive league scheme.

Currently if you make playoffs you would be forced to use ts and grider for protection rule which is just insane. The only players who argue against this are Chelsea and Lukz 

The grider for protection is ridiculous.

bump, and grider protection..

there is barely anyone who likes the tus rules playing it expect chelsea and lukz and they are not traditional bngers....

Quote from: Xrayez on February 16, 2015, 03:50 PM

Quote from: Maciej on February 16, 2015, 01:48 PM
Still 7 girders? ; o

Yeah, 5 girders would be better imo

I think 7 is good for t17, i've finally converted from unlimited lol.

This is because there are less powerful non SD crate chance so there should be a higher focus on map control and you may end up using more girders earlier in the game instead of just at SD to defend if losing. This is  because you will potentially collect a weaker weapon so a good choice is to block to control the map so you have a better chance of increase the cr8 zones in your favour to try and collect more powerful weapons than your opponent.

Where as the tus scheme has more powerful non SD weapons its more beneficial to attack as you can hope the next create will be another hhg, bow, flamie etc.

Please try the scheme a few times and let me know what you think. So far players like Phanton, Vok and Peja have enjoyed this scheme which is nice as they are t17'ers from the tus generation of schemes! 

Quote from: Senator on February 16, 2015, 01:45 PM
I guess there is a reason for the current crate probabilities. In your scheme probability for powerful non-SD weapons is lower so it's more difficult to kill the opponent with non-SD weapons. That means games will be more often SD weapon battles than before, or?

Wasn't water rise also slower when all weapons had the same probability? You had then more time to kill the opponent with non-SD weapons than in TUS scheme.

try it out and see what you think. This is why the % on SD weapons has gone up to 2% and not 1.4%. But in tus you need less sd weapons because more powerful non SD weapons, however i don't think this creates a good t17 game as you see so many early deaths with weapons like longbow and flamie and puts more focus on who gets the most powerful weapons.

As you have a more balanced chance of getting a varied amount of weapons in this scheme you may find it more difficult to make kills, but that prompts a better understand of lower grade weapons.. like batting an opponent out of the edge of the map or into a water pit, or making a kill with molebomb as it climbs and drops through griders well (weapons rarely seen in tus scheme). But there is a higher chance of SD weapons than tus but only slightly to compensate the reduced chance of powerful weapons.

However its totally different to the classic team17 scheme were you get a lot of SD weapons at 3.84% where all weapons have the same chance.

I have taken screenshots of all the team17 schemes i can find that demonstrates the crate percentages. However i don't know how to upload these in a post without uploading them to the internet?

its not about changing the scheme, this one is about playing with it and seeing if you prefer it which i think most players will....

I've made a t17 scheme https://www.tus-wa.com/schemes/scheme-1642/#scheme-editor

Please try it for league games and let me know what you think.