Clan A has 2 members in the hosted game talking strategy
Clan B has 4 members in the hosted game talking strategy

I know you're smart enough to see what I'm getting at.

Scanty turn time?

If you can warm for 60 seconds either;

1) You fell
2) Roped at a sub-maximal speed
3) Did not push yourself hard enough to do more difficult tricks

60 second turns make me sick

Quote from: avirex on February 01, 2012, 11:48 AM
I have a complaint...  Being that w2roper is accepted as a regular tus classic scheme now.. (only if all parties agree *grumble*) why doesn't it make it into this list along with all the other schemes.. Next season should be dedicated to w2roper, for this selfish act of discrimination

Could it be my roper scheme (not actually my scheme)?

I think that people not in the game in clanners should also not make comments  . . . .

gj Seba!

Quote from: Kaleu on February 01, 2012, 08:31 PM

Quote from: Kaleu on February 01, 2012, 08:30 PM
Nah.

w2 is w2
W:A is W:A

If you want w2 roper install it, and comeback to it.

You don't have a f@#!ing clue . . . .

Hes talking about the scheme

I think I just vomitted in my mouth a little

Quote from: avirex on January 31, 2012, 11:05 PM
Well dub... Thats almost exactly me and shys scheme we named w2 roper, with some exceptions.. We were not only trying to resemble the old w2 scheme but also we tried to take into consideration of wa not liking drastic change...

If people would only give it a chance they would see how much strategy is involved...

My personal favorite was 2v2 with different colors for all 4 players.. So some games you had a turn after the other team, and some games you had a turn after your partner.. I loved having turn after partners.. Leaving crates for him... Or attacking a worm to blast him closer trio a spot he could be fd'd or when the worm you want to attack has piled your teammate. Place a mine for him to get a combo.. Lots of strategy and skill involved....

The entire scheme should be changed!!  Dammit

Yes, but I hated the strategy of killing 1 worm as soon as possible.

I'm not going to debate whether roper is lucky or not, we've already had this debate.

However, I am for changing the scheme to make it more tactical and for the right reasons.

I appreciate the thought put into trying to make the scheme better, but, I do not like adding a rule as senseless as roping wxw instead of getting a crate. I absolutely hate that there is sd and a wxw rule at sd.

Why change to an unproven scheme when there has been another scheme that had been in use for years and been thoroughly tested and proven.

Roper use to be as strategic as it was about roping. I would love it go back to that.

What I would propose would be:

No rules Except zook first turn and attack from rope

Cr8 argument is over. Added is a great amount more strategy. When to leave cr8s when to get cr8s. When its more beneficial to go for fd then to get cr8s. Attacking a worm so it lands where you can block it. Skill of getting unblocked. Etc.

Increased FD

Exact number to be increased to is debatable. Adds to the skill of roping by being rewarded for not falling. Adds to the strategy of being able to attack a worm for fd. Makes it possible to catch up to the person your playing if you miss a turn, you can gain a turn back by continuously being able to fd effeiciently. Etc.

Two worms per player

Adds strategy. Exact health is debatable.

Less retreat time

Exact time is debatable. But 10 is definitely to much. With less retreat time it makes it harder to be able to attack the worm and retreat to get the cr8. You may have to throw a well timer'd nade or zook in order to get the crate. This would also make it harder for someone to attack someone that is on the floor or in a cavern and take a well placed top hide.

Less turn time

Debatable, but, I think 13 or 14 seconds would go be better with the other modifications that I suggested.

Destructible Land

Adds both strategy and skill. More fd is possible and a greater amount of places where you can get fd is acquired by having destructible land. It also accounts for a great amount of varying in the terrain itself, making one have to adapt his roping to the changing terrain.

No SD

This is a roper and will be won by playing a roper. Not by stopping the roper because a certain amount of time has gone by and starting to rope wxw before attacking.

Zook first turn

I believe this rule should stay as whoever has first turn can hide on top and easily attack first. A zook at least takes a little more skill then easily getting a cr8 and dropping a mine on a worms head.

Attack from rope

For the simple reason that it takes more skill to zook or attack a worm from the rope then ground zooking.

As per Avirex's request

Shy I just don't understand your logic.

Every turn is revelant . . .

What strategy does it add? Do I go for cr8 or wxw? Do hide near the crate I skipped, farthest away from it, or go get? All this brilliant strategy at the cost of reducing the skills needed.

Ok . . . Your not getting it.

Why add rules to a scheme when you can remove all rules and acomplish the same thing.

Its funny how many times I've seen someone get a hard crate at the end of the game and then blame crates for his loss. Even though he failed many other turns. It was still the crates fault.

I've seen many many times people will think a crate is impossible, yet someone gets the crate and attacks. So although impossible for some does it not show skill for the people that get them?

All this wxw rule does is help noobs and non effecient ropers.

Why the need to complicate things by adding more rules?

Would it not make sense to make less rules?

When I grow up I want to be Pranksta!

Increase fd, use destructible terrain and make no rules. Problems fixed!!