You could use the same idea for a 4-player game too. Red attacks blue, blue attacks green, green attacks purple and purple attacks red. And when you have killed your target, you can attack whoever you want.

Alternatively, the killer could simply get the dead player´s target as his/her new target.

Also, the game could probably be played with 5 or 6 players as well.

Very interesting rule, I think I'll gonna try it one day I play Intermediate FFA with known people. Free For All is good to play with beginners. Maybe that rule could make the game more funny, I don't know, only trying to see. But trying will probably be interesting just because is something different.

People have different opinions, of course, but I feel that many FFA games don´t really start until near the end as people will tend to attack the leader. So a lot of the game is just about saving/gathering weapons, so you can kick ass at the end. That rule was trying to fix that.

I have never liked 1vs1, it is too confrontational to me. One winner and one loser. That is why I prefer the 3-player version of this rule, as you basically have 2 enemies. One offensive and one defensive.

You could use the same idea for a 4-player game too. Red attacks blue, blue attacks green, green attacks purple and purple attacks red. And when you have killed your target, you can attack whoever you want.

a game where there are thousands of different schemes constantly being created and there is not a big company supporting it to receive big updates every week, means that it is very hard to schemes receive programmed rules (the ideal)...

Somebody could make something similar to Rubberworm for rules. Where the most common rules can be selected (crate before attack, kill the leader and so on). As new rules gain popularity they could be added to the list of available rules.

Maybe your interest in 1rule one day results in a rule being available which says "players can have max. X different weapons", where you can set that number.

I think the scheme editor of the game could receive a text box for the scheme description or the rules, where this text would be saved inside the scheme file. If this idea would be too crazy, at least the Hosting Lobby could receive an exclusive text box showing the rules and details of the scheme about to be played.

Sounds like a good idea.

I think the maps were bordered caves (without plops) and not twin islands necessarily.

I think so too.

Very interesting idea. I wonder how the gameplay would be in practice.

Thanks. I was tired of normal games being too much depending on luck, as players tend to attack the leader, at least if it is a big lead. So I wanted a game where the best player would win more often than usual.

In a 4-player game, it would be red vs. blue, and green vs. purple (or some other colour). As collateral damage was allowed, it was a good idea to stay away from the non-enemy worms.

There was a big advantage in winning your duel first, as you could attack the remaining players, but they couldn´t attack you. And it was a good idea to attack the player who was leading the duel, so whoever won the 2nd duel wouldn´t have much left.

In a 3-player game, red could only attack blue, blue could only attack green and green could only attack red (collateral damage still allowed). The better you were at attacking your enemy whilst defending yourself from the 3rd player, the better were your chances if you became one of the two remaining players.

I like these ruled normal games.

Me too.

I'm not sure if the number of worms is two.

I thought that was strange at first too, because I rarely hosted games with few worms. But I see that worms had 200 health, the map had borders and I think the level had a floor too. Combine that with the limited arsenal players are allowed to hold, it makes sense to limit the number of worms, or else the game lasts too long. 

By the way, do you know more or less when you created 1rule? I'm thinking to edit the article, at least to add a History section. I think I'll probably add the link for this thread on that article too. I play WWP online since 2006, so I believe this scheme might have been created around 2006-2009. Maybe it is earlier than 2006...

I only played 1rule over a period of weeks or months, so whenever you played it with me was shortly after I created it.

OH MY GOD! YOU ARE LORD MUSHROOM 🍄!

I played many 1rule games with you. You were one of my favourite hosts of that time.

Thank you for those very kind words. I am so sorry about the very late reply. I figured the thread was over shortly after I wrote my second post in this thread, and stopped checking for more replies. I will keep checking for replies in this thread until a week passes without any new replies.

It has been so long since I have played a worms game (WWP) that I had difficulties remembering what 1rule was about. I initially thought it was a similar game I used to host where you started with infinite shotgun and longbow, I think, but were not allowed to use those to hurt enemy worms directly. It was played on an open map with 4 worms each, but there were no restrictions on how many weapons you could have.

But when I read the description of 1rule, I saw it wasn´t that one. And as I read, it was slowly coming back to me.

I don't think RubberWorm version of that scheme would be the same thing, though I would like to play it again.

I don´t remember if 1rule had crate shower or not. In the description it says it had crate shower, but in the game settings it says that crate probability was set to 100% (1 crate per turn). I used to prefer  games with 1 crate per turn, so I think that was the case for 1rule too. I just loved being forced to use weak weapons.  So you may not need RubberWorm to make that scheme.

Unfortunately, I won´t be playing Worms Armageddon anymore. I have some problems with my eyes, which results in my eyes getting tired quickly from playing games. This is why I stopped playing WWP. I was hoping that playing in HD, which WA allows, would be less tiring than WWP. But alas, it was not sufficiently so.

But you can always host the scheme yourself. If you can´t host "naturally", you can use Wormnat2. That worked like a charm for me.

The only problem of that scheme is that I remember one day I got Kamikaze AND Suicide Bomber from crates.

 

That certainly gives you a dilemma if you have more than 1 worm.

There is an article about 1rule scheme in Worms Knowledge Base:
https://worms2d.info/1rule

It is so nice to see something concrete in the Worms world as a result of my endeavours. Thank you if you were the one to list it there. If I had known the scheme would have ended up on the list, I would have come up with a better name.

In any case, I very much appreciate being remembered (by you) after all this time, and hope you get to enjoy 1rule in the future.

When I choose 1920x1080, the map, worms etc. become small (camera zooms out). Is it possible to play in 1920*1080 and still have everything be as big as in 1280/720?

I just bought WA from GOG, so I don´t think I have the 3.8 version.