Btw does anyone have any replays w/ me that are worth sharing? xD

It really sucks that the ONLY replays I have are from 2009-2013, and from late 2015-current. :/ I lost a couple of old hard drives which had tons of shit on it. Bums me out hardcore.

I haven't seen him since 2010-2013... he got on WormNET very occasionally during that period. Before I saw him then, I assumed that he was dead because a mutual Worms friend of ours trolled me and said he had died from some sort of bone cancer. It made sense since I never really saw him for a very long time. I do know that he has arthritis issues with his hands, which is probably why he doesn't play anymore. He's the dude who taught me how to rope back when I was a lil' noob. Funny how now I'm in the same boat... after years of roping, my hands hurt BADLY after heavy roping sessions. TTRR especially. It'd be cool to see him come around, as well as other older ropers like Volcom, Cool, Hippy, etc.

Quote from: Mablak on May 29, 2016, 07:58 PM
That's so weird skunk, I never noticed getting a skill jump like that, except when I first came to WA from WWP and started leagues for the first time, like 02-03.

I do remember one thing I did that boosted my TTRR skills; a long time ago I gave myself the challenge of beating all 50 QP maps in under 60 secs, and worked on that for a month or two. It seemed really hard at the time since TTRR was only just emerging, though now a bunch of people can do this. But I went from 'this might be impossible' to 'damn this is easy'.

I definitely noticed it dude. We used to play a lot back in the day and it's really inexplicable. I even said this to you back then. I was like 'WTF man have you been doing nothing but playing 24/7 since I left?' lol

TBH I don't know if we were playing W:A or WWP at the time. I played WWP exclusively for quite some time after it came out, but eventually went back to W:A. All I know is that it's really weird, like the real you died in a car wreck and your parents had you rebuilt like the 6 Million Dollar Man without telling you. (Or Robocop, or Goku going into the time chamber) The difference in skill in just a few short months was definitely noticeable. When I came back I asked someone in AG who would be good for some serious competition and they said Mablak. I was like... seriously? Then we played a couple of games some time after that and I noticed that you were wayyyyyy better than before. Like, to a shocking degree.

I've never seen anyone improve so much in such a short amount of time. You must have been playing a LOT, or sold your soul to the devil.

I also think that SD should be eliminated completely from the scheme. w2w is dumb, especially on certain maps. I say let the game continue on without SD until a winner emerges.

I think that CBA should be eliminated altogether from roper. If you want the crate, you should be able to get it before or after attacking. If you wait until after, there's a risk you could fail and not reach it, or leave yourself in a crappy spot where you could possibly take fd. The crates should be a temptation, not a requirement... IMO. This would give people more time to knock and maximize damage and it would make getting crates more important than ever.

Honestly, I have a hard time trying to picture how would we could change roper to make it as luck-free as possible, but unless the crate issue is addressed, there's really not much else to talk about. That's why these days I've gotten kinda bored with ropers... whether I'm sober or stoned/drunk, luck does play a big part of the scheme, which is why I greatly prefer big rr these days because there's NO excuses.

Also, FWIW, I play competitively all of the time. I just don't do it for some silly TUS rank. It's not like people play with their toes in funners.

Quote from: darKz on May 29, 2016, 06:53 PM

Quote from: skunk3 on May 29, 2016, 05:46 PM

Spoiler! View

Quote from: Aerox on May 29, 2016, 10:11 AM

Quote from: skunk3 on May 29, 2016, 05:41 AM
There's nothing wrong with the physics of the newer games. What is wrong with the newer games, PRIMARILY, is:

this is the problem with current society. Someone can see himself involved with an activity for almost 20 years but lack of self awareness unable him to make proper judgement.

It's as if people don't even grasp why the schemes we play, Elite, Bng, Roping, Rope racing and a long etcetera only have depth and a learning curve because the physics are complex and most importantly, coherent and predictable providing valid understanding.

This 'problem' that you speak of doesn't exist aside from in your own head. There is nothing wrong with the physics of the new games.

You know what, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
If I toss a grenade I wanna be able to predict where it goes after the first bounce. I can do that in W:A.
If I toss a grenade in a newer worms title it either goes wherever the f@#! it wants or it sticks to the floor like it's made of glue.
Worms can't slide in newer titles either, there's schemes in W:A which highly rely on rope knocking (hell, ghost knocking is all about rope knocks), they all couldn't exist in any other worms game.
And what do you even mean by "superior" physics? They may be more realistic in some way, but this is a f@#!ing 2d turn based strategy game made of bazooka shooting worms. It doesn't need realistic physics. But if people want to play it competitively it definitely does need predictable physics.
Ropes are a whole different story though and I'm glad we all seem to agree there.
I imagine you're having trouble understanding what makes this game unique for the competitive community because you haven't been playing this game competitively (I think I remember you saying that yourself, sorry if I'm mistaken).

Bonus showerthought:

Spoiler! View

I'd really like to see what happens if an actual T17 developer took a few weeks off work and got into competitive W:A. Because I don't think the people currently working there know what the f@#! we're all talking about.

Your lack of ability to predict what is going to happen with a nade in one of the newer titles is based on your lack of experience with the game, nothing more. Nades don't bounce / roll randomly. It might appear that way if you don't know the game very well, but trust me when I say that isn't the case.

Yes, I know that rope knocking is basically impossible to do in the 2.5D games, and exceedingly difficult in Reloaded...

By "superior" I meant "more realistic." I do agree that more realistic does not necessarily mean BETTER. I've said this before in the Steam forums regarding the newer games. I like all of the games by their own merits. A reason why some W:A players hate the newer games is because the physics are different. Not better or worse, but different. In Clan Wars (for example), some things just aren't possible that are possible in W:A. Nade throws are a perfect example. In W:A, a skilled player can throw a perfect nade that bounces several times before landing exactly where they want it. In Clan Wars, you can still be accurate as hell, but the difference is that the way the nades bounce and roll is far more realistic... velocity and angle determine far more factors than in W:A. If your nade hits a piece of terrain at a certain angle at a certain speed, it can either drop down, bounce to the side, bounce up and oscillate in the air, etc.

Imagine kicking a soccer ball into a sloped surface... depending on the speed, velocity, and angle of impact, the way the shot will bounce and/or roll is going to be very different. To put it another way, making precise nade shots in Clan Wars requires more thought and skill because it employs a more sophisticated physics engine.

I have no problem understanding what makes this game unique for the competitive community. I've played it since day one and I've played loads of competitive matches before. (clanners and solo) All I'm saying is that it is not as though the other Worms games aren't viable options for deeply competitive, skillful, and strategic gameplay.   

I too would also love to see a Team17 dev actually play W:A and get to know it intimately, so they know exactly why and how it is superior (on the whole) to their more recent efforts.

I dunno why I'm resurrecting an old thread, but I just had to say something:

I've always felt like there was something really strange about Mablak. I remember playing with him many years ago (before he inexplicably got good) and he was an average to below-average player. I remember this clearly, and was extremely active at the time. Then, summer comes. I stop playing for the summer (don't remember the year) to, well, enjoy summer.. and I come back to W:A after several months of break time. After I come back, Mab is all of a sudden raping people. I didn't understand it then, and I don't understand it now. I have never seen someone get so good in such a short period of time. He wasn't always the player most people know him as... he was totally mediocre, and then in the span of 3-4 months he become an excellent player. I can't wrap my head around it. *shrug*

I've done all of the training/missions so many times, and played deathmatch from beginning to elite more times than I can remember. I'd rather spend my time playing online. That sounds sooooo boring.

Why does Ropa have to argue every. f@#!ing. thing?

Anyway... Speaking of differences in drinking cultures, here in the U.S. I've noticed that men hardly ever drink wine. Like... you'll never see a group of dudes hanging out and drinking wine together. The only time most male drinkers consume wine here is maybe with a meal at a nice restaurant, or if they are drinking with women, or if they are at some special event, like a wedding or something... wine is also seen as more 'high class' than beer. Dunno why, but it is.

Quote from: Aerox on May 29, 2016, 10:11 AM

Quote from: skunk3 on May 29, 2016, 05:41 AM
There's nothing wrong with the physics of the newer games. What is wrong with the newer games, PRIMARILY, is:

this is the problem with current society. Someone can see himself involved with an activity for almost 20 years but lack of self awareness unable him to make proper judgement.

It's as if people don't even grasp why the schemes we play, Elite, Bng, Roping, Rope racing and a long etcetera only have depth and a learning curve because the physics are complex and most importantly, coherent and predictable providing valid understanding.

This 'problem' that you speak of doesn't exist aside from in your own head. There is nothing wrong with the physics of the new games. Game mechanics, on the other hand, leave quite a bit to be desired. I am not sure if you are conflating these two terms or not. For example, I hate the roping and jumping in Reloaded, but that has nothing to do with the PHYSICS of the game. That's an issue of gameplay mechanics.

I completely understand why people play W:A, and certain schemes in particular. I've been a Worms addict since W2 after all. However, you make it sound as though that the newer games are effectively worthless as competitive titles. In that you are absolutely incorrect. Once again, there is nothing wrong with the physics models in the newer games. Shots aren't "unpredictable." It's just that you might not have enough experience with those games to understand the physics, the gameplay mechanics, etc. I've logged about 400 hours on Worms Reloaded for Steam, and maybe 200 for the PS3 version. I have about 240 hours and 100 hours in for the Steam versions of Revolution and Clan Wars, respectively. My timer for the PS4 version of Clan Wars (Battlegrounds) doesn't even work anymore because I played it so much. I'd estimate a good 700-800 hours, easily. In other words, I have more than enough experience with all of the games to flat-out refute any claim you would make regarding the non-viability of the newer titles as real, competitive Worms games. Basically, all you're doing is stomping your foot and saying "But they're not W:A!!!1"

Yeah, W:A is the best in terms of gameplay mechanics (and my favorite game of all time), but let's face it... it is pretty dated graphically, and it has an inferior physics engine than that of the 2.5D games. The fact that you don't "understand" the new games and the way they work isn't a fault with the games... the fault lies with you. You haven't put in the time and effort to understand those games in the way that you understand W:A...

*mic drop*

Quote from: Husk on May 28, 2016, 04:58 PM
maybe the pro players don't host mole shoppers because it would be too crushing for their ego to lose to someone they consider a noob, atleast judging by the way u write =P

Don't get it twisted. This isn't about my ego at all. This is just an opinion of mine based on objective facts. Mole shopper is a luck-based scheme that is best enjoyed late at night with a bunch of people who just wanna drink, smoke, and play something silly. It's not like... a competitive scheme like TTRR or elite. It's for silly funners and for noobs, let's be honest.

Quote from: Zalo on May 28, 2016, 06:27 PM

Quote from: skunk3 on May 28, 2016, 04:18 PM

Quote from: Zalo on May 10, 2016, 08:43 PM

Quote from: skunk3 on May 10, 2016, 08:14 PM
100 consecutive wins is indeed an impressive streak, but am I alone in feeling that mole shopper is extremely luck-based? I can't believe it's even a ranked scheme, to be honest. Every match more or less plays out the same, and it ultimately comes down to starting placement and crate luck every single time, no matter how good you are. Not trying to shit on your achievement or anything, this is just my worthless personal opinion. If I played ranked games and someone picked mole as their choice, I would literally groan out loud.

Ye I heard that but to me it's like the least luck based scheme if you hide well... In the attached replay I survived clusters, 1x banana (put on my head) and it's all because u gotta know how to not expose your worms. 2nd thing is to be greedy for crates and being kinda an asshole in stealing them in the first turns. If your guy is about to get his first crates, your teleport is a good moment. Sometimes not even to dominate, but more to see what strong weapons the enemy already has. You will do nothing with the strongest weapons if your enemy has made a clever not enterable-from-above fortress.

It really just comes down to your starting positions, where you are in relation to holes with barrels in them (for blowing and getting crates. It's pretty much a noob scheme IMO... that's why you always see random noobs hosting it all of the time in #AG.

Dude, No one here is talking about Hosting Buddy scheme. All these 100x games were played on TUS official scheme (very slow waterrise, no super weapons (no arma, no gold banana, no french sheeps), short distance of blocking. You don't have to hurry up and You have the whole area to build fortress in. In hosting buddy scheme the game ends with SDeath, whereas tus game for real starts with SDeath. The bigger explosion you do in the first turns the biggest mistake you make. You must make sure you don't give a landing zone for the enemy and that you can sacrifice crates to buy domination with them. (It's a long story)

Piki is IMO in Top 6 molers I met and there goes our history of games. It's the least luck based scheme. Trust me. I never avoided the most challenging players in those 100x games. Feel invited to 10x mole games with me. I doubt you will win because you need to learn a lot about which decision is worthy what. And obviously opening each worm from above with accurate 1 mole must be a standard.

Husk lost 2x mole games with me, being perfectly sure he would win. He partially lost because of my crates but first of all he lost because he wasn't as stealing and greedy for crates in the first turns as I was, and sorry... he had BY FAR better placement; nearly all the worms on the top. As far as I know he played Mole since it's very birth.

https://www.tus-wa.com/leagues/game-201546/

I've played the TUS moleshopper scheme. I definitely prefer it to the HostingBuddy scheme, but I STILL disagree with you. I am truly not trying to shit on your achievement, but moleshopper is a noob scheme man. TUS scheme or not. It is a well-known fact on WormNET that moleshoppers are primarily hosted and played by noobs. Am I wrong here? (The answer is 'no.')

Even with certain super weapons removed from the scheme, it is STILL extremely luck-based. The power level of many of the weapons is increased vs. more normal types of schemes, and crate luck is, well, crate luck. Mole shopper is HUGELY dependent on luck... there's no arguing that. Any scheme with powered up weapons and random crates is a luck-based noob fest. Sorry dude but that's how it is. If you see me on WormNET I will play you just for the heck of it, but honestly I don't even like wasting my time on luck schemes like that... might as well be playing a bna or a shopper lol

Quote from: Aerox on May 28, 2016, 06:47 PM
skunk we go through this every new worms release since worms 3D.

as long as physics are dumbed down like they've been since WWP, the game's depth goes out the window and with it its learning curve, replayability and deep competitive aspect.

There's nothing wrong with the physics of the newer games. What is wrong with the newer games, PRIMARILY, is:

1. divided communities (games are released on multiple platforms with no cross play)
2. no global chat lobbies (no real interaction with other players aside from in-game chat unless you add them as friends and talk to them outside of the game)
3. crappy ropes
4. lack of customization on all fronts
5. less than ideal UI (very console-like, which is a huge turn-off for Worms players who started on pre-Reloaded PC Worms titles)

The physics aren't the problem. Sure, zooks and nades behave differently in the newer games, but it's not 'problematic.' I'd actually argue that the physics are far better in Clan Wars than they are in W:A. The physics in W:A are actually pretty bad if we're talking about realism. We're just used to it and have grown to like it.

The list I mentioned is the real cause of lack of success in recent Worms games... especially #1, #2, and #4. Without those, the community will shrivel and die in no time in any Worms title.