|
Post by Bytor on Nov 1, 2004 1:19:55 GMT
Yes, But when U control both teams U don't play like U would when playing someone else. I don't know about the rest of U but alot of thought goes into my next move while my opponent is playing. I tried the same test with a game if chess and the outcome was about the same I found one side won easier. I don't think random placement has allot to do with the outcome of a game. shore U may loose a round once in a while completely do to random placement but I can say I have really never lost a best of 5 rounds game do to placement.
|
|
|
Post by Teletubbies on Nov 1, 2004 9:00:35 GMT
Interesting; thanks for the reply Bytor. So the conclusion so far is that, there is an effect, but it seems that other effects tend to mask it or that using manual palcement of worms would be such a pain in the butt it is better to ignore it.
|
|
fury
Member
Ninja Furries
Posts: 347
|
Post by fury on Nov 2, 2004 2:04:12 GMT
Right, but sometimes luck does matter. No later than this weekend, I played Nyctalope. First round, island, he killed 2 of my worms in the first turn and had many other opportunities. Couldn't keep up, I lost very easily. Second round, island, same story but reversed. That's why I prefer closed caves, the impact of luck is much lower. It's just not interesting to be slaughtered by (or to slaughter) someone your level.
|
|
|
Post by Teletubbies on Nov 2, 2004 11:45:42 GMT
Hi Fury, does that mean you would like to see all CWT matches played in a cave?
|
|
fury
Member
Ninja Furries
Posts: 347
|
Post by fury on Nov 2, 2004 18:37:11 GMT
No, islands are interesting too The best thing I could see as a standard feature included in WWP would be to be allowed to replace 3 worms out of 8 in your team before anyone plays. You wouldn't be forced to do it, but it would tremendously minimize the impact of luck especially on islands, while still providing random placement for at least 5 worms of your team. Oh well, that's just in my dreams...
|
|
|
Post by MrTPenguin on Nov 5, 2004 11:48:42 GMT
In my experience, self-placement with lots of worms - in spite of the fact that it reduces the number of easy kills - is boring and often turns the game into a tight shotgun-battle. I consider the luck (good and bad) associated with random placement as just another element of the game. People who are keen on self-placement can, of course, have it for their home games in the group stage.
|
|
|
Post by Teletubbies on Nov 6, 2004 23:44:34 GMT
I agree with Bobby that games ending up as shotgun battles are boring, but Fury's idea of using your 3 swaps at the start of the game is very intersting. Hmmm I think we should consider this as a possible rule change. It would certainly make things fairer if you could make your really vunerable worms safe before the battle started. This would really mimimise the luck factor in games. What do others think?
|
|
fury
Member
Ninja Furries
Posts: 347
|
Post by fury on Nov 7, 2004 15:05:51 GMT
Well personnally, I wasn't thinking at all of modifying the CWT rules to allow these 3 swaps. This was just a new feature I was dreaming of for future updates of W:A... But it will certainly never come. If you change the intermediate scheme to allow this, how will you add more switches by the way? I've never increased the number and don't know where it can be specified.
|
|
Jigsaw
Member
Inevitability
Posts: 643
|
Post by Jigsaw on Nov 7, 2004 21:38:13 GMT
you need to use scheme editor, however i dont think the whole idea is necessary yet im not in cwt anymore:)
|
|
|
Post by Teletubbies on Nov 8, 2004 8:52:46 GMT
Hi Fury, I was thinking more along the lines of both teams using up their 3 swaps on their first turn then skipping. That way you can sort out your vunerable worms on the first turn without attacking and then play the rest of the game without swaps.
|
|
fury
Member
Ninja Furries
Posts: 347
|
Post by fury on Nov 8, 2004 14:02:07 GMT
Thanks for the info Jigsaw. Indeed it may not be a good idea though. Teletubbies: Hmmm I dunno... I like the swap-using strategy that's involved in intermediate games... ("should I use my last one now or is it too early??"). Would be such a shame to remove it from the game!
|
|
|
Post by Teletubbies on Nov 12, 2004 23:37:23 GMT
OK good point Fury, what do others think?
|
|
|
Post by Mielu on Nov 14, 2004 16:33:59 GMT
I don't like the idea of changing anything in the Intermediate scheme. I think the guys from Team17 struck a perfect balance with it - when you play an Intermediate game everything's involved: strategy, tactics, skill, luck...
The limitations on weapons and utilities are perfectly chosen, I think. Three switches that you can use whenever you want adds all kinds of interesting twists to the gameplay. Using up 2 or 3 switches (and usually a few other precious resources like ropes) at the beginning of a round in order to protect some of your exposed worms is by no means the only strategy you can use. There are also all kinds of passive tactics, using the terrain to 'divide and conquer' and so on.
Not having switches in the game considerably reduces the fun factor for me; and so does manual placement. After all, we're not playing chess, and we're definitely not playing for money... we're playing Worms. And we're mainly playing for fun. Let's not ruin it by letting the balance tilt in any direction.
In summary: I'm all for keeping the Intermediate scheme just the way it is.
|
|
|
Post by Teletubbies on Nov 14, 2004 22:18:03 GMT
Thanks for the input Bogdan, you make some good points. Anybody else feel they want to contribute?
|
|
|
Post by MrTPenguin on Nov 15, 2004 9:30:32 GMT
Mielu's hit the nail on the head.
|
|