|
Post by TenoriTaiga on Oct 2, 2008 19:25:47 GMT
You want to dry out the great game by removing it? Game is exciting enough without this stupid element of luck in it.
|
|
|
Post by khamski on Oct 3, 2008 12:48:21 GMT
this discussion is becoming emty here is a productive way
Question:
How can we get rid of luck factor in worms?
1. get rid of crates - can be done (we have nnn luckless scheme) 2. get rid of sudden sd - can be done (Jigsaw has a scheme with sd timer) 3. get rid of random placement - can be done (manual placement option) 4. get rid of random wind - can be done (wind= 0)
If you hate luck factor so much i am sure you are capable of creating this scheme Do it And make it downloadable
And then we will see is LUCK a "stupid element" of worms or its integral part
|
|
Jigsaw
Member
Inevitability
Posts: 643
|
Post by Jigsaw on Oct 3, 2008 14:49:07 GMT
sd timer is nothing, there should be no health droping down to 1, and it would be FAIR
|
|
|
Post by doubletime on Oct 3, 2008 16:56:24 GMT
Crates sucks. It seems i have very very badl uck with them, EVEN BYTOR USED A CONCRETE DONKEY TO FINISH MY LAST WORMS 1 time. I mroe then often see my enemies get super sheeps. bananabombs. airstrikes. and at worst even nukes and armageddons ( super weopens are common from utility crate reigns. Verey hard to get from ussal crates) This is not good. If someone (wich more then often is me sadly) would lose due to bad luck bad placement or simply the oponent is more skilled we will say they wonn yust becase they picked up a crate. nowing that they would wonn anywauyIt is lame simply. PLease remove yust enough luck elements to keep the game skillbased. with other words no to crates (ma ythe eternal time shine upon you)
|
|
|
Post by TenoriTaiga on Oct 3, 2008 22:18:19 GMT
You guys are deaf to hear my arguments or just trolls. Okay.
|
|
|
Post by Ramone on Oct 3, 2008 23:30:17 GMT
imho: the scheme should be known before tourney was even opened for sign-ups... anyway, it was decided that this is CWT, so play it or just stop it for one more week and revise it all from the beginning... or u guys just like to argue?
|
|
|
Post by khamski on Oct 4, 2008 5:50:24 GMT
no we already make preparations for cwt 2009 and above that why cant we argue about scheme to play worms?
Nicky: thought so.. you too lazy do it
|
|
Johnmir
Member
Karate Kid
Love normal!:D
Posts: 273
|
Post by Johnmir on Oct 4, 2008 6:56:53 GMT
Nickynick, personally, i didn't like your first argument "crates sucks, nothing more to add" . But about what you said later: You can lose cause of extreme bad luck only one round. So you can lose best of 5 game 1 time from 10 000 cause of a bad luck. Well i haven't a statistics for you, but i can tell you what world poker champion wrote in one of his books: "if you have a full house and consider your opponent may get four of a kind next turn, you just shouldn't play poker" - means you should always realize what is possible and what is not. As I already wrote it is a question of sport/fun factor. Probability of getting something from the crates by your opponent makes a game more exiting, including using crates to explode your opponent. After all i don't use weapons from crates in normal since i started to play worms, but i still want them in the scheme. P.S. I stopped using crates when i first played with Bytor. He never used crates before. I liked his idea, for me it was "I want to beat my opponent by using weapons i have, do not need nothing more, if i can't do it - i suck" - it was my thoughts, i just tell you, doesn't mean you suck if you don't think so. That times it was a personal choice of everyone. SirG Bytor me and Dario (and some other guys) didn't use crates against each other, it was kinda tradition, we only exploded them to kill enemy worm.
|
|
|
Post by TenoriTaiga on Oct 4, 2008 11:59:04 GMT
John, my first post meant that I was too lazy to explain the thing I appreciate as obvious. But, well.
Some things here worth to note.
First. Nobody says you will lose 3:0 just because you were unlucky with crates three times a row. I think you know well the fact that first turn gives big advantage in the round. And so, if crates fucked up first-turn round for one of players, it will cost a lot for him to win opponent's first-turn round later. Or, he may be lucky too - so, well, we see that game turns into luck-based shit. Cool?
Second. Do you and others feel lonely without crates? Does removing them take away big and colourful part from the game process? Hell, no! Remember games played in NNN league, they aren't boring at all. Bah.
And third. Wanna gain adrenaline from the game, eh? So play team17 or roper, such a cool schemes with crates. Personally I love Intermediate for calculation being the leading component of the game (yes, as fucking chess, bad?), even though it involves such element of luck as random starting positions.
I'm done.
|
|
|
Post by TenoriTaiga on Oct 4, 2008 12:06:10 GMT
Sorry for double posting. Nicky: thought so.. you too lazy do it Okay. 1. Sense of making something new when there's no time to test it at all? 2. Sense of making such scheme when I'm NOT against random starting positions or sudden SD? Or had I somehow said that I'm against THESE elements of luck? 3. ????? 4. PROFIT
|
|
Jigsaw
Member
Inevitability
Posts: 643
|
Post by Jigsaw on Oct 4, 2008 13:25:11 GMT
Jigsaw Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 7:04 am Post subject: Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post random placement definitely has to stay because without it we'd have only shotgun battles (boring) and the problem with sd is not the sd itself but some players who get ass kicked and then start hiding even if they have no chance to win, and prolong the round whirling girders for 45 second each turn (boring again) so I'm all against boredom (I also still think sd is unfair, as if someone got scales of justice) how about making sd timer visible at least, or perhaps making time to sd longer than 15 minutes? I seriously doubt t17 designed inter for 8 worms battles NickyNick PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 9:49 am Post subject: Reply with quote Fully agree with Jigsaw. Fuck boredom, fuck 1hp sd :S p.s. Daz, how about of separating some posts to a new "SD discussion" thread. nnnclan.freeforums.org/cwt-semi-final-johnmir-vs-dario-t140.html#1987changed your mind then?
|
|
|
Post by TenoriTaiga on Oct 4, 2008 14:27:06 GMT
Again, I somehow said about it here? I fully understand that 1hp SD is too common thing in intermediate to get rid of it, and especially before such big tourney. And you ignored all my arguments about crates once more, so nice.
|
|
Jigsaw
Member
Inevitability
Posts: 643
|
Post by Jigsaw on Oct 4, 2008 16:09:41 GMT
First. Nobody says you will lose 3:0 just because you were unlucky with crates three times a row. I think you know well the fact that first turn gives big advantage in the round. And so, if crates fucked up first-turn round for one of players, it will cost a lot for him to win opponent's first-turn round later. Or, he may be lucky too - so, well, we see that game turns into luck-based shit. Cool? Second. Do you and others feel lonely without crates? Does removing them take away big and colourful part from the game process? Hell, no! Remember games played in NNN league, they aren't boring at all. Bah. And third. Wanna gain adrenaline from the game, eh? So play team17 or roper, such a cool schemes with crates. Personally I love Intermediate for calculation being the leading component of the game (yes, as fucking chess, bad?), even though it involves such element of luck as random starting positions. I'm done. In point 1 you are greatly overestimating the value of going first, then you proseed do discuss "what-if's". following your way of thinking the game is luck based shit anyway, with crates its just a little bit bigger shit In point 2 first sentence you are mocking those who have different opinion, VERY strong and mature argument. And no, I don't remember games played in NNN league, you remember games played in CWT? In point 3 you deliberate on what would you "personally" want intermediate to be like, also you undermine your "argumentation" by stating "I love intermediate (...) even though it involves such element of luck as random starting positions." therefore can't you "love intermediate even though it involves such element of luck as crates" ??
|
|
|
Post by TenoriTaiga on Oct 4, 2008 17:53:13 GMT
I'm bored and tired to reply, because anyway you'll do as YOU wish. Thanks for response, sirs.
|
|
|
Post by doubletime on Oct 5, 2008 13:29:20 GMT
I think that elite is alot easier then normal becase the 4 worms are alot easier to controll... Even though in elite you ahve no select you can place them anywere . that coutns for 4 selects. InLuckless you have 8 worms 3 selects. lets cut that in half.. 4 worms 1.5 selects . That means normal is alot more skill taking and exciting then elite becase more skill is needed to controll the game, Elite=4 Normal=1.5 controll factor simply (since both schemes ahs same amount of teleports) that means elite is less exciting and less skill taking than normal. This is science ? The low turn time on elite actually helps darksider since player become less mighty to plann greater attacks.SImply cast in the nade. In normal there is allso lesss room for aim hackers... So normal luckless it should be., due to science...
But what is diffrence between luckless and cwt scheme,.
Luckless C0 + x =cx
Cwt scheme. C3*3/3 + x =C3x
That means that cwt scheme is devastatinmgly 3 times more lucke then luckless. So due to science i highly recomend luckless scheme for exciting skilltaking gameplay
|
|