XBLA Update. [Archive] - Team17 Forum

PDA

View Full Version : XBLA Update.

Spadge
15 May 2007, 12:15
The update should be with us in a few days time, it is now out of certification and approved for release.
General Fixes
• Jet Pack SFX will no longer loop when a worm dies by drowning.
• The Wind indicator is now visible whenever the weapon panel is opened regardless of the equipped weapon.
• Team health bars will now appear at the start of every turn and also when the weapon panel is open.
• Various code improvements added to handle downloadable landscapes.
• Fixed exploit allowing for deployment of 2 weapons in one turn while using the ninja rope.
• Challenge 13 – the last remaining enemy worm will no longer teleport out of the play area.
• Fall damage will no longer be taken by a worm that started a Jet Pack flight in mid air.
• AI/CPU worms will now make a decision and take action much quicker.
• AI/CPU worm’s grenade accuracy has been tweaked to reduce the number of “unfair” shots.
• SFX will now play to indicate a change in fuse time.
• Removed inactive indication of fuse time settings on user placed mines
• Various code tweaks to improve frontend stability.
Xbox Live
• Fixed 4 Player Crash in lobby relating to multiple users attempting to join a game simultaneously.
• Improvements made to the handling of users with strict NAT settings. Only one player with Strict NAT settings can be present in a game at a time – the game will now inform of this and stop any other players with this setting joining the game.
• The user will now select a Team before searching for a game. This speeds up the process of joining a game and reduces the amount of “Game is unavailable” messages.
• Code improvements made for displaying and refreshing list of available Player Matches.
• Added message and visual indication to notify Host that a downloaded landscape can not be used unless all current members of the game have also downloaded it.
• Team names and colours will no longer be mixed up if a player drops out of the game between rounds.
Ranked Games
• The Ranked Game scheme now contains random fuses for all mines placed on the landscape at the start of the game. Mines will now randomly detonate at any point between 0.01-3.00 seconds after activation. This is a balance improvement added to stop mine clearance at the start of each match. This setting can also be carried over into Local Play and Player Matches by using the “Ranked” scheme when setting up the match.
Leaderboards
• Friends list scores will no longer be corrupted or displayed incorrectly when a user has reached a limit of 100 friends.
• Challenge time Leaderboards will now display times in excess of 20:00 minutes for completion.
• Fixed exploit allowing for times of 0.00 to be reported when playing through the Single Player Challenges.
Leaderboard Resets
Unfortunately, after conversations with the server folks at Microsoft, we are having to reset the leaderboards due to exploitations. We understand that this is disappointing for many people and apologise for the need to do this. With the changes in the update, it should prove a much better field of play and look forward to the update going out and people getting hotly competitive again. No awards or gamerpoints will be lost.
However we will be displaying the current leaders of all boards on our site for historical purposes and are currently looking at doing something special for those that have led the boards (with an authentic score). A URL of these will be released in the meantime.
We thank you for your patience, your business, enthusiasm and understanding. We hope you enjoy Worms even more when the update arrives and the first batch of DLC that will follow in the coming weeks - which includes some free content as promised :)

Melon
15 May 2007, 12:28
So you haven't changed much then? ;)
At this rate we'll be getting recorded game replays in the next 2 months...

Spadge
15 May 2007, 12:46
I can guarantee you won't :-)
Most of the time was spent back in testing, pre-certification and then certification & approval. We spent a few weeks testing and fixing (and tweaking a few bits) prior to that.
Two packs of DLC are ready to roll soon too.

velocity
15 May 2007, 13:11
So the random mine fuses only happen in ranked scheme, or is it possible to have them in a custom scheme?
We've played and tweaked a custom scheme and the only thing its missing is random fuses. Playing ranked would be ok, but the shotty is unlimited (we limit it to 2), no jetpacks, bannana bombs, etc.
Can you clarify?
Cheers.

lightsup55
15 May 2007, 14:10
This is excellent news.
I'll be posting this in the Xbox Live Arcade - Worms section of the Xbox.com forums.

Spadge
15 May 2007, 14:14
So the random mine fuses only happen in ranked scheme, or is it possible to have them in a custom scheme?
We've played and tweaked a custom scheme and the only thing its missing is random fuses. Playing ranked would be ok, but the shotty is unlimited (we limit it to 2), no jetpacks, bannana bombs, etc.
Can you clarify?
Cheers.
Unfortunately they are in the 'ranked' scheme only and not editable in the custom schemes, sorry.

velocity
15 May 2007, 14:17
Ah well, still a fantastic update! Why did you decide to just put random mines in just the ranked sheme?

wickedfool
15 May 2007, 14:54
Great update and I look forward to playing it. I mostly play with friends and wish that the mines were random (at least in option) but everything does sound great.

velocity
15 May 2007, 15:09
Yeah, having random mines when playing with mates (in the same room) would make a huge difference. Every thurs night has become worms night (used to be a pro night!)

Spadge
15 May 2007, 15:30
Simply because it was viewed pretty much as an exploit in the ranked matches. Whereas it's less of an issue amongst friends - people just agree not to do that, or not use weapon X etc.

velocity
15 May 2007, 15:54
Yeah, but the introduction of random mines will change the game dynamics, with a lot more randomness of what's going to happen. We don't mine farm but we do know EXACTLY what will happen when we approach a mine. More ways to be sickeningly screwed! Which is why I love worms.
Sorry, I'm not trying to bash the hard work that's gone into the update, and no doubt you're rolling you eyes and saying 'some people will never be happy'. Just keeping it real. ;)

cngodles
15 May 2007, 15:58
There goes my overall rank of 60. Oh well, I got it legitimatly.
Any word on fixing the issue where people can attach ropes onto the ground and do anti gravity tricks to get over hills, etc? That has got to be my biggest hate right now. I'm sure it's hard to adjust something like that, but if it's not in this version, please consider it late.
Reguardless, thanks for the update! And Spadge, I wish more developers/etc would keep us up to date like this.
Thanks!

ninjarat
15 May 2007, 15:59
I too wish the random mines were put into the customizable schemes(perhaps sometime in the future). But just having it in Ranked is awesome as mines are completely useless and command no fear as they ought to right now.
Spadge, 2 quick questions. First question is whether it would be possible to allow the user to set the fuses on mines...mines right now are just used as dropped bombs but if we were able to set them to short fuses they could actually be used to strategically block off certain paths. Second question for you is do you have permission to tell us about the DLC packs now or do you have to wait until further notice?
Thanks again for the continued support Spadge.

Spadge
15 May 2007, 16:01
Yeah, but the introduction of random mines will change the game dynamics, with a lot more randomness of what's going to happen. We don't mine farm but we do know EXACTLY what will happen when we approach a mine. More ways to be sickeningly screwed! Which is why I love worms.
Sorry, I'm not trying to bash the hard work that's gone into the update, and no doubt you're rolling you eyes and saying 'some people will never be happy'. Just keeping it real. ;)
In that case, I'd suggest when you play with your mates, agree not to use JP or shotgun? In many ways I perhaps wish we'd made all mines the same, but so be it - as many people again wouldn't have been happy. Worms is so full of subjective opinion regarding the weapon set & scheme, we can never win.

ninjarat
15 May 2007, 16:01
There goes my overall rank of 60. Oh well, I got it legitimatly.
Any word on fixing the issue where people can attach ropes onto the ground and do anti gravity tricks to get over hills, etc? That has got to be my biggest hate right now. I'm sure it's hard to adjust something like that, but if it's not in this version, please consider it late.
Reguardless, thanks for the update! And Spadge, I wish more developers/etc would keep us up to date like this.
Thanks!
I think that is part of Worms cngodles, it does get annoying from time to time. I've taken the "if you can't beat 'em join 'em" philosophy on that one as I'm always doing rope stands now. I've heard that every version of Worms has had that...and some had even crazier rope tricks possible.

Spadge
15 May 2007, 16:03
I too wish the random mines were put into the customizable schemes(perhaps sometime in the future). But just having it in Ranked is awesome as mines are completely useless and command no fear as they ought to right now.
Spadge, 2 quick questions. First question is whether it would be possible to allow the user to set the fuses on mines...mines right now are just used as dropped bombs but if we were able to set them to short fuses they could actually be used to strategically block off certain paths. Second question for you is do you have permission to tell us about the DLC packs now or do you have to wait until further notice?
Thanks again for the continued support Spadge.
No, its not possible to set mine fuse, that was actually a bug that's been corrected.
We've been asked to keep the release date and detail of the DLC under wraps, we'll find out when we can mention that. (All agreed with MS, btw, ready to go...) In fact some shots of Carcassonne have sneaked out and someone's got one of the Worms Gamerpics! (Since the additional material is up on Partnernet)

Mink20
15 May 2007, 16:25
The resetting of the leaderboards makes me happier than you can imagine.
I will soon be able to go back to enjoying playing my xbox 360.

steviebwoy
15 May 2007, 17:55
Hi spadge - is there any hope of getting some new features ala Worms Open Warfare 2 bolted on to the 360 version of Worms?
Sorry for the double post, didn't realise there was a 360 forum! :)
I'm pretty sure that more varied terrains and soundbacks are on their way anyway - but I'm really interested in more weapons, and the "grafitti" level designer that seem to be creeping into WOW2 from the merry days of Armageddon.
Is there any scope at all for this to appear in a paid-for update to 360 Worms?
Cheers chapola!

Spadge
15 May 2007, 18:02
Thanks, but there are no current plans for additional weapons and major features.
We are keeping our options open however and we're very happy with the results of our foray into XBLA. It's something we'll be keeping a very open mind about.
Right now our priority is to ensure that the current game runs as smoothly as possible and allows people new to the franchise to pick up and get playing. We appreciate that existing fans and hardcore worms fans want more :-)
There's no real hooks to add new content like you mention and we're concious of the fact that we'd end up with a very fragmented game; those with various elements and those without.
There's an awful lot of content in the new Open Warfare and not all of that would make sense on XBLA (which is more immediate) but we'll see. There are some plans ahead for Worms, but I can't really disclose them at this point.

roboman
15 May 2007, 18:21
Spadge, do you have a rough idea when this patch will hit the Live servers? I haven't bought this game yet because the huge CPU thinking delay drove me nuts in the demo. Now that it has been fixed I am eagerly awaiting the update so that I can download and buy it.

steviebwoy
15 May 2007, 18:27
Perfectly reasoned and understandable matey, cheers for the reply.
I can totally see that newbies to the game may be scared away by Salvie Army drummers and postal strikes, and I suppose I can also see that these kind of features would seperate players into those that could use them effectively, and those that couldn't. It might well be a bit harsh for Wormers relatively new to the series. Makes sense mate.
Plus, like you say, not everyone would have downloaded the new content so you may struggle to find players with the same set of weapons etc. Food for thought indeed. I guess it would be easier to just release a new game, rather than additional content - that way I suppose you could be sure everyone was starting from the same base.
In that case, perhaps this is something for a new game, rather than the existing release. Speaking from a personal perspective, I think the success of the XBLA game has proved that there's still a huge market for the 2D incarnation of the game and that, while the game looks fantastic, you don't need photo-realism to have a successful title on the 360. Personally, I would be delighted to see a full-priced version of the game with all the features of WOW2 for the 360, but I realise it's unlikely for the time being given that Team17 are currently ploughing their resources into the XBLA version.
The graffiti mode would be fantastic though, if it could be squeezed in at some point. I guess you'd have to have some element of level saving and storage for maps which I'd imagine would need addition coding - as far as I know it's just a case of jotting down a code at the moment.
Thanks for your reply Spadge, I must just say that you guys seem to be a lot more in-sync with the community than most other developers, and I love the fact that we can actually ask you questions and get straight answers.
I've been an active member on the Codemasters forums for some time and sometimes it's like trying to get blood from a stone! It's a totally different story on here though and your care towards the community really is to be commended mate.
Big up Team 17! :)

j.m.ratkos
15 May 2007, 18:41
congrats on getting the update past the approval process. the fixes definately should make gameplay a bit more enjoyable. :)
spadge:
can you give us an update on what sales have been for team17 on this title? it's definately one of the better worms titles to hit out of the last couple of incarnations and hopefully the sales reflect how much we appreciate the game.
also, any response for cngodles's comments about the ninja rope?
Any word on fixing the issue where people can attach ropes onto the ground and do anti gravity tricks to get over hills, etc? That has got to be my biggest hate right now. I'm sure it's hard to adjust something like that, but if it's not in this version, please consider it late

Spadge
15 May 2007, 19:04
Thanks for the nice comments.
Sales wise, all you're going to get is "it's done very well" :) And we're highly delighted.
Things typically changed post release; namely the size limit went up and now there's 2 releases a week, which means more competition for sales, but we have been pleased with it all. We certainly plan to do more XBLA stuff in conjunction with Microsoft and/or other partners, as well as maybe some more PSN (playstation network) titles too.

AndrewTaylor
15 May 2007, 19:19
We certainly plan to do more XBLA stuff in conjunction with Microsoft and/or other partners, as well as maybe some more PSN (playstation network) titles too.
Are these smaller games a sort of new favourite direction, then? Lemmings, Lemmings 2, Worms XBLA and four versions of Worms Open Warfare all seem to have come out in the time we'd normally expect to see about one major 3D, two-disc, cross-platform type game and they all seem to have done quite nicely for themselves (with the possible exception of WOW1 on DS).

Spadge
15 May 2007, 19:27
The smaller titles sit alongside other, major projects (two of which remain un-announced) - it's a good way of working for us and it'll continue in this way; with a mix of console digital distribtion titles and possibly more handheld games. It's a real comfortable mix for us.
DS WOW actually did ok in the market, we expect WOW2 DS however, to outsell it by a fair old distance... it's a far, far superior title.

hobbzinio
15 May 2007, 20:52
surely its possible jus to tell us if it will be here before friday???

Spadge
15 May 2007, 20:58
We hope so, but we don't control things over in Seattle (at Microsoft).

rikimaru99
18 May 2007, 16:10
hi are we going to be getting the baseball bat back because thats my fav weapon. pwease

worMatty
18 May 2007, 19:26
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
No new weapons will be added to the game. It has been said countless times. It is stickied in the thread marked 'READ THIS FIRST'.

LiveFan
19 May 2007, 04:18
I know, I know, but I must ask... is there ANY chance of adding multiple profiles online, even just for unranked matches?
I enjoy watching my wife play the ol' 360 online, but playing alongside would be much more fun.
That said, I like what's been improved and look forward to trying it out soon.
Thanks for the hard work!

lightsup55
19 May 2007, 08:07
I know, I know, but I must ask... is there ANY chance of adding multiple profiles online, even just for unranked matches?
I enjoy watching my wife play the ol' 360 online, but playing alongside would be much more fun.
That said, I like what's been improved and look forward to trying it out soon.
Thanks for the hard work!
Do you mean support for a guest or another Gamertag to play on the same console online?

steviebwoy
19 May 2007, 12:38
Yeah, that would be awesome :) Any chance? Or has it already been asked and answered?

rockotaco1
20 May 2007, 17:50
The new patch sounds good so far.
One thing I really wish you guys could fix is this:
When you start a game, and you are configuring the map you want, sometimes the other person quits and the game ends, and that causes True Skill rank to go down. That is such a HUGE bummer. It's beyond frustrating. Why does it have to be like that?
It isn't my fault the guy quit because he was too stupid to pick a 3 or 4 person match rather than "any". Every time this happens I always ask them why they quit and they always say it's because they didn't want to play 1 vs 1. Well then pick 3 or 4 numb nuts! Argh.
Honestly, this is the only thing that upsets me about Worms. When this happens it means that I have to win literally 40 matches in a row in order to make up for that quitter. 40 matches in a ROW! And on top of that, what if you are trying to get those 40 matches, and it happens again!?!? BLARGH!
As the number 1 ranked True Skill player, I am pretty bummed about the leaderboards being reset, but I do appreciate the fact that you guys are sending me a special prize and keeping history of the current leaderboards state. That is really cool of you. Thanks Team17!
If you really wanted to send me a special prize, you could fix the "game session is no longer available" True Skill problem when people quit before the match starts. That would be so freakin awesome.

ScotFarkus
21 May 2007, 01:52
I just want the person to rack up a loss when they drop. That would cause FAR fewer dropped games.

rockotaco1
21 May 2007, 06:18
Hey Scot, I remember playing you.
:)

Stoners01
21 May 2007, 10:35
As the number 1 ranked True Skill player
:)
1st - big congrats for getting to the top dude. I reckon you and Ax01 should have a 1-on-1 which T17 somehow record and allow us wannabees to download and watch. I'd pay some (maybe as much as 400) MS points to see that. Spadge - is this doable?
Totally agree with you on the loss of ranking when someone pulls out... I don't have to play quite so many rounds to make up the lost space, but worst case scenario was dropping 45 places, all because someone else quit.

cjc3uwm
23 May 2007, 19:01
I am extremely upset with the random mine trigger. Not once have I played a game where someone clearing out all the mines was a problem, and I have played a lot of games on XBL. The new random trigger is now the only randomly occuring thing in the game that can truly decide your fate. The entire game is about how you calculate everything in order to win. If you have a worm that is boxed in between two mines, you now have barely any shot at getting out of there without hurting yourself, and in a game like worms that shouldn't be the case. Things should behave in a way where when you have honed in your skills, you are able to navigate accordingly. It takes enjoyment out of the game. I plead with you to rethink this decision, because it not only hurts those who mean to clear out mines, but also those who just want to have their turn without being blasted into the water by no mistake of their own.

Spadge
23 May 2007, 20:16
We made the decision based on entertainment. We're sure that not everyone would agree, but the majority will find it's by far a better game due to the new behaviour of the mine (which incidentally is akin to how we had the original mines in the earlier series).

AndrewTaylor
23 May 2007, 21:15
I am extremely upset with the random mine trigger. Not once have I played a game where someone clearing out all the mines was a problem, and I have played a lot of games on XBL. The new random trigger is now the only randomly occuring thing in the game that can truly decide your fate. The entire game is about how you calculate everything in order to win. If you have a worm that is boxed in between two mines, you now have barely any shot at getting out of there without hurting yourself, and in a game like worms that shouldn't be the case. Things should behave in a way where when you have honed in your skills, you are able to navigate accordingly. It takes enjoyment out of the game. I plead with you to rethink this decision, because it not only hurts those who mean to clear out mines, but also those who just want to have their turn without being blasted into the water by no mistake of their own.
I've not played the XBLA version, since I have no Xbox on which to play it, but I'd like to throw my two cents in:
The first version of Worms I ever played was the pre-release demo of the original, way back when the Ninja Rope was the Batrope. Back then, the mines all exploded instantly. They stayed that way I think until Worms 2; possibly until Worms Reinforcements, when the other fuses were introduced.
I found with the long fuses there was very little point in mines at all. If you encountered one, you just activated it and jumped away before it blew. That seemed a bit pointless to me, so I always played with the short, random or instant fuses.
Random fuses have the advantage that they are a little more forgiving than instant fuses, but they can be a total let off -- much like dud mines (which I think have been a feature since Reinforcements). But they've stayed because a let off isn't as bad as a random explosion: booby-trapped crates, which were introduced in Reinforcements, were quitely taken away again, I think after Worms 2, because they were unpredictable (as you said) and cost you your turn and some health.
I'd much rather a game where mines were something you had to avoid rather than an inconvenient hurdle you just had to spend five seconds clearing. Just don't go near them. Either way, the game isn't as deterministic as you say: the wind is random, as are the weapons in crates. As is dumb luck -- you're not perfect and you never know how badly the next screwup might affect your game.
Hmm. That was rather more than two cents. Mind you, at this exchange rate that's all too easy.

worMatty
23 May 2007, 23:54
Well-put, Andrew. I support what you say. Mines are pretty pointless if they're avoidable, especially ones placed by the enemy. It takes skill to avoid coming in contact with them in the first place. Another random factor is the landscape and worm placement on it. That's the way this game works; it doesn't offer precise tournament options like the ones found in the PC titles.

gcowell
24 May 2007, 00:57
I'm annoyed that the camera still snaps back to the active worm all the time every time it makes the smallest move when I want to look around the map.
The game has a return to active worm button so this is just chuffing annoying.

worMatty
24 May 2007, 01:14
Which is used when it's your go. Can't this be treated as a tactical obstacle to overcome rather than an obstruction in the GUI? Without challenge life is boring.

hsabbers
26 May 2007, 14:18
I really cannot believe you have introduced random mines -- it fundamentally changes gameplay mechanics in a way that is not good. You are introducing randomness into a strategy game. A random board layout is fine but it is important to know how tools will react for strategies to be perfected. Imagine changing the board game chess so that one piece behaved in a random fashion.
People, you have messed up. I will no longer be playing Worms.
Harry.

AndrewTaylor
26 May 2007, 14:21
I really cannot believe you have introduced random mines -- it fundamentally changes gameplay mechanics in a way that is not good. You are introducing randomness into a strategy game. A random board layout is fine but it is important to know how tools will react for strategies to be perfected. Imagine changing the board game chess so that one piece behaved in a random fashion.
Imagine changing the card game poker so that the cards were predictable.
The strategy's still there. You just have to play around the random mines -- same with the crates. You can choose to set a mine off and hope you can get away, but be aware that it's a gamble. The safe option with no randomness still exists: don't walk on landmines.

hobbzinio
26 May 2007, 14:26
the random mines mean you have to display skill in other ways and cant just fly over to every part of the map so easily... i think it definetly increases the strategy of the game and no1 wud expect mines in real life to just all be set to go off at a certain time...
and no1 will miss you 'harry' lool...

hsabbers
26 May 2007, 15:27
Imagine changing the card game poker so that the cards were predictable.
The strategy's still there. You just have to play around the random mines -- same with the crates. You can choose to set a mine off and hope you can get away, but be aware that it's a gamble. The safe option with no randomness still exists: don't walk on landmines.
Your argument is flawed, Andrew.
Poker is a game of chance, with some skill elements *post*-setup (ie, post-deal). Worms XBLA *was* a game of skill, with chance elements *pre*-setup (ie, random map and mine layout). Introducing mines with random timers brings chance to *post*-setup. So, I say again, this change fundamentally alters gameplay mechanics.
Put another way, before this change, players could build strategies based on skill. Now that is not possible in the same way. I can be as skillful as I like but I can still be thwarted by chance. Where, then, is the incentive to improve my skill?
Shame.
Harry.

ninjarat
26 May 2007, 15:33
One could argue that since you and your opponent will be up against 'post setup chance' that it's even footing. Also, you can develop new strategies to get over these new mines. It's not impossible. The mines before were nothing but things to push your enemies into. They behaved nothing as a land mine ought to behave. I like having to avoid the mines, I like not having the player that goes first to walk around the entire map with careless abandon, and I hope the random mines expand into custom schemes in the future. When the leaderboards were reset the game was allowed to "change" it's gameplay IMO.

Melon
26 May 2007, 15:37
5 second mines had far far far less skill. If you can set off a mine and retreat to safety every time, guaranteed, then there's just no point in having them. If you've ever played another worms game, the more strategic schemes had mines that detonated INSTANTLY.
Now, the mines only have a maximum timer of 3 seconds. Mines are there to be avoided. You wouldn't sit next to an oil drum, you shouldn't sit next to a mine either. The purpose of the mines is that you're not SUPPOSED to clear them by setting them off and then running away. If the mines were instant, this would be a no-no. Because they're random, you have to outweigh the possibility that it might blow up in your face with the benefits gained by getting past it.
If you find you're trapped between two mines and it's not worth trying to set one off and run away, then use a rope/teleport/girder/bazooka and grenade skills.
Mines are supposed to be an obstacle. Team17 originally made a mistake by rendering them useless. That is now fixed. If you don't like it, then your tactics didn't really involve much skill beforehand.

hsabbers
26 May 2007, 15:53
One could argue that since you and your opponent will be up against 'post setup chance' that it's even footing. Also, you can develop new strategies to get over these new mines. It's not impossible. The mines before were nothing but things to push your enemies into. They behaved nothing as a land mine ought to behave. I like having to avoid the mines, I like not having the player that goes first to walk around the entire map with careless abandon, and I hope the random mines expand into custom schemes in the future. When the leaderboards were reset the game was allowed to "change" it's gameplay IMO.
It's a fair point about being on an even footing. But I maintain that random mine timers alter the gameplay fundamentally. So I'm not saying that it's unfair -- I'm saying that introduction of chance is unwelcome in what was formerly a game of skill.
Of course, Worms XBLA *did* have other post-setup chance elements -- other players might pick up a jetpack, say -- but the results of these chance elements were predictable, which is important to a game of skill. For example, I could make a strategic decision to girder myself in to protect against a jetpack attack. However, I can no longer make a strategic decision about crossing mines, or even pushing worms onto mines. Mines were previously a skill-based tool; now they're chance tools. If I push a worm onto a mine and it explodes at 0.01 seconds then that might be a different result to a mine that would previously have exploded after 5 seconds: gravity, for instance, might've caused a worm to be just to the right side of a mine, which would've been my skill judgement upon pushing. Now I can't make that skilled assessment, because the mine will explode with a random timer.
Harry.

AndrewTaylor
26 May 2007, 16:08
Your argument is flawed, Andrew.
Poker is a game of chance, with some skill elements *post*-setup (ie, post-deal). Worms XBLA *was* a game of skill, with chance elements *pre*-setup (ie, random map and mine layout). Introducing mines with random timers brings chance to *post*-setup. So, I say again, this change fundamentally alters gameplay mechanics.
Put another way, before this change, players could build strategies based on skill. Now that is not possible in the same way. I can be as skillful as I like but I can still be thwarted by chance. Where, then, is the incentive to improve my skill?
I'm not disputing that the change "alters gameplay mechanics", but I don't think it's fundamental. A fundamental change would be if the terrain stopped deforming, or if you were given infinite teleports to use without ending your turn, or if it was thrown into realtime or 3D. As you said, there's randomness "post-setup" already.
This alters the behaviour of mines. There really are very few situations when this will "thwart" anyone. It's been added to stop the lindmines being set off in little controlled explosions that hardly affect the game. There's still loads of skill in there; aiming, power, positioning, weapon choice, and so on. I don't think you can claim the result is random not that an explosion might sometimes occur a few seconds earlier than it used to.
PS. I liked how you distinguished between "a skill game with chance elements pre-setup" and "a chance game with skill elements post-setup". That's like saying "no, stupid, it's not white with black stripes! it's black with white stripes!"
Edit: you can make a "skill decision" (whatever that means) about crossing mines: "if I try to get across this mine, there's about a 35% chance (or whatever) it'll blow up in my face. but if I don't, then there's about a 70% chance I'll miss this shot. Sod it; I'm going...", or "There's no real reason to be over there; I'll just try to make the shot work from here. I think it'll be okay".

hsabbers
26 May 2007, 16:34
I'm not disputing that the change "alters gameplay mechanics", but I don't think it's fundamental. A fundamental change would be if the terrain stopped deforming, or if you were given infinite teleports to use without ending your turn, or if it was thrown into realtime or 3D. As you said, there's randomness "post-setup" already.
This alters the behaviour of mines. There really are very few situations when this will "thwart" anyone. It's been added to stop the lindmines being set off in little controlled explosions that hardly affect the game. There's still loads of skill in there; aiming, power, positioning, weapon choice, and so on. I don't think you can claim the result is random not that an explosion might sometimes occur a few seconds earlier than it used to.
PS. I liked how you distinguished between "a skill game with chance elements pre-setup" and "a chance game with skill elements post-setup". That's like saying "no, stupid, it's not white with black stripes! it's black with white stripes!"
Edit: you can make a "skill decision" (whatever that means) about crossing mines: "if I try to get across this mine, there's about a 35% chance (or whatever) it'll blow up in my face. but if I don't, then there's about a 70% chance I'll miss this shot. Sod it; I'm going...", or "There's no real reason to be over there; I'll just try to make the shot work from here. I think it'll be okay".
Okay. Right. Lots of points there.
First, I accept that random mines don't t fundamentally alter gameplay mechanics -- that was an overstatement borne of frustration. This change, does, however, fundamentally alter the game’s skill-based nature. I will try once more to explain how and why.
You say that it has been introduced to stop controlled explosions. Fine. But you have not explained why that was a problem (surely mine-clearance, for those that indulge in it, is just another skill decision: “Clearing those mines will make my path across to Worm X easier on go Y.). Sure, occasionally people would clear mines but sometimes people would fire-punch me off the edge of a cliff: it’s just another strategy. Neither had random results.
You say that I can’t claim the results is random just because an explosion happens a few seconds before or after previously. You are just plain wrong on that point. I was previously in the top 400 (which to me felt pretty good but I’m sure was nothing in the grand scheme of things) and could reliably plan my moves to push or otherwise explode a rival worm onto a mine. Moreover, I could reliably predict *where* I could make that worm land. So, to repeat my earlier example but perhaps in more detail, imagine a scenario where there is a mine on a sloping cliff ledge below an overhang. Previously I could with accuracy place, say, a grenade (or another mine, for that matter) to the left of a rival worm in such a way that I could predict where he would land on the aforementioned cliff edge. This was important because whether he lands to the left or to the right of the mine, or right on top of it, depends on where he will be blown (into the water, say). In such instances – and they’re really not as rare as you might think – the mine having a fixed fuse is important. Why? Because I might need gravity to pull him a few pixels to the right of the mine. Unlikely, you say, but I had sufficient skill to pull it off much of the time. Now, too often the mines explode as soon as the worm is proximate, and randomly, making the move unpredictable. No other element in the game is unpredictable in this fashion, even the other outlined post-setup chance elements. I could go through the reasons why one by one if you really want. I previously used the example of the jetpack: we don’t know if other worms have picked one up but we *do* know they picked up a crate and that it will be one of four or five things: that makes it possible to predict outcomes. If the mines *always* exploded immediately, or always after 3 seconds, it would be back to a skill game. It is the random timer that removes the skill. I hope that makes it clearer.
On your black-white/white-black stripes line, I’d also respectfully point out that I’m trying – constructively – to explain my point. I may not be as coherent as I’d like to be but that’s because I’m have to type while bouncing a baby on my knee. (And that’s one random item that has certainly fundamentally changed my life’s gameplay!). But if you re-read my point you’ll realise you have misunderstood it. Black-white/white-black stripes is not the same as skill game with chance elements versus chance game with skill elements. In a skill game with chance elements skill can be used to overcome the chance elements. In a chance game with skill elements it is not always possible to use the skill elements to overcome chance. A rival worm picking up a jetpack is chance – but random it is not. You are confusing chance with randomness, and in this context the two are certainly distinct.
Finally, on your ‘skill decision’ comment, I’d say that you’re confusing skill with chance. Skill isn’t chance, of course. Because of my skill, I could previously say with 100% certainty that I could push worm X onto mine Y for result Z. Now, no amount of skill of pushing worm X onto mine Y will allow me to know result Z, because variable Y is, well, variable. I’m guessing you’re a programmer? Mines used to be a constant. You’ve turned them into variables. Now *that* is fundamental.
Harry.

Squirminator2k
26 May 2007, 17:03
Giving people the opportunity to clear the mines first is tantamount to just ommiting the mines entirely. A random fuse gives the mines purpose.

worMatty
26 May 2007, 21:04
I agree, Ben. Laid mines and map mines are more of a threat now. However, defensive strategy is now less certain because if an opponent is lucky enough to jump over a mine with a slow fuse he can cause damage to your worms. Having said that, because of the random fuses, defensive strategy that relies on mines is more effective considering the possibility of short mine fuses. The risk should also put opponents off.
With this in mind, defensive strategy that relies on mines should be adapted to include multiple mines in each barrier. But there's even more chance an opponent will be hurt by a mine now anyway so none of it really matters.
On the offensive side of things, I believe the possibility of a shorter mine fuse upon an action would provide benefits. Visualise the following: mines bouncing around, being activated on proximity with an enemy, but continuing to bounce out of harm's way. A thing of the past! Also hitting an enemy on to a mine with a short fuse blows him upwards oncemore and further toward the water, or another mine.
Mine clearance is indeed a strategy but it's out of line with the capabilities of a more skilled player, who is more effective at ranged shots. Close-combat weapons are useful when necessary.
I prefer instant mines to random ones.
You have raised a good point, hsabbers, but the manner in which you have occasionally put it across is detrimental to polite discussion. I understand you have been upset; I empathise with you and I'm sure the others do, too. Remember, though, it's just a game, and has so much more to give that the mine issue is very small.
Oh, and if you want to iron out your agression in a game, Squirm and I are prone to making mistakes.

AndrewTaylor
26 May 2007, 22:11
You say that it has been introduced to stop controlled explosions. Fine. But you have not explained why that was a problemBen has, so I won't.You say that I can’t claim the results is random just because an explosion happens a few seconds before or after previously. You are just plain wrong on that point. No, I'm not. It might at the outside drop one worm from one team or the other. If there's a big skill gulf between the players then that won't matter eight times out of ten, and one of the other times it'll help the better player anyway. It adds randomness, certainly, but it doesn't make the result random.
That's what I meant with the poker analogy: there's a LOT of randomness in poker, the cards mostly, but also whether my idiot housemate remembers to burn or not, and yet almost every week me or Adam will win it. So either that's an astonishing coincidence or else there's room for both skill and chance in a game.Mines used to be a constant. You’ve turned them into variables. Now *that* is fundamental.
Yeah, it's a fundamental change to the mines, but not to the game (as you conceded). I agree, it's a change, and obviously whenever you change something some people will think it's worse. That's inevitable. And I can see your point, and I sympathise to a fair degree -- I like the whole pseudo-infinite-game-of-perfect-information aspect of Worms. But I'm an old-school wormer. I've been playing it for well over a decade, since slightly before the first game came out, and five second mine fuses were always one of those options that never got used. They're annoying. They make the mines almost utterly pointless (particularly if there's no baseball bat to hit them with) because they almost never hurt anyone.
I think (again, without having played this version so I could be wrong) that random fuses are better than five second fuses, but fixed one-second or instant fuses would have been better still, from a skill point of view. Random fuses are more "fun", though.
You do seem very keen on 'clockwork worms' that you can predict exactly and become a god at. I worry that you may be taking this game too seriously ;) More to the point, though, how did you know I was a programmer?
And for what it's worth, I don't mean to sound like I'm attacking you (though I think I sometimes do). I just like arguing. Some people think that's weird, but that's okay because I argue that point.

Squirminator2k
26 May 2007, 23:22
Oh, and if you want to iron out your agression in a game, Squirm and I are prone to making mistakes.
http://stuff.benpaddon.co.uk/jdwrestle.jpg

hsabbers
27 May 2007, 13:44
I prefer instant mines to random ones.
Well, so would I. My gripe is primarily the randomness, not the length of the fuse (though for what it's worth, I'd prefer a longer fuse). However, if the fuse was fixed at any length of time -- be it 0 seconds or 3 -- I really wouldn't be that bothered. Why? Because it'd remove randomness.
You have raised a good point, hsabbers, but the manner in which you have occasionally put it across is detrimental to polite discussion. I understand you have been upset; I empathise with you and I'm sure the others do, too. Remember, though, it's just a game, and has so much more to give that the mine issue is very small.
Okay. To be honest, I'm not entirely sure how my manner could be considered detrimental to polite discussion but if that's what you think fair enough. So far as I could tell, this whole discussion has been polite, intelligent and well structured.
Oh, and if you want to iron out your agression in a game, Squirm and I are prone to making mistakes.
I say again, I don't see any obvious example of aggression in my posts to date. Certainly nothing intentional. You might be reading in aggression where there is none.
As for playing Worms again, I've just gone off it. I've tried for several days to deal with the randomness but I just can't: it has substantially spoiled my enjoyment of the game.
Harry.

Squirminator2k
27 May 2007, 13:46
The way I see it is this: You don't like a new layer of strategy being added to a game you've already grown familiar with. That's fine, that's cool. If you're not... y'know... good enough... :p

hsabbers
27 May 2007, 14:04
No, I'm not. It might at the outside drop one worm from one team or the other. If there's a big skill gulf between the players then that won't matter eight times out of ten, and one of the other times it'll help the better player anyway. It adds randomness, certainly, but it doesn't make the result random.
We'll have to agree to disagree then. I maintain, though, that a random trigger will of course lead to random results. Indeed it *does* lead to random results. I supplied an example previously -- it was a fair and realistic example. I'm very good with placement of explosives. Having mines with fixed fuses was an important adjunct to that skill. I can place an explosive and know where a worm will land. But if he lands on a mine with a random fuse, I can't work out where he'll be blown next.
That's what I meant with the poker analogy: there's a LOT of randomness in poker, the cards mostly, but also whether my idiot housemate remembers to burn or not, and yet almost every week me or Adam will win it. So either that's an astonishing coincidence or else there's room for both skill and chance in a game.
I agree with you -- there is room for both skill and chance in a game. My key point remains that Worms XBLA as was was skill-based, as there were no unpredictable random elements. Now there is added randomness. I don't personally welcome. Clearly others do. That, really, is not and never has been the crux of the argument. The pivotal issue is how introducing randomness alters the game, and whether or not it is fundamental to gameplay. Having written this one paragraph I've almost returned once more to thinking that it *is* fundamental. Before: no random elements (other than contents of crates; but those are predictable within parameters and anyway aren't trigger events). After: one random and therefore unpredictable element.
Yeah, it's a fundamental change to the mines, but not to the game (as you conceded). I agree, it's a change, and obviously whenever you change something some people will think it's worse. That's inevitable. And I can see your point, and I sympathise to a fair degree -- I like the whole pseudo-infinite-game-of-perfect-information aspect of Worms. But I'm an old-school wormer. I've been playing it for well over a decade, since slightly before the first game came out, and five second mine fuses were always one of those options that never got used. They're annoying. They make the mines almost utterly pointless (particularly if there's no baseball bat to hit them with) because they almost never hurt anyone.
I'm not an old-school Wormer. Perhaps that's the difference. I only see what Worms XBLA was (and now isn't). I don't see what other Worms games were. But previous Worms games surely aren't under discussion here? I still consider fixed-fuse mines (be it 0 seconds or 5 seconds) to be useful. I used previously fixed-fuse mines as a tool. Now I can't.
I think (again, without having played this version so I could be wrong) that random fuses are better than five second fuses, but fixed one-second or instant fuses would have been better still, from a skill point of view. Random fuses are more "fun", though.
No argument at all on the first part of that -- fixed one-second or instant fuses would be better. I don't see random fuses as fun, though; just darn frustrating.
You do seem very keen on 'clockwork worms' that you can predict exactly and become a god at. I worry that you may be taking this game too seriously ;)
Aye, you're right on both counts. I do prefer predictable outcomes, because it allows me to improve my skill. Having random elements puts the kibosh on developing skills to deal with them -- after all, if something is random, no amont of skill can influence the outcome. I think I said before that I saw Worms XBLA as chess. I think with random mines it's now more akin to poker.
More to the point, though, how did you know I was a programmer?
Er, I dunno! It was a guess. I just assumed that, as you're listed as a moderator, you work for Team 17. From there, it seemed logical that you might be a programmer.
And for what it's worth, I don't mean to sound like I'm attacking you (though I think I sometimes do). I just like arguing. Some people think that's weird, but that's okay because I argue that point.
Aye. Well, ditto. I am not on the attack or defensive -- it's just a silly game, after all. But it's a game I really, really liked and now have been put off. Of course, a very simple fix would be for Team 17 to have given players the option -- random mines or not. Perhaps that would need another leaderboard but for sure, I bet there'd be a lot of people with a preference for fixed fuses.
Fingers crossed that someone at Team 17 is reading 'cos right now, I've paid for a game that I no longer want to play because of a post-purchase change. I bet they won't refund me.
Harry.

worMatty
27 May 2007, 20:54
Tada! (http://forum.team17.co.uk/showpost.php?p=581180&postcount=4)
1234

Squirminator2k
27 May 2007, 22:15
Yep, that does seem rather aggressive. And... y'know... trolly.
Also, if you want a refund then you're better off speaking to Microsoft. They sold you the game, after all.

worMatty
27 May 2007, 22:42
I never thought that ESRB notice about the online game experience changing would come in handy.

AndrewTaylor
28 May 2007, 10:33
We'll have to agree to disagree then. I maintain, though, that a random trigger will of course lead to random results. Indeed it *does* lead to random results.
Seriously? How often does it make a difference? One game in ten? One in twenty? I don't know, maybe you've developed some elaborate tactics that revolve basically around using mines to maximise damage (personally, I tend to tip people into the sea and defend my own worms instead) and this change could really mess that up. But I wouldn't have thought moving a few explosions by a couple of seconds is going to make that much difference to the end results of matches.
I'm not an old-school Wormer. Perhaps that's the difference. I only see what Worms XBLA was (and now isn't). I don't see what other Worms games were. But previous Worms games surely aren't under discussion here?
No, I just thought some context for what I was saying was in order.
Er, I dunno! It was a guess. I just assumed that, as you're listed as a moderator, you work for Team 17. From there, it seemed logical that you might be a programmer.
Er, nope. I do programming for Manchester University...

hsabbers
28 May 2007, 11:55
Yep, that does seem rather aggressive. And... y'know... trolly.
Also, if you want a refund then you're better off speaking to Microsoft. They sold you the game, after all.
Okay, fair enough -- the 'fools' was a bit over the top. I'd forgotten I'd said it, tbh. I was just very frustrated, having only just found out about the change.
So I take it back -- whoever is responsible is not a fool. They could, however, be considered ignorant: how's about consulting with users? Perhaps they did and I missed it. Oh well.
Harry.
Seriously? How often does it make a difference? One game in ten? One in twenty? I don't know, maybe you've developed some elaborate tactics that revolve basically around using mines to maximise damage (personally, I tend to tip people into the sea and defend my own worms instead) and this change could really mess that up. But I wouldn't have thought moving a few explosions by a couple of seconds is going to make that much difference to the end results of matches.
Well, as I said, I'm very good with placement of explosives and I used to use mines as part of that strategy. I accept it may not affect every game but random mines do affect sufficient games to make it frustrating. The fact I'm frustrated is surely evidence of that?
For what it's worth, my stance has softened slightly overnight, as I returned and had a couple of good games last night but I still absolutely detest random mines. As well as adding randomness, they represent a new restriction on movement. Who now even dares to approach a mine, let alone attempt to clear one? It's pointless. The 3-second maximum random fuse makes it all but impossible to get past mines by jumping. A random timer of up to 5 seconds would at least give one a sporting chance.
Anyway, I don't imagine there's much further this thread can go in dissecting the change. Some folks like random mines, some don't. I'm firmly in the 'don't' camp. I have no problem with those who do like random mines, nor with random mines existing as an option in ranked matches -- but wouldn't it be nice to have been given the choice?
Harry.

Squirminator2k
28 May 2007, 12:53
Actually, you're the only person I've spoken to, be it on this forum or actually playing Worms XBLA online, who doesn't like the random mines. Everyone else prefers the change, because it stops people from being mine-clearin' ******s.

thomasp
28 May 2007, 13:17
Actually, you're the only person I've spoken to, be it on this forum or actually playing Worms XBLA online, who doesn't like the random mines. Everyone else prefers the change, because it stops people from being mine-clearin' ******s.
That sounds like a perfect opportunity for a poll!
http://forum.team17.co.uk/showthread.php?t=32706

hsabbers
28 May 2007, 14:35
Actually, you're the only person I've spoken to, be it on this forum or actually playing Worms XBLA online, who doesn't like the random mines. Everyone else prefers the change, because it stops people from being mine-clearin' ******s.
In the same manner as someone earlier responded: Tada! (http://forum.team17.co.uk/showpost.php?p=579149&postcount=11)
In the same manner as someone earlier responded: Tada! (http://forum.team17.co.uk/showpost.php?p=579149&postcount=11)
Also, I have to say that though I didn't personally indulge in mine-clearance (why would I? I use[d] mines as tools), I really can't see the problem with it -- it's just another strategy. Like burrowing in, or allowing the clock to count down in order to drown another worm. I've had people swear at me online because I wait and force their worm to drown. Well, bugger me if I'm not trying to win the game using whatever tools and strategies are available. The point of the game is, after all, to win. How one becomes the winner doesn't much matter, surely?
Harry.

Stoners01
29 May 2007, 17:20
Fascinating thread - as a committed Worms player I think it sad that we are going to lose a good player (HSabbers - farewell - hopefully we can make you reconsider).
For what its worth I think that there are 2 types of wormers in the top 500... those that are good strategists and those that are good movers (I guess the top boys are good at both). I consider myself a good strategist but am a bit duff at moving my worms about the board - never been able to invert my ninja ropes and oft as not I'll mess up one the double-tap back jumps when the pressure is on.
Point is that I have found the random fuses helps me when I am up against less competent strategists who can move across the screen much better than me as it necessitates more circumspection when moving around. In my mind this levels the field nicely - people out there who have the time on their hands to learn how to invert the ninjas are less likely to beat me now. Unlike a lot of games where the sheer hours spent playing impact on skill level, now I can do my 9-5er, spend time with the wife and kid, have 1 or 2 ranked matches per night and not worry about falling behind the bulk-players. Restricting OTT movement upweights the need for strategic savvy.
So whilst I agree with HSabbers that there is more of a randomness now, I strongly believe that it favours the better strategist at the expense of the builk-play monkeys, and for that I say a big thanks to T17...
... and of course its a real laugh to see people get within a sniff of a mine and get blown to smitherines. For all the seriousness of ranked Worms its good to have the odd chuckle at the expense of the impetuous!

hsabbers
29 May 2007, 17:34
Fascinating thread - as a committed Worms player I think it sad that we are going to lose a good player (HSabbers - farewell - hopefully we can make you reconsider).
Well, being honest, I have reconsidered and am now playing again, though less frequently. I just find the game less enjoyable, because I can be killed randomly and through no 'fault' of my own. Previously, if I died, it would've been my doing (ie, even if someone else killed my worm, I would accept it as my failing as I should've had a better defensive strategy).
As well, I do/did consider myself a strategist, which is why I don't like the randomness: randomness + strategy = unhappy bedfellows, in my opinion.
Anyway, it's good to get some lively, adult debate. Elsewhere on here I've been thoroughly told off (in private) for using 'inappropriate language'. I'm a linguist -- none of the words I've used could be described as inappropriate. Unwelcome, perhaps, but I've not issued any profanities and anyway, in an adult forum I think it's acceptable to get cross sometimes.
My final word here -- for I imagine I may get thrown off for the aforesaid 'inapprorpriate language' (really, it wasn't) -- is that I apologise once more to T17 for my initial upset voiced in frustrated tones. I do not, though, apologise for voicing my upset -- I remain upset about the change.
So, I still dislike mines and hope that the option to have fuses is one day offered in ranked matches. In the meantime, I wish you all well.
Harry.

worMatty
29 May 2007, 19:30
But random mines increase defensive capability because of the shorter fuse time and the extra deterrence.

hsabbers
29 May 2007, 19:55
But random mines increase defensive capability because of the shorter fuse time and the extra deterrence.
Yep, they do. But it's not a strategic defence -- it's luck based on the intial (and equally random) placement of the mines. I think most people would agree that the way mines are now makes it effectively impossible to traverse them. By strategic defence I meant placing of girders or burrowing in, for example.
Anyway, I'm accepting that most people seem to prefer random mines. That's okay. All I can do is stress once more that I think it would be nice to have the option of a fixed fuse.
Harry.

Wormetti
29 May 2007, 20:36
Custom mine fuse or weapon settings would add additional inconsistencies between games. They would need to add to the interface so the players could see what the changed settings were. It would give the host an advantage since they are more likely to remember the settings for their own games.

worMatty
29 May 2007, 22:43
Yeah but it doesn't matter much in custom games, Wormetti (Alex, right?). If the host doesn't say anything, the players can all call him a dickhead and find a game with a better host.
Luck based on the initial placement of the mines is a different subject. Positioning yourself behind a cluster of dangerous mines and setting your own mines in places other than your opponents' worms' heads are strategic defenses. Keeping an eye on how many ninja ropes and teleports your opponents use enhances that because you know they have less chance of reaching you. Initial mine placement can't give credit to any particular player for setting up an effective defensive barrier but one can take advantage of it.
Did I mention crates are random and therefore totally unbalanced and ruin strategy completely?

Wormetti
30 May 2007, 08:03
I don't know where you got Alex from, my name starts with J. We should play again sometime.
Yes there are many random elements to worms that prevent even the best player from winning every game. It usually comes down to who is the best at surviving in sudden death and if you got jetpack and airstrikes in crates, you have a great advantage. Even though the fuse is random, most players treat them as instant and avoid them, making it not much different from fixed fuse of instant. There was already a random element to mines (not just the placement), there were and still are random dud mines.

worMatty
30 May 2007, 20:35
I forgot.
<this message is now not too short>

Haoshiro
31 May 2007, 14:54
Yep, they do. But it's not a strategic defence -- it's luck based on the intial (and equally random) placement of the mines. I think most people would agree that the way mines are now makes it effectively impossible to traverse them. By strategic defence I meant placing of girders or burrowing in, for example.
Anyway, I'm accepting that most people seem to prefer random mines. That's okay. All I can do is stress once more that I think it would be nice to have the option of a fixed fuse.
Harry.
You seem to only be complaining about the randomness of mines in conjunction with short fuses. But that is hardly the only random variable in Worms.
Let's look at what random things effect a game of Worms:
- Worm placement
- Mine placement (even when they had longer fuses)
- Mine fuse times
- Barrel placement
- Create/Tool/Health drops
- Player skill/strategy (you are randomly paired with other players)
If the random fuse times didn't exist, people would (and have) still complained about the mine placement, and especially the worm placement. I'm sure some would prefer to play - Manual Worm Placement, No Mines, No Barrels.
But random elements are important. Even slope of terrain has a random effect on the battle (and obviously directly effects mine/barrel/worm placement).
Take all random elements out and you'd have a map with two sides, completely flat, no mines, no barrels, no wind. Each side would be the exact inverse of the other. Who wants that?
Point is we've always had to deal with random elements, that's a big part of the strategy. Having fixed fuse time won't change that. And the benefits, imo, outweigh the shortcomings. I've played games where I've been able to avoid every mine I came in contact with, other times I've hurt myself... it's an element of risk I think was needed, so people couldn't start the match and detonate all the mines.
If you want to point out a problem in worms, I think these are the biggest:
- Mines are sometimes placed on slopes and slide into worms at the start of the match. This shouldn't happen and really ruins the match for those effected.
- Item drops near end game can make or break the game. This has always been true for Worms, but I'm sure most people who lose because of it never appreciate it.
Personally I think that once the each team has only one worm, item drops should stop and let the game play out. If you are playing in a cave and the enemy gets a rope dropped to them (devine favor of the Gods!) after all sides have used theirs... well... that essentially gives the win to them.
I'm sure other fans could come up with a consensus on what changes would be best for Ranked Matches.
Maybe not having it drop Banana Bombs? :D Lower crate drop frequency? I don't know...

Stoners01
31 May 2007, 15:10
- Item drops near end game can make or break the game. This has always been true for Worms, but I'm sure most people who lose because of it never appreciate it.
...
Maybe not having it drop Banana Bombs? :D Lower crate drop frequency? I don't know...
Coincidentally I had this last night - ranked game, 2 player. 8 minutes in and I had 2 well powered worms (placed close but not too close) and my opponent had one on deaths doorstep - he roped around, picked up a box and then dropped a banana bomb on me - game over.
I was gutted, but the bloke had the guts to risk certain death spending his last turn chasing an unknown crate - if it had been anything but the b-bomb he would have lost. Random? yes, annoying? BIG time, but there's something about this desperate gambit paying off that is a positive for Worms - just serves to remind that as long as one of your Worms has life don't give up.

AndrewTaylor
31 May 2007, 15:18
Let's look at what random things effect a game of Worms:
- Worm placement
- Mine placement (even when they had longer fuses)
- Mine fuse times
- Barrel placement
- Create/Tool/Health drops
- Player skill/strategy (you are randomly paired with other players)
- Which player goes first
- How bad the results of bad shots are
- Wind...
The list goes on. Hey, it's lucky he never played Worms 3D with it's "Lottery Strike"!

hsabbers
31 May 2007, 20:05
You seem to only be complaining about the randomness of mines in conjunction with short fuses. But that is hardly the only random variable in Worms.
Let's look at what random things effect a game of Worms:
- Worm placement
- Mine placement (even when they had longer fuses)
- Mine fuse times
- Barrel placement
- Create/Tool/Health drops
- Player skill/strategy (you are randomly paired with other players)
Well, I'd said previously I'd happily go through all the elements one by one if necessary but the thread never got to that. However, since you bring it up I should point out again that:
- Worm placement
- Mine placement (even when they had longer fuses)
- Barrel placement
...are all pre-setup randomness, and thus don't bother me. It is post-setup randomness which bothers me. Which brings me on to:
- Create/Tool/Health drops
...which is indeed post-setup randomness. But I'd already explained that the parameters are known, and thus a defensive strategy can be worked. I see Worm X pick up a crate, I know that he has acquired one of 4 or 5 possible weapons or utilities. I can plan accordingly. It is not, therefore, random in its effect on me, as a player with a good defensive strategy. Yes, random fuses have a known parameter (0.01 to 3 seconds) but it's not the same for my (previous) purposes. Remember, I said I was able to used fixed-fuse mines as tools, and that was the case. I was/am good enough to blast a worm into a specific positon to the left or right of a mine, but such positional skill requires exact (ie, known) timing. With random fuses, my mastery of such positional shots went out the window. So yes, I'm cross because something I was really bloody good at has been buggered up by randomness. Of course, I see now that my skill was unusual (though I knew that anyway, cos few people were as good at it as me) but even if you don't share the same skill (or desire to use such a skill) it does not diminish my point: a change to randomness has nixed a core skill. And as for:
- Player skill/strategy (you are randomly paired with other players)
...well, that of course is true but it's not randomness in the same ballpark. I can quickly guage which players are the most threatening skill/strategy-wise and plan accordingly. I cannot ever again plan when a mine might explode, should that I wish to use it as a tool, because the fuse is truly random.
But, but, but... forget all of this because I've really personally come to the end of my interest in this thread (not in a dismissive way -- I just can't see any further lines of argument or disagreement). I don't really disagree with anyone. I stress again that I accept that most people here like random fuses. I continue not to like them. But I believe in democracy and in the poll elsewhere, people have spoken. I'll deal with it. I'm playing again and will work with the new system. It just for me has made the game less enjoyable. I'm back in the top 400 -- is that difficult to achieve? I don't know. But I do know that I now play less as a result of random-fused mines -- endy story.
Harry.

Haoshiro
1 Jun 2007, 00:18
Well you obviously might not read this reply, but I'll toss it in anyway.
I think your comments about crate drops being predictable is just plain wrong.
Have you never seen a Health crate drop right in front of an enemy worm - right before their turn? Random free health... that sure isn't predictable.
Even if there are know possibilities to the crates, where they drop is random. They might be essentially given to a player, other times a player might have to work for them, it's completely random.
You also leave out that there was always a random element to the mines, there was a random chance of it being a dud, and not exploding at all. You could never know that for sure. You also mentioned there isn't enough time to get away from them. But IIRC, mines before had a 3 second fuse, now it's 0-3. It's a choice decision and not unlikely you're own reasons for liking the "old way", you get to make a strategic choice on whether it's worth it.
To be clear, mine clearers weren't always doing this for defensive reasons or to help future turns. It was especially bad in "cave" levels. Sometimes enemy worms are near a barrel, and these barrels might be near a mine... so someone ropes through the level clearing mines to get "free" damage with no risk.

hsabbers
19 Jul 2007, 21:45
I thought I'd just pop back to revive this thread to say that I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong -- a couple of months in and I'm now a convert to random mines. I think they make the game better; more fun.
Shame about random fuses on dropped mines, though.
Harry.

franpa
21 Jul 2007, 11:32
a tournament game should not have any randomness in it at all, so why complain about a particular level of randomness? the whole goal of the tourney etc. is to see who is the greatest and NOT who is the luckiest... soo, a game with worm placement, no mines (unless the fuse is fixed), no wind. would be good.

vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.