From Worms Knowledge Base
I suggest another order (and structure) for the sections:
- Uses & Mentality
- Notable People Associated With the Scheme
- Warmer practise
The main point is to group Rules, Schemes and Maps, and place them right before the resources section, to add coherence. --OutofOrder 11:34, 28 April 2008 (MST)
- Done, by KRD --OutofOrder 10:39, 3 May 2008 (MST)
The following detail shouldn't be missed in the article: in the last (two,three?) years, there has been a change in the majority of warmers being hosted.
The New Setting
Maps being picked are, most of the time, Wall to Wall (WxW) maps, and not anymore the classic roper-ish maps (two islands) or heterodox warmer maps (multi-island layout and/or floating bits of land). I believe there are two reasons for this:
- The massive migration of WWP-born players (players that started roping first in WWP) to W:A. These type of players only know one standard for quality roping, which is achieved in WxW maps.
- The almost total dissappearance of the group of skilled oldschool warmer and roper players. This lot either got inactive or absolutely abandoned the game (due to the usual reasons in both cases). Almost anyone mentioned in the Warmer article is not seen playing nowadays. All of this made it nearly impossible for the warming mentality, behaviour and knowledge to be passed onto the most recent roping players. Warming schools have practically vanished, and the newer websites that promote warmers aim mainly for WxW warming (also called "freestyling" by these players).
Also, those few remaining oldschool players usually play among themselves: this is mainly because the major part have come back after a worms break and rarely make an attempt to meet the newer "skilled" players (instead, they play among themselves).
I've taken RopeRace out of the consideration: WWP players have practically the same respect as W:A players for the scheme. Their aim for achieving a high RR skill is the same, hence they've not altered the scheme's situation (although, RR has had a small influence on warming habits, but i'll leave this for a later talk). RR activity might have increased, but this fact didn't have any effect on warming standards.
Finally, there might be a third reason: the little availability of appropiate warmer maps. WMDB (the current most popular map source) does have many warmer maps, but like other colour maps, these are either too focused on the looks (and little on the flow that might occur ingame), or they are too simple (like the first roper maps ever) to provoke skill display. Also, many of those are just WxW maps put together. There are exceptions at WMDB, of course, but the rest fit in the above descriptions. Players have very few places elsewhere to look for quality maps, and those are certainly not known by the majorities. Still, i see this reason as a consequence of the second reason (most skilled players being absent), because the word about good maps was always transmitted by oldschool players. Even if there were lots of good maps at WMDB, the players would still not know which are the proper ones.
Food for thought
I've tried to make a rather objective talk so far, although you can easily notice how i don't like this new situation at all. The new setting won't help spread classic warming attitude (with everything it involves: the aim to improve, the search for quality, to spend a good time with others who also have a high standard, the result of imagination at a constant work).
I should make clear what i've been assuming so far. "Freestyling" isn't as rewarding as "warming" (the classic way). There's a simple reason: every move you can make in a WxW map can also be made in a Warmer map, but not the other way around. "Warming" in an appropiate map can be by far more complex than "freestyling" in any WxW map, thus revealling its higher quality.
WxW maps are squared and linear, which means the roughness of a warmer map is missing in them. Tricks get reduced to a bunch, and possible combos are very limited. The fact that WxW maps consist of (slightly) narrow passageways leads the player to focus mainly in speed, while a classic warmer map lets the player add more intelligence and further creativity by focusing also in precision and variety. Spectacularity can be achieved in a WxW map, but not as impressive as it can in a Warmer map. Imagination is in my opinion more limited in the best WxW map than in the lesser Warmer map.
The following paragraph (and the following pargraph only) was added by Ropa 15:10, 3 May 2008 (MST)
To emphasize on the point that Classic warmer maps offer all new trend Freestyle warmer maps offer and more yet not viceversa, this can be easily witnessed once you get a WxW exclusive player into a rope scheme of other kind. They will struggle. On the other hand, experienced Warmers shouldn't have many problems with WxW maps, at all. WxW players notable speed and control in WxW maps suddenly vanishes once put against a Roper map, and in many cases, a RR map. WxW roping is mechanic, there is no improvisation. Players who play WxW will go through the map countless times doing the exact same runs, the exact same moves which usually consist of wall bounce - spike down. They're fast in their maps, that's not up to question. However, the mechanic nature of WxW maps limits their rope creativity and thus limits their rope improvement. Like in every other scheme, simplistic forms are always a trend that wins in the future. BnG's became anchored, with one worm and with less weapons. Ropers lost weapons. Team17's lost worm selects and I wouldn't be surprised if warmers ended up losing creativty and took place in maps consisting of straight and squared lines. Hopefully though, they won't.
If W:A was an established MMORPG, it'd probably be easier to gather some people willling to spread word about the best warming ways. But these days, W:A's more a stop-by game; there are lots of players going inactive, which is balanced with lots of players starting to play for the first time, so it'd be hard for a high roping standard to be settled in their minds.
Still, what one can do is mainly:
- Read the Warmer article,
- Play in Warmer (classic) maps,
- Learn the tricks (all of them! the harder the better!)
- Try to improve (aim for a better display of skill, always)
- Warm with unknown random players,
- and if these are relatively new to roping, teach them the tricks, moves, all that's good about warming
- Suggest "freestylers" that there's an ever higher standard,
- in all, have fun warming with others
Those last two sections wouldn't be appropiate for the Warmer article, i guess. Anyway, i'll be glad to discuss this furthermore. Please add your comment after this! --OutofOrder 10:39, 3 May 2008 (MST)
Dates! And more dates!
I think it'd be best to add approximate dates in the History section. For instance, was Warmer not invented in Worms 2? This would make the first period ("Origin and rise of warmer"?) to start at least in 1998. A reference to W2 is needed, then. Such a period then would end approximately in 2000-2001? Then we'd include the "golden era" (around 2000 to 2002?). "Declination" comes after that. I'd say approximately 2003 (slightly at the beggining?) to the present. A final note then would be included on the current situation.
Also, it's not wrong to mix dates: in History (the science), historical cycles start even when the previous cycles have not yet finished. That's why end dates of one period can be older than start dates of the following period.
Way too opinionated
I really dislike this page and the way many other pages are being made recently. The first scheme page made here was the Rope race page, and when I wrote it, I tried to keep opinion to a minimum. This page is riddled with obvious bias. It's sort of disgraceful. I understand your feelings about the scheme, Gregor, and so do many others. I could have gone on and on about various rope racers, eras, maps, etc. on the Rope race page, but I didn't, and the result is much cleaner and more fit for a knowledge base, which is what this site is meant to be, in my opinion. If I had the effort to revert this page to a Worms Knowledge Base page rather than a Worms Opinion Base page, I would. Honestly, I don't care quite that much, but I care enough to go on this rant. --Lex 06:44, 15 July 2008 (MST)
I agree, but I don't think your rant really applies to the Practice section of the article. Yes, it could be made neater with bullet points and yes, it could be moved back above the Theory section, but at the time of writing we didn't really feel the need to break the flow so much in the name of clarity. Warmer is hard to write anything completely objective about; we'd just end up omitting everything. As for the Theory section, I do realise it goes against what the wiki was initially about, as I've already told you, but personally I'd be very interested to read about other schemes in that manner. It would indeed fit better on a fansite, but are there any around that the majority of the community visits? Either way, anyone's free to fix this article as they see fit; it's not "mine", I just slapped the info I had on it for others to use. --KoreanRedDragon 04:40, 18 July 2008 (MST)