Difference between revisions of "Talk:Boom Race"
From Worms Knowledge Base
CyberShadow (Talk | contribs) (→RubberWorm Boom Race Replay) |
(→RubberWorm Boom Race Replay) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
::"replacing them with e.g. finalist games from W:A tournaments" While I partially agree with the idea of putting up high-quality games' replays as examples, I think that '''might''' alienate newbies from trying out new schemes. Maybe a high quality, and an average one could do the trick, but I donno. Just an idea. [[User:Balee|Balee]] 19:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC) | ::"replacing them with e.g. finalist games from W:A tournaments" While I partially agree with the idea of putting up high-quality games' replays as examples, I think that '''might''' alienate newbies from trying out new schemes. Maybe a high quality, and an average one could do the trick, but I donno. Just an idea. [[User:Balee|Balee]] 19:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::I don't think that's a problem as long as the replay description mentions that it's from tournament final or something. Higher-level games only improve the quality of the information here, as they show what people should aim to achieve in this scheme. --[[User:CyberShadow|Vladimir]] 02:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC) | :::I don't think that's a problem as long as the replay description mentions that it's from tournament final or something. Higher-level games only improve the quality of the information here, as they show what people should aim to achieve in this scheme. --[[User:CyberShadow|Vladimir]] 02:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::::Yes, yes, I 100% agree with that, it's just that... well, some people might look at the replays, think that they'll never be able to play like that, and lose interest. That way, an additional, average replay would let them see a level even they would agree on to be able to reach. Although, of course, we (you) can't base on something that might not happen, this is only a possibility. If it wouldn't take too much space, though, I don't see in what ways would it be worse than the current system. Hey, I'd even bother to make a template so that two replays can be shown in one box, they would take less space that way. [[User:Balee|Balee]] 09:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 09:52, 6 November 2009
I seem to remember a long time ago that a "Boom Race" consisted of placing a banana in a tight spot and blasting your worm right across the map at various points. In fact I think it had a rope in it - it was more like a rope race than a battle race. The one described in the article sounds a far better scheme (i might even have to give it a go) but perhaps this past version should mentioned if anyone knows more about it? Run! 09:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- The one you remember is called Cannon Rope Race, its located in the Rope Race article. Balee 12:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
RubberWorm Boom Race Replay
I don't understand why not put a rubber replay in boom race if in hysteria's page there is 2 replays. One that explains how NOT to play hysteria. This doesn't make sense. --FoxHound 03:13, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- RubberWorm is a 3rd-party extension to W:A. Why do you think that replays only playable with 3rd-party extensions should be together with regular replays? And I agree that many example replays could be cleaned up, replacing them with e.g. finalist games from W:A tournaments. --Vladimir 04:29, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- "replacing them with e.g. finalist games from W:A tournaments" While I partially agree with the idea of putting up high-quality games' replays as examples, I think that might alienate newbies from trying out new schemes. Maybe a high quality, and an average one could do the trick, but I donno. Just an idea. Balee 19:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think that's a problem as long as the replay description mentions that it's from tournament final or something. Higher-level games only improve the quality of the information here, as they show what people should aim to achieve in this scheme. --Vladimir 02:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, yes, I 100% agree with that, it's just that... well, some people might look at the replays, think that they'll never be able to play like that, and lose interest. That way, an additional, average replay would let them see a level even they would agree on to be able to reach. Although, of course, we (you) can't base on something that might not happen, this is only a possibility. If it wouldn't take too much space, though, I don't see in what ways would it be worse than the current system. Hey, I'd even bother to make a template so that two replays can be shown in one box, they would take less space that way. Balee 09:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think that's a problem as long as the replay description mentions that it's from tournament final or something. Higher-level games only improve the quality of the information here, as they show what people should aim to achieve in this scheme. --Vladimir 02:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- "replacing them with e.g. finalist games from W:A tournaments" While I partially agree with the idea of putting up high-quality games' replays as examples, I think that might alienate newbies from trying out new schemes. Maybe a high quality, and an average one could do the trick, but I donno. Just an idea. Balee 19:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
