Talk:Worms (series)

http://www.lynnemusic.com/ This is the website of the author of the wormsongs. He has posted downloads that include worms based mp3 files of his creation. !paradigm! 01:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)!paradigm!Reply

Could someone please add info of Microsoft Worms, the "centepede" like game from the Windows Entertainment Packs. --TEG24601

---Why would anybody do that? It has absolutely nothing to do with Team17's "Worms" Series 66.82.9.42 00:49, 24 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Do we really need a controls section? IMHO, this goes way off an encyclopedia's scope. --Kamek 19:33, 2004 Jun 15 (UTC)

I also think listing the controls is over the top. I've moved the section here for now. — Matt 14:46, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The controls for Worms Armageddon are as follows:

Arrow Keys

Move your worm around;

Aim current weapon up and down

Space bar

Fire currently selected weapon or utility;

Activate Skip Go, Surrender, or Worm Select

Tab

Select a different worm for use (not enabled in all game schemes)

Backspace

Jump straight up a short distance

Double Backspace

Backflip a good distance up, and a little bit backwards

Enter

Jump forwards;

Send a chat message (only if chat window open)

Fire currently selected weapon or utility if you are using the rope

Double Enter

Jump backwards

Backspace, followed quickly by Enter

Short backflip

Page Down

Activate or deactive the in-game chat window

Shift+Del

Keep up the score screen, useful to avoid abl or leader cowing in several game schemes (see Wormnet Acronyms for definition of these terms)

The shopper section mentions KTC but doesn't explain what the acronym stands for, or what it is. Could someone who knows please fix this? KeithD (talk) 15:30, 27 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Done.  Run! 

KTC stands for "Kill The Cow".

A 'cow' is NOT to be confused with "Mad Cows" - a weapon in the game [Not know if this weapon is in all versions of worms or just Worms Armageddon].

In fact, a 'cow' is a player that does not abide by the rules (as stated in the article, the rules are not enforced by the game - but instead agreed upon by the players). The rules are actually standardised by popularity, for each scheme within the game, the rules have altered over time.

The most common usage of the term 'cow' applies to attacking another player(s) when the rules of the scheme forbid it.

If this happens, KTC is enforced. KTC means, simply, that all players in the game must attack the 'cow'. The host of the game is usually the person that must enforce the rule, and will declare "KTC" if he believes it was not an accidental attack. --NeF 18:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

this article is good but it dosn't really cover the indervidgual games very well and it doesn't say much about cheats or game boy

• Wikipedia is not a gamingwebsite, it doesn't need cheats in articles. -- SoothingR^(pour) 15:25, 10 November 2005 (UTC)Reply
• If this article aims to have everything about Worms, then why shouldn't there be any cheats (I don't use them, but still...)? Keaze 20:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC)Reply
• People will look at this article to find out about the game itself. It's our job to inform readers about the subject, not to tell them how to play the game. Cheats are irrelevant, and simply take up space and get in the way of people who just want to know what 'Worms' was, which is what this site is meant for, and what any encyclopedia is for. -- Haridan 16:02, 11 July 2006 (GMT)

I feel that this article should be splitted so that every game in the series gets its own article. I think all of the games are notable enough to deserve an own article. -- SoothingR^(pour) 15:29, 10 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

I don't see a major need for a split at present, but if we did, perhaps a better scheme would be to split up the article into an article on each "generation" of games; one on the classic pixely 2D games, one on the cartoony 2D games, and one on the recent 3D games? — Matt Crypto 15:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. I assume the weapons and schemes articles will continue to cover all games, and be linked from each separate generation article? It seems a bit much to also split those articles into their separate games. see below for change of mind -  Run!  19:26, 17 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Point taken. I can see the logic behind that..so basically, what about this:

• Worms (first generation)
• Worms (second generation)
• Worms (third generation)
• Weapons from Worms (nvm article does already exist) ?

-- SoothingR^(pour) 09:53, 12 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Question: will there be a main article on the Worms series in general? In an encyclopedia, there should be, but I'm beginning to think this will end up with far too many articles for just one game.  Run! 

I disagree...Ever seen how many articles The Legend of Zelda has? Way more than I propose to make for the Worms-series. -- SoothingR^(pour) 13:49, 12 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Okay. So the title of this page needs to be Worms (computer game series) with a general overview of the series (i.e. first four chapters*) and what makes it different, and the sub-topic* pages being:

*Worms (first generation) (computer game)

*Worms (second generation) (computer game)

*Worms (third generation) (computer game)

And, in my opinion, since the weapons act quite differently between generations it might be a good idea to trash the Worms weapons and tools and Worms schemes pages and have their content gleaned and merged into the separate articles. So there would be four pages to cover the series and all content in any sub-topic* page relevant to one particular generation. What do we think?

*excuse my awful lingo, I don't know what the wikipedia terms are.  Run!  19:26, 17 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Well, I would swap the 'computer game' and 'generation'.. since 'Worms (first generation)' is not a computer game. Plain 'Worms' on the other hand, is.

• Worms (computer game) (first generation)
• Worms (computer game) (second generation)
• Worms (computer game) (third generation)

The weapons are not THAT different, the second generation introduces some secret weapons, and the third generation doesn't really add a lot of new weapons..they can stay in one article I'd say. -- SoothingR^(pour) 08:38, 18 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Good points. Sounds good to me, then. I don't know how articles go get split so I'll sit and watch.  Run!  16:58, 19 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

IMHO a split like this is a bad idea. Basically, no one would ever think of looking for Worms (computer game) (second generation) - it's an abstract concept that has no real meaning in the real world. Secondly - they're all basically the same game. If it must be split, give each game its own page - like Doom 1, Doom 2 etc. Any other grouping is just artificial.

In any case the '(third generation)' etc is wrong, as the () brackets are supposed to be for disambiguation, not for hierarchies. You would really want 'Worms first generation (computer game)' etc. --Stevage 21:05, 2 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

What about: Worms (Computer Game) For the Original Worms 2 Worms Armageddon Like all the games split into seperate articles? Not just the generations. DINOMAN 21:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

My advise is that the article should be split, not into different generations, but by each individual game. We can still have a main article for Worms which can perhaps be called Worms series (similar to articles such as Mario Party series or The Legend of Zelda series)--☆TBC☆ 09:30, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

The trouble with that is that there's virtually nothing to say about each individual game. There's no storyline, no characters, and the gameplay is the same for pretty much all of the games. You say that each game should have its own article. What would you say in the Worms World Party article then? "Oh, it's basically just Worms Armageddon with three more options" ;) I don't think turning one well-structured article into a plethora of stubs is appropriate.  -- Run!  10:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Why can't we both have an article for each game and a main article for Worms? Thats the method they use for Mario, Legend of Zelda, and Rayman, so why not Worms? By the way, I'll also have to disagree with your statement about there being "virtually nothing to say about each individual game", as we could also include information about critical reaction, development history, etc.--☆TBC☆ 12:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

In answer to those questions: Because Worms isn't as big a game as the Legend of Zelda or Mario. Just look at their respective categories; they're enormous. Putting their content into a single page would be insane. But with Worms, which doesn't have or need a category, the content fits quite nicely into one article that reads perfectly fine as it is. Notice that the wikisoftware isn't complaining about this article being too long - that's because it isn't. Why not put the critical reaction and development history in this article instead? (as is already the case)  -- Run!  13:38, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Understood, but what about franchises like Tenchu or Ace Combat? They aren't relatively well known and most of the articles on each of the individual games are short. By the way, I'm moving this discussion to the CVG talk page to get some more community consensus. --☆TBC☆ 15:39, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Agree. Worms Armageddon, Worms 2, Worms World Party etc. should have their own pages. --AAA! ^{(AAAA • AAAAAAAA)} 02:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'll agree with the split proposal. I came here looking for specific information and details regarding Worms 4: Mayhem, only to find a tiny section that informs me of nothing that I didn't already know. Each release should receive an individual, detailed article. I don't understand why allowing them would be an issue. Gamer Junkie 06:03, 6 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I agree with the split proposal. It is not appropriate for some worms games to have their own page while others rd here. It appears that people are not too willing to write properly as can be seen with Worms_Forts:_Under_Siege... anger2headshot 00:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

It would be nice to have a screenshot of Worms 1 to integrate into the description of the 'first generation' of games. --Stevage 15:03, 3 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

I have added one. -- SoothingR^(pour) 07:46, 24 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Here's a question: Worms Open Warfare will be coming out soon enough and it will use a new engine. But it's 2D. So which generation will that fit into? It might be worth pointing out here that Team17 don't actually catagorise their games into generations... it's a community thing. So it's open to adjustment.  Run!  19:09, 8 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
Edit: Since there's been no response for some time now I've gone ahead and made some changes, let's see if there's any objection.  Run!  9 days later

Yeah, I'd put it as a 3rd Gen 2D game. The style of graphics is not as "bubbly" as the 2nd Gen and overall, the style of the game is closer to Worms 3/4, with explosions and smoke resembling the effects used in those 3D games (also lacking the FOAM! and BOOM! onomatopoeia from 2nd Gen Worms). Also, the weapon icons are the same as the ones used in the 3D games, and the jetpack has only a vertical thrust, like the jetpack in Worms 3D. The crosshairs are also more similar to the Worms 3/4 crosshairs than the 2nd Gen aimers. All these little changes make the game feel quite different, but still very similar.

Personally, I liked the 2nd Gen style, with onomatopoeia and simple icons, but that's nothing to do with the article itself. 81.109.94.62 18:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Team17's Addiction Pinball [1] featured a Worms-themed pinball table. Is this interesting enough to be mentioned in the article? Ma.rkus.nl 15:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

• Perhaps in the form of a small note in the Trivia-section, but the game as a whole - if it is going to be included in Wikipedia - should get its own article. SoothingR 20:23, 28 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
• I actually used to have a game entitled Worms Pinball, which came in a box-set of worms games. It was the best and most complex pinball game I've ever played. 80.41.91.29 02:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Custom/regional voice sets were available before Worms 2. I know they were in at least Worms United, and possibly Worms Reinforcements too. — Matt Crypto 15:31, 2 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Really? I'll have to investigate. Edit: Actually yes, I think you're right. There was definitely a Scots speech set in W:U&R, so there must have been choice.  Run!  15:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

"The game, whose concept was devised by Andy Davidson[1], is thought to have been inspired by Lemmings, with which it shares many similarities."

Can someone cite a source on this statement? The article on Lemmings mentioned something along this line, and I've seen some occasional objections to that statement in that article. It would be really helpful if a source can be cited. Thanks. 67.160.10.87 05:29, 18 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

The first generation Worms games were reminiscent of Lemmings because of the graphics (i.e. tiny sprites doing comical & cute things, then dying), although the gameplay is pretty different. I think I remember an Amiga Format review making the comparison, but I don't have access to my collection at present. Proving inspiration might be harder. I agree that we need to cite a source, though. — Matt Crypto 07:30, 18 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

There are quite a few statements in the article that still need sources, I've been meaning to get around to them. Having said that, I did poke around the internet for various reviews of the first Worms games and none that I looked at suggested what the article says.  Run!  10:20, 18 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

I went to the same school as Andy where he developed the game on the art department computers. In 1991/1992 it was called Lemmartillery, with sprites captured from Lemmings. Andy (who was 18 at the time) approached Psygnosis about publishing the game, but they didn't want it & made him change, hence worms. If you look at the info in the original game menu, it refers to "****artillery" as a previous name, an obvious reference to the name. It was written in AMOS before recoding in Blitz too. Teriyaki 23:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Interesting, thanks! Psygnosis missed a trick there. (We can't, sadly, use your info in the article directly, as we can only use published accounts). — Matt Crypto 06:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

I've found a source from an old AP issue I had, so I've added it to the article. Alexj2002 18:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Cool, thanks. — Matt Crypto 22:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

The screenshot of the first Worms game would be more useful if it showed what the effects looked like, like the Worms: Armegeddon screenshot. I'm requesting a better image since I don't have the first Worms game at my disposal. M2K 01:18, 24 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

Worms: Open Warfare seems to have slipped away with its own article at some point. Since there's so little to say about it without repeating information in this article, I don't see any reason for it being separate when all the other Worms games are included here. Might be worth integrating the infobox here, though.  -- Run!  08:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

• Oppose, as seperate games merit seperate articles. In fact, I believe this page should be splitted up as well. Also, please note that the title of the article refers to Worms, the computer game, whereas Worms:Open Warfare is on both the DS and PSP, not the PC.--☆TBC☆ 09:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Well technically the DS and PSP are computers too ;) Just not personal computers. But technicalities aside, the title should be renamed to Worms (series) or something like that, then.  -- Run!  10:12, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

• Support Separate games merit separate articles if they are notable. An article about a remake of a previous game with a few screenshots does not offer enough to justify its own article. The argument about the PSP/DS being different than the PC is nothing more than semantics. They are all computer systems. Resolute 02:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Reply
• Support as per Resolute. If enough can be written in this one article about each game to warrant splitting them then, and only then, should they be split. --JimmyTheWig 16:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)Reply
• Oppose,same reasons as TBC Julz
• If we can say all we need to about something with one page, then we should do so. We give computer games their own page if they're needed, not just because "computer games merit their own article". At the moment we have a quite decent article about this series, which covers the games quite well; why ruin it by splitting it into half a dozen different things? 210.10.240.16 03:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)Reply
• Support if the page is not going to be split into 1st Gen Worms, 2nd Gen Worms and 3rd Gen Worms, but if the page is going to be split up, I'd Oppose --81.109.94.62 18:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
• Support. — Matt Crypto 15:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)Reply
• Oppose each game should have its own article to be expanded. I support splitting the page and oppose the merger (not a strong opposition though).--Húsönd 22:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)Reply
• Oppose Per reasons stated Born Acorn 23:02, 26 September 2006 (UTC)Reply
• Oppose As stated above, each game is notable enough to have its own article Jebus0 02:59, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

So are we going to reach a consensus or not? The templates can't hang around on the articles forever. Shall I make a Request for Comment?  -- Run!  19:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'd argue there was enough support to merge the articles. 210.10.240.16 looks like a support to me. Assuming Run! is supporting too, that gives 5 supports and 2 opposes. --JimmyTheWig 08:41, 1 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Actually, it's around 5 supports and 3 opposes, or 3 supports and 3 opposes if you discount the anon votes, so there's no consensus on either merging or splitting.--TBCTaLk?!? 07:38, 22 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

JimmyTheWig was correct at the time of his comment. But yes, more time is needed.  -- Run!  12:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

{The most important aspect of worms happens to be it's various schemes and online play, which isn't mentioned in the main article once.}

The online play is the reason worm has remained a cult game for this long.

Unlike death matches, there are some unique and strangely bizarre schemes:

Roping:

Commonly called a Roper or Proper (Pro Roper - although Noobs would tend to join pro ropers, which defeated the purpose of Proper. So now Roper and Proper are synonymous).

This involves the Ninja Rope weapon, the Parachute, and the Bazooka, Grenade, and Mine. [Note: It is commonly considered a 'cow' to attack with the grenade; this is typically only used to be used to "buy" retreat time.]

The general concept of the scheme is to move around a map using only the Ninja Rope, and attacking enemies, whilst keeping to the strict rules:

For roping the standard rules are:

[AFR] Attack From Rope: When this rule is used, any player that wishes to attack an enemy must attack from the Ninja Rope, as opposed to firing a weapon from the ground. Although, this does not stop players from firing a weapon when not on the rope in order to strategically "buy" time in order to retreat. (These shots must not hit another player).

[CBA] Crate Before Attack: The player must collect a Health Crate/Medic Kit, before making any attack. Although, this does not stop players from firing a weapon before collecting a crate in order to "buy" time in order to retreat.

[KTC] [Already mentioned under KTC in talk page]

Shopping Commonly called a Shopper or Shoppa (synonymous).

This involves the Ninja Rope, the Parachute and the majority of "Cavern allowed weapons".

Similar to the Proper, with some major differences:

Instead of the standard 15 seconds turn time in Roper; Shopper can have 30 to 45 seconds depending on the host.

Instead of a few strategic weapons in Roper, Shopper allows weapons that can kill a player or an entire team. (Such as the Banana Bomb)

Shopper typically uses the PACK rules: Piles Afr Cba Ktc - Piles simply means a player has the ability to Rope Knock worms into Piles and then attack that Pile.

Shopper is considered a Noob game by the majority of elite/expert players.

BnG Which stands for, Bazookas 'n' Grenades.

This involves simply the Bazooka, Grenade, Blowtorch, Girder and teleport.

The worms are anchored down and therefore can not walk.

The game is played on an island, and the players will try to either shoot the enemy to death (health) or shoot them into the surrounding water.

The teleports are limited, as are the girders.

The strategy of this scheme is the fact that players must either use the wind to help their shot hit the enemy (Zook), or bounce a grenade into hard to reach enemies.

The girder may be used to create a wall to help bounce a grenade into a difficult place.

RR Rope Race: Using the Ninja rope players must race between a designated start and finish marker. What makes this scheme challenging is some players are capable of doing entire maps in a single turn. There are many ways to shave off seconds using bounces of walls to launch the worm into strategic moves to increase speed.

BR This acronym actually can be used for 3 schemes.

- Battle Race Typically a map that mainly consists of Pixels (small bits of land strategically placed by the map maker to be used as stepping stones). In Worms Armageddon there 4 types of jump, the number of jumps combined with a worm’s position on a pixel and the direction the worm is facing makes each jump challenging. The players must race between a designated start and finish marker.

- Bungee Race Using the Bungee Rope players must race between a designated start and finish marker. The Bungee Rope is even more challenging to control that the Ninja Rope.

- Boom race Using Anchored worms and infinite health, players must fire into a wall or the ground to launch their worms around the map. --NeF 19:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Actually the variety of online schemes is mentioned in the article (Worms computer game#Schemes), and this has already been discussed, with the conclusion that descriptions of schemes is fancruft and therefore unsuitable material for the article.  -- Run!  21:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Decent start so far, and this is one of my all-time favortie computer games but there is some problems

1. Nothing on crticism of the game
2. Images lack fair use rationales
3. I don't think forums are valid refs

Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 00:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

If anyone doesnt mind, may I add an online schemes section? It will contain a brief description of:

Shopper
Roper
Fly Shopper
BnG
All the different types of Races (Rope, Battle, Bungee, etc.)
Walk for Weapons
Team17 (not to be confused with the company of the same name)
Any others that I might have missed

This can work like STUFF to kep it simple. --Triforce1215 04:17, 26 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Not appropriate; tt's fancruft. See past discussion. 82.46.44.59 20:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

There is a project to do this, however, on the Worms Knowledge Base Wiki. --The CyberShadow 10:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Would you consider this a turn-based strategy or turn-based tactics series? SharkD 19:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Neither. Worms is a turn based artillery game.The Goat 20:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

All the games in the Worms Series are notable. Why don't we have a page about each game? 58.178.9.58 12:22, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

• I agree with you. I don't see why there shouldn't be at least separate articles for the 2d and 3d games because they were completely different and were notable games and I don't see why it is taking so long for people to make up their minds. What is even more pointless is having links to pages for each Worms game but all they are are redirects back to the the main article. What is the point of leading people on to believe that there is separate pages. Xtreme racer 00:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

For the custom weapons in Worms 4: Mayhem, in the bit at the bottom of the back of the box (where it is mentioned) it has what looks like an Old Woman/Inflatable Scouse combo, which led me to believe you could merge weapons. I was thinking of a Holy Hand Banana Bomb. Was anyone else confused by the "Old Scouse" picture? --Indie.Bones 14:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)Indie.BonesReply

Should Worms4 be put as the second generation of 3D games, as it's made using a different engine to Worms3D and Worms Forts? 87.232.1.50 09:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

A new Worms game exclusively for the Wii. Would someone add something about it? Source: http://www.n-europe.com/news.php?nid=11005 Loghete 14:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

The image Image:Worms HolyHandGrenade.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• File:Worms-xbla-logo.jpg

l This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Recently in the US was released a PS3 version of the Worms franchise. This information should be updated and a page for the game should be made. 74.105.77.13 (talk) 15:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

A page for the game should now be created, plenty of info is available.

If your class is doing worm experiments here are some suggestions: hot or cold, light or dark, a maze, smell, taste buds. If you are also doing ethic's boards don't argue or be rude while you are presenting your experiment. If you are on a ethic's boards tell them what they need to work on and tell them why they approve or rejected them and be fair.

If your class is doing worm experiments here are some suggestions: hot or cold, light or dark, a maze, smell, taste buds. If you are also doing ethic's boards don't argue or be rude while you are presenting your experiment. If you are on a ethic's boards tell them what they need to work on and tell them why they approve or rejected them and be fair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.117.102.65 (talk) 02:49, 4 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

I think it would be helpful if a table was created that showed all the games and which systems those games were on. Its more of a problem for the earlier games which were on five or six systems. But I think it would be great if you could easily see which games where on the ps3 or wii etc.... --Jamo58 (talk) 23:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

There is another (unauthorized?) version of Worms 1 for an old Sinclair ZX Spectrum computer, sadly it is not working. Is this version official?

http://www.worldofspectrum.org/infoseekid.cgi?id=0005757&loadpics=1 --217.239.14.107 (talk) 15:49, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

I have heard of clones of Worms video games, including Warmux and Hedgewars. There is not much to say about Warmux, really. Even its Wikipedia article has hardly any references to reliable secondary sources (in which case the article probably will not survive much longer). Probably the most famous Worms clone I have found (and known for about a decade) is Hedgewars. While as of now it is not notable enough for its own article, which has been deleted several times before being salted, the finally-finished free and open-source software is lucky enough to have been covered by the Polish technology magazine Komputer Świat and the mainstream German newspaper Die Welt. I am not sure whether this justifies that we can expand the article to say that Worms' popularity has lead to clones of the games that follow the same spirit as they do, but here I do see a justification for reinstating an administrator-protected page with the title Hedgewars that redirects to "Worms (series)". I am also redirecting or deleting the Warmux article due to the lack of notability. I would like to hear some thoughts about the notability of the clones in the lost genre of artillery games, where Worms Armageddon is probably the quintessential representation and icon of the genre. FreeMediaKid! 08:25, 28 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

The title says it all. Worms Battlegrounds was released in 2014, and isn't on the time-line here. 50.98.65.171 (talk) 08:11, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply