Upvote Upvoted 64 Downvote Downvoted
1 ⋅⋅ 7 8 9 10
December Global Whitelist Changes
271
#271
1 Frags +
Consolefwiw...

You can also use confidence intervals to calculate tighter or looser whitelist sets, I'll probably post at least summaries of that data at some point.

[quote=Console]fwiw...[/quote]
You can also use confidence intervals to calculate tighter or looser whitelist sets, I'll probably post at least summaries of that data at some point.
272
#272
1 Frags +
fraglandsthat's how the game works in competitive yes, it is not intentional but simply a result of the fact valve has balanced TF2 around pubs for so long. Now they are shifting slowly to balancing around competitive.

except for the fact that if u go watch the in game dev commentaries they also acknowledge there that certain classes are generalists and will be viable on both offence and defence.

[quote=fraglands]that's how the game works in competitive yes, it is not intentional but simply a result of the fact valve has balanced TF2 around pubs for so long. Now they are shifting slowly to balancing around competitive.[/quote]

except for the fact that if u go watch the in game dev commentaries they also acknowledge there that certain classes are generalists and will be viable on both offence and defence.
273
#273
1 Frags +
fraglandsthat's how the game works in competitive yes, it is not intentional but simply a result of the fact valve has balanced TF2 around pubs for so long. Now they are shifting slowly to balancing around competitive.

the possible difference in balacing the game for 6v6 and 12v12 is negligible. the game should be balanced around the higher skill play anyway, the argument i hear sometimes that OP items are ok if the players are bad is retarded

[quote=fraglands]that's how the game works in competitive yes, it is not intentional but simply a result of the fact valve has balanced TF2 around pubs for so long. Now they are shifting slowly to balancing around competitive.[/quote]
the possible difference in balacing the game for 6v6 and 12v12 is negligible. the game should be balanced around the higher skill play anyway, the argument i hear sometimes that OP items are ok if the players are bad is retarded
274
#274
8 Frags +
sagefraglandsthat's how the game works in competitive yes, it is not intentional but simply a result of the fact valve has balanced TF2 around pubs for so long. Now they are shifting slowly to balancing around competitive.the possible difference in balacing the game for 6v6 and 12v12 is negligible.

I don't think this is true. Long ranged splash from things like Soldier, Demo, and Jarate are much stronger with higher player count. Larger player count lends itself to larger maps, which affect balance (Sniper becomes stronger, for instance, Teleporters are stronger while slow classes are relatively more disadvantaged compared to standard classes, Wrangled Sentries become weaker since they can be spammed from multiple angles). And player count influences spawn times, which greatly affects how conservative a team has to be when considering if they should push or not.

Multiple classes also are a huge issue. Stacking sticky traps makes walking through chokes a nightmare and Medics being able to overheal each other makes creating advantages extremely difficult. Being able to temporarily switch to like 3 Engineers to build a [Wrangled] level 3 super fast is also a factor exclusive to 12v12.

[quote=sage][quote=fraglands]that's how the game works in competitive yes, it is not intentional but simply a result of the fact valve has balanced TF2 around pubs for so long. Now they are shifting slowly to balancing around competitive.[/quote]
the possible difference in balacing the game for 6v6 and 12v12 is negligible.[/quote]

I don't think this is true. Long ranged splash from things like Soldier, Demo, and Jarate are much stronger with higher player count. Larger player count lends itself to larger maps, which affect balance (Sniper becomes stronger, for instance, Teleporters are stronger while slow classes are relatively more disadvantaged compared to standard classes, Wrangled Sentries become weaker since they can be spammed from multiple angles). And player count influences spawn times, which greatly affects how conservative a team has to be when considering if they should push or not.

Multiple classes also are a huge issue. Stacking sticky traps makes walking through chokes a nightmare and Medics being able to overheal each other makes creating advantages extremely difficult. Being able to temporarily switch to like 3 Engineers to build a [Wrangled] level 3 super fast is also a factor exclusive to 12v12.
275
#275
-7 Frags +
sagethe possible difference in balacing the game for 6v6 and 12v12 is negligible. the game should be balanced around the higher skill play anyway

the difference in balancing the game for 6v6 and 12v12 can actually be major, for 6s players anyway. 12v12 players can be more flexible because people don't exploit broken shit to the fullest extent, but competitive players do, so when I say "balanced around pubs" I more mean "valve has looked at certain weapons/classes and said: this is good enough for pubs"

i definitely agree the game should be balanced around higher skilled play, which is what valve are slowly moving towards

Makexcept for the fact that if u go watch the in game dev commentaries they also acknowledge there that certain classes are generalists and will be viable on both offence and defence.

i've seen all the dev commentaries before. none of what you just said is in any of them. are you referring to this

"The Demoman is the most versatile combat class capable or rapidly switching from strong offensive pushes to defensive area denial."?

because thats pretty different in intention to what you said. the word "generalists" was used by robin walker in a separate interview to describe why demo and soldier were a pain to balance, as in, they werent happy with that situation.

"Some classes are useless most of the time", as syph says, was obviously never an intention of valve if you look at how the pub game is actually played, and the unlocks they've given engineer/heavy (eg gunslinger and gru) to try and make them useful more often.

https://i.imgur.com/8OzvhkC.jpg

[quote=sage]the possible difference in balacing the game for 6v6 and 12v12 is negligible. the game should be balanced around the higher skill play anyway[/quote]

the difference in balancing the game for 6v6 and 12v12 can actually be major, for 6s players anyway. 12v12 players can be more flexible because people don't exploit broken shit to the fullest extent, but competitive players do, so when I say "balanced around pubs" I more mean "valve has looked at certain weapons/classes and said: this is good enough for pubs"

i definitely agree the game should be balanced around higher skilled play, which is what valve are slowly moving towards

[quote=Mak]except for the fact that if u go watch the in game dev commentaries they also acknowledge there that certain classes are generalists and will be viable on both offence and defence.[/quote]

i've seen all the dev commentaries before. none of what you just said is in any of them. are you referring to this

"The Demoman is the most versatile combat class capable or rapidly switching from strong offensive pushes to defensive area denial."?

because thats pretty different in intention to what you said. the word "generalists" was used by robin walker in a separate interview to describe why demo and soldier [url=https://youtu.be/Nh_ItF1wOT0?t=788]were a pain to balance[/url], as in, they werent happy with that situation.

"Some classes are useless most of the time", as syph says, was obviously never an intention of valve if you look at how the pub game is actually played, and the unlocks they've given engineer/heavy (eg gunslinger and gru) to try and make them useful more often.

https://i.imgur.com/8OzvhkC.jpg
276
#276
1 Frags +

Robin Walker specifically mentions "generalists" and "specialists" in this interview.

https://youtu.be/Nh_ItF1wOT0?t=12m54s

Edit: Oh sorry, I guess you linked it already. To expand though, he specifically refers to the Soldier and the Demo as classes with general applicability, which harkens back to the two Hydro commentary nodes: one that states that the Soldier is a "core" combat class, and the other, which was referenced in the post above me, which describes their original intent with demoman as being a versatile class. This might be why people conflate these two ideas, as the commentary is definitely inline with generalist/specialist game design philosophy, but there's no direct correlation until this interview. I wonder how far back the term generalist/specialists was used. I believe this specific phrasing (in regards to TF2, because the term generalist/specialist exists outside of tf2) used by the community predates this interview, but I'm not entirely sure. Was Robin Walker the first to use this terminology in correlation with TF2?

I did a google search with dates, and it does seem that this interview is the first ever use of this concept + tf2. So this would definitely imply that, yes, Valve intended general applicability vs. special applicability for different classes.

Robin Walker specifically mentions "generalists" and "specialists" in this interview.

https://youtu.be/Nh_ItF1wOT0?t=12m54s

Edit: Oh sorry, I guess you linked it already. To expand though, he specifically refers to the Soldier and the Demo as classes with general applicability, which harkens back to the two Hydro commentary nodes: one that states that the Soldier is a "core" combat class, and the other, which was referenced in the post above me, which describes their original intent with demoman as being a versatile class. This might be why people conflate these two ideas, as the commentary is definitely inline with generalist/specialist game design philosophy, but there's no direct correlation until this interview. I wonder how far back the term generalist/specialists was used. I believe this specific phrasing (in regards to TF2, because the term generalist/specialist exists outside of tf2) used by the community predates this interview, but I'm not entirely sure. Was Robin Walker the first to use this terminology in correlation with TF2?

I did a google search with dates, and it does seem that this interview is the first ever use of this concept + tf2. So this would definitely imply that, yes, Valve intended general applicability vs. special applicability for different classes.
277
#277
-1 Frags +

So this whole discussion is a good read but it isn't really productive at all. There's evidently a large amount of people who don't like this whitelist and want one which is much stricter but posting on this thread is probably not going to do anything. The 2 main ideas seem to between only wanting unlocks which add to the game, or only wanting to ban unlocks that break it. I feel that before we decide which specific unlocks we should allow we should have a vote or something deciding on which mentally the global whitelist should be geared towards (I'm not going to create a strawpoll or anything garbage like that because evidently an admin or someone with some credibility should actual start one). Currently there's been no posts or acknowledgements from any admins talking about the fact that a lot of people aren't happy with this whitelist as we're continuing to play the etf2l whitelist cup even though we know that the 3 weapons that have been updated still are not beneficial to the game at all (and also gas passer which is just garbage). It'd be nice to hear from an admin that they aren't just ignoring a lot of the community

So this whole discussion is a good read but it isn't really productive at all. There's evidently a large amount of people who don't like this whitelist and want one which is much stricter but posting on this thread is probably not going to do anything. The 2 main ideas seem to between only wanting unlocks which add to the game, or only wanting to ban unlocks that break it. I feel that before we decide which specific unlocks we should allow we should have a vote or something deciding on which mentally the global whitelist should be geared towards (I'm not going to create a strawpoll or anything garbage like that because evidently an admin or someone with some credibility should actual start one). Currently there's been no posts or acknowledgements from any admins talking about the fact that a lot of people aren't happy with this whitelist as we're continuing to play the etf2l whitelist cup even though we know that the 3 weapons that have been updated still are not beneficial to the game at all (and also gas passer which is just garbage). It'd be nice to hear from an admin that they aren't just ignoring a lot of the community
278
#278
-6 Frags +
vidboyTo expand though, he specifically refers to the Soldier and the Demo as classes with general applicability, which harkens back to the two Hydro commentary nodes: one that states that the Soldier is a "core" combat class, and the other, which was referenced in the post above me, which describes their original intent with demoman as being a versatile class. This might be why people conflate these two ideas, as the commentary is definitely inline with generalist/specialist game design philosophy, but there's no direct correlation until this interview. I wonder how far back the term generalist/specialists was used. I believe this specific phrasing (in regards to TF2, because the term generalist/specialist exists outside of tf2) used by the community predates this interview, but I'm not entirely sure. Was Robin Walker the first to use this terminology in correlation with TF2?

I did a google search with dates, and it does seem that this interview is the first ever use of this concept + tf2. So this would definitely imply that, yes, Valve intended general applicability vs. special applicability for different classes.

i was never implying that Robin Walker didn't originate the term; just that Valve didn't intend "general applicability vs. special applicability" to happen in competitive, and that it was an unintended consequence of balancing for pubs.

"generalist" is used to refer to a negative balance situation: he said "pain to balance relative to the specialist classes".

[quote=vidboy]To expand though, he specifically refers to the Soldier and the Demo as classes with general applicability, which harkens back to the two Hydro commentary nodes: one that states that the Soldier is a "core" combat class, and the other, which was referenced in the post above me, which describes their original intent with demoman as being a versatile class. This might be why people conflate these two ideas, as the commentary is definitely inline with generalist/specialist game design philosophy, but there's no direct correlation until this interview. I wonder how far back the term generalist/specialists was used. I believe this specific phrasing (in regards to TF2, because the term generalist/specialist exists outside of tf2) used by the community predates this interview, but I'm not entirely sure. Was Robin Walker the first to use this terminology in correlation with TF2?

I did a google search with dates, and it does seem that this interview is the first ever use of this concept + tf2. So this would definitely imply that, yes, Valve intended general applicability vs. special applicability for different classes.[/quote]

i was never implying that Robin Walker didn't originate the term; just that Valve didn't intend "general applicability vs. special applicability" to happen in competitive, and that it was an unintended consequence of balancing for pubs.

"generalist" is used to refer to a negative balance situation: he said "pain to balance relative to the specialist classes".
279
#279
4 Frags +
fraglandsValve didn't intend "general applicability vs. special applicability" to happen in competitive, and that it was an unintended consequence of balancing for pubs.

wat. this doesn't make any sense (imo)

That's not how game design works. TF2 has a pretty consistent underlying philosophy of how each class functions and is balanced (barring a few exceptions like demoknight, or medieval mode/passtime/mannpower, idk). It's going to be felt in every single game mode because that's how the game is, and even though the competitive community tinkers with it via a whitelist and class limits, it's impossible to argue that the basic fundamentals of the game are "unintentional".

Yes, the balance of Specialists and Generalists is probably a pain, because there's a fine line that Sniper, Heavy, and Spy sit where if you buff them too much, they become overpowered/annoying, but I don't think this approach is necessarily a regret that valve has. It's very good game design to give players very strong but specific tools. The specialists are like your hail marys [edit: this term isn't exactly perfect for what I'm trying to say, but I hope you understand my point], great when utilized effectively, but high risk/high reward and designed to be switched off of when it is no longer appropriate. People don't run shotguns or forcebuy, etc. in competitive CS:GO full time, but it can be very effective as a surprise play, or when used in specific situations. Heck, the very nature of Spy is that he is a surprise, so running one full-time is not an optimal play. Valve did not do this on accident, I mean, we are all only here, 10 years later, because of Valve, even if you disagree with some of their methods, as I do sometimes.

There's just this weird stigma attached to players' mentalities that each class deserves to be treated equally, and I suppose it's because the base game's rules facilitate no penalties for such risky plays, due to the varying skill levels, but the classes aren't real people: they're tools, they're game mechanics, it doesn't have to be fair. Spy, or Engie isn't going to complain that he isn't being picked very often. The player has these tools in their arsenal, and it's important understand and to know that we have these rare, risky, and high reward options (and this extends to some of the individual weapon choices as well, like Kritz, Banners, etc., and even decisions, should the Demo bomb, should the medic go for the saw, should the scout hide here?), but that they aren't supposed to be run fulltime It makes for a fun and dynamic game, that is fun to play and fun to watch.

This is why people feel that it's important that Valve adopts some sort of accommodation to this understanding, especially to help newer players. But the game is so old now, and people--casual and competitive alike--are set in their ways.

I apologize for going slightly off on a tangent.

[quote=fraglands]Valve didn't intend "general applicability vs. special applicability" to happen in competitive, and that it was an unintended consequence of balancing for pubs.[/quote]

wat. this doesn't make any sense (imo)

That's not how game design works. TF2 has a pretty consistent underlying philosophy of how each class functions and is balanced (barring a few exceptions like demoknight, or medieval mode/passtime/mannpower, idk). It's going to be felt in every single game mode because that's how the game is, and even though the competitive community tinkers with it via a whitelist and class limits, it's impossible to argue that the basic fundamentals of the game are "unintentional".

Yes, the balance of Specialists and Generalists is probably a pain, because there's a fine line that Sniper, Heavy, and Spy sit where if you buff them too much, they become overpowered/annoying, but I don't think this approach is necessarily a regret that valve has. It's very good game design to give players very strong but specific tools. The specialists are like your hail marys [edit: this term isn't exactly perfect for what I'm trying to say, but I hope you understand my point], great when utilized effectively, but high risk/high reward and designed to be switched off of when it is no longer appropriate. People don't run shotguns or forcebuy, etc. in competitive CS:GO full time, but it can be very effective as a surprise play, or when used in specific situations. Heck, the very nature of Spy is that he is a surprise, so running one full-time is not an optimal play. Valve did not do this on accident, I mean, we are all only here, 10 years later, because of Valve, even if you disagree with some of their methods, as I do sometimes.

There's just this weird stigma attached to players' mentalities that each class deserves to be treated equally, and I suppose it's because the base game's rules facilitate no penalties for such risky plays, due to the varying skill levels, but the classes aren't real people: they're tools, they're game mechanics, it doesn't have to be fair. Spy, or Engie isn't going to complain that he isn't being picked very often. The player has these tools in their arsenal, and it's important understand and to know that we have these rare, risky, and high reward options (and this extends to some of the individual weapon choices as well, like Kritz, Banners, etc., and even decisions, should the Demo bomb, should the medic go for the saw, should the scout hide here?), but that they aren't [i]supposed[/i] to be run fulltime It makes for a fun and dynamic game, that is fun to play and fun to watch.

This is why people feel that it's important that Valve adopts some sort of accommodation to this understanding, especially to help newer players. But the game is so old now, and people--casual and competitive alike--are set in their ways.

I apologize for going slightly off on a tangent.
1 ⋅⋅ 7 8 9 10
Please sign in through STEAM to post a comment.