http://puu.sh/dSdil/e7861badac.png
http://puu.sh/dSdmj/381e0f1538.png
no seriously, why do you think 6s has so few players? great if you think these people are retarded, but if you want new players you'd better start listening. it's not like these are one-offs. people have been saying the same thing for years.
if you don't care about new players, by all means keep playing 6s as is, but you're missing out on a bigger audience.
[img]http://puu.sh/dSdil/e7861badac.png[/img]
[img]http://puu.sh/dSdmj/381e0f1538.png[/img]
no seriously, why do you think 6s has so few players? great if you think these people are retarded, but if you want new players you'd better start listening. it's not like these are one-offs. people have been saying the same thing for years.
if you don't care about new players, by all means keep playing 6s as is, but you're missing out on a bigger audience.
I agree with Bloodsire. We need to strike a balance between what Valve would like to see out of TF2 and what we as community would like to see out of TF2. We want to see 6s become an extremely popular competitive scene, but I don't see that happening. Highlander has the potential, as it is a lot closer to what a pub is like, but a lot of people accuse that format of being too casual and far too random. I like the 5v5 format idea, but Arena Respawn is not a good idea. It isn't fun to watch, and many of the higher comp players felt like it wasn't as fun as 6s.
The funny thing about CS is that many of the same weapons are used, but is has a bit more variation than TF2 does, with each individual 6s class having assigned roles and standard weapon formats, with the only variations being a demo or a soldier using the pain train and the medic using a kritz instead of uber.
If we want Valve to support competitive TF2, I think 5s with less strict weapon bans would be ideal. One medic, one demo, one soldier, one scout, and one wild card (sniper, another scout, another solider, pyro?) would be a great format. Obviously OP weapons like the gunslinger, short circuit, or the GRU should be banned, but we should include weapons like the BBB or the pocket pistol, which would have the obvious pyro counter. These weapons help increase variety, randomness, and not a 16-0 team and a team with no wins at all. It's really saddening when there's so little randomness to 6s that a team goes undefeated. Including stupid items in the game shows Valve how little they would be used in comp anyway, showing they need some kind of a buff.
I agree with Bloodsire. We need to strike a balance between what Valve would like to see out of TF2 and what we as community would like to see out of TF2. We want to see 6s become an extremely popular competitive scene, but I don't see that happening. Highlander has the potential, as it is a lot closer to what a pub is like, but a lot of people accuse that format of being too casual and far too random. I like the 5v5 format idea, but Arena Respawn is not a good idea. It isn't fun to watch, and many of the higher comp players felt like it wasn't as fun as 6s.
The funny thing about CS is that many of the same weapons are used, but is has a bit more variation than TF2 does, with each individual 6s class having assigned roles and standard weapon formats, with the only variations being a demo or a soldier using the pain train and the medic using a kritz instead of uber.
If we want Valve to support competitive TF2, I think 5s with less strict weapon bans would be ideal. One medic, one demo, one soldier, one scout, and one wild card (sniper, another scout, another solider, pyro?) would be a great format. Obviously OP weapons like the gunslinger, short circuit, or the GRU should be banned, but we should include weapons like the BBB or the pocket pistol, which would have the obvious pyro counter. These weapons help increase variety, randomness, and not a 16-0 team and a team with no wins at all. It's really saddening when there's so little randomness to 6s that a team goes undefeated. Including stupid items in the game shows Valve how little they would be used in comp anyway, showing they need some kind of a buff.
eXtineRobin Walker wants to see some sort of pick/ban system implementated so that every match features unique and fresh strategies
I don't know why you hold him in high regard excluding the fact that he started cooking up the mod that spawned the entire Team Fortress family, but he's a prime example of the Peter Principle. The instant the Sandman made it into TF2 was the day he lost his credibility regarding TF2 as it was a direct violation of the established design philosophy regarding TF2 before the Scout update. You can say all you want about "muh hats" but that was the first straw.
Arena Respawn (and in turn the idea of a pick/ban system for classes and weapons) has not demonstrated to quite a few people in this community how exactly it is a FUN competitive mode. All I hear is "it's viable and what Robin Walker would like", not that it's fun. I understand completely why no one is rushing to slob on your knob concerning testing A:R; all the mode really accomplishes is being highly similar to the pick/ban from DotA, which is a completely assbackwards considering the fact that TF2 is still a class-based arena shooter. As much as I've grown to dislike what Highlander has become over the years, it's much more representative of what a pub-competitive mode would look like than this Arena Respawn jiggery you've grown so fond of. Hell, even Mannmode is much more representative of what it would look like and that's pretty awful to play right now.
6s has been kicking around for a long-ass time with Valve giving up on helping us years ago. If we need to change anything, we need to change what we've already got, not go on some stupid quest for making everyone new to competitive play a gamemode that takes half of its gameplay from DotA by having the current userbase put themselves through the ringer.
Show Content
If anything, I'd advocate trying out vanilla 6s or HL. Item server went down on a valve pub I was in today and everyone had to use stock - it was refreshing for me, anyway, can't say the same for the pubbers who have been playing with unlocks so long they've forgotten that stock weapons for their class of choice exist.
I promised myself I wouldn't nerd out but here I am fulfilling the prophecy
[quote=eXtine]Robin Walker wants to see some sort of pick/ban system implementated so that every match features unique and fresh strategies[/quote]
I don't know why you hold him in high regard excluding the fact that he started cooking up the mod that spawned the entire Team Fortress family, but he's a prime example of the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle]Peter Principle[/url]. The instant the Sandman made it into TF2 was the day he lost his credibility regarding TF2 as it was a direct violation of the established design philosophy regarding TF2 before the Scout update. You can say all you want about "muh hats" but that was the first straw.
Arena Respawn (and in turn the idea of a pick/ban system for classes and weapons) has not demonstrated to quite a few people in this community how exactly it is a FUN competitive mode. All I hear is "it's viable and what Robin Walker would like", not that it's fun. I understand completely why no one is rushing to slob on your knob concerning testing A:R; all the mode really accomplishes is being highly similar to the pick/ban from DotA, which is a completely assbackwards considering the fact that TF2 is still a class-based arena shooter. As much as I've grown to dislike what Highlander has become over the years, it's much more representative of what a pub-competitive mode would look like than this Arena Respawn jiggery you've grown so fond of. Hell, even Mannmode is much more representative of what it would look like and that's pretty awful to play right now.
6s has been kicking around for a long-ass time with Valve giving up on helping us years ago. If we need to change anything, we need to change what we've already got, not go on some stupid quest for making everyone new to competitive play a gamemode that takes half of its gameplay from DotA by having the current userbase put themselves through the ringer.
[spoiler]If anything, I'd advocate trying out vanilla 6s or HL. Item server went down on a valve pub I was in today and everyone had to use stock - it was refreshing for me, anyway, can't say the same for the pubbers who have been playing with unlocks so long they've forgotten that stock weapons for their class of choice exist.
I promised myself I wouldn't nerd out but here I am fulfilling the prophecy[/spoiler]
Why/how is Arena: Respawn unfun? Serious question, it seemed plenty fun when i was playing it. Maybe needs some tweaks in the future.
Why/how is Arena: Respawn unfun? Serious question, it seemed plenty fun when i was playing it. Maybe needs some tweaks in the future.
RadmanWhy/how is Arena: Respawn unfun? Serious question, it seemed plenty fun when i was playing it. Maybe needs some tweaks in the future.
gimmicky as balls yo
[quote=Radman]Why/how is Arena: Respawn unfun? Serious question, it seemed plenty fun when i was playing it. Maybe needs some tweaks in the future.[/quote]
gimmicky as balls yo
Because everything is allowed, or because you can choose something different every round that the other team cant predict?
Because everything is allowed, or because you can choose something different every round that the other team cant predict?
RadmanBecause everything is allowed, or because you can choose something different every round that the other team cant predict?
because half the unlocks in the game are straight up gimmicky and stupid
[quote=Radman]Because everything is allowed, or because you can choose something different every round that the other team cant predict?[/quote]
because half the unlocks in the game are straight up gimmicky and stupid
gimmicky and stupid is a gimmicky and stupid buzzphrase imo
gimmicky and stupid is a gimmicky and stupid buzzphrase imo
its not like im lying, gimmicky is the word to describe a lot of guns in tf2
and when it comes to a comp environment, gimmicky isnt something u want, therefore its pretty stupid to include things that rely on gimmicks
it just lowers the skill needed to play the game at a high level while making it a lot less fun
its not like im lying, gimmicky is the word to describe a lot of guns in tf2
and when it comes to a comp environment, gimmicky isnt something u want, therefore its pretty stupid to include things that rely on gimmicks
it just lowers the skill needed to play the game at a high level while making it a lot less fun
like that medigun that gives 100% crits, gimmicky as shit
like that medigun that gives 100% crits, gimmicky as shit
His youtube name may be j.kenneth fraac, but his real name is truth teller
http://imgur.com/gOp5i7u.png
His youtube name may be j.kenneth fraac, but his real name is truth teller
[img]http://imgur.com/gOp5i7u.png[/img]
I think there's been too much stock put into what was said at that meeting with Robin. Even if we had a clear indication of what they wanted then, it's definitely not as applicable now over one and a half years later (over which period both the competitive scene and the game itself have changed quite a bit).
At this point, what we know about Valve's desires is speculation and/or extrapolation, and it's folly to go about trying to change how we do things based on that in the hopes of hitting some magical configuration that finally gets us non-trivial support from Valve. If they want to give us support, let them come talk to us and let us work together with them directly.
If we're going to make changes, let's make them for good reasons, like addressing the concrete issues that new players or spectators or anyone else interested have with the format. Chasing after mythical Valve support won't do us any good if we don't have any good indication as to what that entails.
I think there's been too much stock put into what was said at that meeting with Robin. Even if we had a clear indication of what they wanted then, it's definitely not as applicable now over one and a half years later (over which period both the competitive scene and the game itself have changed quite a bit).
At this point, what we know about Valve's desires is speculation and/or extrapolation, and it's folly to go about trying to change how we do things based on that in the hopes of hitting some magical configuration that finally gets us non-trivial support from Valve. If they want to give us support, let them come talk to us and let us work together with them directly.
If we're going to make changes, let's make them for good reasons, like addressing the concrete issues that new players or spectators or anyone else interested have with the format. Chasing after mythical Valve support won't do us any good if we don't have any good indication as to what that entails.
Bastid:
bastidKevinIsPwnDid you hear yourself say that? There is no downside to running GRU on heavy over stock. You run with it during rollout and don't switch when you're at mid and you get to mid with your team for no downsides. Which makes it OP.
It's overpowered compared to the underpowered existing options (minus FOS I guess). By itself it's fine, Heavies don't make big impacts at mid anyway, any good team can focus fire them down, as has been demonstrated in the recent showmatches.
Nonono, it's a straight upgrade from stock in any form of competitive. As a heavy in 6s, you will never pull out your melee, meaning you'll never deal with any of the negatives of GRU, meaning it's a straight upgrade.
bastidAlso isn't Escape Plan the same thing?
That's a bit of a streth imo. Soldiers much more regularly use their melee, so the downsides are more apparent. Also, soldiers would get to mid just as fast without the upgrade, maybe with a bit lower health. Midfights aside, you can't use escape plan to get to transition fights after respawn without a risk of dying, but GRU is pretty safe. I just listed the easiest to visualize issue with GRU, and the one extine mentioned in the vlog.
bastidKevinIsPwnWHY WOULD YOU WANT THAT? There are people that have devoted 1000s of hours to this game why the FUCK would you want random shitters to replace them? I'm sure your youtube audience loves to hear that, but like... that just sounds like a really stupid idea. You can do the local thing with good players...
Random shitters = new players???
I'm all about bringing new players into the game. I coach/admin newbie mixes, I talk to people about competitive (6v6, hl, and even 4v4), I try my best to promote people to try competitive with my tournaments, etc. But in terms of spectating, yes that's exactly what I'm saying. If you've ever watched a UGC 6v6 cast or low level UGC HL cast you'd understand.
bastidKevinIsPwnBecause that version of tf2 is the one we can play 5 nights a week 3 hours a night without having fucking aneurysms and killing ourselves.
This must mean 6s is an anti-competitive hugbox :)
I can't tell if this is a troll or not because that's really not a reasonable thing to say but neither are the other things in your post.
--------
Extine:
eXtineKevinIsPwn ... any competitive format that plays with the "meta" (see: random silliness and stupidity) will be taken seriously by no one, valve included.
Valve eXplicitly told me they'd like to see a competitive format more in tune with their meta.
They said that years ago why are you all of a sudden trying so hard to change it now rather than then? Also I feel like changing from something we (most of us) all love to something we're (most of us) all skeptical of isn't the best of ideas.
eXtineKevinIsPwnit's not a competitive form of tf2
We take 5 people we put them up against 5 people. How is that not a competition? You're welcome to the opinion that 6s is MORE competitve, but A:R is definitely a competitive format.
What I meant by saying that is that it's not a format that has been played competitively at a high level (and never will be with your/PBL's current plan).
eXtineKevinIsPwnThere's no reason you have to switch the entire structure of competitive tf2 so you can have your 20-person burnsider lan.
That's pretty much what I was trying to say with my Vlog and dispel the idea that I'm trying to force everyone to adopt A:R over 6s. I'm hoping we can build up passion for TF2 and establish local groups through A:R, I'm not trying to dictate how you should play the game.
That's not at all what the vlog came off as. Regardless of your intent (which a very small fraction of your youtube audience will see), the vlog came off as a "we need to do this as a community together" type thing. The fact that you tell users actively that you think UGC 6s is something they should support shows just how disconnected you are from the community you claim to represent.
At this point it honestly (and this might seem harsh) seems like you're desperately clinging to the notion that this will work out in a way that Valve accepts it and it becomes big and you're able to make this league a big thing that you're able to work with full time. And to claim this last bit of hope you have to make tf2 a "real esport" or whatever you're willing to destroy what this fantastic community has built up over the past 6 years.
And you can say "you do your thing" all you want to save face on the forums that a few hundred people read but that means literally nothing when you just made a vlog for your 100,000+ youtube subscribers denouncing 6v6 and supporting a new, unproven format in a foreign game mode.
I'm really appreciative of all you've done for this community. You (along with Salamancer) were one of the driving recruiters for competitive back when I started playing, and you convinced me to hop on a 6s team in late 2012. But sometimes it's good to know when your goals are fogging up your view of the present and tampering with your ability to see a reasonable future ahead, especially when your view has so much influence on the view of others.
Bastid:
[quote=bastid][quote=KevinIsPwn]Did you hear yourself say that? There is no downside to running GRU on heavy over stock. You run with it during rollout and don't switch when you're at mid and you get to mid with your team for no downsides. Which makes it OP.[/quote]
It's overpowered compared to the underpowered existing options (minus FOS I guess). By itself it's fine, Heavies don't make big impacts at mid anyway, any good team can focus fire them down, as has been demonstrated in the recent showmatches.[/quote]
Nonono, it's a straight upgrade from stock in any form of competitive. As a heavy in 6s, you will never pull out your melee, meaning you'll never deal with any of the negatives of GRU, meaning it's a straight upgrade.
[quote=bastid]Also isn't Escape Plan the same thing?[/quote]
That's a bit of a streth imo. Soldiers much more regularly use their melee, so the downsides are more apparent. Also, soldiers would get to mid just as fast without the upgrade, maybe with a bit lower health. Midfights aside, you can't use escape plan to get to transition fights after respawn without a risk of dying, but GRU is pretty safe. I just listed the easiest to visualize issue with GRU, and the one extine mentioned in the vlog.
[quote=bastid][quote=KevinIsPwn][b]WHY WOULD YOU WANT THAT?[/b] There are people that have devoted 1000s of hours to this game why the FUCK would you want random shitters to replace them? I'm sure your youtube audience loves to hear that, but like... that just sounds like a really stupid idea. You can do the local thing with good players...[/quote]
Random shitters = new players???[/quote]
I'm all about bringing new players into the game. I coach/admin newbie mixes, I talk to people about competitive (6v6, hl, and even 4v4), I try my best to promote people to try competitive with my tournaments, etc. But in terms of spectating, yes that's exactly what I'm saying. If you've ever watched a UGC 6v6 cast or low level UGC HL cast you'd understand.
[quote=bastid][quote=KevinIsPwn]Because that version of tf2 is the one we can play 5 nights a week 3 hours a night without having fucking aneurysms and killing ourselves.[/quote]
This must mean 6s is an anti-competitive hugbox :)[/quote]
I can't tell if this is a troll or not because that's really not a reasonable thing to say but neither are the other things in your post.
--------
Extine:
[quote=eXtine][quote=KevinIsPwn] ... any competitive format that plays with the "meta" (see: random silliness and stupidity) will be taken seriously by no one, valve included.[/quote]
Valve eXplicitly told me they'd like to see a competitive format more in tune with their meta.[/quote]
They said that years ago why are you all of a sudden trying so hard to change it now rather than then? Also I feel like changing from something we (most of us) all love to something we're (most of us) all skeptical of isn't the best of ideas.
[quote=eXtine][quote=KevinIsPwn]it's not a competitive form of tf2[/quote]
We take 5 people we put them up against 5 people. How is that not a competition? You're welcome to the opinion that 6s is MORE competitve, but A:R is definitely a competitive format.[/quote]
What I meant by saying that is that it's not a format that has been played competitively at a high level (and never will be with your/PBL's current plan).
[quote=eXtine][quote=KevinIsPwn]There's no reason you have to switch the entire structure of competitive tf2 so you can have your 20-person burnsider lan.[/quote]
That's pretty much what I was trying to say with my Vlog and dispel the idea that I'm trying to force everyone to adopt A:R over 6s. I'm hoping we can build up passion for TF2 and establish local groups through A:R, I'm not trying to dictate how you should play the game.[/quote]
That's not at all what the vlog came off as. Regardless of your intent (which a very small fraction of your youtube audience will see), the vlog came off as a "we need to do this as a community together" type thing. The fact that you tell users actively that you think UGC 6s is something they should support shows just how disconnected you are from the community you claim to represent.
At this point it honestly (and this might seem harsh) seems like you're desperately clinging to the notion that this will work out in a way that Valve accepts it and it becomes big and you're able to make this league a big thing that you're able to work with full time. And to claim this last bit of hope you have to make tf2 a "real esport" or whatever you're willing to destroy what this fantastic community has built up over the past 6 years.
And you can say "you do your thing" all you want to save face on the forums that a few hundred people read but that means literally nothing when you just made a vlog for your 100,000+ youtube subscribers denouncing 6v6 and supporting a new, unproven format in a foreign game mode.
[b]I'm really appreciative of all you've done for this community.[/b] You (along with Salamancer) were one of the driving recruiters for competitive back when I started playing, and you convinced me to hop on a 6s team in late 2012. But sometimes it's good to know when your goals are fogging up your view of the present and tampering with your ability to see a reasonable future ahead, especially when your view has so much influence on the view of others.
I know most people have been commenting on the AR thing, the problems with 6v6 and the valve aspect of tf2, but that horse could be substituted for burger meat in European countries by now.
What might be my most controversial phrasing in the video is what I say regarding ESEA not providing enough for the community. It was a long video and I might not have phrased that particular part the best. I'd like to clarify that I appreciate everything ESEA has done for us, but it's becoming clear (even if they do move forward with their season) that we need to seriously assess our structure if TF2 is to keep growing.
It's true that ESEA has kinda screwed the pooch in a lot of ways over the last 8 years, but they are a BUSINESS. They are only interested in making money, and while I am sure they care about esports, and would like to see TF2 continue to have the support it gets out of ESEA, they are not going to do so if the profit margins aren't there.
ESEA has consistently said the same thing to us: get more teams. Could they be doing more to advertise and reach out to potential new teams? probably. But we have the most to lose by not reaching those numbers.
I said this in the last "prominent community member pontificates about the future of our game" thread, but 6v6 competitive TF2 has a marketing problem, we need a marketing solution. UGC had a TON of teams play last season (16) in 6v6, or at least that's how many are listed on the final results page. I don't know how many of those lived through the season, but there were still at least like 300 NA teams. If we got just a quarter of those teams to take a chance on ESEA, we would never be having the discussion of having to think of replacing ESEA. But we as a community have done an abysmal job of reaching out to the UGC newbros and guiding them into the higher levels of competition. Sure, many of them don't want to or cant pay, want to just have a chill time etc, but we could definitely help get some more teams in.
So what do we need to do? I propose a re-invigoration of the mentorship program. Older, experienced teams from mid-top of open to mid IM tier should adopt a new/ugc only team every season and help them get used to the flow of life in ESEA. Help them navigate practicing, teach them some strats, provide some generic mentoring and help them be lifetime members of the community.
Also, post about ESEA everywhere. Be active on the various subreddits, proselytize to your newbie friends on steam, get involved with UGC a little more and start seeing it as the breeding ground for new players that we all say it is.
More on topic: stop with the bullshit about unban this, ban that, 5v5 instead of 6v6, lets get new gametypes. Competitive TF2 is interesting, varied, strategic, fun and fast paced. Is it as varied and strategic as DOTA? Nah, but it doesn't need to be. What we need to do is stop trying to fracture the community and advertise all the things that people /do/ get when they play the game the way we play it. WE DONT FUCKING NEED VALVE SUPPORT. Robin Walker can go shove all the hats in the world up his ass sideways for all I care. We can keep this game alive and kicking all by ourselves. But all I see is apathy from the main player base about new players and new maps. Instead we want to fundamentally change the game? Change the formula that has brought all of us so much enjoyment and community over the better part of the last decade? Knock it the fuck off with this AR and other formats and lets work on making the game we actually play the best it can be.
KevinIsPoonAlso, soldiers would get to mid just as fast without the upgrade, maybe with a bit lower health.
nah, you can get both soldiers to 300 and to mid at rouuuughly the same time as with an escape plan if the rollout is properly practiced and thought about. Otherwise everything you have said is spot on. I <3 u pls marry me
I know most people have been commenting on the AR thing, the problems with 6v6 and the valve aspect of tf2, but that horse could be substituted for burger meat in European countries by now.
[quote]What might be my most controversial phrasing in the video is what I say regarding ESEA not providing enough for the community. It was a long video and I might not have phrased that particular part the best. I'd like to clarify that I appreciate everything ESEA has done for us, but it's becoming clear (even if they do move forward with their season) that we need to seriously assess our structure if TF2 is to keep growing.
[/quote]
It's true that ESEA has kinda screwed the pooch in a lot of ways over the last 8 years, but they are a BUSINESS. They are only interested in making money, and while I am sure they care about esports, and would like to see TF2 continue to have the support it gets out of ESEA, they are not going to do so if the profit margins aren't there.
ESEA has consistently said the same thing to us: get more teams. Could they be doing more to advertise and reach out to potential new teams? probably. But we have the most to lose by not reaching those numbers.
I said this in the last "prominent community member pontificates about the future of our game" thread, but 6v6 competitive TF2 has a marketing problem, we need a marketing solution. UGC had a TON of teams play last season (16) in 6v6, or at least that's how many are listed on the final results page. I don't know how many of those lived through the season, but there were still at least like 300 NA teams. If we got just a quarter of those teams to take a chance on ESEA, we would never be having the discussion of having to think of replacing ESEA. But we as a community have done an abysmal job of reaching out to the UGC newbros and guiding them into the higher levels of competition. Sure, many of them don't want to or cant pay, want to just have a chill time etc, but we could definitely help get some more teams in.
So what do we need to do? I propose a re-invigoration of the mentorship program. Older, experienced teams from mid-top of open to mid IM tier should adopt a new/ugc only team every season and help them get used to the flow of life in ESEA. Help them navigate practicing, teach them some strats, provide some generic mentoring and help them be lifetime members of the community.
Also, post about ESEA everywhere. Be active on the various subreddits, proselytize to your newbie friends on steam, get involved with UGC a little more and start seeing it as the breeding ground for new players that we all say it is.
More on topic: stop with the bullshit about unban this, ban that, 5v5 instead of 6v6, lets get new gametypes. Competitive TF2 is interesting, varied, strategic, fun and fast paced. Is it as varied and strategic as DOTA? Nah, but it doesn't need to be. What we need to do is stop trying to fracture the community and advertise all the things that people /do/ get when they play the game the way we play it. WE DONT FUCKING NEED VALVE SUPPORT. Robin Walker can go shove all the hats in the world up his ass sideways for all I care. We can keep this game alive and kicking all by ourselves. But all I see is apathy from the main player base about new players and new maps. Instead we want to fundamentally change the game? Change the formula that has brought all of us so much enjoyment and community over the better part of the last decade? Knock it the fuck off with this AR and other formats and lets work on making the game we actually play the best it can be.
[quote=KevinIsPoon]Also, soldiers would get to mid just as fast without the upgrade, maybe with a bit lower health. [/quote]
nah, you can get both soldiers to 300 and to mid at rouuuughly the same time as with an escape plan if the rollout is properly practiced and thought about. Otherwise everything you have said is spot on. I <3 u pls marry me
RadmanPeople bring up the stale meta of tf2 as a problem because they are looking towards actual successful, modern-day esports. Specifically, league of legends and dota. Even CS has a lot of variation. Valve has recently started adding a bunch of new maps and balance changes, while the CS scene has been mysteriously exploding.
You bring up what other games have done, but do you know what CS/dota/LoL have never done? Completely change the entire game mode. Yeah dota2 and csgo have major updates that change a lot WITHIN the game mode, but you will never see CS randomly go to 3v3 hostage rescue as the main ruleset.
The whole Arena/PBL thing hurts my brain. They wanted to use TF2 as their flagship game just to change it into something completely different. Why even use TF2 then? Just to split up the community more? It's going to do more harm than good no matter how much money theyre willing to throw at the game and they refuse to see it. One of the many reasons CSGO has become this big is because CS1.6/CSS/COD communties were consolidated, and PBL will accomplish the opposite.
[quote=Radman]People bring up the stale meta of tf2 as a problem because they are looking towards actual successful, modern-day esports. Specifically, league of legends and dota. Even CS has a lot of variation. Valve has recently started adding a bunch of new maps and balance changes, while the CS scene has been [i]mysteriously[/i] exploding. [/quote]
You bring up what other games have done, but do you know what CS/dota/LoL have [b]never[/b] done? Completely change the entire game mode. Yeah dota2 and csgo have major updates that change a lot WITHIN the game mode, but you will never see CS randomly go to 3v3 hostage rescue as the main ruleset.
The whole Arena/PBL thing hurts my brain. They wanted to use TF2 as their flagship game just to change it into something completely different. Why even use TF2 then? Just to split up the community more? It's going to do more harm than good no matter how much money theyre willing to throw at the game and they refuse to see it. One of the many reasons CSGO has become this big is because CS1.6/CSS/COD communties were consolidated, and PBL will accomplish the opposite.
Valve support is not going to happen unless either the DOTA or CSGO scenes has a complete collapse. As it stands now, a formal competitive TF2 will eat into both of the other games and it would negatively affect Valve's bottom line, so it's not in their interests at all to approve of any plan to formalize any variant of competitive TF2.
Valve support is not going to happen unless either the DOTA or CSGO scenes has a complete collapse. As it stands now, a formal competitive TF2 will eat into both of the other games and it would negatively affect Valve's bottom line, so it's not in their interests at all to approve of any plan to formalize any variant of competitive TF2.
LKincheloeValve support is not going to happen unless either the DOTA or CSGO scenes has a complete collapse. As it stands now, a formal competitive TF2 will eat into both of the other games and it would negatively affect Valve's bottom line, so it's not in their interests at all to approve of any plan to formalize any variant of competitive TF2.
A formal comp tf2 only eats into CSGO if it offers the same niche, when it really doesn't
I understand where from a business standpoint CSGO and TF2 can seem like they attract similar audiences, but I personally don't feel like there's a large group of players who would focus on one game over the other, and I do feel there's a large group of people who aren't that interested in CS, but could be enticed by TF2s more Quake style play or simply different style.
obv im just a fukken nerd forum poster who wants his game 2 be popular, but saying valve wont support because of some monetary reason seems dumb
conversely, saying valve wont do it due to artistic vision is perfectly fair and likely a large reason for the lack of support
[quote=LKincheloe]Valve support is not going to happen unless either the DOTA or CSGO scenes has a complete collapse. As it stands now, a formal competitive TF2 will eat into both of the other games and it would negatively affect Valve's bottom line, so it's not in their interests at all to approve of any plan to formalize any variant of competitive TF2.[/quote]
A formal comp tf2 only eats into CSGO if it offers the same niche, when it really doesn't
I understand where from a business standpoint CSGO and TF2 can seem like they attract similar audiences, but I personally don't feel like there's a large group of players who would focus on one game over the other, and I do feel there's a large group of people who aren't that interested in CS, but could be enticed by TF2s more Quake style play or simply different style.
obv im just a fukken nerd forum poster who wants his game 2 be popular, but saying valve wont support because of some monetary reason seems dumb
conversely, saying valve wont do it due to artistic vision is perfectly fair and likely a large reason for the lack of support
Oh, forgot to mention: whoever picked the name of the EU show-matches "Valve's game", that makes the whole idea sound so sarcastic and whiny.
Oh, forgot to mention: whoever picked the name of the EU show-matches "Valve's game", that makes the whole idea sound so sarcastic and whiny.
Not to mention no one on pubs plays arena.
Not to mention no one on pubs plays arena.
I'm too lazy to quote the parts of shadow puppet's thread I am responding to/adding to but read that before this
In my time in TF2 I've done 2 things. Pug and dm my ass off until I thought I was semi-presentable and then I went and found an open team. There is this weird phenomenon in our community where UGC 6s players think that open is called open, but is only there if you've progressed through the ranks of platinum and gold and proven you can play in open. No no no. You can turn 15, get your first mac book pro with 12 frames constant and you are ready to play open. The slowest way to improve in this game is to play teams as good as you. You will only ever be challenged if you play teams that will make you play your damn hardest and best to lose to them 5-4.
Idk if you guys have seen dreamboat popping up here and there in the forums but this kid is super stoked about playing open. 2 months ago? He told me he was looking for a gold team. I told him (honestly probably too harshly) that UGC will get him nowhere and he will regret playing against people that won't challenge him. 1 month ago he messaged me sad, but determined saying that his UGC friends had gotten mad at him, saying he wasn't good enough to play open and that he "was just going to fail." But dreamboat is one determined little shut and he is paid up to play open.
UGC is great. It gives players a free place to play where you can have a little fun if you only scrim once a week. But in order for this game to get real traction people we need to do what shadow puppet said and get more of these UGC players to take it to the next step, and play open.
I'm too lazy to quote the parts of shadow puppet's thread I am responding to/adding to but read that before this
In my time in TF2 I've done 2 things. Pug and dm my ass off until I thought I was semi-presentable and then I went and found an open team. There is this weird phenomenon in our community where UGC 6s players think that open is called open, but is only there if you've progressed through the ranks of platinum and gold and proven you can play in open. No no no. You can turn 15, get your first mac book pro with 12 frames constant and you are ready to play open. The slowest way to improve in this game is to play teams as good as you. You will only ever be challenged if you play teams that will make you play your damn hardest and best to lose to them 5-4.
Idk if you guys have seen dreamboat popping up here and there in the forums but this kid is super stoked about playing open. 2 months ago? He told me he was looking for a gold team. I told him (honestly probably too harshly) that UGC will get him nowhere and he will regret playing against people that won't challenge him. 1 month ago he messaged me sad, but determined saying that his UGC friends had gotten mad at him, saying he wasn't good enough to play open and that he "was just going to fail." But dreamboat is one determined little shut and he is paid up to play open.
UGC is great. It gives players a free place to play where you can have a little fun if you only scrim once a week. But in order for this game to get real traction people we need to do what shadow puppet said and get more of these UGC players to take it to the next step, and play open.
I wonder why we are still discussing over this. I think that it's pretty clear what Valve thinks of TF2 now. I do have a little hope though of Valve adding a matchmaking/ranking system in TF2, with all the leaks/codes and stuffs that we found so far, but if they don't, i would not be surprised.
I wonder why we are still discussing over this. I think that it's pretty clear what Valve thinks of TF2 now. I do have a little hope though of Valve adding a matchmaking/ranking system in TF2, with all the leaks/codes and stuffs that we found so far, but if they don't, i would not be surprised.
Knuckles_But dreamboat is one determined little shut and he is paid up to play open.
And he is going to have the fucking time of his life.
[quote=Knuckles_]But dreamboat is one determined little shut and he is paid up to play open.[/quote]
And he is going to have the fucking time of his life.
http://polls.playcomp.tf/poll/ugc-hl-season15 channnngggeesss
drshdwpuppetKnuckles_But dreamboat is one determined little shut and he is paid up to play open.
And he is going to have the fucking time of his life.
8:18 PM - Dreamboat_: how would you feel about paying for me
8:18 PM - Dreamboat_: then me paying you back
8:22 PM - THE BILLDOZER: maybe
8:22 PM - THE BILLDOZER: if i have money
[quote=drshdwpuppet][quote=Knuckles_]But dreamboat is one determined little shut and he is paid up to play open.[/quote]
And he is going to have the fucking time of his life.[/quote]
8:18 PM - Dreamboat_: how would you feel about paying for me
8:18 PM - Dreamboat_: then me paying you back
8:22 PM - THE BILLDOZER: maybe
8:22 PM - THE BILLDOZER: if i have money
KevinIsPwnNonono, it's a straight upgrade from stock in any form of competitive. As a heavy in 6s, you will never pull out your melee, meaning you'll never deal with any of the negatives of GRU, meaning it's a straight upgrade.
Yeah, and? Not like his Fists are balanced
KevinIsPwnI can't tell if this is a troll or not because that's really not a reasonable thing to say but neither are the other things in your post.
It's the truth, but since you're on the inside it's not apparent to you. I mean just by definition... the way the rules are set up it is most definitely a hugbox. Soldier gets his funstick but Heavy doesn't get his fungloves, because everyone in the hugbox plays Soldier and no one plays Heavy...see? No hurt feelings and baby gets his rattle.
And for A:R: Of course it hasn't been played competitively at a high level - It's new. Oh except for those casted matches with the high level players
[quote=KevinIsPwn]Nonono, it's a straight upgrade from stock in any form of competitive. As a heavy in 6s, you will never pull out your melee, meaning you'll never deal with any of the negatives of GRU, meaning it's a straight upgrade.[/quote]
Yeah, and? Not like his Fists are balanced
[quote=KevinIsPwn]I can't tell if this is a troll or not because that's really not a reasonable thing to say but neither are the other things in your post.[/quote]
It's the truth, but since you're on the inside it's not apparent to you. I mean just by definition... the way the rules are set up it is most definitely a hugbox. Soldier gets his funstick but Heavy doesn't get his fungloves, because everyone in the hugbox plays Soldier and no one plays Heavy...see? No hurt feelings and baby gets his rattle.
And for A:R: Of course it hasn't been played competitively at a high level - It's new. Oh except for those casted matches with the high level players
bastidKevinIsPwnNonono, it's a straight upgrade from stock in any form of competitive. As a heavy in 6s, you will never pull out your melee, meaning you'll never deal with any of the negatives of GRU, meaning it's a straight upgrade.
Yeah, and? Not like his Fists are balanced
Yes it... is. What?
bastidKevinIsPwnI can't tell if this is a troll or not because that's really not a reasonable thing to say but neither are the other things in your post.
It's the truth, but since you're on the inside it's not apparent to you.
You say that like actually playing competitive tf2 disqualifies me from having an opinion on competitive tf2, which is really really really stupid, sorry that's just the truth. Me being "on the inside" isn't like some sort of mental disease. I understand how this game works from the stance of a 6v6 player, HL gold player, and a fanatic pubber (yeah i still like pubs and unlocks a lot). Maybe I don't understand as much as some, but I know enough to call out ignorance when I see it. And calling the GRU balanced in a competitive format is stubborn and ignorant.
bastidI mean just by definition... the way the rules are set up it is most definitely a hugbox. Soldier gets his funstick but Heavy doesn't get his fungloves, because everyone in the hugbox plays Soldier and no one plays Heavy...see? No hurt feelings and baby gets his rattle.
Except I told you why one of those weapons was balanced and the other one isn't so that's a completely invalid example.
bastidAnd for A:R: Of course it hasn't been played competitively at a high level - It's new. Oh except for those casted matches with the high level players
The majority of players that played in those pugs said they were fun but that it wouldn't work out at a high level of competitive with anything on the line.
[quote=bastid][quote=KevinIsPwn]Nonono, it's a straight upgrade from stock in any form of competitive. As a heavy in 6s, you will never pull out your melee, meaning you'll never deal with any of the negatives of GRU, meaning it's a straight upgrade.[/quote]
Yeah, and? Not like his Fists are balanced[/quote]
Yes it... is. What?
[quote=bastid][quote=KevinIsPwn]I can't tell if this is a troll or not because that's really not a reasonable thing to say but neither are the other things in your post.[/quote]
It's the truth, but since you're on the inside it's not apparent to you.[/quote]
You say that like actually playing competitive tf2 disqualifies me from having an opinion on competitive tf2, which is really really really stupid, sorry that's just the truth. Me being "on the inside" isn't like some sort of mental disease. I understand how this game works from the stance of a 6v6 player, HL gold player, and a fanatic pubber (yeah i still like pubs and unlocks a lot). Maybe I don't understand as much as some, but I know enough to call out ignorance when I see it. And calling the GRU balanced in a competitive format is stubborn and ignorant.
[quote=bastid]I mean just by definition... the way the rules are set up it is most definitely a hugbox. Soldier gets his funstick but Heavy doesn't get his fungloves, because everyone in the hugbox plays Soldier and no one plays Heavy...see? No hurt feelings and baby gets his rattle.[/quote]
Except I told you why one of those weapons was balanced and the other one isn't so that's a completely invalid example.
[quote=bastid]And for A:R: Of course it hasn't been played competitively at a high level - It's new. Oh except for those casted matches with the high level players[/quote]
The majority of players that played in those pugs said they were fun but that it wouldn't work out at a high level of competitive with anything on the line.
Arena Respawn is fuckin retarded.
I've literally played tf2 pub arena servers 2 times in 6 years and I have almost 6k hours in this game. Also I've never seen a full arena server. TF2 is not an arena game.
Arena Respawn is fuckin retarded.
I've literally played tf2 pub arena servers 2 times in 6 years and I have almost 6k hours in this game. Also I've never seen a full arena server. TF2 is not an arena game.
The argument for Arena:Respawn makes less sense than the argument for 6s. At least most of the 6s maps are default maps and at least 5cp and koth are official game modes which are played on pubs semi-regularly. Hell, even some pubs I've been on have class limits, so it isn't like class limits are some foreign concept to your average pubber. Most pubbers understand that demos are extremely powerful, and I've seen plenty of pubbers complaining about certain weapons that are banned in 6s.
Arena Respawn not only includes class limits like 6s, but also adds a bunch of stupidly convoluted rules and game mechanics that are more frustrating than fun to play with. Along with that, it also utilizes a game mode which I bet 90% of the TF2 community hasn't even touched. A pubber would probably have less trouble if he was thrown into a random 6s lobby than if he was thrown into an Arena:Respawn game. Not only is full of a bunch of messy piles of random rules that seem like they were thought up by throwing darts at a dartboard full of options, but it is often even more frustrating to play than 6s. Just because the games are fast paced doesn't mean that they are fun.
Quite frankly I'm extremely disappointed that the most popular competitive TF2 Youtube channel is supporting such a bizarre game mode which feels even more pubby than most pubs, especially since the great majority of the community is against this game mode change.
The argument for Arena:Respawn makes less sense than the argument for 6s. At least most of the 6s maps are default maps and at least 5cp and koth are official game modes which are played on pubs semi-regularly. Hell, even some pubs I've been on have class limits, so it isn't like class limits are some foreign concept to your average pubber. Most pubbers understand that demos are extremely powerful, and I've seen plenty of pubbers complaining about certain weapons that are banned in 6s.
Arena Respawn not only includes class limits like 6s, but also adds a bunch of stupidly convoluted rules and game mechanics that are more frustrating than fun to play with. Along with that, it also utilizes a game mode which I bet 90% of the TF2 community hasn't even touched. A pubber would probably have less trouble if he was thrown into a random 6s lobby than if he was thrown into an Arena:Respawn game. Not only is full of a bunch of messy piles of random rules that seem like they were thought up by throwing darts at a dartboard full of options, but it is often even more frustrating to play than 6s. Just because the games are fast paced doesn't mean that they are fun.
Quite frankly I'm extremely disappointed that the most popular competitive TF2 Youtube channel is supporting such a bizarre game mode which feels even more pubby than most pubs, especially since the great majority of the community is against this game mode change.
fists are not balanced because they are underpowered. gru is fine, but it would cause people to play heavy which is degenerate gameplay in the eyes of many 6s players.
like, there's a distinction between op and not fun. i think the latter being a ban reason is fucking stupid and anti-competitive, but that's not what the thread is about, so i'll drop it.
more on topic: A:R - if people are willing to play it at a high level, it will be played at a high level. why not let it grow a bit? lots of interested players on reddit, ugc, etc.
These aren't complicated rules by any means:
Arena: Respawn is a modification of TF2's Arena gamemode developed as an alternative to sixes. Your goal is to eliminate the enemy team as quickly as possible. There are no respawn timers, but you can capture the central control point to respawn the dead members of your team.
Camping the point while you already own it will result in a minicrit debuff until you leave the capture area. The only weapon banned from play is the Vaccinator; all other weapons in the game are allowed, and players are encouraged to experiment with different loadouts and strategies.
Please, anything is going to be "frustrating and stupid!!!" because it's new and video game players think they know what other video game players find fun. Being mad or confused that eXtv is trying out something new reeks of a victim complex.
fists are not balanced because they are underpowered. gru is fine, but it would cause people to play heavy which is degenerate gameplay in the eyes of many 6s players.
like, there's a distinction between op and not fun. i think the latter being a ban reason is fucking stupid and anti-competitive, but that's not what the thread is about, so i'll drop it.
more on topic: A:R - if people are willing to play it at a high level, it will be played at a high level. why not let it grow a bit? lots of interested players on reddit, ugc, etc.
These aren't complicated rules by any means:
[quote]Arena: Respawn is a modification of TF2's Arena gamemode developed as an alternative to sixes. Your goal is to eliminate the enemy team as quickly as possible. There are no respawn timers, but you can capture the central control point to respawn the dead members of your team.
Camping the point while you already own it will result in a minicrit debuff until you leave the capture area. The only weapon banned from play is the Vaccinator; all other weapons in the game are allowed, and players are encouraged to experiment with different loadouts and strategies.[/quote]
Please, anything is going to be "frustrating and stupid!!!" because it's new and video game players think they know what other video game players find fun. Being mad or confused that eXtv is trying out something new reeks of a victim complex.