Upvote Upvoted 231 Downvote Downvoted
1 2 3 4
On NATF2's Future
91
#91
-6 Frags +

can we just agree that literally everyone is shitty and will play to gay the ruleset however they can

euros think their version is better and it is better for lan so just use that one

can we just agree that literally everyone is shitty and will play to gay the ruleset however they can

euros think their version is better and it is better for lan so just use that one
92
#92
0 Frags +

But Which Gay Is Less Gay?

But Which Gay Is Less Gay?
93
#93
8 Frags +
Petecan we just agree that literally everyone is shitty and will play to gay the ruleset however they can

i feel like this is an awful mindset and you can restrict how people manipulate rules if you make the rules with gayness in mind??????

also kawa suggested shortening round reset timer and I think that's an idea that should rlly be talked about

[quote=Pete]can we just agree that literally everyone is shitty and will play to gay the ruleset however they can
[/quote]
i feel like this is an awful mindset and you can restrict how people manipulate rules if you make the rules with gayness in mind??????

also kawa suggested shortening round reset timer and I think that's an idea that should rlly be talked about
94
#94
1 Frags +

If tf2 ever got any real money in it then all these these problems would.be magnified by a thousand

If tf2 ever got any real money in it then all these these problems would.be magnified by a thousand
95
#95
-11 Frags +

I agree on almost every point except the entry level division being free. We've done this before it's never worked and never will work. Having to pay for a good league is a tough pill that this community just can't seem to swallow. A few years ago I ran the numbers and needed to be $25 per to be "safe" meaning you would be league going for at least 2 seasons. $20 dollars also worked if there was sufficient interest but you'ed be dead after season 2 if not enough teams signed up. highlander you could go a lot lower. Old data though, still think it's possible.

I agree on almost every point except the entry level division being free. We've done this before it's never worked and never will work. Having to pay for a good league is a tough pill that this community just can't seem to swallow. A few years ago I ran the numbers and needed to be $25 per to be "safe" meaning you would be league going for at least 2 seasons. $20 dollars also worked if there was sufficient interest but you'ed be dead after season 2 if not enough teams signed up. highlander you could go a lot lower. Old data though, still think it's possible.
96
#96
0 Frags +
tojoalso kawa suggested shortening round reset timer and I think that's an idea that should rlly be talked about

Might be remembering wrong, but the few invite talks I was a part of this was brought up every time and I think almost everyone was open to the idea of trying it out. Pretty sure just nobody got around to it because I don't think there is a setting in default tf2 that allows you to change it, and nobody really took initiative to getting a group of people together to test it out (probably because the invite meetings didn't happen until like a week before the season started and all the teams were busy getting ready for the upcoming season, and once it started nobody cared because they wouldn't change the format mid season).

[quote=tojo]also kawa suggested shortening round reset timer and I think that's an idea that should rlly be talked about[/quote]

Might be remembering wrong, but the few invite talks I was a part of this was brought up every time and I think almost everyone was open to the idea of trying it out. Pretty sure just nobody got around to it because I don't think there is a setting in default tf2 that allows you to change it, and nobody really took initiative to getting a group of people together to test it out (probably because the invite meetings didn't happen until like a week before the season started and all the teams were busy getting ready for the upcoming season, and once it started nobody cared because they wouldn't change the format mid season).
97
#97
16 Frags +

lowering the round reset timer will encourage teams to not push out of last or even second, unless they have a very significant number advantage because you can just wait the 2-3 minutes and get another mid fight without having to risk losing last by pushing out

lowering the round reset timer will encourage teams to not push out of last or even second, unless they have a very significant number advantage because you can just wait the 2-3 minutes and get another mid fight without having to risk losing last by pushing out
98
#98
-17 Frags +

I feel like this is all somewhat off topic but I will say this: If it were possible to try a shortened round timer it would also be good to punish the team that had the initiative advantage for playing safe and stalling out the round. So, for instance, if the round got reset and a new midfight was about to happen then the team that held more control points before the time-out can't move in spawn for an additional, say, 2 seconds upon round reset.

I feel like this is all somewhat off topic but I will say this: If it were possible to try a shortened round timer it would also be good to punish the team that had the initiative advantage for playing safe and stalling out the round. So, for instance, if the round got reset and a new midfight was about to happen then the team that held more control points before the time-out can't move in spawn for an additional, say, 2 seconds upon round reset.
99
#99
18 Frags +
JaguarFiendI feel like this is all somewhat off topic but I will say this: If it were possible to try a shortened round timer it would also be good to punish the team that had the initiative advantage for playing safe and stalling out the round. So, for instance, if the round got reset and a new midfight was about to happen then the team that held more control points before the time-out can't move in spawn for an additional, say, 2 seconds upon round reset.

no offense but this is one of the worst ideas ive ever read on this site

[quote=JaguarFiend]I feel like this is all somewhat off topic but I will say this: If it were possible to try a shortened round timer it would also be good to punish the team that had the initiative advantage for playing safe and stalling out the round. So, for instance, if the round got reset and a new midfight was about to happen then the team that held more control points before the time-out can't move in spawn for an additional, say, 2 seconds upon round reset.[/quote]
no offense but this is one of the worst ideas ive ever read on this site
100
#100
7 Frags +
Air_lowering the round reset timer will encourage teams to not push out of last or even second, unless they have a very significant number advantage because you can just wait the 2-3 minutes and get another mid fight without having to risk losing last by pushing out

In which case the team that is not parking the push would do a full commitment push, as the timer will reset if they fail that push anyway, so you lose nothing from trying. Might be better than both teams just waiting for the other team to make a mistake.

[quote=Air_]lowering the round reset timer will encourage teams to not push out of last or even second, unless they have a very significant number advantage because you can just wait the 2-3 minutes and get another mid fight without having to risk losing last by pushing out[/quote]

In which case the team that is not parking the push would do a full commitment push, as the timer will reset if they fail that push anyway, so you lose nothing from trying. Might be better than both teams just waiting for the other team to make a mistake.
101
#101
-7 Frags +

Would you mind explaining exactly what is bad about the idea? Let me spell it out just in case. The team that had the initiative would have a disadvantage in the in the next midfight if they chose to not take any risks. It doesn't have to be 2 seconds that was just some random shit I made up on the spot. But basically they would likely swap positions and give the other team the initiative. Does that not make sense?

Would you mind explaining exactly what is bad about the idea? Let me spell it out just in case. The team that had the initiative would have a disadvantage in the in the next midfight if they chose to not take any risks. It doesn't have to be 2 seconds that was just some random shit I made up on the spot. But basically they would likely swap positions and give the other team the initiative. Does that not make sense?
102
#102
6 Frags +

If the round goes to time whichever team didn't have mid starts the round in forward spawns lmao

If the round goes to time whichever team didn't have mid starts the round in forward spawns lmao
103
#103
0 Frags +

Ok well it's possible to come up with other ways to (more)slightly disadvantage the team that had mid and decided to waste time if you think that one is too harsh. In any case I think a positional advantage swap is fair here. If the team that had mid would sooner try more bold actions, since they are likely to fail, that would just mean more of the disadvantaged team retaking ground and changing up the situation.

Ok well it's possible to come up with other ways to (more)slightly disadvantage the team that had mid and decided to waste time if you think that one is too harsh. In any case I think a positional advantage swap is fair here. If the team that had mid would sooner try more bold actions, since they are likely to fail, that would just mean more of the disadvantaged team retaking ground and changing up the situation.
104
#104
15 Frags +

how about when the round timer runs out, fireballs start raining from the sky and Merasmus spawns on the mid point and whoever traverses the Hell World and captures his spellbook then takes control of him until the next point is captured

how about when the round timer runs out, fireballs start raining from the sky and Merasmus spawns on the mid point and whoever traverses the Hell World and captures his spellbook then takes control of him until the next point is captured
105
#105
13 Frags +

Higher time limit -> teams will park the bus because they don't have to push.
Lower time limit -> teams will park the bus because they can wait for the time to run out.

Now some have concluded that this means any deviation from <current time limit of their choice> will result in an immediate and irreversible public transport apocalypse where busses rule the world and everyone is too afraid to even leave spawn.
Others might say that apparently the team that is ahead can and will park the bus regardless of the time limit if that's what they want to do.

Higher time limit -> teams will park the bus because they don't have to push.
Lower time limit -> teams will park the bus because they can wait for the time to run out.

Now some have concluded that this means any deviation from <current time limit of their choice> will result in an immediate and irreversible public transport apocalypse where busses rule the world and everyone is too afraid to even leave spawn.
Others might say that apparently the team that is ahead can and will park the bus regardless of the time limit if that's what they want to do.
106
#106
-4 Frags +

more parking the bus = more opportunities for offensive offclasses = no reason for prolander to exist anymore = death of rgl
?

more parking the bus = more opportunities for offensive offclasses = no reason for prolander to exist anymore = death of rgl
?
107
#107
12 Frags +
SetsulHigher time limit -> teams will park the bus because they don't have to push.
Lower time limit -> teams will park the bus because they can wait for the time to run out.

Now some have concluded that this means any deviation from <current time limit of their choice> will result in an immediate and irreversible public transport apocalypse where busses rule the world and everyone is too afraid to even leave spawn.
Others might say that apparently the team that is ahead can and will park the bus regardless of the time limit if that's what they want to do.

in the current NA system teams are more than capable of parking the bus, but theres so much time that if you do want to park the bus you're gonna have to wait a LONG time. everytime that i'm up in a game now, if theres less than 20 minutes left in the second half then i'm more than fine to park the bus for that whole 20 minutes, but that rarely ever happens.

IMO the real advantage in stalemating out isn't that you're going to win off time, its that it puts incredible amounts of pressure on the other team. it forces them to try things that they wouldn't otherwise, and they have to take risks. the higher skill level you get, the easier it is to punish teams trying to take these risks.

when you lower the round timer, teams don't feel that pressure as strongly. if you want to wait the current 10 minutes for a round reset, you're going to have to endure 10 minutes of whatever low % plays and nonsense each team goes for, and if you run a sniper for 10 minutes no matter how bad they are eventually they'll headshot something. If you kill a demoman defending last and you're down and theres 6 minutes left in the round timer, you'll be pretty willing to push out. If the same thing happens and you're defending last, when you headshot the other teams demo and theres only 1 minute left in the round timer, why risk pushing out? in 1 minute the round resets and you basically get to push out of last and second for free and get another mid fight

i don't think that any of the parking the bus problems are actual problems until you get into invite games where people care about winning more than the fun they're having, i don't think any open/most IM teams will be regularly parking the bus if we go to etf2l's ruleset, unless theres a few minutes left. No matter what ruleset we play, if there are sub 5 minutes left in the game and you're up rounds theres almost no reason to not slow the game down and force the other team to try and make things happen. this is just a fault with tf2, and i don't think theres any easy way to remedy it.

[quote=Setsul]Higher time limit -> teams will park the bus because they don't have to push.
Lower time limit -> teams will park the bus because they can wait for the time to run out.

Now some have concluded that this means any deviation from <current time limit of their choice> will result in an immediate and irreversible public transport apocalypse where busses rule the world and everyone is too afraid to even leave spawn.
Others might say that apparently the team that is ahead can and will park the bus regardless of the time limit if that's what they want to do.[/quote]

in the current NA system teams are more than capable of parking the bus, but theres so much time that if you do want to park the bus you're gonna have to wait a LONG time. everytime that i'm up in a game now, if theres less than 20 minutes left in the second half then i'm more than fine to park the bus for that whole 20 minutes, but that rarely ever happens.

IMO the real advantage in stalemating out isn't that you're going to win off time, its that it puts incredible amounts of pressure on the other team. it forces them to try things that they wouldn't otherwise, and they have to take risks. the higher skill level you get, the easier it is to punish teams trying to take these risks.

when you lower the round timer, teams don't feel that pressure as strongly. if you want to wait the current 10 minutes for a round reset, you're going to have to endure 10 minutes of whatever low % plays and nonsense each team goes for, and if you run a sniper for 10 minutes no matter how bad they are eventually they'll headshot something. If you kill a demoman defending last and you're down and theres 6 minutes left in the round timer, you'll be pretty willing to push out. If the same thing happens and you're defending last, when you headshot the other teams demo and theres only 1 minute left in the round timer, why risk pushing out? in 1 minute the round resets and you basically get to push out of last and second for free and get another mid fight

i don't think that any of the parking the bus problems are actual problems until you get into invite games where people care about winning more than the fun they're having, i don't think any open/most IM teams will be regularly parking the bus if we go to etf2l's ruleset, unless theres a few minutes left. No matter what ruleset we play, if there are sub 5 minutes left in the game and you're up rounds theres almost no reason to not slow the game down and force the other team to try and make things happen. this is just a fault with tf2, and i don't think theres any easy way to remedy it.
108
#108
5 Frags +

I think the main issue is not that one team can park the bus, but that not pushing is better than pushing for both teams (in terms of risk/reward) so you have a bad equilibrium where nobody wants to do anything.

Fiddling with the timers is the simplest way to upset that equilibrium by either increasing the risk of not pushing or decreasing the reward for not pushing. It may be that the other team has even more of an incentive not to push as a result of the change, but the point is that at least one of the teams should always have a clear incentive to push.

The two extremes are a) having no round timer and a short match timer, so that the team that's down rounds has an incentive to push because otherwise they'll lose the match, and b) having a short round timer and no match timer, so that the team with the advantage has an incentive to push quickly because there's no timer to run down and not pushing means they lose their advantage. The former is akin to soccer, while the latter is akin to a shot clock.

Of course, it may be the case that no amount of tweaking of anything is sufficient to decisively tip one team towards pushing at all times, but if that's the case then it's a fundamental flaw in 5CP that no ruleset can fix, so picking a ruleset comes more down to personal preference. We can't really know for sure either way without seriously testing at least some of the ideas discussed previously in this thread.

I think the main issue is not that one team can park the bus, but that not pushing is better than pushing for both teams (in terms of risk/reward) so you have a bad equilibrium where nobody wants to do anything.

Fiddling with the timers is the simplest way to upset that equilibrium by either increasing the risk of not pushing or decreasing the reward for not pushing. It may be that the other team has even more of an incentive not to push as a result of the change, but the point is that at least one of the teams should always have a clear incentive to push.

The two extremes are a) having no round timer and a short match timer, so that the team that's down rounds has an incentive to push because otherwise they'll lose the match, and b) having a short round timer and no match timer, so that the team with the advantage has an incentive to push quickly because there's no timer to run down and not pushing means they lose their advantage. The former is akin to soccer, while the latter is akin to a shot clock.

Of course, it may be the case that no amount of tweaking of anything is sufficient to decisively tip one team towards pushing at all times, but if that's the case then it's a fundamental flaw in 5CP that no ruleset can fix, so picking a ruleset comes more down to personal preference. We can't really know for sure either way without seriously testing at least some of the ideas discussed previously in this thread.
1 2 3 4
Please sign in through STEAM to post a comment.