ok

why did you post this

http://i.imgur.com/Ot82tho.png

help

http://puu.sh/qLZL4/c29ff6510e.png

wtf when people argue against class limits and then proceed to go "well i've never seen anybody actually abusing them" ?????????????????????? im so confused then again it's my fault for reading youtube comments

I don't see anything wrong, uncle Dane himself has accepted 6v6 as the official competitive mode and he himself want's tf2 to become a larger e-sports.

ankle dain iz vur-e gud publzity man

I completely agree with him on the class limit of 1.
Definitely going to make players more consious of the fact that which class they pick matters and can definitely build the 'competitive spirit' of the mode.

or valve could just use the class limit structure that we as a community have developed after 7 years of playing their game competitively

people supporting prolander

https://static-cdn.jtvnw.net/emoticons/v1/58765/2.0

hey, atleast they aren't talking about Highlander, it's a step that hopefully will soon get them into the current 6v6 we have

i'll take prolander over highlander or 0-class-limits any day

it's a step in the right direction

Honestly I support most of what Dane says (not all) I think we need more people like this who are invested in the pub and competitive community. Yes Dane may not be one hundred percent correct but compared to muselk or scottjaw it is gold.

0 class limits > prolander

do you really want to play against a perma sniper and heavy

Muselk was the only tf2 "celebrity" who was correct about the mym update. Everyone else said it was going to be great. He said he didn't trust valve to do it right. Granted with slin and b4nny lying and saying it was going to be an amazing update because valve supposedly showed them it beforehand it was a risky position to take. But he still was right.

Okay I dont play engineer or pubs for that matter but using rescue ranger and rocketjumping on the last point to put that sneaky sentry was impressive as fuck. I rarely see any innovation in pubs.

https://65.media.tumblr.com/4d812160a7d18816ca9d1c5d6d55ef7a/tumblr_inline_n1y3a5r0PF1stijz9.jpg

Not starting a thing, but Scott was recently involved in a 6v6 video supporting comp and additionally helped work on Masters of Classes. He may not play competitively but he openly supports the scene.

I made a mistake in looking at the comments

playing against a perma sniper/heavy > playing against 5 heavies and a med or pushing last against 5 lv3s ,

I don't see any good reasons to use that.
I mean do things become unbalanced if instead of 2 scouts, 2 soldiers and 2 spies we have 1 scout, 1 soldier and 1 spy?
Please explain to me, won't something like this end up in the classic 6v6 lineup being the meta with classes like engineer and pyro barely seeing enough playtime?

Also, the class limit structure that we as a community have developed after 7 years is a structure that when you break it down, the Scout is the strongest class on your team and if you want more people to join competitive then you have to be open minded about what can attract more people to it without making pyro or any other class underused.

Why force classes that are inferior in general to be played full time? Teams will just end up playing around their demo/sniper, it'll make the game less interesting and less fast-paced. That's what the current meta is about.

I haven't played prolander, why is it not good exactly? Sounds really good in theory, more switching classes to adapt to the situation, more variety of plays, more interesting game, or?

Swapping to what? You have
1 medic
1 demo
1 scout
1 heavy
1 sniper
1 soldier

Why would you run spy, pyro, engineer?

Might be that spy is better then soldier or heavy or sniper or something, but once we figure out what the best classes are theres NO point to change class, because offclass is for picks usually, and you already have a sniper or something.

The problem is, it just limits your class comps by not allowing the 2 stacks. It also encourages running a perma-sniper and heavy to fill the the other spots. Heavy and sniper naturally slow the game, so the game stalemates even more than traditional 6s.

We have the class structure that has become the standard after all these years not for balance reasons, but because it leads to the most competitive, skill-based, and interesting to watch version of 6v6 tf2. I mean, if each team was 3 medics and 3 demos, it would be perfectly balanced. It would also be boring as fuck to watch and play.

If the classes themselves were evenly balanced and skill indexed, then a class limit of 1 would be great, and would lead to lots of interesting variety. As it stands, however, there are objectively optimal builds to achieve certain goals, and if we want to have anything but a terrible game, then we have an obligation to create class limits and weapon banlists, or else degenerate strategies will become the only way to win the game.

Aren't some classes better situationally though? And wouldn't for example a sniper shut down a heavy all the time, so a spy instead would work to counter the sniper, etc.?

so you have a core 4 classes then the offclasses just play rock paper scissors against each other? nice

It's a reasonable thought, it sounds intuitive at first, but it comes down to two simple questions:
With scouts and soldiers limited to 1 per team, will 6v6 TF2 be more fun to play, and more fun to watch?

The answer is simply no: Soldiers and scouts are capable of dynamic aggression and fast plays, while the alternative classes that would take those two slots in the team excel in denying aggression. The end result is slower, more passive, less skillful, less dynamic, and, as a result, less fun to play and to watch.