Hi all.
This thread will be used to keep people in the loop as to what is happening and provide information where possible. One of our prominent issues last year was the lack of communication, both internally and externally and as such we aim to be much more active in ensuring there are no lingering questions in the run up to the event.

LAN Staff Applications will be released as soon as possible. We will unlikely be approaching people individually as to whether or not they want to be on staff, so if you want to attend you have to fill out the form. This form will be posted here and on our Twitter (@TF2Essentials for those that aren't aware) which also will be where the vast majority of our public details will be posted so keep an eye on them.

As of right now, nothing is confirmed in that regard. The only thing that is certain is TF2's attendance at the event. That being said, if there are intercontinental teams (NA, AU, Asia) that may be interested in attending that may need some additional support to attend, contact us and we can see what we can do. Although we cannot guarantee that support can be given.

BlackoutJon is the current owner of EssentialsTF as a company since Wolf Machina has decided to move on from TF2. However, since he will not be attending the actual event, yours truly will be the acting Project Lead for i65. Specific questions should be directed to these people:

Event Management or General Queries - DrHappiness#0897 on Discord
Event Production - ArchRhythm#0001or soda#1017
Creative - soda#1017 or Teleportato#9730

Hope to see you there!

cu@

Perhaps "sculpted" may have been a poor choice of words, but there has historically been a notable shift in behavior and mentality to the way we have approached the 6s format. Whilst I will agree that the class lineup has remained generally the same (which I believe is more a consequence of the way the classes have been designed), the maps and especially the mentality when approaching the Whitelist has very much changed over time. Notably, ETF2L Season 9 to like 17-18 is a great example of a gradual flip in approaching weapon bans.

I can't speak for anyone else and this is entirely my own opinion, but, the Meta that has been formed has never aimed to be the best composition. If we aimed for what the competitive community deemed 'best' then that could be similar to what Cat Noises has run. The meta has evolved to demonstrate and reward the highest tier of play possible, allowing classes that reward individuals mechanics and deathmatching in tandem with efficient team play in a state where both individual and team play are balanced to be 'fun' to play and spectate. Whilst NR6s does allow more dynamic off-classing and weapon usage, the main thing to take away is whether or not the gameplay becomes unbalanced in one way or another.

It would not be a 'fun' way to play competitive 6s if:

• One player can carry the entire match through the mechanical ability
  
• Individual's plays are negated or not important
  
• Team dynamics are irrelevant

Current 6s has achieved this balance by careful and gradual changes of rulesets to find a method of play that rewards individuals and teamwork equally (or in a balanced way). The community isn't especially resistant to new playstyles or tactics, it's just that those tactics do not compliment the method of play that we have decided to play. Whether or not that is the right method of play, remains to be debated.

Narrowing down, particularly on community engagement and league administration. Covering everything would be out of scope, nor directly relatable to the project aims.

Hi all, I'm in a bit of a pinch and hope to get some help from you guys.

Boring stuff
To provide some context, I am a third-year University Student studying Computer Games Technology. For my final year project, I am writing a paper on Team Fortress 2's competitive scene, it's community-centric nature, and what game developers can learn from it. It is a paper written from the perspective of someone who not only analyzing the community from an academic standpoint but also as a participant within the scene. If you would like to know more, look into Participant Observation.

Since my opinion is my own, regardless of academic sourcing or discussion, I would like other peoples opinions on the community as it is right now to get a wider view on how the community feels. Outside of providing developers an insiders perspective for how a community-led esport conducts itself and what drawbacks are causes of this, I also hope that it will provide the community with a list of consequences with their current methods should people be interested in the findings.

Who I'm looking for, and what for?

• Significant Community Members - Meaning Admins, 'Pro' Players, or other people who have contributed to the scene
  
• 10-15 minute interview, unstructured (Meaning few scripted questions)
  
• Willingness to be recorded
  
• Members from NA and AU preferred although EU is more than welcome.

If you fit the bill and are interested, message me on Discord (DrHappiness#0897) or add me on Steam. DEADLINES CLOSE 18TH MARCH 11:59 GMT, I will not be accepting interviews past this point.

Also in general if you would be interested in me posting the paper here when I'm done, let me know down below. I will watch this thread over the next few days to answer any questions.

Many thanks.

https://imgur.com/a/tSi5Ttb

I didn't just sit here for 40 minutes memorizing their locations, nope.

Whilst I'm against the completely open whitelist and lack of class limits, suggesting a very limited whitelist banning only bugged weapons and potentially enforcing minor class limits. I do think that this can only be at a minimum neutral. Either:

1. It's terrible and we go back to playing the way we normally do.
   
2. It's decent and we can begin to tweak rules based on findings.

I still hold the belief that we shouldn't be catering towards a player base that isn't interested in playing competitive or hoping that bringing our ruleset closer to Matchmaking will actually constitute anything since historically this hasn't been the case. Again, at this point, why would Valve realistically invest in the scene at all? If we knew more about what feedback they do listen to and how they intend to approach their own vision in comparison with ours, then perhaps many more people would be willing to change. But since they are notoriously one-way with their communication, I believe we should just focus on making the scene as comfortable for the majority and perfect what we already have rather than aggressively changing rulesets in a vague attempt to bring us to some sort of modern relevancy.

That all aside, I do think that people should sign up to this league to make up their own opinions on it. I'm more than willing to accept my viewpoint is antiquated or misguided if evidence comes up to counter it, but until then i'm remaining skeptical.

https://imgur.com/gallery/oBH2x

I will admit that there is inherent bias on my part, but I'm in full support of these bans and think that the leagues that still use the Global Whitelist are correct in adopting it. However, I think that there should be some written guidelines as to what constitutes a ban. I do think the way that we approach bans right now is good, but it would be nice to have for players to see how Leagues come to those decisions.

also, thanks joe

Interesting. Probably not possible to run a production there, but definitely could arrange like a small tournament there. Might look into this when I have some free time.

making the next LAN i work on better than the last
graduate university with a first or 2:1 class honors
cut down my smoking to nicotine free
find the positivity in every day

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/joko29nqg6z667u/AAAn5DVKlj1RjmuzGl6Ckh0fa?dl=0

Edit: Added new frags (22 Oct)

Is the magnitude of hate directed towards Sigafoo unnecessary? Yes. But is the response from this decision unwarranted? Absolutely not.

If RGL wants productive feedback, then perhaps individuals shouldn't isolate the exact audience that RGL needs to cater towards. The decision to separate players from playing in one team because they are dominant in recent history is the antithesis of what a competitive league should stand for. One thing I should point out is that RGL is completely within their right to do this as it is their league, but that does not mean we just have to accept it and go along with the decision. Earlier in the thread, Sigafoo debunked dominant teams not separating players in professional sports, pointing out the fact that they were under the effect of a Salary Cap.

What they have apparently failed to realize in avoiding to enforce an actual Salary Cap is the actual intention of what a salary cap is supposed to do. In the current method of roster changes and a player worth in the TF2 scene, no player has an attached value and players are free to transfer between teams in regards of their localized league's rules to prevent hijacking. Because players do not have a monetary value attached to them, the idea of a salary cap does not work with the rule that RGL have put forward. The rule's goal is similar to a salary cap, which is the prevention of a dominant team to encourage more competition but fails to realize that the method put forward prevents any team from establishing themselves.

I understand that froyotech is a unique case because of their strength and dominance over the past 3 or so years if not more, with Se7en being the only team that can really challenge them. But I don't see that as an issue that requires breaking apart an established team because of that. RGL have shot themselves in the foot and have created a problem that, if they are not careful, will cause them more harm then good in the future. There are so many clauses and loopholes that would have to be addressed without the rule being seen as nothing more than an artificial handicap towards the other teams in the League. For example:

• What defines someone as the best player in their respective class? Who determines that?
  
• What about roster changes mid-season? What would happen if you don't have enough teams without more than one froyo member on each team?
  
• What would label a team in RGL only as a Super Team? Is this rule only for froyotech or is it for any team that establishes themselves as dominant? If Cat Noises win the next few seasons, would they be broken up as well?

Also I want to address some points that RGL have brought up in their updated post.

• What you believe is 'more interesting' should not be a determining factor when making decisions for your League, but rather an objective view as to whether or not the decision would be a benefit to your league, both in viewership and participation.
  
• You have established this rule only to say you will never use it again most likely, making it seem like the rule is only being made since you don't like froyotech being as strong as they are, almost like reverse favoritism.
  
• You use the latest ESEA season as an example, but forget that the teams distributed themselves naturally and through choice, not the League forcing them to do so.
  
• You acknowledge that your rule is harsh but apparently made no effort to find a rule that would encourage (not force) a competitive atmosphere or be at all compromising to the players that it would affect the most.

Finally, I wish to address the responses to criticism. Whilst I understand that some of TFTVs users can be narrowly-minded about certain topics, having been on the side that is criticised, but Sigafoo's criticisms have been nothing short of dismissive. Rather than address the issue, it seems that he has adopted the method of debating their criticisms or straight up bringing up points to delegitimize their complaints (e.g. Pointing out when dominant teams in professional sports have had salary caps when that wasn't even the point being made.).

It definitely in no way shape or form damaging to RGL's reputation when you label an entire group of people as being on the wrong side of history by linking a thread discussing toxicity and sexual harassment when the vast majority of people were against the comments made by those individuals, as well as comparing that thread to this one.

It would be in RGL's best interests to abandon the rule, acknowledge that they made a bad choice, and work with the teams, players and perhaps even other leagues as to how best you should approach the issue of dominant teams like froyotech. Because I can say with absolute sincerity that this decision will be far more damaging to your League than having froyotech win another season.

I might as well throw my hat into the mix.

No shade to anyone at Essentials, but I sort of was thrown into a situation I was neither prepared nor planned for. With Heny stepping down from regular Head Admin but saying he should be the Tournament Lead for iSeries we were planned to go ahead with Heny leading and me shadowing him, doing most of the basic admin expectations; reporting scores, resolving match disputes etc.

However, Heny stepped down from Tournament Lead as he was not able to attend, so being the only other "official" Essentials Admin, I took up the reigns that were left behind. In a small frame of time (which should have been much bigger and plans are in the works to resolve that) I had to cover all the bases that would have been done by someone far more experienced than I. I ended up getting Aoshi on board since he was keen to help again this year and he is someone that I have tremendous respect for and faith that he would help cover areas in which I was more inexperienced. However, I did not expect him to "carry" me and I needed to put as much effort into this as everyone else was. Upon retrospect, it may have been better for Aoshi to lead and me to shadow but at the time the way we were doing it seemed the most appropriate given the circumstances.

Because of the small time frame that we were given to prepare for this, certain aspects needed to be rushed. Case in point, the ruleset. The rules format was a combination of the old League of Legends iSeries ruleset and our monthly cups ruleset where all game specific rules were covered. In an ideal scenario, I would have rewritten the whole ruleset by hand, but the rules covered most of the disputes that would occur. However, at no point did I relay or go through the ruleset with my other Admin which led to decisions that were allowed by one but not by the other. Again, as Aoshi had said, we had separated into two different areas due to an oversight by the event organizers causing our communication to be quite inconsistent.

There is a lot of things that could have gone better, and I'll be the first to admit that some of it is on me. Information should have been far more transparent and easy to get than it was. I cannot speak for production, but I concur on all of DanS' points. We will be having a post-mortem on production and discussions are already happening on how Essentials will be working for the future so for next year we can have a production and event both attendees and viewers at home can be happy with. We aren't aiming to throw on a show as extravagant as i55/58, but we aim to make a production that is sustainable, yet demonstrates the best we have to offer.