The whole point of this pick/ban item list thing is so Valve knows which weapons to change. If it isn't tweaked yet, it'll still be banned by said HL lobby system. Valve will retweak it to within their best interest. We should leave Valve to be making those balancing specifics rather than try to do it ourselves. We should judge unlocks on this pick/ban list with regards to competitive.

420! is 1.1798323952931782591485877784439827674239081636 × 10^921
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=420%21

Funny though, because that's also the same attitude that most casual TF2 players think about competitive TF2. We need those guys on board for growth.

We can't use highlander for LAN's, it's just not possible. If we wish to attend offline events, we will need to have a 6vs6 or even a 5vs5 setup, so even though this whole thread could be biased towards highlander, it's the 6vs6 community that is going to need to jump on the train with this.

If we want Valve to support this 6vs6 setup, we are going to need to make them some money. If we want public players to start playing our competitive setup, we are going to need to get them interested in doing so. Valve sell items, and public players love items. It's a no-brainer that we need to get them into the game somehow. How we do it without destroying the competitive side of TF2? Well this whole picks and bans system means that anything that is literally destructive to the competitive game, we are able to ban out. Consistent bans will give Valve feedback, and Valve have just stated that they are willing to actively work with us on this.

Of course, it's going to mean compromise, it's going to mean changes in strategies, it's going to throw a large portion of the meta game out the window. It's going to be hella frustrating at first.

It means we would need teams to use and abuse every item in the game. I want to see HRG come out with some Quickfix-deadringer strat and destroy their opponents. This would be competitive TF2 on crack and I think we are at the stage where we could handle it, but the lazy people and teams are going to be left behind while their opponents come out with some crazy effective strategies.

#440 Don't confuse skill with performance. When you give a person a harder task than he is accustomed to, you have increased the difficulty but his skill is the same (assuming you didn't give him time to train). The combination of same skill, increased difficulty leads to reduced performance levels. Hence, highlander coordination tends to be shakier compared to 6v6. The skill ceiling meanwhile has been raised because the gap between high skill teams and average skill ones can now be even bigger in highlander than in 6's, assuming highly coordinated teams exist.

I do not think coordinating 9 people is such an insurmountable task. Combined military operations in the real world regularly involve more than 9 commandos. The difference is TF2 is a video game, whereas military or special forces training is serious business. The point is that higher levels of coordination and teamwork are possible in 9v9, even if nobody bothers to put enough time and effort in to achieve it (due to the increased difficulty).

Why don't they just make it so when you start a lobby you can select the number of each class you'd like to allow in your game and have it defaulted to 1 playe ron each class so highlander is easy to start and 6v6 would take nothing more than selecting 2 on scout and soldier, 1 on demo and medic, and 0 on everything else? Would easily allow for 6v6 without directly supporting it...

Also if its all the same to everyone else it'd be nice if format-bashing was left out of the thread.

OK, fair enough. I'm not arguing that nothing should ever change. I guess I am arguing that after looking at the unlocks Valve has put out I am not sure I trust them to understand how new unlocks are going to affect the game, 6s or otherwise. And I'm not sure any format of the game people played seriously would benefit by being totally disrupted by a new game-changing unlock every few months.

Holy shit. That's a fricking genius idea. It's really good imo, valve should do exactly this.

Honestly, just because Valve is intent on 9 classes doesn't mean there is no opportunity for 6's now. The stuff this community has done without Valve's help is impressive, who knows, there might be 6's mode later on. And even if not, people could still utilize resources for custom modes. No one is really suffering from this move.

Simply

I like the idea, and I'd like to see availability for customization so we can keep the old stuff or use the new meta depending on preference. Although, I feel like that would split the community, which I dont like. So I'm kind of 50/50. Definitely gonna try it though.

Noise to signal ratio is rising.

Creating games is easier than organizing and finding them. A system like the one you describe could support a combinatorial explosion of possible formats. Valve would have to restrict it somewhere and the first post states clearly that they plan on cutting that restriction off at 9v9 being the only format. From a technical standpoint, adding a 6v6 lobby would not seem to very difficult. Maybe I'm reading the first post incorrectly but my feeling is the opposition is more philosophical - they simply don't want to spend resources on it at this point in time.

OK. So you think a Scout should be able to Bonk through them, and that Ruwin is arguing the same? Or the other way around? If the first, do you think fixing that aspect of chokes is worth everything else Bonk does?

Agree completely. It's so simple and flexible. This really is a great idea.

The HL lobby system will be a place for pubbers to play with a different rule set. The restriction of one player per class will spark interest in people that are fed up of the 4 sniper 3 spy setups that are too often found in pubs. Players will develop their HL skills in the same way that they developed their pubbing skills - that is what will grow comp TF2. It wouldn't work if they join a lobby where other players are used to the roles of HL and new players feel like an anchor to the team. It will start with people playing without much coordination, but as they play more, and actively try to improve, they will look to understand class roles and develop the skills that competitive players have that pubbers don't. This will no doubt increase the number of HL players, and with the ever-growing coverage of 6s, it is highly likely that 6s community will grow as well.

EDIT: This was my comment on eXtine's most recent Yao vlog and I thought it was relevant here

Something strikes me about the idea of trashing the current banlist and starting afresh. If people played a decent amount of games in the system and rated the effectiveness of each weapon as they see it used, it would become apparent pretty quickly what weapons are over-effective or under-effective.

Heck, I'd be willing to design such a system if it would be used and not ignored by the competitive community at large because of the disrupted metagame.

This sounds like good news. However, I do not think new competitive players will grow on their own if we just throw them in lobbies where everyone is new. It's probably just going to end up being a 9v9 pub with class limits. Maybe if we implanted a "Lobby Coaching System", basically people with competitive experience mentoring the new players, they could learn a lot and eventually join leagues like UGC, CEVO or even ESEA. But if Valve just throws pubbers in lobbies without any help/coaching, it's going to end up being a skial server with class limits.

I assume there will be some tier matchmaking system so that you aren't matched with people far from your skill level.

#464

That was my initial point. Luckily for the 6's scene (and likely due to HL players being themselves half 6v6 players/players who come to respect certain skills) 6v6 is sometimes held up as holier than thou, and while this hurts with respects to how pub players view us, it seems to help with how dedicated HL players view the scene. Meaning, many (thought not all) see 6v6 as the next rung on the ladder.

Since HL will basically be legitimized this should start that "trickle-up" process of incoming players: Pub to pub star, to Highlander system, to Highlander league, to Highlander star, to 6v6. This is what we should be excited about, and we likely have to do jack all to our rule-set to attain this. Being smarter with unlocks would be wise and probably quicken the process, but for now this is really just a HL thing.

So in that regard (and what people seem to have been getting at among the noise)it seems sort of simple...

1) Start with the UGC whitelist, focus first on all weapons currently banned and let players start to pick/ban those items in pugs. When people consistently ban the ones universally disliked (should be all of the already banned HL ones) those will be the first on the fixing table at valve.

2) Then talk to experienced HL players about weapons that are annoying/could possible be bannable and begin the process again for round 2.

3) Keep going

There should be a bottom up approach. Begin on equal footing where everyone can agree X weapon should be banned, then start to get into the muddier waters.

I'm not talking about the skill level. How can people that come from pub and play against pub players learn everything on their own? I'm talking about an help system with higher level players coaching lower level players (for instance, pub players).

the so-called 'data' can be a bit biased because when people play against weapons they just don't like they don't try as hard to think of creative ways to counter it, especially when they can just moan and get it banned. a lot of tf2 weapons are currently situation based. if most unlocks are made available then i'm sure we'll see much more off-classing, mind games and creative strats. It gives the team which is quickly adaptable an advantage as opposed to the one which runs and practices the same strats over and over again. in other words rewarding creativity over perfection.

Wait, what if we give each player a pick or a ban of a weapon in their class?

Don't allow bans until you've both played with them or against them for a certain number of games? I.E, you aren't allowed to ban the pomson until you've played against people using it at least 5 times.

If you ban wrangler then HL wont be a challenge anymore just a competition who can run the fastest

1) Start with the UGC whitelist, focus first on all weapons currently banned and let players start to pick/ban those items in pugs. When people consistently ban the ones universally disliked (should be all of the already banned HL ones) those will be the first on the fixing table at valve.

2) Then talk to experienced HL players about weapons that are annoying/could possible be bannable and begin the process again for round 2.

3) Keep going - bloodsire

I like this idea, as for how to carry it out, this becomes more complicated.
-First as tf2 is a free to play game, and if Valve is planing on making tf2 a competitive game, with a community, the default weapons should all be allowed in all forms of game play. So that any new player who plays or watches tf2 will have access to weapons that they see being used. Not to mention how confusing tf2 would become to new competitive players if the set of weapons they had available was never consistent. Allowing for all stock weapons would give a base line, for each class.

-Second, to address the issues the Robin mentioned in that tf2 does not have enough variety in game play; All, yes all, non-stock weapon should be [ maybe] allowed to be picked in pug games. ( should go without saying that while players as a community have already found the set of weapons they are content to ban, and thoughs to allow - but Valve as a company needs a more reliable system, which gives information, not opinion, to them.) Moreover, they need a system which always gives information, by having a pick-ban system, they would be able to continually gather data on what is being ban, and [maybe] see what unlocks when used give an unfair advantage. Also, relying on players for feedback on unlocks and the such is [ retarded ] not a sound system. As players will ALWAYS disagree on what should and should not be allowed.

-Next, we would see this system begin to work. Yes this would mean that you would see weapons used that you do not like; and yes this would mean that some times you cannot play with a weapon you are use to - But over time this system would likely begin to weed out broken weapons. And realistically, some thing like this must be done if tf2 is ever to become a true competitive game. And this would allow Valve a way to see how weapon effect game play in a competitive manner, while also allowing some consistency with pub players, as all there weaponry is potentially allowed. [ Also the white list, the always allowed to be used list could potentially grow over time (as well as shrink) ]

-Lastly, as for what the pick-pan system would actually be. This is open to a lot of debate. As for my two cents - Each class, should be able to ban [ any amount really ] one weapons from each slot, and these bans, would effect that class for BOTH teams. For example: red medic bans - bluteslauger, quick, amputator / blu medic bans - overdose, vacinator, amputator. This would mean that BOTH medics cannot use the bluteslauger, quickfix, vacinator, or amputator.
as for the amount that each slot, and for each class, that should be flexible, and change if need is scene to change.

And finally. This would be a HL pug system. this would not change ESEA bans, This would not change UGC bans, in fact the current competitive scene would not be changed. This would only create a Scene for new competitive players, that is not so threatening. This should be scene as the start of a trickle up, a foundation for a competitive scene. If this is effective, more players would watch competitive games, and want to get better in tf2, and more involved. Not to mention the whole part about Valve being a company . . Simply saying 'play 6's" to new players is not a solution, we need to create a way for new players to enjoy the game as much as we do.

lastly, forgive my grammar and spelling, i do not proof read, and i select the first auto correct option every time with out looking, i hope you enjoyed your read.

bingo

Hmm, but then you should limit the options to 6v6 settings or 9v9 settings. Or you're going to get people selecting 3 pyros and 0 soldiers for example, and get all sorts of impossible formats where people can't find opponents and stick to the public servers.

You could set up an indicator of how many people are looking for the same class restrictions and maybe even have a list of the most played formats (in which 6v6 and 9v9 with their respective restrictions will most likely show up and maybe even a crazy new meta).

mabey when creating the lobby have a dropdown list with options "Highlander" and "Custom" and only have class limits shown when custom is selected. In the lobby browser have lobby searches defaulted to search only for highlander matches, and have feedback from item bans only delivered from those matches.

this way the addition of extra functionality (which from a coding standpoint doesnt sound like much extra work) to satisfy the 6s community really seems like a win for everyone

I understand this doesnt help getting new unlocks to work in 6s because they arent receiving feedback on what works best in the format but Highlander is similar to 6s in alot of ways and if the system is a success, items will change in the favor of competitive and if the 6s community is willing to be flexible you guys can still get something out of it

just because they arent catering directly to the format doesnt mean that people need to be as dramatic as the wholey ungrateful people posting stuff like

and getting +39 frags

i'm not sure how much we know about this, but how would the picking aspect work?

something that's always put me off of highlander is the sheer amount of unlocks anyone could switch to making it so you're never really sure what you're playing against; would it be something that'd narrow it down eg stock + x chosen unlocks for each class?