While I wouldn't go out of my way to bash HL - different strokes for different folks and all - the idea of playing against gimmicks like backstabs, cloaking, consistent one-shot bodyshots/headshots, air-blasts, aimbots, aimbots with shields, mini aimbots, and 450hp heavies that are ALWAYS on the field makes HL easy to pass on.
In 6v6 these gimmicks only happen in specific scenarios that can be predicted and easily countered with enough foreknowledge or skill.
While I wouldn't go out of my way to bash HL - different strokes for different folks and all - the idea of playing against gimmicks like backstabs, cloaking, consistent one-shot bodyshots/headshots, air-blasts, aimbots, aimbots with shields, mini aimbots, and 450hp heavies that are ALWAYS on the field makes HL easy to pass on.
In 6v6 these gimmicks only happen in specific scenarios that can be predicted and easily countered with enough foreknowledge or skill.
I don't see the appeal. All utilities are played 24/7 in a game, which says enough as it is, but they also allow ridiculous unlocks and I can't come to an understanding with how "strategy" is supposed to be involved.
I've only ever played in pugs, if that's what you can even call them, but as an observer and someone who's been playing this game long enough, I can't see the appeal.
I don't see the appeal. All utilities are played 24/7 in a game, which says enough as it is, but they also allow ridiculous unlocks and I can't come to an understanding with how "strategy" is supposed to be involved.
I've only ever played in pugs, if that's what you can even call them, but as an observer and someone who's been playing this game long enough, I can't see the appeal.
As a veteran engi / pyro main I can safely say the following:
pub+
organizing 8 other people is really fun.
muh unlocks!
As a veteran engi / pyro main I can safely say the following:
pub+
organizing 8 other people is really fun.
muh unlocks!
HL is just a huge shitfest compared to 6s and is basically an
organized pub
HL is just a huge shitfest compared to 6s and is basically an
organized pub
I mostly don't like HL because of the community that surrounds it - HL pyro/engineer/heavy/spy mains posting here with ill-informed one-dimensional opinions on how the game should be balanced around them reflects badly for the HL community, but we've got our own retards too*. After watching a few HL matches play out I can say with certainty that I don't like it because of how much slower it plays out and how full retard the utility classes can end up being.
I mean, I'm pretty sure it could be at least fun if some weapon changes were made and actually playable with some inherent class changes, but staring down the laser sight of a wrangled sentry, a pocketed heavy, a pyro who is constantly critting for no good reason, and the standard bombing of soldiers and demomen even with a team that has the same shit at chokepoint after chokepoint doesn't sound fun. Sounds more like a meat grinder than anything else, much like the Soviet "THROW BODIES AT IT UNTIL IT FALTERS" tactics employed during the earliest conflicts of WWII.
*
eXtinehaters be hating.
6s players see it as a threat.
I mostly don't like HL because of the community that surrounds it - HL pyro/engineer/heavy/spy mains posting here with ill-informed one-dimensional opinions on how the game should be balanced around them reflects badly for the HL community, but we've got our own retards too*. After watching a few HL matches play out I can say with certainty that I don't like it because of how much slower it plays out and how full retard the utility classes can end up being.
I mean, I'm pretty sure it could be at least fun if some weapon changes were made and actually playable with some inherent class changes, but staring down the laser sight of a wrangled sentry, a pocketed heavy, a pyro who is constantly critting for no good reason, and the standard bombing of soldiers and demomen even with a team that has the same shit at chokepoint after chokepoint doesn't sound fun. Sounds more like a meat grinder than anything else, much like the Soviet "THROW BODIES AT IT UNTIL IT FALTERS" tactics employed during the earliest conflicts of WWII.
*[quote=eXtine]haters be hating.
6s players see it as a threat.[/quote]
m4risaI really feel this is wrong.
The Medic really only keeps track of the Heavy and Demo; Pyro keeps track of the Heavy, Medic, Demo. The Engineer, Sniper, and Spy generally do their own things (build stuff and get key picks). Scout and Soldier (usually) play the flank and try to annoy. Losing a player in Highlander, especially classes like Scout, Spy, Engineer (on offense), Pyro, or Spy doesn't make nearly as much of an impact as losing any single one class does in 6v6. If you're trying to keep track of the positions of every single player on your team by yourself like in 6v6 then you're going to to crazy. There isn't a need to keep track of so many things at once in the 9v9 format. If everyone plays their role like they're supposed to then there shouldn't be a problem and you shouldn't feel overwhelmed.
Your assessment is correct for each individual position, but I think in order for the HL meta to advance a more efficient method of main calling is required. As it stands now a full team is pretty slow at pushing, and the lesson from 6s is that faster is usually better. The quicker you can take and hold ground in between control points the better, ideally with as few enemy picks as possible.
The team that figures out how to do all that and somehow keep comms efficient will probably dominate for a couple of seasons until everybody else catches up.
[quote=m4risa]
I really feel this is wrong.
The Medic really only keeps track of the Heavy and Demo; Pyro keeps track of the Heavy, Medic, Demo. The Engineer, Sniper, and Spy generally do their own things (build stuff and get key picks). Scout and Soldier (usually) play the flank and try to annoy. Losing a player in Highlander, especially classes like Scout, Spy, Engineer (on offense), Pyro, or Spy doesn't make nearly as much of an impact as losing any single one class does in 6v6. If you're trying to keep track of the positions of every single player on your team by yourself like in 6v6 then you're going to to crazy. There isn't a need to keep track of so many things at once in the 9v9 format. If everyone plays their role like they're supposed to then there shouldn't be a problem and you shouldn't feel overwhelmed.[/quote]
Your assessment is correct for each individual position, but I think in order for the HL meta to advance a more efficient method of main calling is required. As it stands now a full team is pretty slow at pushing, and the lesson from 6s is that faster is usually better. The quicker you can take and hold ground in between control points the better, ideally with as few enemy picks as possible.
The team that figures out how to do all that and somehow keep comms efficient will probably dominate for a couple of seasons until everybody else catches up.
highlander is pretty fun if played with the right people, its just harder to find that much more right people to play with.
highlander is pretty fun if played with the right people, its just harder to find that much more right people to play with.
lower level point of view compared to the higher levels of gold+ has a much different mindset due to the gamesense of it all
lower level point of view compared to the higher levels of gold+ has a much different mindset due to the gamesense of it all
It sucks dying to someone that didn't beat you in a fight, but simply was the right class at the right time. Pick classes, sentries, pyro airblast, it kinda makes the game feel less like a shooter involving skill and aim and more like an A-RTS involving positioning and strategy.
That said, Highlander is theoretically the best game mode. I think that including one of each class really makes the class-based shooter shine, but some classes were balanced with game mechanics that are just no fun to fight. If Valve made TF2 with comp in mind, Highlander would be amazing. However, we have to deal with things that are balanced around pub play.
It sucks dying to someone that didn't beat you in a fight, but simply was the right class at the right time. Pick classes, sentries, pyro airblast, it kinda makes the game feel less like a shooter involving skill and aim and more like an A-RTS involving positioning and strategy.
That said, Highlander is [i]theoretically[/i] the best game mode. I think that including one of each class really makes the class-based shooter shine, but some classes were balanced with game mechanics that are just no fun to fight. If Valve made TF2 with comp in mind, Highlander would be amazing. However, we have to deal with things that are balanced around pub play.
smoboThat said, Highlander is theoretically the best game mode.
the best game mode is the one that rewards skill most efficiently
highlander is not this
i know you said theoretically, but im not sure how that is true for any sense besides a marketing one
[quote=smobo]
That said, Highlander is [i]theoretically[/i] the best game mode. [/quote]
the best game mode is the one that rewards skill most efficiently
highlander is not this
i know you said theoretically, but im not sure how that is true for any sense besides a marketing one
Basically people don't like it because its different. It will always be seen as less skillful even though thats not necessarily true.
mthere is a class that has invisibility and an instant kill button
there is a class that builds robots that aim for him or have bullets with no falloff
there is a class that right clicks and stuns you
and i havent even talked about heavy yet
People complain about all time heavy and engie yet they have an all time heavy and engie too. A lot of people complain about spies and snipers yet there are easy counters to each, such as; spy checking (turning around every 3-4 seconds) or having a soldier/scout harass the sniper.
2sy_morphiend The end result is a slower paced game with little chance for stellar individual play (outside of maybe 2 classes) to be showcased.
I can think of plenty of classes that can showcase skill: Demo, Soldier, Scout, Sniper and Spy. All of those classes can completely change the momentum of the game just like they can in 6s.
It can be slow at times but it is also very face paced at others. 6s is the EXACT same way. In 6s there can be stalemates on pushing from mid to 2nd or if you wipe their team at mid, you may already be at their 2nd/last before they even have respawns. In HL the same thing can happen, teams can either wait for a pick or can totally steam roll the other team.
gr8stalina pyro who is constantly critting for no good reason,
Are you referring to pyros being decent at hitting their flares/using their melee?
tl;dr Each team has the same classes, and can be countered by other classes. HL can be a little slower but so can 6s.
Basically people don't like it because its different. It will always be seen as less skillful even though thats not necessarily true.
[quote=m]there is a class that has invisibility and an instant kill button
there is a class that builds robots that aim for him or have bullets with no falloff
there is a class that right clicks and stuns you
and i havent even talked about heavy yet[/quote]
People complain about all time heavy and engie yet they have an all time heavy and engie too. A lot of people complain about spies and snipers yet there are easy counters to each, such as; spy checking (turning around every 3-4 seconds) or having a soldier/scout harass the sniper.
[quote=2sy_morphiend] The end result is a slower paced game with little chance for stellar individual play (outside of maybe 2 classes) to be showcased.[/quote]
I can think of plenty of classes that can showcase skill: Demo, Soldier, Scout, Sniper and Spy. All of those classes can completely change the momentum of the game just like they can in 6s.
It can be slow at times but it is also very face paced at others. 6s is the [b]EXACT[/b] same way. In 6s there can be stalemates on pushing from mid to 2nd or if you wipe their team at mid, you may already be at their 2nd/last before they even have respawns. In HL the same thing can happen, teams can either wait for a pick or can totally steam roll the other team.
[quote=gr8stalin]
a pyro who is constantly critting for no good reason, [/quote]
Are you referring to pyros being decent at hitting their flares/using their melee?
tl;dr Each team has the same classes, and can be countered by other classes. HL can be a little slower [b]but[/b] so can 6s.
msmoboThat said, Highlander is theoretically the best game mode.
the best game mode is the one that rewards skill most efficiently
highlander is not this
i know you said theoretically, but im not sure how that is true for any sense besides a marketing one
I agree with you that HL doesn't reward skill as much. I said as much in my post. I was speaking in the context of an ideal class-based game, not TF2.
I think that the best competitive format for any class-based shooter should give every single class an equal role, thus 9v9 with a class limit of 1 would be ideal IF the game was balanced around that, but it is not. I do prefer 6v6 most of the time, but at the same time the format is pretty stagnant.
[quote=m][quote=smobo]
That said, Highlander is [i]theoretically[/i] the best game mode. [/quote]
the best game mode is the one that rewards skill most efficiently
highlander is not this
i know you said theoretically, but im not sure how that is true for any sense besides a marketing one[/quote]
I agree with you that HL doesn't reward skill as much. I said as much in my post. I was speaking in the context of an ideal class-based game, not TF2.
I think that the best competitive format for any class-based shooter should give every single class an equal role, thus 9v9 with a class limit of 1 would be ideal IF the game was balanced around that, but [b]it is not[/b]. I do prefer 6v6 most of the time, but at the same time the format is pretty stagnant.
I feel that 9v9 is very team-centric, similar to 6v6. It's difficult to have as much of an individual impact in the game which is similar to what clockwork was saying earlier; I can understand people not enjoying highlander because it's harder to do big plays and makes you feel small in a way. However, every class has a team-based role that helps the team as a whole regardless of some classes being more useful than others. Highlander has developed a lot more since two years ago to the point where a team of individual DM powerhouses can't just out-DM players that actually play as a team as easily as they would in 6v6. You're a lot more limited to the classes that you can play since 9v9 only allows one of each class which in turn makes the strategy in 9v9 much more static than it is in 6v6. But on the plus side, it forces all teams to play similarly (being mostly limited to different positioning), only losing or winning because of how well they played as a team, not because of a last second class switching strategy that some teams in 6v6 could not adjust to.
Something else that bugs me is how people throw around the term 'fast-paced' and make it sound like it is factually better than 'slower-paced' as opposed to a only being matter of preference. Lots of players don't mind and still enjoy slower games. It's like how fast-food chains throw around words like 'fresh' or 'all-natural', just a buzzword.
I feel that 9v9 is very team-centric, similar to 6v6. It's difficult to have as much of an individual impact in the game which is similar to what clockwork was saying earlier; I can understand people not enjoying highlander because it's harder to do big plays and makes you feel small in a way. However, every class has a team-based role that helps the team as a whole regardless of some classes being more useful than others. Highlander has developed a lot more since two years ago to the point where a team of individual DM powerhouses can't just out-DM players that actually play as a team as easily as they would in 6v6. You're a lot more limited to the classes that you can play since 9v9 only allows one of each class which in turn makes the strategy in 9v9 much more static than it is in 6v6. But on the plus side, it forces all teams to play similarly (being mostly limited to different positioning), only losing or winning because of how well they played as a team, not because of a last second class switching strategy that some teams in 6v6 could not adjust to.
Something else that bugs me is how people throw around the term 'fast-paced' and make it sound like it is factually better than 'slower-paced' as opposed to a only being matter of preference. Lots of players don't mind and still enjoy slower games. It's like how fast-food chains throw around words like 'fresh' or 'all-natural', just a buzzword.
Highlander is a lot of fun, but for inherent reasons is less competitive, such as having too many players for LANs and prizes, and less of a focus on individual skill and more on teamwork ability. And because it's less competitive, sixes players tend to like it less.
Highlander is a lot of fun, but for inherent reasons is less competitive, such as having too many players for LANs and prizes, and less of a focus on individual skill and more on teamwork ability. And because it's less competitive, sixes players tend to like it less.
ninjanickfrom my perspective, i personally prefer 6v6... it's all preference, because they're basically two entirely different games. 6v6 seems more organized, more strategically balanced, and less of a spamfest. Some things are just more appealing to me as a 6v6 player, such as playing with scouts and how much more ability they have in 6s compared to 9v9. The current scout meta is enough for me to enjoy 6s over 9v9 / demo tank / spam / setting up for payload holds / boring sitting around a lot.
This is coming from someone who plays esea-invite 6s and has tried platinum 9v9, so take it as you wish
tl;dr - highlander technically has more going on, but it's too slow for me.
To be fair you played with giraffe. You're gonna have a bad time regardless of format or class heh
[quote=ninjanick]from my perspective, i personally prefer 6v6... it's all preference, because they're basically two entirely different games. 6v6 seems more organized, more strategically balanced, and less of a spamfest. Some things are just more appealing to me as a 6v6 player, such as playing with scouts and how much more ability they have in 6s compared to 9v9. The current scout meta is enough for me to enjoy 6s over 9v9 / demo tank / spam / setting up for payload holds / boring sitting around a lot.
This is coming from someone who plays esea-invite 6s and has tried platinum 9v9, so take it as you wish
tl;dr - highlander technically has more going on, but it's too slow for me.[/quote]
To be fair you played with giraffe. You're gonna have a bad time regardless of format or class heh
mthere is a class that has invisibility and an instant kill button
there is a class that builds robots that aim for him or have bullets with no falloff
there is a class that right clicks and stuns you
and i havent even talked about heavy yet
all of those are AVAILABLE in 6v6. except the wrangler
what's your point?
[quote=m]there is a class that has invisibility and an instant kill button
there is a class that builds robots that aim for him or have bullets with no falloff
there is a class that right clicks and stuns you
and i havent even talked about heavy yet[/quote]
all of those are AVAILABLE in 6v6. except the wrangler
what's your point?
I haven't played much HL, but from what I've seen it seems that due to the larger teams and class differences people transferring from HL to 6's tend to do their own thing and be less team oriented because they are not punished as heavily in 9v9 for over extending or not using their heads(I think there's a stereotype that HL players are less aware of team dynamics, which isn't really true; this might be due to low level HL players playing like they're in a pub.)
-I think clock brought up some important points outside of the game play, that anyone who would like the tf2 comp community to grow should consider.
-Another reason I enjoy 6s is because of the comprehensibility-- there's just too much going on in 9v9. I imagine it makes it harder to assess team play, things just seem too random in 9v9.
-Also I think 6s showcases individual skill much more, it's more rewarding as a player to me.
-I'm curious as to what people think is the reason that many "good" tf2 players seem to gravitate toward 6s and play 9v9 on the side.
-I think the reason is that it's easier to understand the core of tf2 from 6v6 as compared to 9v9(positioning, aim, movement, communication) because it's less chaotic. Once you have these concepts and mechanics down 9v9 becomes much easier.
-I think 9v9 is a lot less balanced than 6v6.
I haven't played much HL, but from what I've seen it seems that due to the larger teams and class differences people transferring from HL to 6's tend to do their own thing and be less team oriented because they are not punished as heavily in 9v9 for over extending or not using their heads(I think there's a stereotype that HL players are less aware of team dynamics, which isn't really true; this might be due to low level HL players playing like they're in a pub.)
-I think clock brought up some important points outside of the game play, that anyone who would like the tf2 comp community to grow should consider.
-Another reason I enjoy 6s is because of the comprehensibility-- there's just too much going on in 9v9. I imagine it makes it harder to assess team play, things just seem too random in 9v9.
-Also I think 6s showcases individual skill much more, it's more rewarding as a player to me.
-I'm curious as to what people think is the reason that many "good" tf2 players seem to gravitate toward 6s and play 9v9 on the side.
-I think the reason is that it's easier to understand the core of tf2 from 6v6 as compared to 9v9(positioning, aim, movement, communication) because it's less chaotic. Once you have these concepts and mechanics down 9v9 becomes much easier.
-I think 9v9 is a lot less balanced than 6v6.
BlackdottI think 9v9 is a lot less balanced than 6v6.
I don't think balance is the proper word to use. Different classes have different value in both 6v6 and 9v9. In 9v9, there might be a much larger difference between how valuable each of the classes are but it in no way should imply that the format is imbalanced. Different values for each classes is part of what makes TF2 interesting from a competitive standpoint, Demoman and Medic picks are huuuugeeee, but a Scout not so much. Both team both have the same set of classes, this is not imbalance. Imbalance would be a map being unsymmetrical or one team being allowed a different set of classes than the other.
[quote=Blackdott]I think 9v9 is a lot less balanced than 6v6.[/quote]
I don't think balance is the proper word to use. Different classes have different value in both 6v6 and 9v9. In 9v9, there might be a much larger difference between how valuable each of the classes are but it in no way should imply that the format is imbalanced. Different values for each classes is part of what makes TF2 interesting from a competitive standpoint, Demoman and Medic picks are huuuugeeee, but a Scout not so much. Both team both have the same set of classes, this is not imbalance. Imbalance would be a map being unsymmetrical or one team being allowed a different set of classes than the other.
really dull to spectate imo (unless it's a semi-finals/finals match or something)
even then after like 5 minutes I end up thinking, "WOW, I DON'T CARE"
cuz it's basically just watching people play in a pub with class restrictions
I had fun playing medic in it for a long time though
I imagine playing on a good hl team as medic could actually be really fun
really dull to spectate imo (unless it's a semi-finals/finals match or something)
even then after like 5 minutes I end up thinking, "WOW, I DON'T CARE"
cuz it's basically just watching people play in a pub with class restrictions
I had fun playing medic in it for a long time though
I imagine playing on a good hl team as medic could actually be really fun
I enjoy hl but I don't think it's comparable to 6s at all. The more people you have on a team the less important each player is overall. I don't hate a lot of unlocks but the ones I do are tolerable because there's only one of them (and one player just doesn't matter too much). If I were to take it more seriously I think HL would need a way stricter banlist. Scouts running the atomizer or sandman instead of dodging or aiming, pyros running the reserve shooter, soldiers with the beggars bazooka and black box, etc. It's hard to take the game seriously when all of these unlocks can (and do) completely supplement player skill. The beggars bazooka thing before the nerf was disgusting to watch. A weapon that is literally impossible to aim was the best weapon for soldier to be using. What's the difference between all that in pubs? I've had way better games on ducksoup than I have playing HL.
I enjoy hl but I don't think it's comparable to 6s at all. The more people you have on a team the less important each player is overall. I don't hate a lot of unlocks but the ones I do are tolerable because there's only one of them (and one player just doesn't matter too much). If I were to take it more seriously I think HL would need a way stricter banlist. Scouts running the atomizer or sandman instead of dodging or aiming, pyros running the reserve shooter, soldiers with the beggars bazooka and black box, etc. It's hard to take the game seriously when all of these unlocks can (and do) completely supplement player skill. The beggars bazooka thing before the nerf was disgusting to watch. A weapon that is [i]literally[/i] impossible to aim was the best weapon for soldier to be using. What's the difference between all that in pubs? I've had way better games on ducksoup than I have playing HL.
AllealWhat's the difference between all that and pubs?
Communication, teamwork, smarter and better players. A far more competitive experience regardless of how dumb and annoying some of the unlocks are. Considering you've only played Highlander in Iron and Steel, I can see why you think that way though.
[quote=Alleal]What's the difference between all that and pubs?[/quote]
Communication, teamwork, smarter and better players. A far more competitive experience regardless of how dumb and annoying some of the unlocks are. Considering you've only played Highlander in Iron and Steel, I can see why you think that way though.
Those people who brag they used to play at the top level of tf2, just to look them up and find they got a participation platinum award for playing heavy in S6
but mostly minisentries
why the hell are those still allowed
Those people who brag they used to play at the top level of tf2, just to look them up and find they got a participation platinum award for playing heavy in S6
but mostly minisentries
why the hell are those still allowed
Bein a main caller in HL and now playing demo in main in my second season of ESEA (albeit I'm NOT one of the best ones in the div heh) with my highlander teammates on scouts and roamer I have a pretty good insight on the differences between 6v6 and 9v9.
The main one (at the TOP levels of highlander, at least) is that the biggest challenge in highlander is getting 9 people to think similarly and be on the same page. This feels far more difficult to me than getting a team in 6v6 to be on the same page. On the flip side, because this is the case, and because of the classes in highlander, individual DM is diminished in importance (with the exception of sniping). This may or may not appeal to certain people. If I wasn't main calling in highlander and organizing everything as it happens, there is no way on earth I'd play heavy because it is a boring class that requires minimal DM. I'm guessing harbleu feels similarly on medic in highlander.
In response to why some people bash 9v9, THE UNLOCKS would have to be one of the biggest reason. However, this is a reason to bash the league, not the game mode. I think almost everyone would be much happier if all unlocks that dealt any form of crits or minicrits was not allowed.
If the team you played for was not organized, then the resulting chaos would cause frustration. Our team's biggest frustrations come from when we are playing without teamwork and organization, not from a medic dropping etc.
Bein a main caller in HL and now playing demo in main in my second season of ESEA (albeit I'm NOT one of the best ones in the div heh) with my highlander teammates on scouts and roamer I have a pretty good insight on the differences between 6v6 and 9v9.
The main one (at the TOP levels of highlander, at least) is that the biggest challenge in highlander is getting 9 people to think similarly and be on the same page. This feels far more difficult to me than getting a team in 6v6 to be on the same page. On the flip side, because this is the case, and because of the classes in highlander, individual DM is diminished in importance (with the exception of sniping). This may or may not appeal to certain people. If I wasn't main calling in highlander and organizing everything as it happens, there is no way on earth I'd play heavy because it is a boring class that requires minimal DM. I'm guessing harbleu feels similarly on medic in highlander.
In response to why some people bash 9v9, THE UNLOCKS would have to be one of the biggest reason. However, this is a reason to bash the league, not the game mode. I think almost everyone would be much happier if all unlocks that dealt any form of crits or minicrits was not allowed.
If the team you played for was not organized, then the resulting chaos would cause frustration. Our team's biggest frustrations come from when we are playing without teamwork and organization, not from a medic dropping etc.
pretty much what skyrolla said. both take skill, people that think HL takes less skill than 6s probably have never played it or only played at silver level. I enjoy highlander because it lets me practice my calling a lot more than 6s. communication in HL is huge and having your whole team on the same page takes a lot more skill than it does in 6v6. both are fun and challenging in their own regards.
pretty much what skyrolla said. both take skill, people that think HL takes less skill than 6s probably have never played it or only played at silver level. I enjoy highlander because it lets me practice my calling a lot more than 6s. communication in HL is huge and having your whole team on the same page takes a lot more skill than it does in 6v6. both are fun and challenging in their own regards.
Coming from yet another 6s player who hasn't really done anything of note:
Highlander has no logical basis. At some point or another, someone said that we should have one of each class, which for obvious reasons seems reasonable. 6v6 was based off of people playing with different numbers of people (7v7 was a thing for a while, not sure about 5v5 though) until a decent equilibrium between class balance, the ability of one person to carry/ruin a game, etc. was found.
If TF2 didn't have the class-centric gameplay that it does, this could easily be reasonable, but when classes are considered, it just gets silly. Highlander has always(?) restricted all classes to 1, meaning that no class-based strategies are possible (unforeseen spy/sniper plays, switching to a defensive setup on last, etc). This also emphasizes the importance of the classes that have higher DPM (Heavy, demo) or higher health (Heavy) due to being so much more important than the rest of the team (barre medic). Contrasted to 6s, where the only restrictions of that level are on demo and medic, which are arguably necessary to have some sort of variety in the game.
The completely unavoidable problem with HL is that there are more people. More people = more damage output = more deaths + more frags. This means that at any point in time, a single person getting a 3k is less important than it is in 6v6, or, conversely, that the death of 3 people means significantly less. This allows for generally more sloppiness, as well as slower gameplay, and ultimately less effect that an individual can have on the outcome of the game.
tl;dr not enough basis for it to exist, too many people
Coming from yet another 6s player who hasn't really done anything of note:
Highlander has no logical basis. At some point or another, someone said that we should have one of each class, which for obvious reasons seems reasonable. 6v6 was based off of people playing with different numbers of people (7v7 was a thing for a while, not sure about 5v5 though) until a decent equilibrium between class balance, the ability of one person to carry/ruin a game, etc. was found.
If TF2 didn't have the class-centric gameplay that it does, this could easily be reasonable, but when classes are considered, it just gets silly. Highlander has always(?) restricted all classes to 1, meaning that no class-based strategies are possible (unforeseen spy/sniper plays, switching to a defensive setup on last, etc). This also emphasizes the importance of the classes that have higher DPM (Heavy, demo) or higher health (Heavy) due to being so much more important than the rest of the team (barre medic). Contrasted to 6s, where the only restrictions of that level are on demo and medic, which are arguably necessary to have some sort of variety in the game.
The completely unavoidable problem with HL is that there are more people. More people = more damage output = more deaths + more frags. This means that at any point in time, a single person getting a 3k is less important than it is in 6v6, or, conversely, that the death of 3 people means significantly less. This allows for generally more sloppiness, as well as slower gameplay, and ultimately less effect that an individual can have on the outcome of the game.
tl;dr not enough basis for it to exist, too many people
m4risaSomething else that bugs me is how people throw around the term 'fast-paced' and make it sound like it is factually better than 'slower-paced' as opposed to a only being matter of preference. Lots of players don't mind and still enjoy slower games. It's like how fast-food chains throw around words like 'fresh' or 'all-natural', just a buzzword.
Nope.
Slow-paced refers to gameplay that's more methodological and deliberate. Best example of this I can think of would be CS. Fast-paced refers to reflex and memorization, Quake exemplifying this type of speed. Highlander is just slow overall - like I said before, it's a meat grinder where the defending team grips onto the point they have come hell or high water.
[quote=m4risa]Something else that bugs me is how people throw around the term 'fast-paced' and make it sound like it is factually better than 'slower-paced' as opposed to a only being matter of preference. Lots of players don't mind and still enjoy slower games. It's like how fast-food chains throw around words like 'fresh' or 'all-natural', just a buzzword.[/quote]
Nope.
Slow-paced refers to gameplay that's more methodological and deliberate. Best example of this I can think of would be CS. Fast-paced refers to reflex and memorization, Quake exemplifying this type of speed. Highlander is just slow overall - like I said before, it's a meat grinder where the defending team grips onto the point they have come hell or high water.
m4risaBlackdottI think 9v9 is a lot less balanced than 6v6.
I don't think balance is the proper word to use. Different classes have different value in both 6v6 and 9v9. In 9v9, there might be a much larger difference between how valuable each of the classes are but it in no way should imply that the format is imbalanced. Different values for each classes is part of what makes TF2 interesting from a competitive standpoint, Demoman and Medic picks are huuuugeeee, but a Scout not so much. Both team both have the same set of classes, this is not imbalance. Imbalance would be a map being unsymmetrical or one team being allowed a different set of classes than the other.
I should have added more to that last statement, but I guess I wasn't exactly sure how to express it, anyway let me have a go:
I think most of us can agree that certain classes are more situation that others, that's a big part of the foundation of 6s, a problem arises in my mind as to the point of having extra classes that don't matter as much all the time. Adding the extra numbers to the game doesn't make it better, in fact it might be part of the reason HL is so slow paced and boring for so many of us. Do the engie, spy, pyro really make for a game that is better, or is it just what we're used to? This might be a bit radical, but my suggestion is that we merge HL and 6s in some way. Maybe make engie, spy and pyro utilities, allow each team a certain number of utilities and keep the core the same as HL is now. My goal is just to reduce the number of players and keep the big damage dealers the same because those, at least in my mind, are the core of TF2.
[quote=m4risa][quote=Blackdott]I think 9v9 is a lot less balanced than 6v6.[/quote]
I don't think balance is the proper word to use. Different classes have different value in both 6v6 and 9v9. In 9v9, there might be a much larger difference between how valuable each of the classes are but it in no way should imply that the format is imbalanced. Different values for each classes is part of what makes TF2 interesting from a competitive standpoint, Demoman and Medic picks are huuuugeeee, but a Scout not so much. Both team both have the same set of classes, this is not imbalance. Imbalance would be a map being unsymmetrical or one team being allowed a different set of classes than the other.[/quote]
I should have added more to that last statement, but I guess I wasn't exactly sure how to express it, anyway let me have a go:
I think most of us can agree that certain classes are more situation that others, that's a big part of the foundation of 6s, a problem arises in my mind as to the point of having extra classes that don't matter as much all the time. Adding the extra numbers to the game doesn't make it better, in fact it might be part of the reason HL is so slow paced and boring for so many of us. Do the engie, spy, pyro really make for a game that is better, or is it just what we're used to? This might be a bit radical, but my suggestion is that we merge HL and 6s in some way. Maybe make engie, spy and pyro utilities, allow each team a certain number of utilities and keep the core the same as HL is now. My goal is just to reduce the number of players and keep the big damage dealers the same because those, at least in my mind, are the core of TF2.
Why i don't like highlander anymore is because of the community. Usually in lower divs you get zainy trolls trying to look good spamming binds and generally being annoying.
Why i don't like highlander anymore is because of the community. Usually in lower divs you get zainy trolls trying to look good spamming binds and generally being annoying.
I think the silliest thing people can say to try to talk down on HL is "its an organized pub", because these people seem to forget that TF2 was, from its very beginnings, designed to be a pub game.
I never got into 6s because I could never get into any comp modes that required banning huge parts of the game, including maps, weapons, and classes. I suppose I'm weird in how I love all of TF2, all game modes, classes, and unlocks. I feel like a lot of people here don't actually like TF2, they like 6v6, and they keep those ideas very separate.
tl;dr: People who like all of TF2 like HL because its all of TF2.
I think the silliest thing people can say to try to talk down on HL is "its an organized pub", because these people seem to forget that TF2 was, from its very beginnings, designed to be a pub game.
I never got into 6s because I could never get into any comp modes that required banning huge parts of the game, including maps, weapons, and classes. I suppose I'm weird in how I love [b]all[/b] of TF2, all game modes, classes, and unlocks. I feel like a lot of people here don't actually like TF2, they like 6v6, and they keep those ideas very separate.
tl;dr: People who like all of TF2 like HL because its all of TF2.