I think it's high time we got to see The Eviction Notice used more heavily in competitive 6s play. Otherwise, we run the risk of having our game grow increasingly stagnant and discourage new blood from playing competitively.
pick/ban system
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
I think it's high time we got to see The Eviction Notice used more heavily in competitive 6s play. Otherwise, we run the risk of having our game grow increasingly stagnant and discourage new blood from playing competitively.
- At the start of each match, there's a default banlist that bans items that people tend to ban and allows ones that they don't. How this is decided isn't important to the rest of this concept.
- There are two phases to voting: nominations and votes. First, weapons will be nominated to switch them from banned to unbanned and vice versa. To avoid solo griefing, a certain number of nominations is required for a weapon to go to the voting phase.
- During the voting phase, every player must vote "ban", "unban", or "don't care" on the given weapons. Weapons with more "ban" than "unban" or vice versa will be given that status. Weapons with a tie will retain their default status.
- If someone doesn't vote on a weapon before the voting phase is over, they're counted as a "don't care" vote on that weapon.
- The whitelist is generated and activated once the voting phase is over.
This system avoids the following problems that other voting systems have:
- Extremely time consuming (avoids voting on every weapon by using a nomination phase)
- Majority of players don't care enough to vote at all (avoids players not voting at all in an optional "vote on whatever weapons you care about" system by presenting them a set of weapons to vote on which reduces thought required to engage with the system -- just vote on what gets presented to you, don't think about what you want to vote on)
- Players don't care to change their previous opinions after a weapon is changed from unbalanced to balanced (avoids flaw of "premade before match list of desired bans/unbans" type voting which was proposed to solve the time problem of voting on every weapon directly)
- Doesn't represent the nature of tf2 weapons effectively (dota style pick/ban system)
- At the start of each match, there's a default banlist that bans items that people tend to ban and allows ones that they don't. How this is decided isn't important to the rest of this concept.
- There are two phases to voting: nominations and votes. First, weapons will be nominated to switch them from banned to unbanned and vice versa. To avoid solo griefing, a certain number of nominations is required for a weapon to go to the voting phase.
- During the voting phase, every player must vote "ban", "unban", or "don't care" on the given weapons. Weapons with more "ban" than "unban" or vice versa will be given that status. Weapons with a tie will retain their default status.
- If someone doesn't vote on a weapon before the voting phase is over, they're counted as a "don't care" vote on that weapon.
- The whitelist is generated and activated once the voting phase is over.
[i]This system avoids the following problems that other voting systems have:[/i]
- Extremely time consuming (avoids voting on every weapon by using a nomination phase)
- Majority of players don't care enough to vote at all (avoids players not voting at all in an optional "vote on whatever weapons you care about" system by presenting them a set of weapons to vote on which reduces thought required to engage with the system -- just vote on what gets presented to you, don't think about what you want to vote on)
- Players don't care to change their previous opinions after a weapon is changed from unbalanced to balanced (avoids flaw of "premade before match list of desired bans/unbans" type voting which was proposed to solve the time problem of voting on every weapon directly)
- Doesn't represent the nature of tf2 weapons effectively (dota style pick/ban system)
- There are two phases to voting: nominations and votes. First, weapons will be nominated to switch them from banned to unbanned and vice versa. To avoid solo griefing, a certain number of nominations is required for a weapon to go to the voting phase.
- During the voting phase, every player must vote "ban", "unban", or "don't care" on the given weapons. Weapons with more "ban" than "unban" or vice versa will be given that status. Weapons with a tie will retain their default status.
- If someone doesn't vote on a weapon before the voting phase is over, they're counted as a "don't care" vote on that weapon.
- The whitelist is generated and activated once the voting phase is over.
[i]This system avoids the following problems that other voting systems have:[/i]
- Extremely time consuming (avoids voting on every weapon by using a nomination phase)
- Majority of players don't care enough to vote at all (avoids players not voting at all in an optional "vote on whatever weapons you care about" system by presenting them a set of weapons to vote on which reduces thought required to engage with the system -- just vote on what gets presented to you, don't think about what you want to vote on)
- Players don't care to change their previous opinions after a weapon is changed from unbalanced to balanced (avoids flaw of "premade before match list of desired bans/unbans" type voting which was proposed to solve the time problem of voting on every weapon directly)
- Doesn't represent the nature of tf2 weapons effectively (dota style pick/ban system)
wareya- At the start of each match, there's a default banlist that bans items that people tend to ban and allows ones that they don't. How this is decided isn't important to the rest of this concept.
- There are two phases to voting: nominations and votes. First, weapons will be nominated to switch them from banned to unbanned and vice versa. To avoid solo griefing, a certain number of nominations is required for a weapon to go to the voting phase.
- During the voting phase, every player must vote "ban", "unban", or "don't care" on the given weapons. Weapons with more "ban" than "unban" or vice versa will be given that status. Weapons with a tie will retain their default status.
- If someone doesn't vote on a weapon before the voting phase is over, they're counted as a "don't care" vote on that weapon.
- The whitelist is generated and activated once the voting phase is over.
This system avoids the following problems that other voting systems have:
- Extremely time consuming (avoids voting on every weapon by using a nomination phase)
- Majority of players don't care enough to vote at all (avoids players not voting at all in an optional "vote on whatever weapons you care about" system by presenting them a set of weapons to vote on which reduces thought required to engage with the system -- just vote on what gets presented to you, don't think about what you want to vote on)
- Players don't care to change their previous opinions after a weapon is changed from unbalanced to balanced (avoids flaw of "premade before match list of desired bans/unbans" type voting which was proposed to solve the time problem of voting on every weapon directly)
- Doesn't represent the nature of tf2 weapons effectively (dota style pick/ban system)
except then all the stuff you vote on most likely won't be used anyway
[quote=wareya]- At the start of each match, there's a default banlist that bans items that people tend to ban and allows ones that they don't. How this is decided isn't important to the rest of this concept.
- There are two phases to voting: nominations and votes. First, weapons will be nominated to switch them from banned to unbanned and vice versa. To avoid solo griefing, a certain number of nominations is required for a weapon to go to the voting phase.
- During the voting phase, every player must vote "ban", "unban", or "don't care" on the given weapons. Weapons with more "ban" than "unban" or vice versa will be given that status. Weapons with a tie will retain their default status.
- If someone doesn't vote on a weapon before the voting phase is over, they're counted as a "don't care" vote on that weapon.
- The whitelist is generated and activated once the voting phase is over.
[i]This system avoids the following problems that other voting systems have:[/i]
- Extremely time consuming (avoids voting on every weapon by using a nomination phase)
- Majority of players don't care enough to vote at all (avoids players not voting at all in an optional "vote on whatever weapons you care about" system by presenting them a set of weapons to vote on which reduces thought required to engage with the system -- just vote on what gets presented to you, don't think about what you want to vote on)
- Players don't care to change their previous opinions after a weapon is changed from unbalanced to balanced (avoids flaw of "premade before match list of desired bans/unbans" type voting which was proposed to solve the time problem of voting on every weapon directly)
- Doesn't represent the nature of tf2 weapons effectively (dota style pick/ban system)[/quote]
except then all the stuff you vote on most likely won't be used anyway
- There are two phases to voting: nominations and votes. First, weapons will be nominated to switch them from banned to unbanned and vice versa. To avoid solo griefing, a certain number of nominations is required for a weapon to go to the voting phase.
- During the voting phase, every player must vote "ban", "unban", or "don't care" on the given weapons. Weapons with more "ban" than "unban" or vice versa will be given that status. Weapons with a tie will retain their default status.
- If someone doesn't vote on a weapon before the voting phase is over, they're counted as a "don't care" vote on that weapon.
- The whitelist is generated and activated once the voting phase is over.
[i]This system avoids the following problems that other voting systems have:[/i]
- Extremely time consuming (avoids voting on every weapon by using a nomination phase)
- Majority of players don't care enough to vote at all (avoids players not voting at all in an optional "vote on whatever weapons you care about" system by presenting them a set of weapons to vote on which reduces thought required to engage with the system -- just vote on what gets presented to you, don't think about what you want to vote on)
- Players don't care to change their previous opinions after a weapon is changed from unbalanced to balanced (avoids flaw of "premade before match list of desired bans/unbans" type voting which was proposed to solve the time problem of voting on every weapon directly)
- Doesn't represent the nature of tf2 weapons effectively (dota style pick/ban system)[/quote]
except then all the stuff you vote on most likely won't be used anyway
How many unique weapons are there (not counting reskins, stranges, etc)?
It is entirely too many to take seriously in a competitive fps environment, even if they weren't unbalanced and/or gimicky
How many unique weapons are there (not counting reskins, stranges, etc)?
It is entirely too many to take seriously in a competitive fps environment, even if they weren't unbalanced and/or gimicky
It is entirely too many to take seriously in a competitive fps environment, even if they weren't unbalanced and/or gimicky
fsXDexcept then all the stuff you vote on most likely won't be used anyway
is that really a thing
I can imagine people trying to ban good weapons or unban op ones to troll or out of ignorance but it's useful that it happens because valve can be like "oh people like/don't like these weapons"
and if a weapon is never banned but people don't use it valve will be able to tell it's useless
[quote=fsXD]except then all the stuff you vote on most likely won't be used anyway[/quote]
is that really a thing
I can imagine people trying to ban good weapons or unban op ones to troll or out of ignorance but it's useful that it happens because valve can be like "oh people like/don't like these weapons"
and if a weapon is never banned but people don't use it valve will be able to tell it's useless
is that really a thing
I can imagine people trying to ban good weapons or unban op ones to troll or out of ignorance but it's useful that it happens because valve can be like "oh people like/don't like these weapons"
and if a weapon is never banned but people don't use it valve will be able to tell it's useless
The pick/ban thing last year was about HL not 6v6. 6v6 wasn't even on the table in that discussion, so throwing another tantrum about Valve not supporting 6v6 is a waste of time. There's no reason to do pick/ban HL pugs again, because all we were asked to do was experiment with a couple different systems and report our opinions on them, which we did.
The pick/ban thing last year was about HL not 6v6. 6v6 wasn't even on the table in that discussion, so throwing another tantrum about Valve not supporting 6v6 is a waste of time. There's no reason to do pick/ban HL pugs again, because all we were asked to do was experiment with a couple different systems and report our opinions on them, which we did.
AllealThe pick/ban thing last year was about HL not 6v6.
oh oops
[quote=Alleal]The pick/ban thing last year was about HL not 6v6.[/quote]
oh oops
oh oops
marmadukeGRYLLSquake didn't need gimmicky shit, why do we?
because both games are dead
a ban system would work fine. you'd just be playing around whatever op items get through the pool. would add a lot of variety to the game which tbh is worthwhile as I've always found tf2 'a lot of the same'
[quote=marmadukeGRYLLS]
quake didn't need gimmicky shit, why do we?
[/quote]
because both games are dead
a ban system would work fine. you'd just be playing around whatever op items get through the pool. would add a lot of variety to the game which tbh is worthwhile as I've always found tf2 'a lot of the same'
quake didn't need gimmicky shit, why do we?
[/quote]
because both games are dead
a ban system would work fine. you'd just be playing around whatever op items get through the pool. would add a lot of variety to the game which tbh is worthwhile as I've always found tf2 'a lot of the same'
2c
because both games are dead
a ban system would work fine. you'd just be playing around whatever op items get through the pool. would add a lot of variety to the game which tbh is worthwhile as I've always found tf2 'a lot of the same'
this post is pretty shit tier but i guess i'll bite.
quake came out in 1999. it's 15 years old, no fucking wonder it's dead. plus, games in general are past the "strictly dm" game mode phase.
more variance = more luck based success = lowered skill ceiling = less incentive to try and be the best because you might get fucked over by something like a conch push you had no way of knowing was coming.
fps games are not dota. dota is not an fps. let's stop trying to act like we can adopt a captains mode and it's gonna catapult tf2 into "quake in its prime" territory.
like i said before, with a few unlocks (gunboats, kritz, etc) and few measly months' worth of profits from mann co. store we could have a tf2 international that would ACTUALLY breathe some new life into this game but valves cool with just collecting the paycheck every month from the store so it's never gonna happen.
[quote=2c]
because both games are dead
a ban system would work fine. you'd just be playing around whatever op items get through the pool. would add a lot of variety to the game which tbh is worthwhile as I've always found tf2 'a lot of the same'[/quote]
this post is pretty shit tier but i guess i'll bite.
quake came out in 1999. it's 15 years old, no fucking wonder it's dead. plus, games in general are past the "strictly dm" game mode phase.
more variance = more luck based success = lowered skill ceiling = less incentive to try and be the best because you might get fucked over by something like a conch push you had no way of knowing was coming.
fps games are not dota. dota is not an fps. let's stop trying to act like we can adopt a captains mode and it's gonna catapult tf2 into "quake in its prime" territory.
like i said before, with a few unlocks (gunboats, kritz, etc) and few measly months' worth of profits from mann co. store we could have a tf2 international that would ACTUALLY breathe some new life into this game but valves cool with just collecting the paycheck every month from the store so it's never gonna happen.
because both games are dead
a ban system would work fine. you'd just be playing around whatever op items get through the pool. would add a lot of variety to the game which tbh is worthwhile as I've always found tf2 'a lot of the same'[/quote]
this post is pretty shit tier but i guess i'll bite.
quake came out in 1999. it's 15 years old, no fucking wonder it's dead. plus, games in general are past the "strictly dm" game mode phase.
more variance = more luck based success = lowered skill ceiling = less incentive to try and be the best because you might get fucked over by something like a conch push you had no way of knowing was coming.
fps games are not dota. dota is not an fps. let's stop trying to act like we can adopt a captains mode and it's gonna catapult tf2 into "quake in its prime" territory.
like i said before, with a few unlocks (gunboats, kritz, etc) and few measly months' worth of profits from mann co. store we could have a tf2 international that would ACTUALLY breathe some new life into this game but valves cool with just collecting the paycheck every month from the store so it's never gonna happen.
Pick/ban system would be really interesting if Valve would implement more than a handful of useful/interesting/balanced sidegrades. If TF2 was actually designed around 6v6 then I genuinely think a modified pick/ban system would be amazing. Sadly it's not, so we have to assume Robin Walker has practically no understanding of competitive TF2 or he wouldn't have made such a comment.
Pick/ban system would be really interesting if Valve would implement more than a handful of useful/interesting/balanced sidegrades. If TF2 was actually designed around 6v6 then I genuinely think a modified pick/ban system would be amazing. Sadly it's not, so we have to assume Robin Walker has practically no understanding of competitive TF2 or he wouldn't have made such a comment.
I've thought a lot about how pick/bans can be implemented and I currently of the opinion that a pick system, backed by a starting ban list, would be the route to go. Total gimmicky/destructive items would just be taken off the board at the start. This would be a list of weapons that are OP things that do not fit in 6s and weapons that we wish we could use but are currently problematic.
Teams would have a smaller number of weapons to pick through and the meta can be protected by limiting how much craziness is brought in.
The picks would also at least show to the other team what items could be run. Marmaduke brings up the conch again, which he doesn't like because its hard to tell when it might be in use. If items are added to the pool, both teams are going to be aware of whats on the table, and can also use later picks to counter the earlier picks.
Here's a very loose eXample - everything on this list could be picked. If not picked, they'd be banned before match time. I don't claim to know how many picks each team should get.
I've thought a lot about how pick/bans can be implemented and I currently of the opinion that a pick system, backed by a starting ban list, would be the route to go. Total gimmicky/destructive items would just be taken off the board at the start. This would be a list of weapons that are OP things that do not fit in 6s and weapons that we wish we could use but are currently problematic.
Teams would have a smaller number of weapons to pick through and the meta can be protected by limiting how much craziness is brought in.
The picks would also at least show to the other team what items could be run. Marmaduke brings up the conch again, which he doesn't like because its hard to tell when it might be in use. If items are added to the pool, both teams are going to be aware of whats on the table, and can also use later picks to counter the earlier picks.
Here's a very loose eXample - everything on this list could be picked. If not picked, they'd be banned before match time. I don't claim to know how many picks each team should get.
Teams would have a smaller number of weapons to pick through and the meta can be protected by limiting how much craziness is brought in.
The picks would also at least show to the other team what items could be run. Marmaduke brings up the conch again, which he doesn't like because its hard to tell when it might be in use. If items are added to the pool, both teams are going to be aware of whats on the table, and can also use later picks to counter the earlier picks.
Here's a very loose eXample - everything on this list could be picked. If not picked, they'd be banned before match time. I don't claim to know how many picks each team should get.
the most important question in this whole pick/ban shit is WHY DO WE NEED IT?
you will still have soldiers running vanilla rl, demos running vanilla stickies, etc.
you will see the same amount of variation you see in games now. everything op will remain banned and the rest will remain niche sidegrades with the exception of the "classics" like gunboats, kritz, etc.
the most important question in this whole pick/ban shit is [b]WHY DO WE NEED IT?[/b]
you will still have soldiers running vanilla rl, demos running vanilla stickies, etc.
you will see the same amount of variation you see in games now. everything op will remain banned and the rest will remain niche sidegrades with the exception of the "classics" like gunboats, kritz, etc.
you will still have soldiers running vanilla rl, demos running vanilla stickies, etc.
you will see the same amount of variation you see in games now. everything op will remain banned and the rest will remain niche sidegrades with the exception of the "classics" like gunboats, kritz, etc.
marmadukeGRYLLS
quake came out in 1999. it's 15 years old, no fucking wonder it's dead. plus, games in general are past the "strictly dm" game mode phase.
broodwar managed to be alive in every sense for a longer amount of time, age isn't an argument
more variance = more luck based success = lowered skill ceiling = less incentive to try and be the best because you might get fucked over by something like a conch push you had no way of knowing was coming.
and if in a competitive mode it was found something getting through pick/ban phase valve would have objective evidence to actually balance their items.
fps games are not dota. dota is not an fps. let's stop trying to act like we can adopt a captains mode and it's gonna catapult tf2 into "quake in its prime" territory.
im not even sure what prime you're referring to. I think at some point a lot of people here forgot that tf2 actually has public servers that are pretty fun but play completely different than 6s. What's the point of the bubble
i wouldnt care about your theorycraft if it wasnt so blatantly wrong/stupid but whatever. ive rebutalled all of this shit like a year ago and I dont care enough to do it again
[quote=marmadukeGRYLLS]
quake came out in 1999. it's 15 years old, no fucking wonder it's dead. plus, games in general are past the "strictly dm" game mode phase.
[/quote]
broodwar managed to be alive in every sense for a longer amount of time, age isn't an argument
[quote]
more variance = more luck based success = lowered skill ceiling = less incentive to try and be the best because you might get fucked over by something like a conch push you had no way of knowing was coming.
[/quote]
and if in a competitive mode it was found something getting through pick/ban phase valve would have objective evidence to actually balance their items.
[quote]
fps games are not dota. dota is not an fps. let's stop trying to act like we can adopt a captains mode and it's gonna catapult tf2 into "quake in its prime" territory.
[/quote]
im not even sure what prime you're referring to. I think at some point a lot of people here forgot that tf2 actually has public servers that are pretty fun but play completely different than 6s. What's the point of the bubble
i wouldnt care about your theorycraft if it wasnt so blatantly wrong/stupid but whatever. ive rebutalled all of this shit like a year ago and I dont care enough to do it again
quake came out in 1999. it's 15 years old, no fucking wonder it's dead. plus, games in general are past the "strictly dm" game mode phase.
[/quote]
broodwar managed to be alive in every sense for a longer amount of time, age isn't an argument
[quote]
more variance = more luck based success = lowered skill ceiling = less incentive to try and be the best because you might get fucked over by something like a conch push you had no way of knowing was coming.
[/quote]
and if in a competitive mode it was found something getting through pick/ban phase valve would have objective evidence to actually balance their items.
[quote]
fps games are not dota. dota is not an fps. let's stop trying to act like we can adopt a captains mode and it's gonna catapult tf2 into "quake in its prime" territory.
[/quote]
im not even sure what prime you're referring to. I think at some point a lot of people here forgot that tf2 actually has public servers that are pretty fun but play completely different than 6s. What's the point of the bubble
i wouldnt care about your theorycraft if it wasnt so blatantly wrong/stupid but whatever. ive rebutalled all of this shit like a year ago and I dont care enough to do it again
marmadukeGRYLLSthe most important question in this whole pick/ban shit is WHY DO WE NEED IT?
you will still have soldiers running vanilla rl, demos running vanilla stickies, etc.
you will see the same amount of variation you see in games now. everything op will remain banned and the rest will remain niche sidegrades with the exception of the "classics" like gunboats, kritz, etc.
like how would you know this? what if there's only 2 bans each side? the number is arbitrary yet would have huge effects on how things play out
poeple could purposely ban horrible items to let more overpowered items slip through the pool
there's so many things wrong with what you say its unbearable
[quote=marmadukeGRYLLS]the most important question in this whole pick/ban shit is [b]WHY DO WE NEED IT?[/b]
you will still have soldiers running vanilla rl, demos running vanilla stickies, etc.
you will see the same amount of variation you see in games now. everything op will remain banned and the rest will remain niche sidegrades with the exception of the "classics" like gunboats, kritz, etc.[/quote]
like how would you know this? what if there's only 2 bans each side? the number is arbitrary yet would have huge effects on how things play out
poeple could purposely ban horrible items to let more overpowered items slip through the pool
there's so many things wrong with what you say its unbearable
you will still have soldiers running vanilla rl, demos running vanilla stickies, etc.
you will see the same amount of variation you see in games now. everything op will remain banned and the rest will remain niche sidegrades with the exception of the "classics" like gunboats, kritz, etc.[/quote]
like how would you know this? what if there's only 2 bans each side? the number is arbitrary yet would have huge effects on how things play out
poeple could purposely ban horrible items to let more overpowered items slip through the pool
there's so many things wrong with what you say its unbearable
i would like to see leagues provide actual reasons behind why certain items are banned, through demos or logs or whatever. never see that, seems like bans are just done under the table and the public has no idea why but goes along with it
for instance why is the widowmaker banned in any league. thats just class bias showing through clear as day. its "skill-indexed" and all those other buzzwords comp loves
"too many weapons" is a baby's excuse, its a mark of a good player to identify what enemies are running and react accordingly
and for the record conch plays a sound indicator basically everywhere on the map so you will know it's coming, if you get fucked by a conch push you weren't properly prepared.
also if pick/ban happens again stock absolutely should be subject to the same ban system unlocks are; they're not the base on which you balance, you balance to the game as a whole.
i would like to see leagues provide actual reasons behind why certain items are banned, through demos or logs or whatever. never see that, seems like bans are just done under the table and the public has no idea why but goes along with it
for instance why is the widowmaker banned in any league. thats just class bias showing through clear as day. its "skill-indexed" and all those other buzzwords comp loves
"too many weapons" is a baby's excuse, its a mark of a good player to identify what enemies are running and react accordingly
and for the record conch plays a sound indicator basically everywhere on the map so you will know it's coming, if you get fucked by a conch push you weren't properly prepared.
also if pick/ban happens again stock absolutely should be subject to the same ban system unlocks are; they're not the base on which you balance, you balance to the game as a whole.
for instance why is the widowmaker banned in any league. thats just class bias showing through clear as day. its "skill-indexed" and all those other buzzwords comp loves
"too many weapons" is a baby's excuse, its a mark of a good player to identify what enemies are running and react accordingly
and for the record conch plays a sound indicator basically everywhere on the map so you will know it's coming, if you get fucked by a conch push you weren't properly prepared.
also if pick/ban happens again stock absolutely should be subject to the same ban system unlocks are; they're not the base on which you balance, you balance to the game as a whole.
( ▀̿̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄ ɴᴀᴍᴇ's ᴅᴏɴɢ. ᴊᴀᴍᴇs ᴅᴏɴɢ (▀̿̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)
( ▀̿̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄ ɴᴀᴍᴇ's ᴅᴏɴɢ. ᴊᴀᴍᴇs ᴅᴏɴɢ (▀̿̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)
All this talk about too much variety causing too much randomness.
The pick/ban system is there SPECIFICALLY to address too much randomness/counterpicking/etc.
All this talk about too much variety causing too much randomness.
The pick/ban system is there SPECIFICALLY to address too much randomness/counterpicking/etc.
The pick/ban system is there SPECIFICALLY to address too much randomness/counterpicking/etc.
bastidi would like to see leagues provide actual reasons behind why certain items are banned, through demos or logs or whatever. never see that, seems like bans are just done under the table and the public has no idea why but goes along with it
for instance why is the widowmaker banned in any league. thats just class bias showing through clear as day. its "skill-indexed" and all those other buzzwords comp loves
"too many weapons" is a baby's excuse, its a mark of a good player to identify what enemies are running and react accordingly
and for the record conch plays a sound indicator basically everywhere on the map so you will know it's coming, if you get fucked by a conch push you weren't properly prepared.
also if pick/ban happens again stock absolutely should be subject to the same ban system unlocks are; they're not the base on which you balance, you balance to the game as a whole.
Man the only person who has no idea why items are banned is you.
[quote=bastid]i would like to see leagues provide actual reasons behind why certain items are banned, through demos or logs or whatever. never see that, seems like bans are just done under the table and the public has no idea why but goes along with it
for instance why is the widowmaker banned in any league. thats just class bias showing through clear as day. its "skill-indexed" and all those other buzzwords comp loves
"too many weapons" is a baby's excuse, its a mark of a good player to identify what enemies are running and react accordingly
and for the record conch plays a sound indicator basically everywhere on the map so you will know it's coming, if you get fucked by a conch push you weren't properly prepared.
also if pick/ban happens again stock absolutely should be subject to the same ban system unlocks are; they're not the base on which you balance, you balance to the game as a whole.[/quote]
Man the only person who has no idea why items are banned is you.
for instance why is the widowmaker banned in any league. thats just class bias showing through clear as day. its "skill-indexed" and all those other buzzwords comp loves
"too many weapons" is a baby's excuse, its a mark of a good player to identify what enemies are running and react accordingly
and for the record conch plays a sound indicator basically everywhere on the map so you will know it's coming, if you get fucked by a conch push you weren't properly prepared.
also if pick/ban happens again stock absolutely should be subject to the same ban system unlocks are; they're not the base on which you balance, you balance to the game as a whole.[/quote]
Man the only person who has no idea why items are banned is you.
kaceMan the only person who has no idea why items are banned is you.
you know why the widowmaker is banned?
it's more than that, giving reasons is just a way for leagues to appear more professional, i'm not even arguing against banning/allowing right now, but if you're a new player looking into competitive tf2 wouldn't you like to be given reason? it would help dispel some notions people have about comp
some people just won't settle for cheap talk is all (if they get even that)
[quote=kace]Man the only person who has no idea why items are banned is you.[/quote]
you know why the widowmaker is banned?
it's more than that, giving reasons is just a way for leagues to appear more professional, i'm not even arguing against banning/allowing right now, but if you're a new player looking into competitive tf2 wouldn't you like to be given reason? it would help dispel some notions people have about comp
some people just won't settle for cheap talk is all (if they get even that)
you know why the widowmaker is banned?
it's more than that, giving reasons is just a way for leagues to appear more professional, i'm not even arguing against banning/allowing right now, but if you're a new player looking into competitive tf2 wouldn't you like to be given reason? it would help dispel some notions people have about comp
some people just won't settle for cheap talk is all (if they get even that)
marmadukeGRYLLS
ignoring the part where i also said "and fps players have moved past 'strictly dm' game modes as a whole" but ok cool 1 old game lasted for ages. so did quake.
no it didnt
yeah totally, just like they've fixed players becoming invisible during the game very quickly, right? just look at our banlist and how long some of the shit has been on there and NOTHING about the item(s) has changed.
there's a trend of isolation over reasonable bans that has existed for years here. there's no objective data.
the competitive prime of quake when it was at its peak of popularity in the competitive fps scene. but yes lets talk about pubbing.
died in like 2001 not sure why you want to recreate that experience.
yeah dude lets play with the overpowered retarded items in this game that we've removed for a reason. for the meta man!
i read stuff like this and realize how conservatives exist and it bothers me
[quote=marmadukeGRYLLS]
ignoring the part where i also said "and fps players have moved past 'strictly dm' game modes as a whole" but ok cool 1 old game lasted for ages. so did quake.
[/quote]
no it didnt
[quote]
yeah totally, just like they've fixed [i]players becoming invisible during the game[/i] very quickly, right? just look at our banlist and how long some of the shit has been on there and NOTHING about the item(s) has changed.
[/quote]
there's a trend of isolation over reasonable bans that has existed for years here. there's no objective data.
[quote]
the competitive prime of quake when it was at its peak of popularity in the competitive fps scene. but yes lets talk about pubbing.
[/quote]
died in like 2001 not sure why you want to recreate that experience.
[quote]
yeah dude lets play with the overpowered retarded items in this game that we've removed for a reason. for the meta man!
[/quote]
i read stuff like this and realize how conservatives exist and it bothers me
ignoring the part where i also said "and fps players have moved past 'strictly dm' game modes as a whole" but ok cool 1 old game lasted for ages. so did quake.
[/quote]
no it didnt
[quote]
yeah totally, just like they've fixed [i]players becoming invisible during the game[/i] very quickly, right? just look at our banlist and how long some of the shit has been on there and NOTHING about the item(s) has changed.
[/quote]
there's a trend of isolation over reasonable bans that has existed for years here. there's no objective data.
[quote]
the competitive prime of quake when it was at its peak of popularity in the competitive fps scene. but yes lets talk about pubbing.
[/quote]
died in like 2001 not sure why you want to recreate that experience.
[quote]
yeah dude lets play with the overpowered retarded items in this game that we've removed for a reason. for the meta man!
[/quote]
i read stuff like this and realize how conservatives exist and it bothers me
The fact people are even considering a pick/ban system for TF2 is kind of worrying haha.
The fundamental problem here is Robin Walker sees TF2 as a public game, and at a push champions highlander as the supreme competitive mode. While the 6v6 community see it as a quakesque DM style game, on the source engine.
Until he realises this or it's spelled out to him he's just going to spin the same yarn - even then he's probably going to stick to his guns. Hard to understand fully in my opinion considering the game is the successor to TFC, which was a complete build upon on a Quake based game. Granted TF2 is totally original and unique but to at completely negate this obvious constituent section of a community is arrogant at best.
Meanwhile this 'cast out' community he refuses to back in any way, shape or form has raised over 60k in the last 24 months to fund it's own global LANS.
You can't blame him for not having a fucking clue about the competitive side of the game because the 6v6 format has eluded and confused him from it's inception - nothing even remotely close to the format we've grown accustom to and love even entered their heads when they were developing it. It's so blatantly designed and engineered as a pure public game it really is a true fluke/freak the game actually works as well as it does competitively. Hats off to the early pioneers for routing out the 6v6 format I say.
The game won't get any updates truly geared towards the competitive angle. It won't get an in-game lobby system, and it definitely won't get any cold hard cash thrown at it. I feel what people should be pushing and pestering the valve TF2 team for is some sort of eSports crate system like cs:go has received (2 x 250k tournaments within the first 6 months of implementation, it's actually a fucking joke how easy it is to add into the game as well, considering TF2 was the first game they Guinea Pig'd the whole market system on) where a large % of the cash surplussed from said crates goes towards getting teams to LAN and prize purses. Depending on the revenue I suspect a solid cash injection could be obtained with the possibility of hosting separate NA, EU and International events (I think the best method would be continuing to use the preexisting LAN infrastructures - ESEA/Mplay - then 100% of the revenue could go towards expenses and prize purses) this would inject passion and motivation into all skill tiers within 6v6 and would do wonders for the longevity of the format/scene.
I have not had much time to play games for the past 18 months bar the odd sporadic few weeks here and there. However after seeing how much these eSports crates helped cs:go I did take the time to email Mr Walker with the above mentioned thoughts and the possibility of implementation into TF2. I've mailed him 3 times and all 3 times I have received no response. Perhaps an organization within the community or person(s) with a direct line would be more successful in at least soliciting a response.. or perhaps i've just spent the last 10 minutes typing bollocks?
tl;dr - We accept you're not going to help the 6v6 scene, so give us a way we can directly help ourselves. With minimal effort required on your part.
The fact people are even considering a pick/ban system for TF2 is kind of worrying haha.
The fundamental problem here is Robin Walker sees TF2 as a public game, and at a push champions highlander as the supreme competitive mode. While the 6v6 community see it as a quakesque DM style game, on the source engine.
Until he realises this or it's spelled out to him he's just going to spin the same yarn - even then he's probably going to stick to his guns. Hard to understand fully in my opinion considering the game is the successor to TFC, which was a complete build upon on a Quake based game. Granted TF2 is totally original and unique but to at completely negate this obvious constituent section of a community is arrogant at best.
Meanwhile this 'cast out' community he refuses to back in any way, shape or form has raised over 60k in the last 24 months to fund it's own global LANS.
You can't blame him for not having a fucking clue about the competitive side of the game because the 6v6 format has eluded and confused him from it's inception - nothing even remotely close to the format we've grown accustom to and love even entered their heads when they were developing it. It's so blatantly designed and engineered as a pure public game it really is a true fluke/freak the game actually works as well as it does competitively. Hats off to the early pioneers for routing out the 6v6 format I say.
The game won't get any updates truly geared towards the competitive angle. It won't get an in-game lobby system, and it definitely won't get any cold hard cash thrown at it. I feel what people should be pushing and pestering the valve TF2 team for is some sort of eSports crate system like cs:go has received (2 x 250k tournaments within the first 6 months of implementation, it's actually a fucking joke how easy it is to add into the game as well, considering TF2 was the first game they Guinea Pig'd the whole market system on) where a large % of the cash surplussed from said crates goes towards getting teams to LAN and prize purses. Depending on the revenue I suspect a solid cash injection could be obtained with the possibility of hosting separate NA, EU and International events (I think the best method would be continuing to use the preexisting LAN infrastructures - ESEA/Mplay - then 100% of the revenue could go towards expenses and prize purses) this would inject passion and motivation into all skill tiers within 6v6 and would do wonders for the longevity of the format/scene.
I have not had much time to play games for the past 18 months bar the odd sporadic few weeks here and there. However after seeing how much these eSports crates helped cs:go I did take the time to email Mr Walker with the above mentioned thoughts and the possibility of implementation into TF2. I've mailed him 3 times and all 3 times I have received no response. Perhaps an organization within the community or person(s) with a direct line would be more successful in at least soliciting a response.. or perhaps i've just spent the last 10 minutes typing bollocks?
tl;dr - We accept you're not going to help the 6v6 scene, so give us a way we can directly help ourselves. With minimal effort required on your part.
The fundamental problem here is Robin Walker sees TF2 as a public game, and at a push champions highlander as the supreme competitive mode. While the 6v6 community see it as a quakesque DM style game, on the source engine.
Until he realises this or it's spelled out to him he's just going to spin the same yarn - even then he's probably going to stick to his guns. Hard to understand fully in my opinion considering the game is the successor to TFC, which was a complete build upon on a Quake based game. Granted TF2 is totally original and unique but to at completely negate this obvious constituent section of a community is arrogant at best.
Meanwhile this 'cast out' community he refuses to back in any way, shape or form has raised over 60k in the last 24 months to fund it's own global LANS.
You can't blame him for not having a fucking clue about the competitive side of the game because the 6v6 format has eluded and confused him from it's inception - nothing even remotely close to the format we've grown accustom to and love even entered their heads when they were developing it. It's so blatantly designed and engineered as a pure public game it really is a true fluke/freak the game actually works as well as it does competitively. Hats off to the early pioneers for routing out the 6v6 format I say.
The game won't get any updates truly geared towards the competitive angle. It won't get an in-game lobby system, and it definitely won't get any cold hard cash thrown at it. I feel what people should be pushing and pestering the valve TF2 team for is some sort of eSports crate system like cs:go has received (2 x 250k tournaments within the first 6 months of implementation, it's actually a fucking joke how easy it is to add into the game as well, considering TF2 was the first game they Guinea Pig'd the whole market system on) where a large % of the cash surplussed from said crates goes towards getting teams to LAN and prize purses. Depending on the revenue I suspect a solid cash injection could be obtained with the possibility of hosting separate NA, EU and International events (I think the best method would be continuing to use the preexisting LAN infrastructures - ESEA/Mplay - then 100% of the revenue could go towards expenses and prize purses) this would inject passion and motivation into all skill tiers within 6v6 and would do wonders for the longevity of the format/scene.
I have not had much time to play games for the past 18 months bar the odd sporadic few weeks here and there. However after seeing how much these eSports crates helped cs:go I did take the time to email Mr Walker with the above mentioned thoughts and the possibility of implementation into TF2. I've mailed him 3 times and all 3 times I have received no response. Perhaps an organization within the community or person(s) with a direct line would be more successful in at least soliciting a response.. or perhaps i've just spent the last 10 minutes typing bollocks?
tl;dr - We accept you're not going to help the 6v6 scene, so give us a way we can directly help ourselves. With minimal effort required on your part.
I think his logic runs something like this. Your average new viewer, who has no knowledge of the game and it's intricacies, surely would find it stale. So we add a bunch of random shit to the mix to make it look cool and so everyone can see their favourite class/item being used.
To me, this is fucking dumb. Because as soon as you stick around long enough to actually understand what's going on, you realise how idiotic it is.
The part of the game that we the community find interesting to watch are the small plays that win the game. As someone said earlier in this thread. Positioning, aim, movement, teamwork. Things that appear insignificant to the layman. These are the fundamentals of a team based fps. The success of this formula has been shown in quake and cs and their various clones/alternatives. Why Valve seem to think that such a huge abundance of items are even necessary for this game is beyond me. Look at the small pool of weapons available in any other successful fps. Small, clearly recognisable variance in TF2 is already present in classes. This variance can be predicted based off proper game knowledge e.g. only seeing 5 in front and having uber advantage would lead you to believe they are running sniper/spy. The only item which you can really predict from what you can perceive in game (other than seeing the actual item) is kritz. Items whose use is unpredictable add an element of luck to a game that shouldn't be in a competitive game. May as well re add random crits.
In my opinion, the real reason that TF2 is difficult for new players to understand is because its a complete abstraction of the tf2 that they play. CS:GO has similar intricacies in competitive play to tf2 but a wider viewer base understand these small details because they have played the game. They recognise situations, can relate and understand. This is simply not the case with TF2. The viewers ask why they aren't running a pyro to mid, because they have never tried that themselves and realised why it's a bad idea.
EDIT: I completely went off on a tangent.
I think his logic runs something like this. Your average new viewer, who has no knowledge of the game and it's intricacies, surely would find it stale. So we add a bunch of random shit to the mix to make it look cool and so everyone can see their favourite class/item being used.
To me, this is fucking dumb. Because as soon as you stick around long enough to actually understand what's going on, you realise how idiotic it is.
The part of the game that we the community find interesting to watch are the small plays that win the game. As someone said earlier in this thread. Positioning, aim, movement, teamwork. Things that appear insignificant to the layman. These are the fundamentals of a team based fps. The success of this formula has been shown in quake and cs and their various clones/alternatives. Why Valve seem to think that such a huge abundance of items are even necessary for this game is beyond me. Look at the small pool of weapons available in any other successful fps. Small, clearly recognisable variance in TF2 is already present in classes. This variance can be predicted based off proper game knowledge e.g. only seeing 5 in front and having uber advantage would lead you to believe they are running sniper/spy. The only item which you can really predict from what you can perceive in game (other than seeing the actual item) is kritz. Items whose use is unpredictable add an element of luck to a game that shouldn't be in a [i]competitive[/i] game. May as well re add random crits.
In my opinion, the real reason that TF2 is difficult for new players to understand is because its a complete abstraction of the tf2 that they play. CS:GO has similar intricacies in competitive play to tf2 but a wider viewer base understand these small details because they have played the game. They recognise situations, can relate and understand. This is simply not the case with TF2. The viewers ask why they aren't running a pyro to mid, because they have never tried that themselves and realised why it's a bad idea.
EDIT: I completely went off on a tangent.
To me, this is fucking dumb. Because as soon as you stick around long enough to actually understand what's going on, you realise how idiotic it is.
The part of the game that we the community find interesting to watch are the small plays that win the game. As someone said earlier in this thread. Positioning, aim, movement, teamwork. Things that appear insignificant to the layman. These are the fundamentals of a team based fps. The success of this formula has been shown in quake and cs and their various clones/alternatives. Why Valve seem to think that such a huge abundance of items are even necessary for this game is beyond me. Look at the small pool of weapons available in any other successful fps. Small, clearly recognisable variance in TF2 is already present in classes. This variance can be predicted based off proper game knowledge e.g. only seeing 5 in front and having uber advantage would lead you to believe they are running sniper/spy. The only item which you can really predict from what you can perceive in game (other than seeing the actual item) is kritz. Items whose use is unpredictable add an element of luck to a game that shouldn't be in a [i]competitive[/i] game. May as well re add random crits.
In my opinion, the real reason that TF2 is difficult for new players to understand is because its a complete abstraction of the tf2 that they play. CS:GO has similar intricacies in competitive play to tf2 but a wider viewer base understand these small details because they have played the game. They recognise situations, can relate and understand. This is simply not the case with TF2. The viewers ask why they aren't running a pyro to mid, because they have never tried that themselves and realised why it's a bad idea.
EDIT: I completely went off on a tangent.
Is tf2 as strategic as cs? Serious question, I don't know all that much about cs.
Is tf2 as strategic as cs? Serious question, I don't know all that much about cs.
cs has more strategy despite what ppl here will tell you
cs has more strategy despite what ppl here will tell you
A lot of this thread has been talking about people who are new to the competetive scene, specifically what new people like myself may or may not want to see in 6's. Personally, I found the world of competetive 6 vs 6 very confusing and intimidating. I think implimenting an intricate vote/ban system would only make it even more confusing for new players. The whitelist system thats currently in place seems like it is clearly the best option.
On a side note, I think introducing new maps (process, metalworks, sunshine, ect.) is a much better way to keep the game from getting stale than new weapons.
A lot of this thread has been talking about people who are new to the competetive scene, specifically what new people like myself may or may not want to see in 6's. Personally, I found the world of competetive 6 vs 6 very confusing and intimidating. I think implimenting an intricate vote/ban system would only make it even more confusing for new players. The whitelist system thats currently in place seems like it is clearly the best option.
On a side note, I think introducing new maps (process, metalworks, sunshine, ect.) is a much better way to keep the game from getting stale than new weapons.
On a side note, I think introducing new maps (process, metalworks, sunshine, ect.) is a much better way to keep the game from getting stale than new weapons.
Idk man, once i started getting into dota, captains mode stood out to me as a very obvious mechanic that was in place to prevent counterpicking.
Plus, which is more confusing: watching a few competitive games without pub weapons ever being even mentioned? Or watching a few competitive games where the weapons each team can and cant use is determined for everyone right at the beginning.
Idk man, once i started getting into dota, captains mode stood out to me as a very obvious mechanic that was in place to prevent counterpicking.
Plus, which is more confusing: watching a few competitive games without pub weapons ever being even mentioned? Or watching a few competitive games where the weapons each team can and cant use is determined for everyone right at the beginning.
Plus, which is more confusing: watching a few competitive games without pub weapons ever being even mentioned? Or watching a few competitive games where the weapons each team can and cant use is determined for everyone right at the beginning.
TomSinisterA lot of this thread has been talking about people who are new to the competetive scene, specifically what new people like myself may or may not want to see in 6's. Personally, I found the world of competetive 6 vs 6 very confusing and intimidating. I think implimenting an intricate vote/ban system would only make it even more confusing for new players. The whitelist system thats currently in place seems like it is clearly the best option.
On a side note, I think introducing new maps (process, metalworks, sunshine, ect.) is a much better way to keep the game from getting stale than new weapons.
I couldn't care less about changing the system regarding items, I'm sure 90% of players would agree. But if it means there's a chance in hell of getting any kind of Valve support if we do use such a system then sign me up.
[quote=TomSinister]A lot of this thread has been talking about people who are new to the competetive scene, specifically what new people like myself may or may not want to see in 6's. Personally, I found the world of competetive 6 vs 6 very confusing and intimidating. I think implimenting an intricate vote/ban system would only make it even more confusing for new players. The whitelist system thats currently in place seems like it is clearly the best option.
On a side note, I think introducing new maps (process, metalworks, sunshine, ect.) is a much better way to keep the game from getting stale than new weapons.[/quote]
I couldn't care less about changing the system regarding items, I'm sure 90% of players would agree. But if it means there's a chance in hell of getting any kind of Valve support if we do use such a system then sign me up.
On a side note, I think introducing new maps (process, metalworks, sunshine, ect.) is a much better way to keep the game from getting stale than new weapons.[/quote]
I couldn't care less about changing the system regarding items, I'm sure 90% of players would agree. But if it means there's a chance in hell of getting any kind of Valve support if we do use such a system then sign me up.
bastidyou know why the widowmaker is banned?
...you're kidding right?
How about a rundown:
1shot per 30 Metal. So right out of the gate, you have 6 shots. Starting right here it's now currently a shotgun, but you need to loot metal to reload. However, you regen 1 metal per 1 damage dealt, or so it appears after about 5 minutes of testing.
So, in order to completely regen your shot, you need to do 30 damage per shot. At close range you deal about 9 damage per pellt, this means you need to hit 3/10 pellets fired to regen your metal. So at close range, as long as you hit ~30% of your shots. You have infinite ammo.
At medium range, this lowers to around 6 damage/pellet. So you need to hit 5/10 pellets. This means as long as you hit half your shots, you have infinite ammo.
Now, people don't all completely suck at this game, and can actually hit their shots. So as long as they aren't chipping you for 3 damage at long range, widowmaker will effectively give you infinite ammo without the need of reloading. Even the random scrub can hit a few shots, get all their ammo back and get 7-9 loaded shots, before considering ammo packs, and before considering looting 100/kill.
Now: compare it to the shotgun. Why in the hell wouldn't this be banned?
[quote=bastid]
you know why the widowmaker is banned?
[/quote]
...you're kidding right?
How about a rundown:
1shot per 30 Metal. So right out of the gate, you have 6 shots. Starting right here it's now currently a shotgun, but you need to loot metal to reload. However, you regen 1 metal per 1 damage dealt, or so it appears after about 5 minutes of testing.
So, in order to completely regen your shot, you need to do 30 damage per shot. At close range you deal about 9 damage per pellt, this means you need to hit 3/10 pellets fired to regen your metal. So at close range, as long as you hit ~30% of your shots. You [i]have infinite ammo.[/i]
At medium range, this lowers to around 6 damage/pellet. So you need to hit 5/10 pellets. This means as long as you hit half your shots, you [i]have infinite ammo.[/i]
Now, people don't all completely suck at this game, and can actually hit their shots. So as long as they aren't chipping you for 3 damage at long range, widowmaker will effectively give you infinite ammo without the need of reloading. Even the random scrub can hit a few shots, get all their ammo back and get 7-9 loaded shots, before considering ammo packs, and before considering looting 100/kill.
Now: compare it to the shotgun. Why in the hell wouldn't this be banned?
you know why the widowmaker is banned?
[/quote]
...you're kidding right?
How about a rundown:
1shot per 30 Metal. So right out of the gate, you have 6 shots. Starting right here it's now currently a shotgun, but you need to loot metal to reload. However, you regen 1 metal per 1 damage dealt, or so it appears after about 5 minutes of testing.
So, in order to completely regen your shot, you need to do 30 damage per shot. At close range you deal about 9 damage per pellt, this means you need to hit 3/10 pellets fired to regen your metal. So at close range, as long as you hit ~30% of your shots. You [i]have infinite ammo.[/i]
At medium range, this lowers to around 6 damage/pellet. So you need to hit 5/10 pellets. This means as long as you hit half your shots, you [i]have infinite ammo.[/i]
Now, people don't all completely suck at this game, and can actually hit their shots. So as long as they aren't chipping you for 3 damage at long range, widowmaker will effectively give you infinite ammo without the need of reloading. Even the random scrub can hit a few shots, get all their ammo back and get 7-9 loaded shots, before considering ammo packs, and before considering looting 100/kill.
Now: compare it to the shotgun. Why in the hell wouldn't this be banned?
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.