all i've got out of this thread is that slin thinks sigafoo has the best understanding of the future of competitive tf2
forgive me if i don't rate anything else you're saying then, slin
The State of TF2, Post-Valve Meetings
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
all i've got out of this thread is that slin thinks sigafoo has the best understanding of the future of competitive tf2
forgive me if i don't rate anything else you're saying then, slin
forgive me if i don't rate anything else you're saying then, slin
MR_SLINValve doesn't care about weapon balancing right now. Who cares if a weapon is overpowered in 6v6 if the final competitive format is 7v7? 4v4? 5v5? What if a weapon is overpowered with class limit 2 but not with class limit 3?
Whether an unlock is "overpowered" is hardly the point, you're missing the subtlety of the argument. Many of these weapons have been around for years and are aimed purely at casual play and have literally no place in a competitive environment yet their effects are so strong that they have to be included. The situation has been tolerable because whitelist is a thing, but if Valve are committing to MM then that's no longer the case.
Purely fun mechanics or mechanics made to make up for the inherent randomness of pub play can no longer be strong enough to have an impact competitively and they simply have to do something about it, once again the parachute is fucking ridiculous in this regard, the vitasaw is another example.
They don't need to consider "balance" to do this, they have to commit to a competitive mindset - it is a completely different matter. They can include weird shit that is basically ineffective and players who just like to pub with odd loadouts can still do so. From a game design perspective that's both fine and necessary.
"Balance" isn't the key, it's about putting the skill of competitive play first. You can't have a no-whitelist MM without making those changes and have it taken seriously, it doesn't matter how many players you have or what ruleset, in fact changing them is probably a prerequisite for any format to work. Some items are simply too powerful for the low skill anti-competitive mechanic they introduce and you don't need to argue about balance to change them.
[quote=MR_SLIN]Valve doesn't care about weapon balancing right now. Who cares if a weapon is overpowered in 6v6 if the final competitive format is 7v7? 4v4? 5v5? What if a weapon is overpowered with class limit 2 but not with class limit 3?
[/quote]
Whether an unlock is "overpowered" is hardly the point, you're missing the subtlety of the argument. Many of these weapons have been around for years and are aimed purely at casual play and have literally no place in a competitive environment yet their effects are so strong that they have to be included. The situation has been tolerable because whitelist is a thing, but if Valve are committing to MM then that's no longer the case.
Purely fun mechanics or mechanics made to make up for the inherent randomness of pub play can no longer be strong enough to have an impact competitively and they simply have to do something about it, once again the parachute is fucking ridiculous in this regard, the vitasaw is another example.
They don't need to consider "balance" to do this, they have to commit to a competitive mindset - it is a completely different matter. They can include weird shit that is basically ineffective and players who just like to pub with odd loadouts can still do so. From a game design perspective that's both fine and necessary.
"Balance" isn't the key, it's about putting the skill of competitive play first. You can't have a no-whitelist MM without making those changes and have it taken seriously, it doesn't matter how many players you have or what ruleset, in fact changing them is probably a prerequisite for any format to work. Some items are simply too powerful for the low skill anti-competitive mechanic they introduce and you don't need to argue about balance to change them.
[/quote]
Whether an unlock is "overpowered" is hardly the point, you're missing the subtlety of the argument. Many of these weapons have been around for years and are aimed purely at casual play and have literally no place in a competitive environment yet their effects are so strong that they have to be included. The situation has been tolerable because whitelist is a thing, but if Valve are committing to MM then that's no longer the case.
Purely fun mechanics or mechanics made to make up for the inherent randomness of pub play can no longer be strong enough to have an impact competitively and they simply have to do something about it, once again the parachute is fucking ridiculous in this regard, the vitasaw is another example.
They don't need to consider "balance" to do this, they have to commit to a competitive mindset - it is a completely different matter. They can include weird shit that is basically ineffective and players who just like to pub with odd loadouts can still do so. From a game design perspective that's both fine and necessary.
"Balance" isn't the key, it's about putting the skill of competitive play first. You can't have a no-whitelist MM without making those changes and have it taken seriously, it doesn't matter how many players you have or what ruleset, in fact changing them is probably a prerequisite for any format to work. Some items are simply too powerful for the low skill anti-competitive mechanic they introduce and you don't need to argue about balance to change them.
MR_SLINI think that the TF2 dev team handled everything pretty well given these circumstances, and while they may not be able to satisfy everyone, I think that they've done a good job and that's why I have faith in them to make the best decisions for their game moving forward. People will always want more updates in less time with more content, but they've done the best that they can and that is commendable.
Do you actually believe what you're saying? The dev team handled everything pretty well? They worked on MM for two years and what they gave us is a pile of shit. What exactly took them two years? Creating a barely working server infrastructure and some new HUD elements? Because they surely didn't spend their time playtesting, balancing weapons, classes, creating tutorials or anything. How do you call that "handling pretty well"?
"oh, its because they're a small dev team". I don't care. Even if they are just three interns in two years they should have been able to create a properly balanced 6v6 format. If they wanted to. Because all the info they needed was here on tf.tv all along. Any of the top players could give them the balance suggestions they obviously need. But no, instead they make a survey asking the pubbers who tried MM : "was the game gud? yes/no" Yes, that is surely going to give them a lot of useful information.
"but communicating with the community is not their way" Then their way is shit. A no-communication format would only work if the developers were competent and understood their own game perfectly well. Clearly they don't.
Honestly, if you are so confident in your way of helping Valve, go organize a cup with a 5v5, 7v7, 8v8 format, no class limits and balance changes. See how many people sign up. The answer is probably not many, because nobody wants to waste their time with this.
[quote=MR_SLIN]
I think that the TF2 dev team handled everything pretty well given these circumstances, and while they may not be able to satisfy everyone, I think that they've done a good job and that's why I have faith in them to make the best decisions for their game moving forward. People will always want more updates in less time with more content, but they've done the best that they can and that is commendable.[/quote]
Do you actually believe what you're saying? The dev team handled everything pretty well? They worked on MM for two years and what they gave us is a pile of shit. What exactly took them two years? Creating a barely working server infrastructure and some new HUD elements? Because they surely didn't spend their time playtesting, balancing weapons, classes, creating tutorials or anything. How do you call that "handling pretty well"?
"oh, its because they're a small dev team". I don't care. Even if they are just three interns in two years they should have been able to create a properly balanced 6v6 format. If they wanted to. Because all the info they needed was here on tf.tv all along. Any of the top players could give them the balance suggestions they obviously need. But no, instead they make a survey asking the pubbers who tried MM : "was the game gud? yes/no" Yes, that is surely going to give them a lot of useful information.
"but communicating with the community is not their way" Then their way is shit. A no-communication format would only work if the developers were competent and understood their own game perfectly well. Clearly they don't.
Honestly, if you are so confident in your way of helping Valve, go organize a cup with a 5v5, 7v7, 8v8 format, no class limits and balance changes. See how many people sign up. The answer is probably not many, because nobody wants to waste their time with this.
I think that the TF2 dev team handled everything pretty well given these circumstances, and while they may not be able to satisfy everyone, I think that they've done a good job and that's why I have faith in them to make the best decisions for their game moving forward. People will always want more updates in less time with more content, but they've done the best that they can and that is commendable.[/quote]
Do you actually believe what you're saying? The dev team handled everything pretty well? They worked on MM for two years and what they gave us is a pile of shit. What exactly took them two years? Creating a barely working server infrastructure and some new HUD elements? Because they surely didn't spend their time playtesting, balancing weapons, classes, creating tutorials or anything. How do you call that "handling pretty well"?
"oh, its because they're a small dev team". I don't care. Even if they are just three interns in two years they should have been able to create a properly balanced 6v6 format. If they wanted to. Because all the info they needed was here on tf.tv all along. Any of the top players could give them the balance suggestions they obviously need. But no, instead they make a survey asking the pubbers who tried MM : "was the game gud? yes/no" Yes, that is surely going to give them a lot of useful information.
"but communicating with the community is not their way" Then their way is shit. A no-communication format would only work if the developers were competent and understood their own game perfectly well. Clearly they don't.
Honestly, if you are so confident in your way of helping Valve, go organize a cup with a 5v5, 7v7, 8v8 format, no class limits and balance changes. See how many people sign up. The answer is probably not many, because nobody wants to waste their time with this.
MR_SLINI think that the TF2 dev team handled everything pretty well given these circumstances, and while they may not be able to satisfy everyone, I think that they've done a good job and that's why I have faith in them to make the best decisions for their game moving forward. People will always want more updates in less time with more content, but they've done the best that they can and that is commendable.
its been a fucking disaster considering the circumstances. Like even ignoring the ruleset itself (which imo there can be good reasons for it being lenient like it is, assuming its open to change later) there were a ton of issues:
- The company has two successful matchmaking systems and appeared to take very little reference from them, resulting in issues with region placement and major ELO hell problems for average skilled players and below
- The MM system itself had a six month beta but saw more changes (that were made known to us at least) in its first month post-release than it seemed to during the entire beta.
- The quickplay system was released with casual, which at launch had shorter games, longer wait times, penalized players for leaving, and was lacking standard features that already existed, like map-selection, ad-hoc connections, or the ability to choose based on server location or player count. Competitive & MM became a scapegoat for an arguably worse casual experience for people who werent particularly interested in MM
- The update itself launched with massive server problems, which combined with the above, meant that the game was basically unplayable outside of community servers (AKA the servers that completely lacked all the new features they were trying to push)
peak player count barely broke numbers set merely a month before and have basically stagnated since then. this entire ordeal has failed to meet very reasonable expectations so far, and their increased frequency of updates look more like extensive damage control to bring the game to a place that everyone kind of expected it to be when MyM was released back in July. The ruleset is just icing on what is already a poorly executed system overall.
[quote=MR_SLIN]I think that the TF2 dev team handled everything pretty well given these circumstances, and while they may not be able to satisfy everyone, I think that they've done a good job and that's why I have faith in them to make the best decisions for their game moving forward. People will always want more updates in less time with more content, but they've done the best that they can and that is commendable.[/quote]
its been a fucking disaster considering the circumstances. Like even ignoring the ruleset itself (which imo there can be good reasons for it being lenient like it is, assuming its open to change later) there were a ton of issues:[list]
[*] The company has two successful matchmaking systems and appeared to take very little reference from them, resulting in issues with region placement and major ELO hell problems for average skilled players and below
[*] The MM system itself had a six month beta but saw more changes (that were made known to us at least) in its first month post-release than it seemed to during the entire beta.
[*] The quickplay system was released with casual, which at launch had shorter games, longer wait times, penalized players for leaving, and was lacking standard features that already existed, like map-selection, ad-hoc connections, or the ability to choose based on server location or player count. Competitive & MM became a scapegoat for an arguably worse casual experience for people who werent particularly interested in MM
[*] The update itself launched with massive server problems, which combined with the above, meant that the game was basically unplayable outside of community servers (AKA the servers that completely lacked all the new features they were trying to push)[/list]
peak player count barely broke numbers set merely a month before and have basically stagnated since then. this entire ordeal has failed to meet very reasonable expectations so far, and their increased frequency of updates look more like extensive damage control to bring the game to a place that everyone kind of expected it to be when MyM was released back in July. The ruleset is just icing on what is already a poorly executed system overall.
its been a fucking disaster considering the circumstances. Like even ignoring the ruleset itself (which imo there can be good reasons for it being lenient like it is, assuming its open to change later) there were a ton of issues:[list]
[*] The company has two successful matchmaking systems and appeared to take very little reference from them, resulting in issues with region placement and major ELO hell problems for average skilled players and below
[*] The MM system itself had a six month beta but saw more changes (that were made known to us at least) in its first month post-release than it seemed to during the entire beta.
[*] The quickplay system was released with casual, which at launch had shorter games, longer wait times, penalized players for leaving, and was lacking standard features that already existed, like map-selection, ad-hoc connections, or the ability to choose based on server location or player count. Competitive & MM became a scapegoat for an arguably worse casual experience for people who werent particularly interested in MM
[*] The update itself launched with massive server problems, which combined with the above, meant that the game was basically unplayable outside of community servers (AKA the servers that completely lacked all the new features they were trying to push)[/list]
peak player count barely broke numbers set merely a month before and have basically stagnated since then. this entire ordeal has failed to meet very reasonable expectations so far, and their increased frequency of updates look more like extensive damage control to bring the game to a place that everyone kind of expected it to be when MyM was released back in July. The ruleset is just icing on what is already a poorly executed system overall.
MR_SLINYou could say "why don't they just use the competitive 6s format that we've been running for almost a decade?" but the problem is that it might not be the perfect format. It might be close, but it might not be the final format. I personally tend to agree with this notion because I don't think you should have some classes limited to 2 and others to 1.
The problem is that there is no perfect format, and changing the format just for the sake of change is a waste of time and resources. 6v6 is the best we've got, and is certainly the most established; if the dev team is as small as most people think, they should follow what prior work there is, not start from scratch. I do agree that having some classes limited to 2 and some to 1 is pretty dumb, but it's a necessary consequence of the state of balance between the classes. Ideally, Valve should commit to a class limit (probably a limit of one) and then balance around that.
As an aside, I think that this thread has gone pretty far into Slin vs. the world, when this is really the kind of discussion the community should be having with the TF2 team. As it stands, we're all just tilting at windmills.
[quote=MR_SLIN]You could say "why don't they just use the competitive 6s format that we've been running for almost a decade?" but the problem is that it might not be the perfect format. It might be close, but it might not be the final format. I personally tend to agree with this notion because I don't think you should have some classes limited to 2 and others to 1.[/quote]
The problem is that there is no perfect format, and changing the format just for the sake of change is a waste of time and resources. 6v6 is the best we've got, and is certainly the most established; if the dev team is as small as most people think, they should follow what prior work there is, not start from scratch. I do agree that having some classes limited to 2 and some to 1 is pretty dumb, but it's a necessary consequence of the state of balance between the classes. Ideally, Valve should commit to a class limit (probably a limit of one) and then balance around that.
As an aside, I think that this thread has gone pretty far into Slin vs. the world, when this is really the kind of discussion the community should be having with the TF2 team. As it stands, we're all just tilting at windmills.
The problem is that there is no perfect format, and changing the format just for the sake of change is a waste of time and resources. 6v6 is the best we've got, and is certainly the most established; if the dev team is as small as most people think, they should follow what prior work there is, not start from scratch. I do agree that having some classes limited to 2 and some to 1 is pretty dumb, but it's a necessary consequence of the state of balance between the classes. Ideally, Valve should commit to a class limit (probably a limit of one) and then balance around that.
As an aside, I think that this thread has gone pretty far into Slin vs. the world, when this is really the kind of discussion the community should be having with the TF2 team. As it stands, we're all just tilting at windmills.
the tf2 dev team is one of the worst dev teams ive ever seen in a good game and THE worst for a game of this size how can you speak well of them when 90% of their "work" turns out to be fucking garbage
the tf2 dev team is one of the worst dev teams ive ever seen in a good game and THE worst for a game of this size how can you speak well of them when 90% of their "work" turns out to be fucking garbage
this is what happens when you get MLP-fans as your developers.
this is what happens when you get MLP-fans as your developers.
Zanethe tf2 dev team is one of the worst dev teams ive ever seen in a good game and THE worst for a game of this size how can you speak well of them when 90% of their "work" turns out to be fucking garbage
On the other hand, though, as a programmer myself, I know how terryfing experience can it be to work on a 10 years old codebase. I don't envy TF2 dev team, working on an old spaghetti code where hardly anybody knows what the hell is going on and looking at your collegue sitting next to you who is working on a state-of-the-art project that uses cool new technologies must be frustrating. Also, the code as old as TF2's is like a pile of old, dry shit - it doesn't smell bad, but when you touch it with a stick, this is where all the stench comes out. So it's not like developers don't give a shit about TF2 quality. It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.
[quote=Zane]the tf2 dev team is one of the worst dev teams ive ever seen in a good game and THE worst for a game of this size how can you speak well of them when 90% of their "work" turns out to be fucking garbage[/quote]
On the other hand, though, as a programmer myself, I know how terryfing experience can it be to work on a 10 years old codebase. I don't envy TF2 dev team, working on an old spaghetti code where hardly anybody knows what the hell is going on and looking at your collegue sitting next to you who is working on a state-of-the-art project that uses cool new technologies must be frustrating. Also, the code as old as TF2's is like a pile of old, dry shit - it doesn't smell bad, but when you touch it with a stick, this is where all the stench comes out. So it's not like developers don't give a shit about TF2 quality. It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.
On the other hand, though, as a programmer myself, I know how terryfing experience can it be to work on a 10 years old codebase. I don't envy TF2 dev team, working on an old spaghetti code where hardly anybody knows what the hell is going on and looking at your collegue sitting next to you who is working on a state-of-the-art project that uses cool new technologies must be frustrating. Also, the code as old as TF2's is like a pile of old, dry shit - it doesn't smell bad, but when you touch it with a stick, this is where all the stench comes out. So it's not like developers don't give a shit about TF2 quality. It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.
I've never really understood that the "varying class limits is counterintuitive" thing.
You could actually get fairly reasonable class limits close to what we have already by using 2 for attack classes and 1 for defense and support classes. (this might be even more reasonable with pyro being rebalanced). This is a solution that is consistent with existing in-game logic. Medic limit 1 is always a good place to start because medic is the most powerful class in the game and the only actual support class so teams are going to run as many as they can (within reason) of them.
A bigger problem with the current format is probably that it's way easier to defend than to attack and some of this comes from the fact that there's a complete lack of diversity for current class roles in the game.
To break a stalemate you have to create an advantage somehow- scout and soldier can do this through getting picks/creating space/doing damage/forcing. Demoman can do this to a lesser extent as he does fill more of a defense role. Sniper and spy are an alternative that can be used as a pick class but both are easily counterable by smart teams and still don't necessarily allow the team to push off the 1 pick, as well as a sniper often making the other team play even more conservatively. Pyro is quite clearly not an attack class despite being grouped as one and heavy and engineer are absolutely the worst classes for breaking stalemates as they're based on area denial.
If valve are looking towards creating their own format/ruleset they should look to try and create a healthy balance between stalemates and breaking them. Having periods of downtime and then pushes is no bad thing- if the game was constant teamfights then it would also be unenjoyable to watch and very difficult to cast.
Right now though, it's pretty clear that once a stalemate is established it's really hard to break out of it against a good team in the current meta. I think the pacing of the game is probably one of the things most key to its success and when players complain about the game being "aids" it's normally either because it's way too stalematey or because there's always something going on. Some gamemodes like highlander and payload especially suffer from this because of the increased player count and because the objective is constantly being played as opposed to in short bursts like with control points.
I've never really understood that the "varying class limits is counterintuitive" thing.
You could actually get fairly reasonable class limits close to what we have already by using 2 for attack classes and 1 for defense and support classes. (this might be even more reasonable with pyro being rebalanced). This is a solution that is consistent with existing in-game logic. Medic limit 1 is always a good place to start because medic is the most powerful class in the game and the only actual support class so teams are going to run as many as they can (within reason) of them.
A bigger problem with the current format is probably that it's way easier to defend than to attack and some of this comes from the fact that there's a complete lack of diversity for current class roles in the game.
To break a stalemate you have to create an advantage somehow- scout and soldier can do this through getting picks/creating space/doing damage/forcing. Demoman can do this to a lesser extent as he does fill more of a defense role. Sniper and spy are an alternative that can be used as a pick class but both are easily counterable by smart teams and still don't necessarily allow the team to push off the 1 pick, as well as a sniper often making the other team play even more conservatively. Pyro is quite clearly not an attack class despite being grouped as one and heavy and engineer are absolutely the worst classes for breaking stalemates as they're based on area denial.
If valve are looking towards creating their own format/ruleset they should look to try and create a healthy balance between stalemates and breaking them. Having periods of downtime and then pushes is no bad thing- if the game was constant teamfights then it would also be unenjoyable to watch and very difficult to cast.
Right now though, it's pretty clear that once a stalemate is established it's really hard to break out of it against a good team in the current meta. I think the pacing of the game is probably one of the things most key to its success and when players complain about the game being "aids" it's normally either because it's way too stalematey or because there's always something going on. Some gamemodes like highlander and payload especially suffer from this because of the increased player count and because the objective is constantly being played as opposed to in short bursts like with control points.
You could actually get fairly reasonable class limits close to what we have already by using 2 for attack classes and 1 for defense and support classes. (this might be even more reasonable with pyro being rebalanced). This is a solution that is consistent with existing in-game logic. Medic limit 1 is always a good place to start because medic is the most powerful class in the game and the only actual support class so teams are going to run as many as they can (within reason) of them.
A bigger problem with the current format is probably that it's way easier to defend than to attack and some of this comes from the fact that there's a complete lack of diversity for current class roles in the game.
To break a stalemate you have to create an advantage somehow- scout and soldier can do this through getting picks/creating space/doing damage/forcing. Demoman can do this to a lesser extent as he does fill more of a defense role. Sniper and spy are an alternative that can be used as a pick class but both are easily counterable by smart teams and still don't necessarily allow the team to push off the 1 pick, as well as a sniper often making the other team play even more conservatively. Pyro is quite clearly not an attack class despite being grouped as one and heavy and engineer are absolutely the worst classes for breaking stalemates as they're based on area denial.
If valve are looking towards creating their own format/ruleset they should look to try and create a healthy balance between stalemates and breaking them. Having periods of downtime and then pushes is no bad thing- if the game was constant teamfights then it would also be unenjoyable to watch and very difficult to cast.
Right now though, it's pretty clear that once a stalemate is established it's really hard to break out of it against a good team in the current meta. I think the pacing of the game is probably one of the things most key to its success and when players complain about the game being "aids" it's normally either because it's way too stalematey or because there's always something going on. Some gamemodes like highlander and payload especially suffer from this because of the increased player count and because the objective is constantly being played as opposed to in short bursts like with control points.
garrappachcZanethe tf2 dev team is one of the worst dev teams ive ever seen in a good game and THE worst for a game of this size how can you speak well of them when 90% of their "work" turns out to be fucking garbageOn the other hand, though, as a programmer myself, I know how terryfing experience can it be to work on a 10 years old codebase. I don't envy TF2 dev team, working on an old spaghetti code where hardly anybody knows what the hell is going on and looking at your collegue sitting next to you who is working on a state-of-the-art project that uses cool new technologies must be frustrating. Also, the code as old as TF2's is like a pile of old, dry shit - it doesn't smell bad, but when you touch it with a stick, this is where all the stench comes out. So it's not like developers don't give a shit about TF2 quality. It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.
oh im well aware of how fucking rotted tf2s code is after years of different teams not being told by their predecessors what to do, its just that they commit to things such as goofy wacky zany taunts and ignore the danger shield
[quote=garrappachc][quote=Zane]the tf2 dev team is one of the worst dev teams ive ever seen in a good game and THE worst for a game of this size how can you speak well of them when 90% of their "work" turns out to be fucking garbage[/quote]
On the other hand, though, as a programmer myself, I know how terryfing experience can it be to work on a 10 years old codebase. I don't envy TF2 dev team, working on an old spaghetti code where hardly anybody knows what the hell is going on and looking at your collegue sitting next to you who is working on a state-of-the-art project that uses cool new technologies must be frustrating. Also, the code as old as TF2's is like a pile of old, dry shit - it doesn't smell bad, but when you touch it with a stick, this is where all the stench comes out. So it's not like developers don't give a shit about TF2 quality. It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.[/quote]
oh im well aware of how fucking rotted tf2s code is after years of different teams not being told by their predecessors what to do, its just that they commit to things such as goofy wacky zany taunts and ignore the danger shield
On the other hand, though, as a programmer myself, I know how terryfing experience can it be to work on a 10 years old codebase. I don't envy TF2 dev team, working on an old spaghetti code where hardly anybody knows what the hell is going on and looking at your collegue sitting next to you who is working on a state-of-the-art project that uses cool new technologies must be frustrating. Also, the code as old as TF2's is like a pile of old, dry shit - it doesn't smell bad, but when you touch it with a stick, this is where all the stench comes out. So it's not like developers don't give a shit about TF2 quality. It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.[/quote]
oh im well aware of how fucking rotted tf2s code is after years of different teams not being told by their predecessors what to do, its just that they commit to things such as goofy wacky zany taunts and ignore the danger shield
ZestyI've never really understood that the "varying class limits is counterintuitive" thing.
You could actually get fairly reasonable class limits close to what we have already by using 2 for attack classes and 1 for defense and support classes.
This actually sounds like a really good idea
[quote=Zesty]I've never really understood that the "varying class limits is counterintuitive" thing.
You could actually get fairly reasonable class limits close to what we have already by using 2 for attack classes and 1 for defense and support classes. [/quote]
This actually sounds like a really good idea
You could actually get fairly reasonable class limits close to what we have already by using 2 for attack classes and 1 for defense and support classes. [/quote]
This actually sounds like a really good idea
garrappachc It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.
How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?
[quote=garrappachc] It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.[/quote]
How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?
How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?
Screwballgarrappachc It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?
Not sure but we're working in valve time here, is that really what we would want to wait on?
[quote=Screwball][quote=garrappachc] It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.[/quote]
How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?[/quote]
Not sure but we're working in valve time here, is that really what we would want to wait on?
How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?[/quote]
Not sure but we're working in valve time here, is that really what we would want to wait on?
Screwballgarrappachc It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?
Do you remember how buggy and horrid the source 2 launch was for dota?
Also, it's already been leaked that they pretty much have ported a lot of their games to source 2.
https://codingrange.com/assets/images/source-2-leaks/p4web-source2.png
I can't imagine they've done anything beyond the "click port button and hope it works".
[quote=Screwball][quote=garrappachc] It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.[/quote]
How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?[/quote]
Do you remember how buggy and horrid the source 2 launch was for dota?
Also, it's already been leaked that they pretty much have ported a lot of their games to source 2.
https://codingrange.com/assets/images/source-2-leaks/p4web-source2.png
I can't imagine they've done anything beyond the "click port button and hope it works".
How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?[/quote]
Do you remember how buggy and horrid the source 2 launch was for dota?
Also, it's already been leaked that they pretty much have ported a lot of their games to source 2.
https://codingrange.com/assets/images/source-2-leaks/p4web-source2.png
I can't imagine they've done anything beyond the "click port button and hope it works".
Paladin_IMSScrewballgarrappachc It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?
Do you remember how buggy and horrid the source 2 launch was for dota?
Also, it's already been leaked that they pretty much have ported a lot of their games to source 2.
https://codingrange.com/assets/images/source-2-leaks/p4web-source2.png
I can't imagine they've done anything beyond the "click port button and hope it works".
Sorry if this is off-topic (as the multi-million dollar TF2 item economy more than likely means we won't get a source 2 port any time soon) but could you point me to the source of that image? I am very intrigued...
[quote=Paladin_IMS][quote=Screwball][quote=garrappachc] It's just extremely difficult to maintain the code.[/quote]
How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?[/quote]
Do you remember how buggy and horrid the source 2 launch was for dota?
Also, it's already been leaked that they pretty much have ported a lot of their games to source 2.
https://codingrange.com/assets/images/source-2-leaks/p4web-source2.png
I can't imagine they've done anything beyond the "click port button and hope it works".[/quote]
Sorry if this is off-topic (as the multi-million dollar TF2 item economy more than likely means we won't get a source 2 port any time soon) but could you point me to the source of that image? I am very intrigued...
How hard would it be for them to scrap the whole thing, port the resources over to source 2, and start from scratch like they did with DOTA 2?[/quote]
Do you remember how buggy and horrid the source 2 launch was for dota?
Also, it's already been leaked that they pretty much have ported a lot of their games to source 2.
https://codingrange.com/assets/images/source-2-leaks/p4web-source2.png
I can't imagine they've done anything beyond the "click port button and hope it works".[/quote]
Sorry if this is off-topic (as the multi-million dollar TF2 item economy more than likely means we won't get a source 2 port any time soon) but could you point me to the source of that image? I am very intrigued...
AntimoonI think that this thread has gone pretty far into Slin vs. the world, when this is really the kind of discussion the community should be having with the TF2 team. As it stands, we're all just tilting at windmills.
I do realize that my opinion on this situation is going to be unpopular, but I also know who my audience is. The whole reason that we're on this forum in the first place is because we're dissatisfied with the game that the developers gave us, so we created our own game mode / format that we could play in tournaments. Anything that the developers create that is seen as "less" than what we've already created for ourselves is going to be seen as incompetent. Matchmaking system? Woop de frickin' doo, TSC and Erynn created PugChamp with only two people, complete with ELO system and public stat tracking. SizzlingCalamari created an entire stats system that allows people to drill down into their individual performances, and it's accessible in-game. We have amazing map makers that have created maps that the developers had to basically steal from us since they couldn't do it on their own.
If you compare what they've done to what we've done, then of course it's going to look bad. But I look at it this way -- the TF2 dev team is pivoting right now, moving from years and years of casual development to now supporting a competitive format. We've been working on our competitive game for almost a decade with many, many people getting involved. It is truly a grassroots competitive scene. Their team has only been working on this for two years and they've come a really long way. If I compare the game 12 months ago to the game as it is now, there's been a large number of really positive changes made to the game and that's what I'm happy about. If you guys compare the game as it is now to the competitive game that we've been working on for years and years, then of course it will pale in comparison and you'll be upset.
That said, it's all constructive feedback and many of you guys aren't wrong. I'm just saying put things in perspective and the whole situation is not as bad as you're painting it to be.
[quote=Antimoon]I think that this thread has gone pretty far into Slin vs. the world, when this is really the kind of discussion the community should be having with the TF2 team. As it stands, we're all just tilting at windmills.[/quote]
I do realize that my opinion on this situation is going to be unpopular, but I also know who my audience is. The whole reason that we're on this forum in the first place is because we're dissatisfied with the game that the developers gave us, so we created our own game mode / format that we could play in tournaments. Anything that the developers create that is seen as "less" than what we've already created for ourselves is going to be seen as incompetent. Matchmaking system? Woop de frickin' doo, TSC and Erynn created PugChamp with only two people, complete with ELO system and public stat tracking. SizzlingCalamari created an entire stats system that allows people to drill down into their individual performances, and it's accessible in-game. We have amazing map makers that have created maps that the developers had to basically steal from us since they couldn't do it on their own.
If you compare what they've done to what we've done, then of course it's going to look bad. But I look at it this way -- the TF2 dev team is pivoting right now, moving from years and years of casual development to now supporting a competitive format. We've been working on our competitive game for almost a decade with many, many people getting involved. It is truly a grassroots competitive scene. Their team has only been working on this for two years and they've come a really long way. If I compare the game 12 months ago to the game as it is now, there's been a large number of really positive changes made to the game and that's what I'm happy about. If you guys compare the game as it is now to the competitive game that we've been working on for years and years, then of course it will pale in comparison and you'll be upset.
That said, it's all constructive feedback and many of you guys aren't wrong. I'm just saying put things in perspective and the whole situation is not as bad as you're painting it to be.
I do realize that my opinion on this situation is going to be unpopular, but I also know who my audience is. The whole reason that we're on this forum in the first place is because we're dissatisfied with the game that the developers gave us, so we created our own game mode / format that we could play in tournaments. Anything that the developers create that is seen as "less" than what we've already created for ourselves is going to be seen as incompetent. Matchmaking system? Woop de frickin' doo, TSC and Erynn created PugChamp with only two people, complete with ELO system and public stat tracking. SizzlingCalamari created an entire stats system that allows people to drill down into their individual performances, and it's accessible in-game. We have amazing map makers that have created maps that the developers had to basically steal from us since they couldn't do it on their own.
If you compare what they've done to what we've done, then of course it's going to look bad. But I look at it this way -- the TF2 dev team is pivoting right now, moving from years and years of casual development to now supporting a competitive format. We've been working on our competitive game for almost a decade with many, many people getting involved. It is truly a grassroots competitive scene. Their team has only been working on this for two years and they've come a really long way. If I compare the game 12 months ago to the game as it is now, there's been a large number of really positive changes made to the game and that's what I'm happy about. If you guys compare the game as it is now to the competitive game that we've been working on for years and years, then of course it will pale in comparison and you'll be upset.
That said, it's all constructive feedback and many of you guys aren't wrong. I'm just saying put things in perspective and the whole situation is not as bad as you're painting it to be.
EnterimSorry if this is off-topic (as the multi-million dollar TF2 item economy more than likely means we won't get a source 2 port any time soon) but could you point me to the source of that image? I am very intrigued...
Leak is around 3 years old, now:
[quote=Enterim]
Sorry if this is off-topic (as the multi-million dollar TF2 item economy more than likely means we won't get a source 2 port any time soon) but could you point me to the source of that image? I am very intrigued...[/quote]
Leak is around 3 years old, now:
https://twitter.com/SteamDB/status/497516483229257728
Sorry if this is off-topic (as the multi-million dollar TF2 item economy more than likely means we won't get a source 2 port any time soon) but could you point me to the source of that image? I am very intrigued...[/quote]
Leak is around 3 years old, now:
https://twitter.com/SteamDB/status/497516483229257728
mildy off-topic, but isn't there an argument to be made that allowing all the unlocks in competitive is unfair to newer players? i've been in the game for a year and a half and i'm still finding new unlocks. i had to trade for a loose cannon a month ago because one never dropped for me.
mildy off-topic, but isn't there an argument to be made that allowing all the unlocks in competitive is unfair to newer players? i've been in the game for a year and a half and i'm still finding new unlocks. i had to trade for a loose cannon a month ago because one never dropped for me.
samifacemildy off-topic, but isn't there an argument to be made that allowing all the unlocks in competitive is unfair to newer players? i've been in the game for a year and a half and i'm still finding new unlocks. i had to trade for a loose cannon a month ago because one never dropped for me.
haha but mym was great now you can buy all the demo weapons in a box for 5 bucks :))
[quote=samiface]mildy off-topic, but isn't there an argument to be made that allowing all the unlocks in competitive is unfair to newer players? i've been in the game for a year and a half and i'm still finding new unlocks. i had to trade for a loose cannon a month ago because one never dropped for me.[/quote]
haha but mym was great now you can buy all the demo weapons in a box for 5 bucks :))
haha but mym was great now you can buy all the demo weapons in a box for 5 bucks :))
samifacemildy off-topic, but isn't there an argument to be made that allowing all the unlocks in competitive is unfair to newer players? i've been in the game for a year and a half and i'm still finding new unlocks. i had to trade for a loose cannon a month ago because one never dropped for me.
If you play consistently and a decent amount, you should be able to get enough drops to just do 1:1 weapon trades on scrap.tf for most of the stuff you're missing.
[quote=samiface]mildy off-topic, but isn't there an argument to be made that allowing all the unlocks in competitive is unfair to newer players? i've been in the game for a year and a half and i'm still finding new unlocks. i had to trade for a loose cannon a month ago because one never dropped for me.[/quote]
If you play consistently and a decent amount, you should be able to get enough drops to just do 1:1 weapon trades on scrap.tf for most of the stuff you're missing.
If you play consistently and a decent amount, you should be able to get enough drops to just do 1:1 weapon trades on scrap.tf for most of the stuff you're missing.
you need a premium account for matchmaking; if you buy a single mann co ticket for $.99 for premium you can turn it into 168 unique weapons.
you need a premium account for matchmaking; if you buy a single mann co ticket for $.99 for premium you can turn it into 168 unique weapons.
These seem like tricks for people who are familiar with the game. Actually, I don't really know any of these tricks and I'm pretty sure I'm unfamiliar with a lot of the weapons as well. The fact that you don't just spawn into a matchmaking server with every item at your disposal is probably also a roadblock.
These seem like tricks for people who are familiar with the game. Actually, I don't really know any of these tricks and I'm pretty sure I'm unfamiliar with a lot of the weapons as well. The fact that you don't just spawn into a matchmaking server with every item at your disposal is probably also a roadblock.
MR_SLINBut I look at it this way -- the TF2 dev team is pivoting right now, moving from years and years of casual development to now supporting a competitive format.
Objectively that isn't the case though, they've made a system that offers something that their new competitor offers to a minimal level of quality (it works), there's no clear change of direction to making the game fundamentally competitively focused though.
In this regard the changes to the casual format were far more significant and really looked like they might be trying to push something big, but the massive backlash and reversal of many of those changes probably points to the dev team reassessing their priorities and their confidence in the wider player base's willingness to change mindset.
[quote=MR_SLIN]But I look at it this way -- the TF2 dev team is pivoting right now, moving from years and years of casual development to now supporting a competitive format. [/quote]
Objectively that isn't the case though, they've made a system that offers something that their new competitor offers to a minimal level of quality (it works), there's no clear change of direction to making the game fundamentally competitively focused though.
In this regard the changes to the casual format were far more significant and really looked like they might be trying to push something big, but the massive backlash and reversal of many of those changes probably points to the dev team reassessing their priorities and their confidence in the wider player base's willingness to change mindset.
Objectively that isn't the case though, they've made a system that offers something that their new competitor offers to a minimal level of quality (it works), there's no clear change of direction to making the game fundamentally competitively focused though.
In this regard the changes to the casual format were far more significant and really looked like they might be trying to push something big, but the massive backlash and reversal of many of those changes probably points to the dev team reassessing their priorities and their confidence in the wider player base's willingness to change mindset.
If our goal is to get multiple LAN tournaments within the community, not just a valve sponsored one, then realistically we should only be experimenting with class limits of 5 or 6 right? One problem with 9s was that it's too expensive to fly that many people out and computer costs and blah blah blah. So if that's still a realistic problem with 7s or 8s then we can just ignore those unless we can't find something we can all agree with in 5s or 6s right?
If our goal is to get multiple LAN tournaments within the community, not just a valve sponsored one, then realistically we should only be experimenting with class limits of 5 or 6 right? One problem with 9s was that it's too expensive to fly that many people out and computer costs and blah blah blah. So if that's still a realistic problem with 7s or 8s then we can just ignore those unless we can't find something we can all agree with in 5s or 6s right?
NakadaIf our goal is to get multiple LAN tournaments within the community, not just a valve sponsored one, then realistically we should only be experimenting with class limits of 5 or 6 right? One problem with 9s was that it's too expensive to fly that many people out and computer costs and blah blah blah. So if that's still a realistic problem with 7s or 8s then we can just ignore those unless we can't find something we can all agree with in 5s or 6s right?
After this many years of seasons, tournaments and weapon testing the issue isn't that we haven't found the right format. It's that the game isn't being properly adjusted to support 6s. 3 months later and we've yet to see any balance changes, we probably won't see the pyro update until christmas at bare minimum, we've seen no sign of them implementing placement matches or getting off of this dumb system where "team rank total adds up = fair match!!", And I certainly won't hold my breath for a beta branch or any notable changes in the coming months. I'd love, absolutely love to be proven wrong. But we've seen every side of this dice a thousand times and no matter how much you roll it, Valve's going to try and do it their way which is equatable to dragging your feet while you run a marathon.
And if Valve is convinced 6s (or just its associated meta) isn't the best for the game, they're going to be hard pressed to find another format that works without them actively adjusting and rebalancing the game. Which of course, I wouldn't hold your breath for either.
[quote=Nakada]If our goal is to get multiple LAN tournaments within the community, not just a valve sponsored one, then realistically we should only be experimenting with class limits of 5 or 6 right? One problem with 9s was that it's too expensive to fly that many people out and computer costs and blah blah blah. So if that's still a realistic problem with 7s or 8s then we can just ignore those unless we can't find something we can all agree with in 5s or 6s right?[/quote]
After this many years of seasons, tournaments and weapon testing the issue isn't that we haven't found the right format. It's that the game isn't being properly adjusted to support 6s. 3 months later and we've yet to see any balance changes, we probably won't see the pyro update until christmas at bare minimum, we've seen no sign of them implementing placement matches or getting off of this dumb system where "team rank total adds up = fair match!!", And I certainly won't hold my breath for a beta branch or any notable changes in the coming months. I'd love, absolutely love to be proven wrong. But we've seen every side of this dice a thousand times and no matter how much you roll it, Valve's going to try and do it their way which is equatable to dragging your feet while you run a marathon.
And if Valve is convinced 6s (or just its associated meta) isn't the best for the game, they're going to be hard pressed to find another format that works without them actively adjusting and rebalancing the game. Which of course, I wouldn't hold your breath for either.
After this many years of seasons, tournaments and weapon testing the issue isn't that we haven't found the right format. It's that the game isn't being properly adjusted to support 6s. 3 months later and we've yet to see any balance changes, we probably won't see the pyro update until christmas at bare minimum, we've seen no sign of them implementing placement matches or getting off of this dumb system where "team rank total adds up = fair match!!", And I certainly won't hold my breath for a beta branch or any notable changes in the coming months. I'd love, absolutely love to be proven wrong. But we've seen every side of this dice a thousand times and no matter how much you roll it, Valve's going to try and do it their way which is equatable to dragging your feet while you run a marathon.
And if Valve is convinced 6s (or just its associated meta) isn't the best for the game, they're going to be hard pressed to find another format that works without them actively adjusting and rebalancing the game. Which of course, I wouldn't hold your breath for either.
NakadaIf our goal is to get multiple LAN tournaments within the community, not just a valve sponsored one, then realistically we should only be experimenting with class limits of 5 or 6 right? One problem with 9s was that it's too expensive to fly that many people out and computer costs and blah blah blah. So if that's still a realistic problem with 7s or 8s then we can just ignore those unless we can't find something we can all agree with in 5s or 6s right?
Yeah, costs are definitely a factor but the primary reason 9v9 doesn't work is because queue times would be sooo much longer. They're already pretty long with just 6v6.
Valve was able to work around this for 12v12 pubs by partially filling servers and then adding new players to the server as they added themselves to the matchmaking queue.
[quote=Nakada]If our goal is to get multiple LAN tournaments within the community, not just a valve sponsored one, then realistically we should only be experimenting with class limits of 5 or 6 right? One problem with 9s was that it's too expensive to fly that many people out and computer costs and blah blah blah. So if that's still a realistic problem with 7s or 8s then we can just ignore those unless we can't find something we can all agree with in 5s or 6s right?[/quote]
Yeah, costs are definitely a factor but the primary reason 9v9 doesn't work is because queue times would be sooo much longer. They're already pretty long with just 6v6.
Valve was able to work around this for 12v12 pubs by partially filling servers and then adding new players to the server as they added themselves to the matchmaking queue.
Yeah, costs are definitely a factor but the primary reason 9v9 doesn't work is because queue times would be sooo much longer. They're already pretty long with just 6v6.
Valve was able to work around this for 12v12 pubs by partially filling servers and then adding new players to the server as they added themselves to the matchmaking queue.
You know how you deal with an abusively neglectful and manipulative parent who tries to get back into your life?
Not like this:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CeauMcCUYAA5G_n.jpg
Or like this: https://play.esea.net/teams/74784
Like this:
The TF2 community has done more on it's own than Valve ever imagined, and Valve keep dangling their potential acceptance as bait to do... what, exactly? Satisfy some deeply hidden urges and insecurities? It boggles my mind.
If you want to sell out and have the devs pat you on the head for it, go play Overwatch. I won't miss you, and neither should anyone else.
To Valve: hire sigsev, give us money for i61, and let us do our own thing. We've already proven that we know what we're doing, and all you do is use us as a profitable guinea pig. All we need from you now is food on the table and a roof over our head so that we can do it without the constant uncertainty that you've been forcing us to deal with.
For FUCKS sake, don't shoot TF2 in the head like Bethesda is doing with Quake.
You know how you deal with an abusively neglectful and manipulative parent who tries to get back into your life?
Not like this: [img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CeauMcCUYAA5G_n.jpg[/img]
Or like this: https://play.esea.net/teams/74784
Like this: [youtube]https://youtu.be/CkCWVNaX6-k[/youtube]
The TF2 community has done more on it's own than Valve ever imagined, and Valve keep dangling their potential acceptance as bait to do... what, exactly? Satisfy some deeply hidden urges and insecurities? It boggles my mind.
If you want to sell out and have the devs pat you on the head for it, go play Overwatch. I won't miss you, and neither should anyone else.
To Valve: hire sigsev, give us money for i61, and let us do our own thing. We've already proven that we know what we're doing, and all you do is use us as a profitable guinea pig. All we need from you now is food on the table and a roof over our head so that we can do it without the constant uncertainty that you've been forcing us to deal with.
For FUCKS sake, don't shoot TF2 in the head like Bethesda is doing with Quake.
Not like this: [img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CeauMcCUYAA5G_n.jpg[/img]
Or like this: https://play.esea.net/teams/74784
Like this: [youtube]https://youtu.be/CkCWVNaX6-k[/youtube]
The TF2 community has done more on it's own than Valve ever imagined, and Valve keep dangling their potential acceptance as bait to do... what, exactly? Satisfy some deeply hidden urges and insecurities? It boggles my mind.
If you want to sell out and have the devs pat you on the head for it, go play Overwatch. I won't miss you, and neither should anyone else.
To Valve: hire sigsev, give us money for i61, and let us do our own thing. We've already proven that we know what we're doing, and all you do is use us as a profitable guinea pig. All we need from you now is food on the table and a roof over our head so that we can do it without the constant uncertainty that you've been forcing us to deal with.
For FUCKS sake, don't shoot TF2 in the head like Bethesda is doing with Quake.
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.