MR_SLINFaster matchmaking makes 6v6 a more scalable format. 7v7 prolander has the same problems that 9v9 HL has.
I disagree with this. In a matchmaking setting or a non serious game, I think that many class compositions could be viable, with only sniper and medic being necessary picks.
MR_SLINChange class limit of 1 to class limit of 2 except on Medic, Demoman, Heavy, Engineer.
Having a suicide wave with any combination of two beggars soldiers, two jarates, two mad milks a demoman and a spy sounds so aids.
[quote=MR_SLIN]Faster matchmaking makes 6v6 a more scalable format. 7v7 prolander has the same problems that 9v9 HL has.[/quote]
I disagree with this. In a matchmaking setting or a non serious game, I think that many class compositions could be viable, with only sniper and medic being necessary picks.
[quote=MR_SLIN]Change class limit of 1 to class limit of 2 except on Medic, Demoman, Heavy, Engineer.[/quote]
Having a suicide wave with any combination of two beggars soldiers, two jarates, two mad milks a demoman and a spy sounds so aids.
ScrambledHaving a suicide wave with any combination of two beggars soldiers, two jarates, two mad milks a demoman and a spy sounds so aids.
HUH, its almost like we have a whitelist for a reason!
[quote=Scrambled]
Having a suicide wave with any combination of two beggars soldiers, two jarates, two mad milks a demoman and a spy sounds so aids.[/quote]
HUH, its almost like we have a whitelist for a reason!
ProSkeezScrambledHaving a suicide wave with any combination of two beggars soldiers, two jarates, two mad milks a demoman and a spy sounds so aids.
HUH, its almost like we have a whitelist for a reason!
In highlander these things aren't banned, so I'd assume in a prolander setting they wouldn't be either. Allowing more classes to participate in a suicide wave will make the strategy involved in pushing first so boring. I'm sorry that you so blatantly missed my point that I had to spell it out to you.
[quote=ProSkeez][quote=Scrambled]
Having a suicide wave with any combination of two beggars soldiers, two jarates, two mad milks a demoman and a spy sounds so aids.[/quote]
HUH, its almost like we have a whitelist for a reason![/quote]
In highlander these things aren't banned, so I'd assume in a prolander setting they wouldn't be either. Allowing more classes to participate in a suicide wave will make the strategy involved in pushing first so boring. I'm sorry that you so blatantly missed my point that I had to spell it out to you.
DarkNecrid the season where everyone ran 2 natascha heavies because it was broken and allowed, the season where people ran double gunslinger on gravel pit,
Ohh god please don't remind me. These two things ALONE are enough of a reason for whitelists and shit.
[quote=DarkNecrid] the season where everyone ran 2 natascha heavies because it was broken and allowed, the season where people ran double gunslinger on gravel pit, [/quote]
Ohh god please don't remind me. These two things ALONE are enough of a reason for whitelists and shit.
The game is 7 verses 7 with a classlimit of 1.
The game is 7 verses 7 with a classlimit of 1.
MR_SLINhttp://i.imgur.com/avS6ppV.png
I just want to go on record saying that while I did enjoy the tournament (and partially because I had a chance to cast it, which is always fun), I find many types of TF2 enjoyable. I enjoy 6v6, Highlander, 7v7, Ultiduo, Bball, and even Pyro Dodgeball.
6v6 is superior to 7v7 prolander for tournament play. Here's a few reasons why:- Faster matchmaking makes 6v6 a more scalable format. 7v7 prolander has the same problems that 9v9 HL has.
- Smaller team sizes are cheaper for sending teams to in-person events / LANs
- Pick/bans slow down a tournament, creating more downtime
- The downtime you create with pick/bans does not add additional fun to the game. People tend to ban the same stuff every time, and most of the bans were used against the OP weapons that 6v6 already bans anyways.
There's no point in comparing it to 6v6, though, because it can't replace 6v6 for obvious reasons. [the gameplay provided by Prolander 7s is distinct from that of 6s] If anything, it should be seen as a potential replacement for Highlander 9s--in which case, the first two points are positives in favor of Prolander 7s, not negatives. The other two points are with a concept that isn't inherent to Prolander 7s: if any other league attempted to develop the format, it could easily be done with a static whitelist, just as with the majority of leagues.
[quote=MR_SLIN][img]http://i.imgur.com/avS6ppV.png[/img]
I just want to go on record saying that while I did enjoy the tournament (and partially because I had a chance to cast it, which is always fun), I find many types of TF2 enjoyable. I enjoy 6v6, Highlander, 7v7, Ultiduo, Bball, and even Pyro Dodgeball.
6v6 is superior to 7v7 prolander for tournament play. Here's a few reasons why:
[list]
[*] Faster matchmaking makes 6v6 a more scalable format. 7v7 prolander has the same problems that 9v9 HL has.
[*] Smaller team sizes are cheaper for sending teams to in-person events / LANs
[*] Pick/bans slow down a tournament, creating more downtime
[*] The downtime you create with pick/bans does not add additional fun to the game. People tend to ban the same stuff every time, and most of the bans were used against the OP weapons that 6v6 already bans anyways.
[/list][/quote]
There's no point in comparing it to 6v6, though, because it can't replace 6v6 for obvious reasons. [the gameplay provided by Prolander 7s is distinct from that of 6s] If anything, it should be seen as a potential replacement for Highlander 9s--in which case, the first two points are positives in favor of Prolander 7s, not negatives. The other two points are with a concept that isn't inherent to Prolander 7s: if any other league attempted to develop the format, it could easily be done with a static whitelist, just as with the majority of leagues.
RespectAPAThere's no point in comparing it to 6v6, though, because it can't replace 6v6 for obvious reasons.
Which is why everyone is wondering why anyone is bothering to put this much money into this. If anything the community should be looking to put effort into exploring options that are viable at scale, not rehashing concepts that likely won't work at scale.
Artificially trying to push any single format like this is going to be very costly.
[quote=RespectAPA]There's no point in comparing it to 6v6, though, because it can't replace 6v6 for obvious reasons.[/quote]
Which is why everyone is wondering why anyone is bothering to put this much money into this. If anything the community should be looking to put effort into exploring options that are viable at scale, not rehashing concepts that likely won't work at scale.
Artificially trying to push any single format like this is going to be very costly.
MR_SLINRespectAPAThere's no point in comparing it to 6v6, though, because it can't replace 6v6 for obvious reasons.
Which is why everyone is wondering why anyone is bothering to put this much money into this. If anything the community should be looking to put effort into exploring options that are viable at scale, not rehashing concepts that likely won't work at scale.
Artificially trying to push any single format like this is going to be very costly.
The impression I get is he's trying to make a format that resembles the way that pubs play that also works competitively and logistically for matchmaking. Which funnily enough isn't what the 6s community wants. They want all public players to adapt to their format. I wonder what is more likely to succeed?
[quote=MR_SLIN][quote=RespectAPA]There's no point in comparing it to 6v6, though, because it can't replace 6v6 for obvious reasons.[/quote]
Which is why everyone is wondering why anyone is bothering to put this much money into this. If anything the community should be looking to put effort into exploring options that are viable at scale, not rehashing concepts that likely won't work at scale.
Artificially trying to push any single format like this is going to be very costly.[/quote]
The impression I get is he's trying to make a format that resembles the way that pubs play that also works competitively and logistically for matchmaking. Which funnily enough isn't what the 6s community wants. They want all public players to adapt to their format. I wonder what is more likely to succeed?
ScrambledThey want all public players to adapt to their format. I wonder what is more likely to succeed?
The one that's logistically feasible
[quote=Scrambled]They want all public players to adapt to their format.[u] I wonder what is more likely to succeed?[/u][/quote]
The one that's logistically feasible
ProSkeezThe one that's logistically feasible
Sorry I should rephrase my question, since you seem to have completely misunderstood me again.
Will people who enjoy playing pubs play something that they don't enjoy because its being streamed, or will a format that resembles pubs be successful?
[quote=ProSkeez]
The one that's logistically feasible[/quote]
Sorry I should rephrase my question, since you seem to have completely misunderstood me again.
Will people who enjoy playing pubs play something that they don't enjoy because its being streamed, or will a format that resembles pubs be successful?
ScrambledThe impression I get is he's trying to make a format that resembles the way that pubs play that also works competitively and logistically for matchmaking. Which funnily enough isn't what the 6s community wants. They want all public players to adapt to their format. I wonder what is more likely to succeed?
You're saying 7v7 one of each class is more logistically viable for matchmaking? Even right now the only thing that gets considered is player count, so it's just 2 more players required, which is objectively "worse".
Also, you realize about 1 year ago 6s became the official format? It's the one in the game menu that anyone can queue for. It's not "stupid 6s elitists" anymore, it's stupid anti-6s elitists fighting the most competitive mode, and Valve. While leagues are a slightly more restrictive version of it, it is still the official competitive mode.
[quote=Scrambled]
The impression I get is he's trying to make a format that resembles the way that pubs play that also works competitively and logistically for matchmaking. Which funnily enough isn't what the 6s community wants. They want all public players to adapt to their format. I wonder what is more likely to succeed?[/quote]
You're saying 7v7 one of each class is more logistically viable for matchmaking? Even right now the only thing that gets considered is player count, so it's just 2 more players required, which is objectively "worse".
Also, you realize about 1 year ago 6s became the official format? It's the one in the game menu that anyone can queue for. It's not "stupid 6s elitists" anymore, it's stupid anti-6s elitists fighting the most competitive mode, and Valve. While leagues are a slightly more restrictive version of it, it is still the official competitive mode.
KairuYou're saying 7v7 one of each class is more logistically viable for matchmaking? Even right now the only thing that gets considered is player count, so it's just 2 more players required, which is objectively "worse".
Sorry, I was actually just saying that 7v7 is a format that could be logistically viable for matchmaking, not that it was moreso than 6s. I was comparing it to highlander. In the point I made, I was comparing 6s to prolander by stating how prolander is more similar in playstyle to pubs.
KairuAlso, you realize about 1 year ago 6s became the official format? It's the one in the game menu that anyone can queue for. It's not "stupid 6s elitists" anymore, it's stupid anti-6s elitists fighting the most competitive mode, and Valve. While leagues are a slightly more restrictive version of it, it is still the official competitive mode.
Valve have said that they are not willing to put forward a prize pool because they don't feel that the current competitive rulesets properly display what they feel the game is meant to be, and what many players enjoy. I think it was in the Valve News Network interview, though I can't remember.
[quote=Kairu]
You're saying 7v7 one of each class is more logistically viable for matchmaking? Even right now the only thing that gets considered is player count, so it's just 2 more players required, which is objectively "worse".
[/quote]
Sorry, I was actually just saying that 7v7 is a format that could be logistically viable for matchmaking, not that it was moreso than 6s. I was comparing it to highlander. In the point I made, I was comparing 6s to prolander by stating how prolander is more similar in playstyle to pubs.
[quote=Kairu]
Also, you realize about 1 year ago 6s became the official format? It's the one in the game menu that anyone can queue for. It's not "stupid 6s elitists" anymore, it's stupid anti-6s elitists fighting the most competitive mode, and Valve. While leagues are a slightly more restrictive version of it, it is still the official competitive mode.[/quote]
Valve have said that they are not willing to put forward a prize pool because they don't feel that the current competitive rulesets properly display what they feel the game is meant to be, and what many players enjoy. I think it was in the Valve News Network interview, though I can't remember.
ScrambledProSkeezThe one that's logistically feasible
Sorry I should rephrase my question, since you seem to have completely misunderstood me again.
Will people who enjoy playing pubs play something that they don't enjoy because its being streamed, or will a format that resembles pubs be successful?
You're really grasping here buddy. 6s has been organically grown for almost a decade now -- the competitive community has gone through every single variation of player counts and compositions and ended up at the 6v6 we know now. Not only has it been deemed the "most fun" of the tested game modes, it's also by far the best balance of player counts & being logistically possible for LANs and prize pools as OW has shown.
As Slin said, ARTIFICIALLY pushing another game mode will do absolutely nothing but fracture the already small community that has been ORGANICALLY grown.
[quote=Scrambled][quote=ProSkeez]
The one that's logistically feasible[/quote]
Sorry I should rephrase my question, since you seem to have completely misunderstood me again.
Will people who enjoy playing pubs play something that they don't enjoy because its being streamed, or will a format that resembles pubs be successful?[/quote]
You're really grasping here buddy. 6s has been organically grown for almost a decade now -- the competitive community has gone through every single variation of player counts and compositions and ended up at the 6v6 we know now. Not only has it been deemed the "most fun" of the tested game modes, it's also by far the best balance of player counts & being logistically possible for LANs and prize pools as OW has shown.
As Slin said, ARTIFICIALLY pushing another game mode will do absolutely nothing but fracture the already small community that has been ORGANICALLY grown.
ProSkeezYou're really grasping here buddy. 6s has been organically grown for almost a decade now -- the competitive community has gone through every single variation of player counts and compositions and ended up at the 6v6 we know now. Not only has it been deemed the "most fun" of the tested game modes, it's also by far the best balance of player counts & being logistically possible for LANs and prize pools as OW has shown.
As Slin said, ARTIFICIALLY pushing another game mode will do absolutely nothing but fracture the already small community that has been ORGANICALLY grown.
"most fun" is very subjective. Most players who play the game casually, or for fun, play pubs.
OW has shown that having a pub gamemode in the same format as your competitive gamemode means that players are far more interested in it from the get go.
Artificial and Organic are just buzzwords at this point. You're either implying that having a prizepool to spark interest in a new gamemode is a bad thing, or that a game is better because its older.
I feel that this video will explain my points better than I will: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2to9Pb0DOM
The tldw of the video is that quake will never take the spot for no1 shooter esport from csgo/overwatch because its not accessible, I feel that this conversation follows a lot of parallels.
[quote=ProSkeez]You're really grasping here buddy. 6s has been organically grown for almost a decade now -- the competitive community has gone through every single variation of player counts and compositions and ended up at the 6v6 we know now. Not only has it been deemed the "most fun" of the tested game modes, it's also by far the best balance of player counts & being logistically possible for LANs and prize pools as OW has shown.
As Slin said, ARTIFICIALLY pushing another game mode will do absolutely nothing but fracture the already small community that has been ORGANICALLY grown.[/quote]
"most fun" is very subjective. Most players who play the game casually, or for fun, play pubs.
OW has shown that having a pub gamemode in the same format as your competitive gamemode means that players are far more interested in it from the get go.
Artificial and Organic are just buzzwords at this point. You're either implying that having a prizepool to spark interest in a new gamemode is a bad thing, or that a game is better because its older.
I feel that this video will explain my points better than I will: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2to9Pb0DOM
The tldw of the video is that quake will never take the spot for no1 shooter esport from csgo/overwatch because its not accessible, I feel that this conversation follows a lot of parallels.
Scrambled"most fun" is very subjective. Most players who play the game casually, or for fun, play pubs.
OW has shown that having a pub gamemode in the same format as your competitive gamemode means that players are far more interested in it from the get go.
Artificial and Organic are just buzzwords at this point. You're either implying that having a prizepool to spark interest in a new gamemode is a bad thing, or that a game is better because its older.
I feel that this video will explain my points better than I will: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2to9Pb0DOM
I guess the majority of people who take this game semi-seriously found their subjectively fun game mode then?
Literally every single esport has shown that having the same pub game mode as their competitive shows more interest, but that isn't relevant in TF2, nor will it ever be since Valve's official pub game mode is 12v12 with no class limits.
Having ANYTHING to try and push a dog shit game mode is a bad thing when it fractures your tiny fucking community. What is so hard to understand about that? Do you not remember when CEVO/ESEA almost killed competitive tf2? and that was the same fucking game mode
[quote=Scrambled]
"most fun" is very subjective. Most players who play the game casually, or for fun, play pubs.
OW has shown that having a pub gamemode in the same format as your competitive gamemode means that players are far more interested in it from the get go.
Artificial and Organic are just buzzwords at this point. You're either implying that having a prizepool to spark interest in a new gamemode is a bad thing, or that a game is better because its older.
I feel that this video will explain my points better than I will: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2to9Pb0DOM[/quote]
I guess the majority of people who take this game semi-seriously found their subjectively fun game mode then?
Literally every single esport has shown that having the same pub game mode as their competitive shows more interest, but that isn't relevant in TF2, nor will it ever be since Valve's official pub game mode is 12v12 with no class limits.
Having ANYTHING to try and push a dog shit game mode is a bad thing when it fractures your tiny fucking community. What is so hard to understand about that? Do you not remember when CEVO/ESEA almost killed competitive tf2? and that was the same fucking game mode
ProSkeezLiterally every single esport has shown that having the same pub game mode as their competitive shows more interest, but that isn't relevant in TF2, nor will it ever be since Valve's official pub game mode is 12v12 with no class limits.
We already know that 12v12 with no class limits will never work competitively, this format is an attempt to create something that plays similarly, but is also competitively viable.
CSGO casual is like 10v10 isn't it? But because the games play so similarly, transitioning from casual to competitive is so much easier, even if there's less strategy and more random things in casual.
[quote=ProSkeez]
Literally every single esport has shown that having the same pub game mode as their competitive shows more interest, but that isn't relevant in TF2, nor will it ever be since Valve's official pub game mode is 12v12 with no class limits.
[/quote]
We already know that 12v12 with no class limits will never work competitively, this format is an attempt to create something that plays similarly, but is also competitively viable.
CSGO casual is like 10v10 isn't it? But because the games play so similarly, transitioning from casual to competitive is so much easier, even if there's less strategy and more random things in casual.
ScrambledProSkeezLiterally every single esport has shown that having the same pub game mode as their competitive shows more interest, but that isn't relevant in TF2, nor will it ever be since Valve's official pub game mode is 12v12 with no class limits.
CSGO casual is like 10v10 isn't it? But because the games play so similarly, transitioning from casual to competitive is so much easier, even if there's less strategy and more random things in casual.
no one plays csgo casual seriously and a large portion of the csgo community has been pushing valve to make csgo casual exactly like comp except with no rank to help ease players into the competitive gameplay easier
(also casual in no way plays similar to competitive in csgo at all, positioning, player count, bomb timer, and the money system are substantially different)
[quote=Scrambled][quote=ProSkeez]
Literally every single esport has shown that having the same pub game mode as their competitive shows more interest, but that isn't relevant in TF2, nor will it ever be since Valve's official pub game mode is 12v12 with no class limits.
[/quote]
CSGO casual is like 10v10 isn't it? But because the games play so similarly, transitioning from casual to competitive is so much easier, even if there's less strategy and more random things in casual.[/quote]
no one plays csgo casual seriously and a large portion of the csgo community has been pushing valve to make csgo casual exactly like comp except with no rank to help ease players into the competitive gameplay easier
(also casual in no way plays similar to competitive in csgo at all, positioning, player count, bomb timer, and the money system are substantially different)
I don't know why Valve ended up rejecting 9v9 matchmaking, but if it was simply a logistical problem that would be viably solved by Prolander 7v7, then it should be seriously considered... and I think that we should all want that even if we don't play Highlander, because it means less Spy and Pyro mains queuing up for 6v6 matchmaking...
I don't know why Valve ended up rejecting 9v9 matchmaking, but if it was simply a logistical problem that would be viably solved by Prolander 7v7, then it should be seriously considered... and I think that we should all want that [b]even if[/b] we don't play Highlander, because it means less Spy and Pyro mains queuing up for 6v6 matchmaking...
RespectAPAI don't know why Valve ended up rejecting 9v9 matchmaking, but if it was simply a logistical problem that would be viably solved by Prolander 7v7, then it should be seriously considered... and I think that we should all want that even if we don't play Highlander, because it means less Spy and Pyro mains queuing up for 6v6 matchmaking...
They rejected highlander because it's impractical, uncompetitive, and not fun.
[quote=RespectAPA]I don't know why Valve ended up rejecting 9v9 matchmaking, but if it was simply a logistical problem that would be viably solved by Prolander 7v7, then it should be seriously considered... and I think that we should all want that [b]even if[/b] we don't play Highlander, because it means less Spy and Pyro mains queuing up for 6v6 matchmaking...[/quote]
They rejected highlander because it's impractical, uncompetitive, and not fun.
HighclassRespectAPAI don't know why Valve ended up rejecting 9v9 matchmaking, but if it was simply a logistical problem that would be viably solved by Prolander 7v7, then it should be seriously considered... and I think that we should all want that even if we don't play Highlander, because it means less Spy and Pyro mains queuing up for 6v6 matchmaking...
They rejected highlander because it's impractical, uncompetitive, and not fun.
ez upfrags to post that on a 6s forum
[quote=Highclass][quote=RespectAPA]I don't know why Valve ended up rejecting 9v9 matchmaking, but if it was simply a logistical problem that would be viably solved by Prolander 7v7, then it should be seriously considered... and I think that we should all want that [b]even if[/b] we don't play Highlander, because it means less Spy and Pyro mains queuing up for 6v6 matchmaking...[/quote]
They rejected highlander because it's impractical, uncompetitive, and not fun.[/quote]
ez upfrags to post that on a 6s forum
DarkNecridno one plays csgo casual seriously and a large portion of the csgo community has been pushing valve to make csgo casual exactly like comp except with no rank to help ease players into the competitive gameplay easier
(also casual in no way plays similar to competitive in csgo at all, positioning, player count, bomb timer, and the money system are substantially different)
Your first paragraph actually supports my argument, the difference with TF2 is that the most played mode is Pubs, so we should be adapting the competitive mode to allow transitioning easier.
The argument about casual playing completely different to competitive csgo is just bullshit, of course there are some different mechanics, but do you really think that someone isn't going to play competitive csgo because you get more money for kills? Or that the bomb timer is different? Sure, there are going to be differences in where people play, but I bet that silvers' positioning being different than casual players really doesn't stop people playing competitive either.
[quote=DarkNecrid]
no one plays csgo casual seriously and a large portion of the csgo community has been pushing valve to make csgo casual exactly like comp except with no rank to help ease players into the competitive gameplay easier
(also casual in no way plays similar to competitive in csgo at all, positioning, player count, bomb timer, and the money system are substantially different)[/quote]
Your first paragraph actually supports my argument, the difference with TF2 is that the most played mode is Pubs, so we should be adapting the competitive mode to allow transitioning easier.
The argument about casual playing completely different to competitive csgo is just bullshit, of course there are some different mechanics, but do you really think that someone isn't going to play competitive csgo because you get more money for kills? Or that the bomb timer is different? Sure, there are going to be differences in where people play, but I bet that silvers' positioning being different than casual players really doesn't stop people playing competitive either.
since sigafoo is imposing that dumb 10 minute stream delay rule just so that he can get viewers, can we all agree to just boycott him and not give him any viewers at all?
since sigafoo is imposing that dumb 10 minute stream delay rule just so that he can get viewers, can we all agree to just boycott him and not give him any viewers at all?
ScrambledOW has shown that having a pub gamemode in the same format as your competitive gamemode means that players are far more interested in it from the get go.
This is actually incorrect... Even with the money and support blizz is providing there is a large gap between the comp game and the pubbers. Truthfully it looks exactly like TF2 did like 3 or 4 years ago, with pubbers being all "REEEEEE, OW is not a comp game, why are you trying to force us to play comp, its making the game worse" etc, etc. Hell even OW stream numbers are abysmal for the actual player base they have and a large portion of the viewers come form pub personalities and not tournaments and the likes. So no, while having the modes the same does help it does not always equal adoption or growth.
[quote=Scrambled]OW has shown that having a pub gamemode in the same format as your competitive gamemode means that players are far more interested in it from the get go.[/quote]
This is actually incorrect... Even with the money and support blizz is providing there is a large gap between the comp game and the pubbers. Truthfully it looks exactly like TF2 did like 3 or 4 years ago, with pubbers being all "REEEEEE, OW is not a comp game, why are you trying to force us to play comp, its making the game worse" etc, etc. Hell even OW stream numbers are abysmal for the actual player base they have and a large portion of the viewers come form pub personalities and not tournaments and the likes. So no, while having the modes the same does help it does not always equal adoption or growth.
Tino_ScrambledOW has shown that having a pub gamemode in the same format as your competitive gamemode means that players are far more interested in it from the get go.
This is actually incorrect... Even with the money and support blizz is providing there is a large gap between the comp game and the pubbers. Truthfully it looks exactly like TF2 did like 3 or 4 years ago, with pubbers being all "REEEEEE, OW is not a comp game, why are you trying to force us to play comp, its making the game worse" etc, etc. Hell even OW stream numbers are abysmal for the actual player base they have and a large portion of the viewers come form pub personalities and not tournaments and the likes. So no, while having the modes the same does help it does not always equal adoption or growth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2to9Pb0DOM I linked this video earlier, but here it is again.
The transition between pubs and competitive in overwatch is virtually nonexistant though. High level gameplay in any esport will differ greatly from low level play. I'm talking about the format though. Going from only playing dustbowl and thundermountain pubs to playing a 6s lobby on process is a completely jarring experience in comparison to playing a pub in overwatch to the competitive mode.
[quote=Tino_][quote=Scrambled]OW has shown that having a pub gamemode in the same format as your competitive gamemode means that players are far more interested in it from the get go.[/quote]
This is actually incorrect... Even with the money and support blizz is providing there is a large gap between the comp game and the pubbers. Truthfully it looks exactly like TF2 did like 3 or 4 years ago, with pubbers being all "REEEEEE, OW is not a comp game, why are you trying to force us to play comp, its making the game worse" etc, etc. Hell even OW stream numbers are abysmal for the actual player base they have and a large portion of the viewers come form pub personalities and not tournaments and the likes. So no, while having the modes the same does help it does not always equal adoption or growth.[/quote]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2to9Pb0DOM I linked this video earlier, but here it is again.
The transition between pubs and competitive in overwatch is virtually nonexistant though. High level gameplay in any esport will differ greatly from low level play. I'm talking about the format though. Going from only playing dustbowl and thundermountain pubs to playing a 6s lobby on process is a completely jarring experience in comparison to playing a pub in overwatch to the competitive mode.
http://imgur.com/a/Ne75D
oh noes
also when can eXtine stop typing like that
[img]http://imgur.com/a/Ne75D[/img]
oh noes
also when can eXtine stop typing like that
ToXiCiTy
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/862563616297320448/qxAz0LKd.jpg
oh noes extine is our enemy now
https://www.reddit.com/user/extine
ScrambledThe transition between pubs and competitive in overwatch is virtually nonexistant though. High level gameplay in any esport will differ greatly from low level play. I'm talking about the format though. Going from only playing dustbowl and thundermountain pubs to playing a 6s lobby on process is a completely jarring experience in comparison to playing a pub in overwatch to the competitive mode.
is this an argument for sigafoo forrmat though? because sigafoo format is significantly MORE removed from pub play when compared to 6's just from the addition of a pick/ban phase.
[quote=Scrambled]
The transition between pubs and competitive in overwatch is virtually nonexistant though. High level gameplay in any esport will differ greatly from low level play. I'm talking about the format though. Going from only playing dustbowl and thundermountain pubs to playing a 6s lobby on process is a completely jarring experience in comparison to playing a pub in overwatch to the competitive mode.[/quote]
is this an argument for sigafoo forrmat though? because sigafoo format is significantly MORE removed from pub play when compared to 6's just from the addition of a pick/ban phase.
ScrambledThe transition between pubs and competitive in overwatch is virtually nonexistant though. High level gameplay in any esport will differ greatly from low level play. I'm talking about the format though. Going from only playing dustbowl and thundermountain pubs to playing a 6s lobby on process is a completely jarring experience in comparison to playing a pub in overwatch to the competitive mode.
And the transition from CSGO casual to comp is completely existant, they're very different games, and CSGO is one of the most successful esports... so what's your point? There's no correlation...
[quote=Scrambled]
The transition between pubs and competitive in overwatch is virtually nonexistant though. High level gameplay in any esport will differ greatly from low level play. I'm talking about the format though. Going from only playing dustbowl and thundermountain pubs to playing a 6s lobby on process is a completely jarring experience in comparison to playing a pub in overwatch to the competitive mode.[/quote]
And the transition from CSGO casual to comp is completely existant, they're very different games, and CSGO is one of the most successful esports... so what's your point? There's no correlation...
nite
is this an argument for sigafoo forrmat though? because sigafoo format is significantly MORE removed from pub play when compared to 6's just from the addition of a pick/ban phase.
Yeah I don't agree with the pick/ban thing, but its got proper flow to the game on payload with the lowest amount of players to do so.
[quote=nite]
is this an argument for sigafoo forrmat though? because sigafoo format is significantly MORE removed from pub play when compared to 6's just from the addition of a pick/ban phase.[/quote]
Yeah I don't agree with the pick/ban thing, but its got proper flow to the game on payload with the lowest amount of players to do so.