Why are you guys downfragging Mitch
Have you seen ANY of the prior 'big important meetings' that were streamed and ended up being an awkward shit show slog fest with close to nothing accomplished? This is bigger than a global whitelist, let them figure some shit out first
New Beginnings
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
Why are you guys downfragging Mitch
Have you seen ANY of the prior 'big important meetings' that were streamed and ended up being an awkward shit show slog fest with close to nothing accomplished? This is bigger than a global whitelist, let them figure some shit out first
Have you seen ANY of the prior 'big important meetings' that were streamed and ended up being an awkward shit show slog fest with close to nothing accomplished? This is bigger than a global whitelist, let them figure some shit out first
FozzlmDiscordCould you specify who you guys have invited to attend, just admins of leagues or also players?
Well by Mitch's own admission, ozfortress aren't invited to the cool kids table for this meeting when ETF2L are :(
Why is this directed at me? The leagues chose not to invite ozfortress cause we didn't think they would be intending to run a league.
[quote=Fozzlm][quote=Discord]
Could you specify who you guys have invited to attend, just admins of leagues or also players?[/quote]
Well by Mitch's own admission, ozfortress aren't invited to the cool kids table for this meeting when ETF2L are :([/quote]
Why is this directed at me? The leagues chose not to invite ozfortress cause we didn't think they would be intending to run a league.
Could you specify who you guys have invited to attend, just admins of leagues or also players?[/quote]
Well by Mitch's own admission, ozfortress aren't invited to the cool kids table for this meeting when ETF2L are :([/quote]
Why is this directed at me? The leagues chose not to invite ozfortress cause we didn't think they would be intending to run a league.
Mitch_FozzlmWhy is this directed at me? The roundtable chose not to invite ozfortress cause we didn't think they would be intending to run a league.DiscordCould you specify who you guys have invited to attend, just admins of leagues or also players?
Well by Mitch's own admission, ozfortress aren't invited to the cool kids table for this meeting when ETF2L are :(
Who is the "roundtable" that made the decisions?
[quote=Mitch_][quote=Fozzlm][quote=Discord]
Could you specify who you guys have invited to attend, just admins of leagues or also players?[/quote]
Well by Mitch's own admission, ozfortress aren't invited to the cool kids table for this meeting when ETF2L are :([/quote]
Why is this directed at me? The roundtable chose not to invite ozfortress cause we didn't think they would be intending to run a league.[/quote]
Who is the "roundtable" that made the decisions?
Could you specify who you guys have invited to attend, just admins of leagues or also players?[/quote]
Well by Mitch's own admission, ozfortress aren't invited to the cool kids table for this meeting when ETF2L are :([/quote]
Why is this directed at me? The roundtable chose not to invite ozfortress cause we didn't think they would be intending to run a league.[/quote]
Who is the "roundtable" that made the decisions?
Hey all! I'm very glad there's been a lot of support as well as discussion around this. I'd like to specifically address SirCupcake's post as he brings up good points that I do want to make sure we address. (I'd like to note that I am speaking personally and not on behalf of the entire group.)
SirCupcakeI guess another thing that slightly worries me is how non-organic this entire approach seems. While I see the benefits for the few of us competing internationally of unifying the scene, I'm just a bit worried that this will somewhat hinder it in the long run. Everyone's aware that it's far from easy coming to an agreement on topics (such as whitelists and formats) and I've always felt the most logical approach to fixing that issue was to provide a (supposedly) good alternative and let the playerbase decide how they feel about it in the long run. Players are naturally going to play, and keep playing, what is most fun. So why not take this as an opportunity to rethink things, come up with a new (or suitable) idea and offer more variety (on a sensible scale *cough*). I can see the some of the upsides of a universal consensus but I'm not convinced it's entirely the best approach for some specific issues.
The goal of this isn't for some select minority to enforce a standard of TF2 that every league must follow for the Good of the Scene(TM). I don't think that's even possible or wise. Rather, the goal should be to have an org that is driven from the ground up that takes everyone's concerns into consideration across the competitive spectrum, even if they ultimately don't agree with what's decided and decide that they want to provide an alternative. (After all, competition will make everyone better.)
Trying to unify the leagues also has huge benefits beyond international competition, in my view; in particular, the differing rulesets between leagues adds an artificial barrier for new players, who may be faced with a different experience depending on which league and region they're playing in.
Having the new NA league driven by the global org seems to be a logical choice given that its decisions are driven by the community - however, if the needs of NA players are really significantly different from that of the global community, I could see that league having limited exceptions that diverge from the decided ruleset (though obviously they should be kept to a minimum where possible).
SirCupcakeI feel like part of the reason that for example the global whitelist was so much of a disaster is how split everyone is on the very specifics of it. There's a lot of differing on opinions especially on a small scale. With the way the TF2 community works, there's always been some who get heard louder due to popularity, sometimes justifiably so other times not. What does your idea of finding fair solutions that please most people look like? I feel like this point is worded very vague and yet incredible difficult to realize.
Following from above, the idea would be to have a structured approach to deciding the issues that would promote order rather than the chaos we've seen in the past. In particular, I'd like to see a committee approach where involved leagues and other organizations each have a number of representatives that are presenting the views of their community. (For example, ETF2L as a league might have four representatives, two of which come from league staff and two of which are elected by their player base at large, ensuring that both the league and the players have their voices heard). This should definitely NOT be driven by a small group of people who have outsized influence over the community.
Having a well-defined structure allows there to be set procedures on how things are decided, but also allows for input from the community to be taken in appropriately. While a potential committee would make the final call on what the global org's recommended ruleset is, the members of the committee would draw upon information from the parts of the community they represent, and the committee could also draw upon information from the community directly by running surveys or running playtests, such that the final decision does represent what the overall competitive scene desires.
I don't think it's possible for everyone to be happy with what ultimately ends up being drawn up, but they should feel like they have a say in what is decided; if that's not the case, then the global org is not doing what it should be.
Hey all! I'm very glad there's been a lot of support as well as discussion around this. I'd like to specifically address SirCupcake's post as he brings up good points that I do want to make sure we address. (I'd like to note that I am speaking personally and not on behalf of the entire group.)
[quote=SirCupcake]I guess another thing that slightly worries me is how non-organic this entire approach seems. While I see the benefits for the few of us competing internationally of unifying the scene, I'm just a bit worried that this will somewhat hinder it in the long run. Everyone's aware that it's far from easy coming to an agreement on topics (such as whitelists and formats) and I've always felt the most logical approach to fixing that issue was to provide a (supposedly) good alternative and let the playerbase decide how they feel about it in the long run. Players are naturally going to play, and keep playing, what is most fun. So why not take this as an opportunity to rethink things, come up with a new (or suitable) idea and offer more variety (on a sensible scale *cough*). I can see the some of the upsides of a universal consensus but I'm not convinced it's entirely the best approach for some specific issues.[/quote]
The goal of this isn't for some select minority to enforce a standard of TF2 that every league must follow for the Good of the Scene(TM). I don't think that's even possible or wise. Rather, the goal should be to have an org that is driven from the ground up that takes everyone's concerns into consideration across the competitive spectrum, even if they ultimately don't agree with what's decided and decide that they want to provide an alternative. (After all, competition will make everyone better.)
Trying to unify the leagues also has huge benefits beyond international competition, in my view; in particular, the differing rulesets between leagues adds an artificial barrier for new players, who may be faced with a different experience depending on which league and region they're playing in.
Having the new NA league driven by the global org seems to be a logical choice given that its decisions are driven by the community - however, if the needs of NA players are really significantly different from that of the global community, I could see that league having limited exceptions that diverge from the decided ruleset (though obviously they should be kept to a minimum where possible).
[quote=SirCupcake]I feel like part of the reason that for example the global whitelist was so much of a disaster is how split everyone is on the very specifics of it. There's a lot of differing on opinions especially on a small scale. With the way the TF2 community works, there's always been some who get heard louder due to popularity, sometimes justifiably so other times not. What does your idea of finding fair solutions that please most people look like? I feel like this point is worded very vague and yet incredible difficult to realize.[/quote]
Following from above, the idea would be to have a structured approach to deciding the issues that would promote order rather than the chaos we've seen in the past. In particular, I'd like to see a committee approach where involved leagues and other organizations each have a number of representatives that are presenting the views of their community. (For example, ETF2L as a league might have four representatives, two of which come from league staff and two of which are elected by their player base at large, ensuring that both the league and the players have their voices heard). This should definitely NOT be driven by a small group of people who have outsized influence over the community.
Having a well-defined structure allows there to be set procedures on how things are decided, but also allows for input from the community to be taken in appropriately. While a potential committee would make the final call on what the global org's recommended ruleset is, the members of the committee would draw upon information from the parts of the community they represent, and the committee could also draw upon information from the community directly by running surveys or running playtests, such that the final decision does represent what the overall competitive scene desires.
I don't think it's possible for everyone to be happy with what ultimately ends up being drawn up, but they should feel like they have a say in what is decided; if that's not the case, then the global org is not doing what it should be.
[quote=SirCupcake]I guess another thing that slightly worries me is how non-organic this entire approach seems. While I see the benefits for the few of us competing internationally of unifying the scene, I'm just a bit worried that this will somewhat hinder it in the long run. Everyone's aware that it's far from easy coming to an agreement on topics (such as whitelists and formats) and I've always felt the most logical approach to fixing that issue was to provide a (supposedly) good alternative and let the playerbase decide how they feel about it in the long run. Players are naturally going to play, and keep playing, what is most fun. So why not take this as an opportunity to rethink things, come up with a new (or suitable) idea and offer more variety (on a sensible scale *cough*). I can see the some of the upsides of a universal consensus but I'm not convinced it's entirely the best approach for some specific issues.[/quote]
The goal of this isn't for some select minority to enforce a standard of TF2 that every league must follow for the Good of the Scene(TM). I don't think that's even possible or wise. Rather, the goal should be to have an org that is driven from the ground up that takes everyone's concerns into consideration across the competitive spectrum, even if they ultimately don't agree with what's decided and decide that they want to provide an alternative. (After all, competition will make everyone better.)
Trying to unify the leagues also has huge benefits beyond international competition, in my view; in particular, the differing rulesets between leagues adds an artificial barrier for new players, who may be faced with a different experience depending on which league and region they're playing in.
Having the new NA league driven by the global org seems to be a logical choice given that its decisions are driven by the community - however, if the needs of NA players are really significantly different from that of the global community, I could see that league having limited exceptions that diverge from the decided ruleset (though obviously they should be kept to a minimum where possible).
[quote=SirCupcake]I feel like part of the reason that for example the global whitelist was so much of a disaster is how split everyone is on the very specifics of it. There's a lot of differing on opinions especially on a small scale. With the way the TF2 community works, there's always been some who get heard louder due to popularity, sometimes justifiably so other times not. What does your idea of finding fair solutions that please most people look like? I feel like this point is worded very vague and yet incredible difficult to realize.[/quote]
Following from above, the idea would be to have a structured approach to deciding the issues that would promote order rather than the chaos we've seen in the past. In particular, I'd like to see a committee approach where involved leagues and other organizations each have a number of representatives that are presenting the views of their community. (For example, ETF2L as a league might have four representatives, two of which come from league staff and two of which are elected by their player base at large, ensuring that both the league and the players have their voices heard). This should definitely NOT be driven by a small group of people who have outsized influence over the community.
Having a well-defined structure allows there to be set procedures on how things are decided, but also allows for input from the community to be taken in appropriately. While a potential committee would make the final call on what the global org's recommended ruleset is, the members of the committee would draw upon information from the parts of the community they represent, and the committee could also draw upon information from the community directly by running surveys or running playtests, such that the final decision does represent what the overall competitive scene desires.
I don't think it's possible for everyone to be happy with what ultimately ends up being drawn up, but they should feel like they have a say in what is decided; if that's not the case, then the global org is not doing what it should be.
NicholasNaCl (North American Competitive League)
MEGA SALT
[quote=Nicholas]NaCl (North American Competitive League)[/quote]
MEGA SALT
MEGA SALT
Mitch_Hi, there is already a global organisation of the current leagues in NA, we're actually having our meeting to discuss these issues tonight.
UGC, RGL, TFCL, ESL, ESEA and ETF2L will be attending and we hope to provide some information to people soon.
y not asiafortress ozfortress and some sort of South American league maybe so representatives for south african tf2?
[quote=Mitch_]Hi, there is already a global organisation of the current leagues in NA, we're actually having our meeting to discuss these issues tonight.
UGC, RGL, TFCL, ESL, ESEA and ETF2L will be attending and we hope to provide some information to people soon.[/quote]
y not asiafortress ozfortress and some sort of South American league maybe so representatives for south african tf2?
UGC, RGL, TFCL, ESL, ESEA and ETF2L will be attending and we hope to provide some information to people soon.[/quote]
y not asiafortress ozfortress and some sort of South American league maybe so representatives for south african tf2?
phobiawait theres actually gonna be no more esea?
This is the final season unfortunately.
https://play.esea.net/index.php?s=news&d=comments&id=15396
[quote=phobia]wait theres actually gonna be no more esea?[/quote]
This is the final season unfortunately.
https://play.esea.net/index.php?s=news&d=comments&id=15396
This is the final season unfortunately.
https://play.esea.net/index.php?s=news&d=comments&id=15396
Olgha https://whitelist.tf/9935
Dont speak to me or my grenade launchers ever again
[quote=Olgha] https://whitelist.tf/9935
[/quote]
Dont speak to me or my grenade launchers ever again
[/quote]
Dont speak to me or my grenade launchers ever again
Olgha https://whitelist.tf/9935)
i have no fucking words man
[quote=Olgha] https://whitelist.tf/9935)[/quote]
i have no fucking words man
i have no fucking words man
Olgha https://whitelist.tf/9935
ban cowmangler and iron bomber but allow almost everything else?????????????????????
[quote=Olgha] https://whitelist.tf/9935[/quote]
ban cowmangler and iron bomber but allow almost everything else?????????????????????
ban cowmangler and iron bomber but allow almost everything else?????????????????????
this is cringe, every person and their mother acting like their league has more validity than another while in reality everyone of you is 22 years old at most and talking like you have the backing of every team fortress player or some big org that has the same ideas
this mitch guy has to be the most shady lying mother fucker alive
this is cringe, every person and their mother acting like their league has more validity than another while in reality everyone of you is 22 years old at most and talking like you have the backing of every team fortress player or some big org that has the same ideas
this mitch guy has to be the most shady lying mother fucker alive
this mitch guy has to be the most shady lying mother fucker alive
kyaathis is cringe, every person and their mother acting like their league has more validity than another while in reality everyone of you is 22 years old at most and talking like you have the backing of every team fortress player or some big org that has the same ideas
this mitch guy has to be the most shady lying mother fucker alive
?
[quote=kyaa]this is cringe, every person and their mother acting like their league has more validity than another while in reality everyone of you is 22 years old at most and talking like you have the backing of every team fortress player or some big org that has the same ideas
this mitch guy has to be the most shady lying mother fucker alive[/quote]
?
this mitch guy has to be the most shady lying mother fucker alive[/quote]
?
TwiggytwikuuAll ESEA players would be able to migrate to this new league, which would offer distinct advantages thanks to being a community-ran league.So what's the point when there is UGC already?
Will you provide LAN playoffs?
What do you have against RGL or UGC taking over as the default NA league to justify starting a new league?
not having cringe admins
[quote=Twiggy][quote=twikuu]All ESEA players would be able to migrate to this new league, which would offer distinct advantages thanks to being a community-ran league.[/quote]
So what's the point when there is UGC already?
Will you provide LAN playoffs?
What do you have against RGL or UGC taking over as the default NA league to justify starting a new league?[/quote]
not having cringe admins
So what's the point when there is UGC already?
Will you provide LAN playoffs?
What do you have against RGL or UGC taking over as the default NA league to justify starting a new league?[/quote]
not having cringe admins
A league with the backing of Tino and Samiface? I don't even care what the other options are, I trust those two immensely. TSC Erynn and Twiiku is an even bigger benefit.
It's finally time to have matches just like we scrim :D
A league with the backing of Tino and Samiface? I don't even care what the other options are, I trust those two immensely. TSC Erynn and Twiiku is an even bigger benefit.
It's finally time to have matches just like we scrim :D
It's finally time to have matches just like we scrim :D
agree with anathon, ETF2L and ozfortress have both had a full decade to decide on their own rulesets maplists and whitelist, and its happened very organically over that time
seems silly to waste 10 years of progress in those regions because some people are still hung up on tf2 esports ideas
agree with anathon, ETF2L and ozfortress have both had a full decade to decide on their own rulesets maplists and whitelist, and its happened very organically over that time
seems silly to waste 10 years of progress in those regions because some people are still hung up on tf2 esports ideas
seems silly to waste 10 years of progress in those regions because some people are still hung up on tf2 esports ideas
So just to let people know I will be personally trying to contact every ESEA team leader in the next 2 or so days to try and get some more info about what the players want out of a league. If I don't have you on steam currently please throw me an add so we can have a chat just to make this easier on everyone.
So just to let people know I will be personally trying to contact every ESEA team leader in the next 2 or so days to try and get some more info about what the players want out of a league. If I don't have you on steam currently please throw me an add so we can have a chat just to make this easier on everyone.
Tino_So just to let people know I will be personally trying to contact every ESEA team leader in the next 2 or so days to try and get some more info about what the players want out of a league. If I don't have you on steam currently please throw me an add so we can have a chat just to make this easier on everyone.
do you mean like invite or EVERY esea team leader
[quote=Tino_]So just to let people know I will be personally trying to contact every ESEA team leader in the next 2 or so days to try and get some more info about what the players want out of a league. If I don't have you on steam currently please throw me an add so we can have a chat just to make this easier on everyone.[/quote]
do you mean like invite or EVERY esea team leader
do you mean like invite or EVERY esea team leader
basic plugin for individual player ready up in match servers
1 or 2 maps per week, no pick ban garbage outside of playoffs bo3
make the matches be 30 minutes, 5 win difference.
more controversial but i believe a paid league is the best route to go. having to put money in to play ensures a basic level of commitment from teams. maybe have this be 5 dollars, make it fund a prize pool or even make it a deposit. if you finish out the season and don't die, you get your deposit back. could be 5/15/25 for open/im/invite (or new divisional equivalents) numbers are just examples they could be adjusted as needed, maybe have open be free and just IM/invite. I also accept that a paid league may be unrealistic.
please do not have your mother make the website. when it comes to a league website, functionality>all. stv's need to be easy to find, stats clear and easy to find, matches and schedules ready and easy to find.
have a real map vote
NA should remain a seperate entity from EU, AUS, and ASIA, theres no reason etf2l admins need to have input on what happens in NA, nor should we have any input on what happens in EU.
Tino_So just to let people know I will be personally trying to contact every ESEA team leader in the next 2 or so days to try and get some more info about what the players want out of a league. If I don't have you on steam currently please throw me an add so we can have a chat just to make this easier on everyone.
team leaders are not representative of their teams ideas/thoughts on this, i'm sure most will not consult their teams. this will affect everyone that plays, not just team leaders. please do not take the words of individual team leaders as gospel of what other people want. Maybe make a quick google doc survey, and you have to put your esea in to verify you've actually played to get information from a large group of players.
basic plugin for individual player ready up in match servers
1 or 2 maps per week, no pick ban garbage outside of playoffs bo3
make the matches be 30 minutes, 5 win difference.
more controversial but i believe a paid league is the best route to go. having to put money in to play ensures a basic level of commitment from teams. maybe have this be 5 dollars, make it fund a prize pool or even make it a deposit. if you finish out the season and don't die, you get your deposit back. could be 5/15/25 for open/im/invite (or new divisional equivalents) numbers are just examples they could be adjusted as needed, maybe have open be free and just IM/invite. I also accept that a paid league may be unrealistic.
please do not have your mother make the website. when it comes to a league website, functionality>all. stv's need to be easy to find, stats clear and easy to find, matches and schedules ready and easy to find.
have a real map vote
NA should remain a seperate entity from EU, AUS, and ASIA, theres no reason etf2l admins need to have input on what happens in NA, nor should we have any input on what happens in EU.
[quote=Tino_]So just to let people know I will be personally trying to contact every ESEA team leader in the next 2 or so days to try and get some more info about what the players want out of a league. If I don't have you on steam currently please throw me an add so we can have a chat just to make this easier on everyone.[/quote]
team leaders are not representative of their teams ideas/thoughts on this, i'm sure most will not consult their teams. this will affect everyone that plays, not just team leaders. please do not take the words of individual team leaders as gospel of what other people want. Maybe make a quick google doc survey, and you have to put your esea in to verify you've actually played to get information from a large group of players.
1 or 2 maps per week, no pick ban garbage outside of playoffs bo3
make the matches be 30 minutes, 5 win difference.
more controversial but i believe a paid league is the best route to go. having to put money in to play ensures a basic level of commitment from teams. maybe have this be 5 dollars, make it fund a prize pool or even make it a deposit. if you finish out the season and don't die, you get your deposit back. could be 5/15/25 for open/im/invite (or new divisional equivalents) numbers are just examples they could be adjusted as needed, maybe have open be free and just IM/invite. I also accept that a paid league may be unrealistic.
please do not have your mother make the website. when it comes to a league website, functionality>all. stv's need to be easy to find, stats clear and easy to find, matches and schedules ready and easy to find.
have a real map vote
NA should remain a seperate entity from EU, AUS, and ASIA, theres no reason etf2l admins need to have input on what happens in NA, nor should we have any input on what happens in EU.
[quote=Tino_]So just to let people know I will be personally trying to contact every ESEA team leader in the next 2 or so days to try and get some more info about what the players want out of a league. If I don't have you on steam currently please throw me an add so we can have a chat just to make this easier on everyone.[/quote]
team leaders are not representative of their teams ideas/thoughts on this, i'm sure most will not consult their teams. this will affect everyone that plays, not just team leaders. please do not take the words of individual team leaders as gospel of what other people want. Maybe make a quick google doc survey, and you have to put your esea in to verify you've actually played to get information from a large group of players.
AnaThonI don't really get this honestly. I think having local leagues representing its people has been working fine. What's bringing some sort of an international bureau into it going to accomplish? Who does it benefit?
The direct benefit for players is to have a chance for their voice and concerns to be heard when decisions that affect the entire community are being taken.
This is all under the assumption that major leagues are considering and/or making an effort to unify how 6v6 is played, which seems to be the case after talking with Aoshi (ETF2L) and Fozzle (ozfortress).
Other benefits don't necessarily directly apply to players, but I can foresee communication between admins and to the community being easier to manage, admins will be able to share common issues or similar workloads, players will be able to trust decisions coming from a trustable process, etc.
AnaThonFor the rest of us it seems it'd just make it harder to have things we like happen. If, for example, eu players like or want something that the others don't, what will happen?
I understand that concern and it's definitely part of the huge list of things we need to hash out, I don't think I can give you a satisfying answer as this point, but this is something we will try to figure out. I don't exactly recall of any such cases happening ever since the global whitelist was put in place though, but you might know otherwise.
It's possible that we don't find an answer, we're very much aware of that, if that's the case, we will direct our entire focus on running a stable and competitive NA league in the style of ETF2L and ozfortress, which is already our primary goal.
MrSmithers96agree with anathon, ETF2L and ozfortress have both had a full decade to decide on their own rulesets maplists and whitelist, and its happened very organically over that time
seems silly to waste 10 years of progress in those regions because some people are still hung up on tf2 esports ideas
I might be mistaken in understanding what you meant, do you believe we would force ETF2L and ozfortress to change drastically in order to achieve unity? If that's the case, and we apologize for not being clearer about it, then it is not something we intend or even expect, I would say that's actually the opposite of what we would want, they have worked so well for so long and we obviously would want to benefit from that. The rationale is that these leagues aren't exactly different from one another, in their rulesets and philosophies, our goal would be to find a common ground, if possible, and duplicate it in the North American region, if that's what the players want.
Thank you for your questions, I would like to encourage more people to voice their opinions and experiences playing ESEA, you're also more than welcome to any of us (names in the OP) if you'd prefer to share it privately, or even if you'd like to have a conversation. As said previously, our goal is to provide a great league for players to land on when ESEA leaves us and your feedback matters to us.
[quote=AnaThon]I don't really get this honestly. I think having local leagues representing its people has been working fine. What's bringing some sort of an international bureau into it going to accomplish? Who does it benefit?[/quote]
The direct benefit for players is to have a chance for their voice and concerns to be heard when decisions that affect the entire community are being taken.
This is all under the assumption that major leagues are considering and/or making an effort to unify how 6v6 is played, which seems to be the case after talking with Aoshi (ETF2L) and Fozzle (ozfortress).
Other benefits don't necessarily directly apply to players, but I can foresee communication between admins and to the community being easier to manage, admins will be able to share common issues or similar workloads, players will be able to trust decisions coming from a trustable process, etc.
[quote=AnaThon]For the rest of us it seems it'd just make it harder to have things we like happen. If, for example, eu players like or want something that the others don't, what will happen?[/quote]
I understand that concern and it's definitely part of the huge list of things we need to hash out, I don't think I can give you a satisfying answer as this point, but this is something we will try to figure out. I don't exactly recall of any such cases happening ever since the global whitelist was put in place though, but you might know otherwise.
It's possible that we don't find an answer, we're very much aware of that, if that's the case, we will direct our entire focus on running a stable and competitive NA league in the style of ETF2L and ozfortress, which is already our primary goal.
[quote=MrSmithers96]agree with anathon, ETF2L and ozfortress have both had a full decade to decide on their own rulesets maplists and whitelist, and its happened very organically over that time
seems silly to waste 10 years of progress in those regions because some people are still hung up on tf2 esports ideas[/quote]
I might be mistaken in understanding what you meant, do you believe we would force ETF2L and ozfortress to change drastically in order to achieve unity? If that's the case, and we apologize for not being clearer about it, then it is not something we intend or even expect, I would say that's actually the opposite of what we would want, they have worked so well for so long and we obviously would want to benefit from that. The rationale is that these leagues aren't exactly different from one another, in their rulesets and philosophies, our goal would be to find a common ground, if possible, and duplicate it in the North American region, if that's what the players want.
Thank you for your questions, I would like to encourage more people to voice their opinions and experiences playing ESEA, you're also more than welcome to any of us (names in the OP) if you'd prefer to share it privately, or even if you'd like to have a conversation. As said previously, our goal is to provide a great league for players to land on when ESEA leaves us and your feedback matters to us.
The direct benefit for players is to have a chance for their voice and concerns to be heard when decisions that affect the entire community are being taken.
This is all under the assumption that major leagues are considering and/or making an effort to unify how 6v6 is played, which seems to be the case after talking with Aoshi (ETF2L) and Fozzle (ozfortress).
Other benefits don't necessarily directly apply to players, but I can foresee communication between admins and to the community being easier to manage, admins will be able to share common issues or similar workloads, players will be able to trust decisions coming from a trustable process, etc.
[quote=AnaThon]For the rest of us it seems it'd just make it harder to have things we like happen. If, for example, eu players like or want something that the others don't, what will happen?[/quote]
I understand that concern and it's definitely part of the huge list of things we need to hash out, I don't think I can give you a satisfying answer as this point, but this is something we will try to figure out. I don't exactly recall of any such cases happening ever since the global whitelist was put in place though, but you might know otherwise.
It's possible that we don't find an answer, we're very much aware of that, if that's the case, we will direct our entire focus on running a stable and competitive NA league in the style of ETF2L and ozfortress, which is already our primary goal.
[quote=MrSmithers96]agree with anathon, ETF2L and ozfortress have both had a full decade to decide on their own rulesets maplists and whitelist, and its happened very organically over that time
seems silly to waste 10 years of progress in those regions because some people are still hung up on tf2 esports ideas[/quote]
I might be mistaken in understanding what you meant, do you believe we would force ETF2L and ozfortress to change drastically in order to achieve unity? If that's the case, and we apologize for not being clearer about it, then it is not something we intend or even expect, I would say that's actually the opposite of what we would want, they have worked so well for so long and we obviously would want to benefit from that. The rationale is that these leagues aren't exactly different from one another, in their rulesets and philosophies, our goal would be to find a common ground, if possible, and duplicate it in the North American region, if that's what the players want.
Thank you for your questions, I would like to encourage more people to voice their opinions and experiences playing ESEA, you're also more than welcome to any of us (names in the OP) if you'd prefer to share it privately, or even if you'd like to have a conversation. As said previously, our goal is to provide a great league for players to land on when ESEA leaves us and your feedback matters to us.
Air_team leaders are not representative of their teams ideas/thoughts on this, i'm sure most will not consult their teams. this will affect everyone that plays, not just team leaders. please do not take the words of individual team leaders as gospel of what other people want. Maybe make a quick google doc survey, and you have to put your esea in to verify you've actually played to get information from a large group of players.
That is not the plan. I have meme'd about the invite Illuminati forever and I understand that a single person does not represent a whole. I am starting with the team leads because it is the easiest first step really. If i get a whole bunch of them saying very similar things it gives us something to look into, but with that said we will probably also do a larger survey in the near future.
[quote=Air_]
team leaders are not representative of their teams ideas/thoughts on this, i'm sure most will not consult their teams. this will affect everyone that plays, not just team leaders. please do not take the words of individual team leaders as gospel of what other people want. Maybe make a quick google doc survey, and you have to put your esea in to verify you've actually played to get information from a large group of players.[/quote]
That is not the plan. I have meme'd about the invite Illuminati forever and I understand that a single person does not represent a whole. I am starting with the team leads because it is the easiest first step really. If i get a whole bunch of them saying very similar things it gives us something to look into, but with that said we will probably also do a larger survey in the near future.
team leaders are not representative of their teams ideas/thoughts on this, i'm sure most will not consult their teams. this will affect everyone that plays, not just team leaders. please do not take the words of individual team leaders as gospel of what other people want. Maybe make a quick google doc survey, and you have to put your esea in to verify you've actually played to get information from a large group of players.[/quote]
That is not the plan. I have meme'd about the invite Illuminati forever and I understand that a single person does not represent a whole. I am starting with the team leads because it is the easiest first step really. If i get a whole bunch of them saying very similar things it gives us something to look into, but with that said we will probably also do a larger survey in the near future.
I'm glad there's been responses to a lot of concerns brought up, however (forgive me if I'm a bit stupid) I'm still a bit confused regarding some points. I'm gonna try and keep things simple so it's easier to understand my confusion, so apologies if I come across as a bit blunt.
First of all: A NA community driven TF2 league is good. 100% with you there.
Global communication between regions is also something we've had way too little of. It definitely needs to happen, case and point being, for example, all the LANs a team's travelled to from a different continent only to be at a disadvantage in picks/bans due to having to permaban a map they don't play. Stuff like this is stupid and shouldn't happen. Therefore I think having a place to bring up concerns like these and simplify exchange between regions was long needed. Again 100% with you there.
Now what I don't get is the other effort about unifying the way to play TF2 and the way you're looking to approach that. There's a couple points that still have me thinkin', so I'm just gonna go through them.
(this is only a minor thing, it just really confused me) I don't think the differences in leagues have ever been an entry barrier (directed at tsc's reply). Just like how allowing xyz unlock into the game isn't suddenly gonna bring in all the pubbers who were just holding off until this moment, I don't think adjusting rulesets/whitelists/whatever is gonna bring people in who were too afraid of competitive TF2 because they didn't know if koth was played to 3 or 4. Like, if you're new to the competitive, you play the videogame in whatever league you end up in. Any confusion regarding ruleset or whatever isn't an actual entry barrier, it's something that's cleared up in one sentence. Again this is something incredibly minor but I feel like it somewhat leads into my second point.
My issue with your idea. I don't know who it serves. In mind, it neither makes sense for any leagues or players. Leagues' (especially community driven ones like ETF2L and ozfortress) primary focus should not (and isn't as far as I can tell) be attracting new players. A community driven league aims to satisfy the community that's, well, driving it. Satisfying their players base, namely the players who are already interested in the game, is how a league persists. If there are people in your league who have played the game for years and years or travelled to different countries to play, you generally try and keep them around. Thus it makes sense for leagues to try and act to please their playerbase. Now what I don't understand is how it is in any way appealing for any league that has its own unique approach (and all of them do in their own way) to try and become part of a unified TF2. It directly stands in conflict with a league's interests and by extension my interests as a player. Here's why I believe that's the case:
A league wants to cater its players and make the game as enjoyable as possible to keep them around.
I, as a player, what to be heard by the league as clearly as possible.
To me it makes absolutely 0 (zero) sense how implementing an additional layer of discussion for league specific issues is going to help these two points. The closer decisions happen to the player base, the more accurately they are going to reflect the playerbase's interest. Quite literally the best case scenario of adding this additional instance of discussion would be that I as a player get the same amount of representation I would have gotten without said instance. You either end up summarizing opinions from different sources, effectively losing the opinions of those who didn't agree (very much like it is the case in an electoral college or a first-past-the-post system) or you don't summarize at all, at which point I'm wondering what the point of the entire thing is if the best case outcomes the same as it is currently.
In conclusion, I'm trying to say that I believe (and I feel like generally speaking this makes sense) that, if you're accurately trying to reflect the interests of the playerbase a devolution of the decision-making process is needed, not adding extra steps on top. It makes no sense to me how adding this extra step is in the interest of any league, considering it a) complicates the process of appeasing their players, b) actively hinders their competition with other leagues and most importantly c) creates a lack of alternatives and variety which may even hinder the game in the long run.
And at the end of the day, it is your org, a new entity in the scene asking the leagues to adhere to your system of deciding league specifics on a more global scale for benefits that are still fairly unclear to me. If you're already creating a platform for allowing easy exchange between regions and leagues I don't see the need for deciding anything league specific on a global scale. All the issues we had in the past, e.g. the map bullshit at lan, approaching outside organizations, etc., can just be discussed on this platform. That's what I like about it and what it does well. Exchange of ideas and suggestions to help form decisions. It shouldn't try to be anything more than that. Keeping the decisions close to the players. For me, that's what by the community, for the community means.
I hope that made sense, thanks for reading my nerd essay.
I'm glad there's been responses to a lot of concerns brought up, however (forgive me if I'm a bit stupid) I'm still a bit confused regarding some points. I'm gonna try and keep things simple so it's easier to understand my confusion, so apologies if I come across as a bit blunt.
First of all: A NA community driven TF2 league is good. 100% with you there.
Global communication between regions is also something we've had way too little of. It definitely needs to happen, case and point being, for example, all the LANs a team's travelled to from a different continent only to be at a disadvantage in picks/bans due to having to permaban a map they don't play. Stuff like this is stupid and shouldn't happen. Therefore I think having a place to bring up concerns like these and simplify exchange between regions was long needed. Again 100% with you there.
Now what I don't get is the other effort about unifying the way to play TF2 and the way you're looking to approach that. There's a couple points that still have me thinkin', so I'm just gonna go through them.
(this is only a minor thing, it just really confused me) I don't think the differences in leagues have ever been an entry barrier (directed at tsc's reply). Just like how allowing xyz unlock into the game isn't suddenly gonna bring in all the pubbers who were just holding off until this moment, I don't think adjusting rulesets/whitelists/whatever is gonna bring people in who were too afraid of competitive TF2 because they didn't know if koth was played to 3 or 4. Like, if you're new to the competitive, you play the videogame in whatever league you end up in. Any confusion regarding ruleset or whatever isn't an actual entry barrier, it's something that's cleared up in one sentence. Again this is something incredibly minor but I feel like it somewhat leads into my second point.
My issue with your idea. I don't know who it serves. In mind, it neither makes sense for any leagues or players. Leagues' (especially community driven ones like ETF2L and ozfortress) primary focus should not (and isn't as far as I can tell) be attracting new players. A community driven league aims to satisfy the community that's, well, driving it. Satisfying their players base, namely the players who are already interested in the game, is how a league persists. If there are people in your league who have played the game for years and years or travelled to different countries to play, you generally try and keep them around. Thus it makes sense for leagues to try and act to please their playerbase. Now what I don't understand is how it is in any way appealing for any league that has its own unique approach (and all of them do in their own way) to try and become part of a unified TF2. It directly stands in conflict with a league's interests and by extension my interests as a player. Here's why I believe that's the case:
A league wants to cater its players and make the game as enjoyable as possible to keep them around.
I, as a player, what to be heard by the league as clearly as possible.
To me it makes absolutely 0 (zero) sense how implementing an additional layer of discussion for league specific issues is going to help these two points. The closer decisions happen to the player base, the more accurately they are going to reflect the playerbase's interest. Quite literally the best case scenario of adding this additional instance of discussion would be that I as a player get the same amount of representation I would have gotten without said instance. You either end up summarizing opinions from different sources, effectively losing the opinions of those who didn't agree (very much like it is the case in an electoral college or a first-past-the-post system) or you don't summarize at all, at which point I'm wondering what the point of the entire thing is if the best case outcomes the same as it is currently.
In conclusion, I'm trying to say that I believe (and I feel like generally speaking this makes sense) that, if you're accurately trying to reflect the interests of the playerbase a devolution of the decision-making process is needed, not adding extra steps on top. It makes no sense to me how adding this extra step is in the interest of any league, considering it a) complicates the process of appeasing their players, b) actively hinders their competition with other leagues and most importantly c) creates a lack of alternatives and variety which may even hinder the game in the long run.
And at the end of the day, it is your org, a new entity in the scene [i]asking[/i] the leagues to adhere to your system of deciding league specifics on a more global scale for benefits that are still fairly unclear to me. If you're already creating a platform for allowing easy exchange between regions and leagues I don't see the need for deciding anything league specific on a global scale. All the issues we had in the past, e.g. the map bullshit at lan, approaching outside organizations, etc., can just be discussed on this platform. That's what I like about it and what it does well. Exchange of ideas and suggestions to help form decisions. It shouldn't try to be anything more than that. Keeping the decisions close to the players. For me, that's what [i]by the community, for the community[/i] means.
I hope that made sense, thanks for reading my nerd essay.
First of all: A NA community driven TF2 league is good. 100% with you there.
Global communication between regions is also something we've had way too little of. It definitely needs to happen, case and point being, for example, all the LANs a team's travelled to from a different continent only to be at a disadvantage in picks/bans due to having to permaban a map they don't play. Stuff like this is stupid and shouldn't happen. Therefore I think having a place to bring up concerns like these and simplify exchange between regions was long needed. Again 100% with you there.
Now what I don't get is the other effort about unifying the way to play TF2 and the way you're looking to approach that. There's a couple points that still have me thinkin', so I'm just gonna go through them.
(this is only a minor thing, it just really confused me) I don't think the differences in leagues have ever been an entry barrier (directed at tsc's reply). Just like how allowing xyz unlock into the game isn't suddenly gonna bring in all the pubbers who were just holding off until this moment, I don't think adjusting rulesets/whitelists/whatever is gonna bring people in who were too afraid of competitive TF2 because they didn't know if koth was played to 3 or 4. Like, if you're new to the competitive, you play the videogame in whatever league you end up in. Any confusion regarding ruleset or whatever isn't an actual entry barrier, it's something that's cleared up in one sentence. Again this is something incredibly minor but I feel like it somewhat leads into my second point.
My issue with your idea. I don't know who it serves. In mind, it neither makes sense for any leagues or players. Leagues' (especially community driven ones like ETF2L and ozfortress) primary focus should not (and isn't as far as I can tell) be attracting new players. A community driven league aims to satisfy the community that's, well, driving it. Satisfying their players base, namely the players who are already interested in the game, is how a league persists. If there are people in your league who have played the game for years and years or travelled to different countries to play, you generally try and keep them around. Thus it makes sense for leagues to try and act to please their playerbase. Now what I don't understand is how it is in any way appealing for any league that has its own unique approach (and all of them do in their own way) to try and become part of a unified TF2. It directly stands in conflict with a league's interests and by extension my interests as a player. Here's why I believe that's the case:
A league wants to cater its players and make the game as enjoyable as possible to keep them around.
I, as a player, what to be heard by the league as clearly as possible.
To me it makes absolutely 0 (zero) sense how implementing an additional layer of discussion for league specific issues is going to help these two points. The closer decisions happen to the player base, the more accurately they are going to reflect the playerbase's interest. Quite literally the best case scenario of adding this additional instance of discussion would be that I as a player get the same amount of representation I would have gotten without said instance. You either end up summarizing opinions from different sources, effectively losing the opinions of those who didn't agree (very much like it is the case in an electoral college or a first-past-the-post system) or you don't summarize at all, at which point I'm wondering what the point of the entire thing is if the best case outcomes the same as it is currently.
In conclusion, I'm trying to say that I believe (and I feel like generally speaking this makes sense) that, if you're accurately trying to reflect the interests of the playerbase a devolution of the decision-making process is needed, not adding extra steps on top. It makes no sense to me how adding this extra step is in the interest of any league, considering it a) complicates the process of appeasing their players, b) actively hinders their competition with other leagues and most importantly c) creates a lack of alternatives and variety which may even hinder the game in the long run.
And at the end of the day, it is your org, a new entity in the scene [i]asking[/i] the leagues to adhere to your system of deciding league specifics on a more global scale for benefits that are still fairly unclear to me. If you're already creating a platform for allowing easy exchange between regions and leagues I don't see the need for deciding anything league specific on a global scale. All the issues we had in the past, e.g. the map bullshit at lan, approaching outside organizations, etc., can just be discussed on this platform. That's what I like about it and what it does well. Exchange of ideas and suggestions to help form decisions. It shouldn't try to be anything more than that. Keeping the decisions close to the players. For me, that's what [i]by the community, for the community[/i] means.
I hope that made sense, thanks for reading my nerd essay.
Its great to see the international TF community come together in its time of peril. Thank you to everyone in the TF community that is attempting to rebuild the NA 6's scene.
Its great to see the international TF community come together in its time of peril. Thank you to everyone in the TF community that is attempting to rebuild the NA 6's scene.
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.