Instead of looking at each weapon individually in a whitelist we could choose between two broader philosophies about banned weapons.
Philosophy A is the current global whitelist (alternatively the b4nny/valve major philosophy) which is to allow everything that doesn't break competitive 6v6.
In other words weapons that nobody uses in serious games because they aren't very good, but don't break the game, are all allowed. Think of the scout primary unlocks; pretty much nobody seriously uses them.
Philosophy B would be like something people have asked for in this/other threads and in the past, where you ban everything that doesn't contribute positively to the game.
Pretty much this would mean memey weapons (like the aforementioned scout unlocks) would be banned, because they are almost never used. Would anyone really care that much if they were banned?
Maybe this wouldn't even be a big deal, because these superfluous unlocks are pretty much only run in non-competitive games anyways, i.e. in games where there is a skill gap between both teams and one/both start memeing because they give up, in aids doublemixes, games of meme teams with meme compositions (that usually consist of sandbaggers anyways), etc.
Why not have a poll where people choose between these broad ideas, and only then discussing individual weapons?
Instead of looking at each weapon individually in a whitelist we could choose between two broader philosophies about banned weapons.
Philosophy A is the current global whitelist (alternatively the b4nny/valve major philosophy) which is to [i]allow everything that doesn't break competitive 6v6[/i].
In other words weapons that nobody uses in serious games because they aren't very good, but don't break the game, are all allowed. Think of the scout primary unlocks; pretty much nobody seriously uses them.
Philosophy B would be like something people have asked for in this/other threads and in the past, where you [i]ban everything that doesn't contribute positively to the game[/i].
Pretty much this would mean memey weapons (like the aforementioned scout unlocks) would be banned, because they are almost never used. Would anyone really care that much if they were banned?
Maybe this wouldn't even be a big deal, because these superfluous unlocks are pretty much only run in non-competitive games anyways, i.e. in games where there is a skill gap between both teams and one/both start memeing because they give up, in aids doublemixes, games of meme teams with meme compositions (that usually consist of sandbaggers anyways), etc.
Why not have a poll where people choose between these broad ideas, and only then discussing individual weapons?
[url=https://www.strawpoll.me/17901729]what's your whitelist philosophy? vote here.[/url]
NursayI also said later in the same paragraph that as long as people are loud about what they want, that's what they'll get no matter how hard luc and b4nny try to push their own ideas. I obviously have my own personal preference on things, but when it comes to a new league I highly doubt they'll do much to try to piss a majority of people off.
Hasn't banny been a pretty open person about the fact that he would gladly remove the entirety of the current invite players if it meant making progress towards what he thinks it's the way to grow the game?
Either way this discussion started with your saying that luc and banny should be invited. I agree. So should you, purple, skeez, botmode, etc.
And tbh someone should be a neutral 3rd party with a mute button because every meeting similar to this that I've been apart of has been banny aggressively shouting his ideas and trying to silence people who disagree
[quote=Nursay]
I also said later in the same paragraph that as long as people are loud about what they want, that's what they'll get no matter how hard luc and b4nny try to push their own ideas. I obviously have my own personal preference on things, but when it comes to a new league I highly doubt they'll do much to try to piss a majority of people off.[/quote]
Hasn't banny been a pretty open person about the fact that he would gladly remove the entirety of the current invite players if it meant making progress towards what he thinks it's the way to grow the game?
Either way this discussion started with your saying that luc and banny should be invited. I agree. So should you, purple, skeez, botmode, etc.
And tbh someone should be a neutral 3rd party with a mute button because every meeting similar to this that I've been apart of has been banny aggressively shouting his ideas and trying to silence people who disagree
i just wanna have fun
[img]https://i.imgur.com/ODqb9a4.png[/img]
Cabbage_
Philosophy A is the current global whitelist (alternatively the b4nny/valve major philosophy) which is to allow everything that doesn't break competitive 6v6.
In other words weapons that nobody uses in serious games because they aren't very good, but don't break the game, are all allowed. Think of the scout primary unlocks; pretty much nobody seriously uses them.
Why not have a poll where people choose between these broad ideas, and only then discussing individual weapons?
tsarwhat's your whitelist philosophy? vote here.
the problem with this is even I agree with allowing everything that doesn't break competitive tf2, but what b4nny and co actually want is to allow everything full stop, as well as remove class limits, and possibly change a huge percentage of the map pool
you are underestimating what that side of things actually wants; we are pretty close to already having a whitelist that allows everything not game-breaking, which I'm fine with, and if people see the results of a poll like this and say "see it proves that we should have 3 medics!!!" then that's just SO far removed from what people actually want
[quote=Cabbage_]
Philosophy A is the current global whitelist (alternatively the b4nny/valve major philosophy) which is to [i]allow everything that doesn't break competitive 6v6[/i].
In other words weapons that nobody uses in serious games because they aren't very good, but don't break the game, are all allowed. Think of the scout primary unlocks; pretty much nobody seriously uses them.
Why not have a poll where people choose between these broad ideas, and only then discussing individual weapons?[/quote]
[quote=tsar][url=https://www.strawpoll.me/17901729]what's your whitelist philosophy? vote here.[/url][/quote]
the problem with this is even I agree with allowing everything that doesn't break competitive tf2, but what b4nny and co actually want is to allow everything full stop, as well as remove class limits, and possibly change a huge percentage of the map pool
you are underestimating what that side of things actually wants; we are pretty close to already having a whitelist that allows everything not game-breaking, which I'm fine with, and if people see the results of a poll like this and say "see it proves that we should have 3 medics!!!" then that's just SO far removed from what people actually want
i think accessibility should be a much larger priority in the future. many newer players i know were very dissuaded from trying esea because of the esea client and the entry fee for a season that they 100% were not going to win any money from.
i think accessibility should be a much larger priority in the future. many newer players i know were very dissuaded from trying esea because of the esea client and the entry fee for a season that they 100% were not going to win any money from.
"Another, which was resoundingly rejected, was to unify all leagues behind a front-runner as to avoid fracturing the player pool."
I'm a bit disappointed to read that though I understand many of the good reasons for doing it like this. Nevertheless I think that fracturing the player pool is a very real possibility and the main thing that I don't want to see next fall is 3-5 different leagues all going live at the same time. We should not wait to see who joins what leagues and use that as a gauge of popularity and to see which league to get behind. By the time you let it get that far there could be substantial damage done which could lead to a shortening of the lifespan of our beloved game.
I think we need the leagues that are competing for this spot to present a standardized mission statement/cover letter type document that lays out clearly where they stand on certain issues as well as lets them describe in a brief and direct way their vision for their product and how it would be better or different from some of their competitors. We then need to conduct rounds of runoff elections the results of which would eliminate the least popular choice(s) after which the remaining parties could add to their statements and further plead their cases. This process would be done multilpe times until there are as few options left as reasonably possible. We could even use a form of system like this (https://youtu.be/l8XOZJkozfI) (or not because that might be needlessly complicated).
I should mention that I have no idea what the best way to conduct voting would be as far as making it fair and accessible and logistically practical but I'm sure someone here has some good ideas. The important thing for me is to have as few leagues as possible duking it out for participation come next season. Ideally it would just be one left and we could all give it a fair shake.
"Another, which was resoundingly rejected, was to unify all leagues behind a front-runner as to avoid fracturing the player pool."
I'm a bit disappointed to read that though I understand many of the good reasons for doing it like this. Nevertheless I think that fracturing the player pool is a very real possibility and the main thing that I don't want to see next fall is 3-5 different leagues all going live at the same time. We should not wait to see who joins what leagues and use that as a gauge of popularity and to see which league to get behind. By the time you let it get that far there could be substantial damage done which could lead to a shortening of the lifespan of our beloved game.
I think we need the leagues that are competing for this spot to present a standardized mission statement/cover letter type document that lays out clearly where they stand on certain issues as well as lets them describe in a brief and direct way their vision for their product and how it would be better or different from some of their competitors. We then need to conduct rounds of runoff elections the results of which would eliminate the least popular choice(s) after which the remaining parties could add to their statements and further plead their cases. This process would be done multilpe times until there are as few options left as reasonably possible. We could even use a form of system like this (https://youtu.be/l8XOZJkozfI) (or not because that might be needlessly complicated).
I should mention that I have no idea what the best way to conduct voting would be as far as making it fair and accessible and logistically practical but I'm sure someone here has some good ideas. The important thing for me is to have as few leagues as possible duking it out for participation come next season. Ideally it would just be one left and we could all give it a fair shake.
Oculismhabib should be banned he cheated before
pauly has also cheated before and by before i mean yesterday
http://logs.tf/2270254
looking at the long list of "former" cheaters who played in esea, it would be nice to have league admins who actually care about this for once
[quote=Oculism]
habib should be banned he cheated before
pauly has also cheated before and by before i mean yesterday
http://logs.tf/2270254
[/quote]
looking at the long list of "former" cheaters who played in esea, it would be nice to have league admins who actually care about this for once
OculismdishsoapOculismfyggOculismcuck noises
ur only saying this cuz ur cheeks are getting clapped by whatever the new league is
yeah but its just generally accepted to not have admin bias that negatively effects people
also people should only be punished in leagues for stuff they do in the league. that should be universally accepted. If an entirely new league is established, it should be a clean slate for everybody playing. I'm not the only one whos done shit in the past
ur right about admin bias being bad, but banning people for doing things out of the league (like hacking, harassing, etc.) is more or less a good thing to do as it helps keep players in a safe/welcoming environment.
Show Content
u can stop acting like u care about pushing this point across btw scratch, ur not gunna get banned if theres a new league most likely
Would you ban someone from playing a league if you caught him hacking in an MGE/Pub server for fun?
Gladly, I would actually go out of my way in trying to get said person banned from every league.
[quote=Oculism][quote=dishsoap][quote=Oculism][quote=fygg][quote=Oculism]cuck noises[/quote]
ur only saying this cuz ur cheeks are getting clapped by whatever the new league is[/quote]
yeah but its just generally accepted to not have admin bias that negatively effects people
also people should only be punished in leagues for stuff they do in the league. that should be universally accepted. If an entirely new league is established, it should be a clean slate for everybody playing. I'm not the only one whos done shit in the past[/quote]
ur right about admin bias being bad, but banning people for doing things out of the league (like hacking, harassing, etc.) is more or less a good thing to do as it helps keep players in a safe/welcoming environment.
[spoiler]u can stop acting like u care about pushing this point across btw scratch, ur not gunna get banned if theres a new league most likely[/spoiler][/quote]
Would you ban someone from playing a league if you caught him hacking in an MGE/Pub server for fun?[/quote]
Gladly, I would actually go out of my way in trying to get said person banned from every league.
I realize it's a big opportunity for TF2, but the best approach to establishing a new league would be to take the ESEA ruleset wholesale and graft it to whatever league will be its successor for at least the first season. The primary problem of running a league isn't the ruleset, map pool, or whitelist, it's getting players to play there and the day to day stuff that comes with actually running such a league like: scheduling matches, scheduling matches, playoffs, and seasons around holidays, ensuring uniform rule enforcement and having working mechanisms that are fair and understood by the player base, trustworthy, active, and accessible admins, and many other very tedious and unsexy things.
Until a potential successor league can demonstrate that it could actually sustain the greatly increased workload of being the primary TF2 league for NA, it's not really worth discussing what that league ought to look like because it's way easier to deliver on "we have an experimental whitelist" than to demonstrate that one possesses the infrastructure required to run such a league well - which is the important part.
I realize it's a big opportunity for TF2, but the best approach to establishing a new league would be to take the ESEA ruleset wholesale and graft it to whatever league will be its successor for at least the first season. The primary problem of running a league isn't the ruleset, map pool, or whitelist, it's getting players to play there and the day to day stuff that comes with actually running such a league like: scheduling matches, scheduling matches, playoffs, and seasons around holidays, ensuring uniform rule enforcement and having working mechanisms that are fair and understood by the player base, trustworthy, active, and accessible admins, and many other very tedious and unsexy things.
Until a potential successor league can demonstrate that it could actually sustain the greatly increased workload of being the primary TF2 league for NA, it's not really worth discussing what that league ought to look like because it's way easier to deliver on "we have an experimental whitelist" than to demonstrate that one possesses the infrastructure required to run such a league well - which is the important part.
JaguarFiendI think we need the leagues that are competing for this spot to present a standardized mission statement/cover letter type document that lays out clearly where they stand on certain issues as well as lets them describe in a brief and direct way their vision for their product and how it would be better or different from some of their competitors.
At the meeting we all agreed to do this. It's compiled in a spreadsheet that is soon to be publicised once leagues confirm it's okay to do so.
[quote=JaguarFiend]
I think we need the leagues that are competing for this spot to present a standardized mission statement/cover letter type document that lays out clearly where they stand on certain issues as well as lets them describe in a brief and direct way their vision for their product and how it would be better or different from some of their competitors. [/quote]
At the meeting we all agreed to do this. It's compiled in a spreadsheet that is soon to be publicised once leagues confirm it's okay to do so.
Nursayb4nny and luc get invited because they obviously care way more about growing the scene than most of anyone else. While it may seem lame because their ideas of progressing the game forward may seem outlandish to most, it's way better to have heads that actually believe in the future of the game than let's say 90% of fucking invite that just constantly spout "the game is dead/i hate this game" (this attitude does not lead to good leadership). They also do a lot to try to move the game forward. If you're worried that they're going to constantly try to push a no unlock/no class limit ruleset, as long as a majority of you guys genuinely keep saying you don't want it then it will not happen no matter how much they say.
Just going to point out that if a no unlock/no class limit meta with a wider map pool was actually going to work and get new players the ingame comp MM would be doing A LOT better than it currently is. Competitive players don't like it cause it's not balanced, forced garbage settings and map pool creates really stale matches. Casual players hate it cause it's not balanced. Everyone hates it cause skill rating took 2 years to exist..., match times take forever (even when there was plenty of players to queue), was filled cheaters, etc.
Valve is supposed to be balancing weapons and classes but...
March 28, 2018 Patch
This is the day of the last balance patch for items in TF2. Everything else have been relatively minor bug fixes. That was 397 days ago.
How many useless weapons still exist? A lot.
How many subpar weapons still exist? A lot.
Has the sticky det bug been fixed? Partially...
Where is the fabled generalist pyro? All the items added did basically nothing/had to long of cooldowns to have any value.
Does pyro need more, less or the same amount of skill as it did 3 years ago? Basically the same, airblast combos are harder. Spamming fire for decent damage is easier.
Can you still build uber during pauses? Yeah.
Valve does need time to collect data but nearly 400 days? Some of these items have had very obvious problems since day 1 of their release. Valve even recognized this with the Thermal Thrusters where after 6 months they reduced the cool down from 1.1s to 0.8s, it took probably most of us 1 attempt at using them to understand the swap speed was WAY to slow and STILL is. Pretty Boy's pocket pistol still doesn't need the added HP. All flame particles need some transparency. Could go on to list a million other things that are still very obviously bad/under-performing/broken as can MOST OF US. Some of it is literally a single line change and a weapon can be made significantly better/worse yet Valve can't seem to muster that in over a year.
It doesn't matter what b4nny/luc does or anyone/group other than Valve does to have any kind of significant growth for competitive TF2. To anyone who disagrees name a major FPS that has both a prize pool and competitive player base that's larger than competitive TF2 that DOES NOT have developer support in terms of $$$.
R6 Siege gets money from Ubisoft
PUBG gets money from Bluehole/PUBG Corp.
Fortnite gets money from EPIC
CSGO gets money from Valve (both directly and indirectly)
Overwatch gets money from Blizzard
Every Short lived iteration of COD gets money from Activision
ESEA waived open fees + added voting on maps, and Open really wasn't that much bigger than it ever was before. We came up with a Global Whitelist that a lot of people hated, but where are the players? We then started to ignore said Global Whitelist, not much changed there either.
TL:DR game needs dev support for growth, recommended changes based largely on "it'll help grow the playerbase" should have 0 value.
Personally I still love the game, and have enjoyed playing competitive TF2 in various formats, and honestly I don't think the Global Whitelist hurt anything it might've actually helped very slightly but being 100% honest every positive thing the competitive TF2 community could do combined would still be trivial compared to what Valve could/should do.
[quote=Nursay]b4nny and luc get invited because they obviously care way more about growing the scene than most of anyone else. While it may seem lame because their ideas of progressing the game forward may seem outlandish to most, it's way better to have heads that actually believe in the future of the game than let's say 90% of fucking invite that just constantly spout "the game is dead/i hate this game" (this attitude does not lead to good leadership). They also do a lot to try to move the game forward. If you're worried that they're going to constantly try to push a no unlock/no class limit ruleset, as long as a majority of you guys genuinely keep saying you don't want it then it will not happen no matter how much they say.[/quote]
Just going to point out that if a no unlock/no class limit meta with a wider map pool was actually going to work and get new players the ingame comp MM would be doing A LOT better than it currently is. Competitive players don't like it cause it's not balanced, forced garbage settings and map pool creates really stale matches. Casual players hate it cause it's not balanced. Everyone hates it cause skill rating took [b]2 years to exist...[/b], match times take forever (even when there was plenty of players to queue), was filled cheaters, etc.
Valve is supposed to be balancing weapons and classes but...
[u][b]March 28, 2018 Patch[/b][/u]
This is the day of the last balance patch for items in TF2. Everything else have been relatively minor bug fixes. That was 397 days ago.
How many useless weapons still exist? A lot.
How many subpar weapons still exist? A lot.
Has the sticky det bug been fixed? Partially...
Where is the fabled generalist pyro? All the items added did basically nothing/had to long of cooldowns to have any value.
Does pyro need more, less or the same amount of skill as it did 3 years ago? Basically the same, airblast combos are harder. Spamming fire for decent damage is easier.
Can you still build uber during pauses? Yeah.
Valve does need time to collect data but nearly 400 days? Some of these items have had very obvious problems since day 1 of their release. Valve even recognized this with the Thermal Thrusters where after 6 months they reduced the cool down from 1.1s to 0.8s, it took probably most of us 1 attempt at using them to understand the swap speed was WAY to slow and STILL is. Pretty Boy's pocket pistol still doesn't need the added HP. All flame particles need [i]some[/i] transparency. Could go on to list a million other things that are still very obviously bad/under-performing/broken as can [i]MOST OF US[/i]. Some of it is literally a single line change and a weapon can be made significantly better/worse yet Valve can't seem to muster that in over a year.
It doesn't matter what b4nny/luc does or anyone/group other than Valve does to have any kind of significant growth for competitive TF2. To anyone who disagrees name a major FPS that has both a prize pool and competitive player base that's larger than competitive TF2 that [i][b]DOES NOT[/b][/i] have developer support in terms of $$$.
R6 Siege gets money from Ubisoft
PUBG gets money from Bluehole/PUBG Corp.
Fortnite gets money from EPIC
CSGO gets money from Valve (both directly and indirectly)
Overwatch gets money from Blizzard
Every Short lived iteration of COD gets money from Activision
ESEA waived open fees + added voting on maps, and Open really wasn't that much bigger than it ever was before. We came up with a Global Whitelist that a lot of people hated, but where are the players? We then started to ignore said Global Whitelist, not much changed there either.
TL:DR game needs dev support for growth, recommended changes based largely on "it'll help grow the playerbase" should have 0 value.
Personally I still love the game, and have enjoyed playing competitive TF2 in various formats, and honestly I don't think the Global Whitelist hurt anything it might've actually helped very slightly but being 100% honest every positive thing the competitive TF2 community could do combined would still be trivial compared to what Valve could/should do.
I feel like people are reading into what I said too hard or I didn't word myself properly the two times I posted about it. I agree with Luc/b4nny being leaders because of their optimism for the games future, not because of what they want. My personal philosophy is I only want a very select few weapons banned, and I still wish for class limits. I was also trying to state that no matter what they want as long as you guys keep discussing why you don't want it (like you guys are currently doing now) then they won't get their way. The poor wording comes from me trying to shove in that I have personal bias because no matter what happens to the game I am going to keep playing. Trying to cram all those things together came out pretty poor.
I feel like people are reading into what I said too hard or I didn't word myself properly the two times I posted about it. I agree with Luc/b4nny being leaders because of their optimism for the games future, not because of what they want. My personal philosophy is I only want a very select few weapons banned, and I still wish for class limits. I was also trying to state that no matter what they want as long as you guys keep discussing why you don't want it (like you guys are currently doing now) then they won't get their way. The poor wording comes from me trying to shove in that I have personal bias because no matter what happens to the game I am going to keep playing. Trying to cram all those things together came out pretty poor.
NursayI feel like people are reading into what I said too hard or I didn't word myself properly the two times I posted about it. I agree with Luc/b4nny being leaders because of their optimism for the games future, not because of what they want. My personal philosophy is I only want a very select few weapons banned, and I still wish for class limits. I was also trying to state that no matter what they want as long as you guys keep discussing why you don't want it (like you guys are currently doing now) then they won't get their way. The poor wording comes from me trying to shove in that I personal bias because no matter what happens to the game I am going to keep playing. Trying to cram all those things together came out pretty poor.
If you're including me I wasn't trying to go after you specifically Nursey, just the concept/justification for a lot of luc's & b4nny's ideas.
Sadly my optimism has died after being repeatedly stabbed by Valve. Game balance, updates, community engagement, Artifact... , etc
[quote=Nursay]I feel like people are reading into what I said too hard or I didn't word myself properly the two times I posted about it. I agree with Luc/b4nny being leaders because of their optimism for the games future, not because of what they want. My personal philosophy is I only want a very select few weapons banned, and I still wish for class limits. I was also trying to state that no matter what they want as long as you guys keep discussing why you don't want it (like you guys are currently doing now) then they won't get their way. The poor wording comes from me trying to shove in that I personal bias because no matter what happens to the game I am going to keep playing. Trying to cram all those things together came out pretty poor.[/quote]
If you're including me I wasn't trying to go after you specifically Nursey, just the concept/justification for a lot of luc's & b4nny's ideas.
Sadly my optimism has died after being repeatedly stabbed by Valve. Game balance, updates, community engagement, Artifact... , etc
I can personally say the meeting was pretty productive, the league personnel talked about future plans for every league and how we want to distribute and carry ourselves after ESEA's departure.
I can personally say the meeting was pretty productive, the league personnel talked about future plans for every league and how we want to distribute and carry ourselves after ESEA's departure.
can we start a petition to get tri back in invite though?
can we start a petition to get tri back in invite though?
https://mobile.twitter.com/RGL_gg/status/1122968059033968640
idk how other leagues are gonna compete with that prize pool
idk how other leagues are gonna compete with that prize pool
jetzzzzzhttps://mobile.twitter.com/RGL_gg/status/1122968059033968640
*ahem* Sigafoo bad.
But besides that if RGL canput up a LAN as well as everything else listed it might be a good place to start. Dare I say they have been *gaining traction* and a playerbase in the TF2 community, having all of the "subcategories" of TF2 under one org wouldn't be awful. While I'm sure no one here really has taken RGL seriously thus far, I'm sure many people have messed around in one of their leagues, and maybe this could be a chance for them to prove themselves.
[quote=jetzzzzz]https://mobile.twitter.com/RGL_gg/status/1122968059033968640[/quote]
*ahem* Sigafoo bad.
But besides that if RGL canput up a LAN as well as everything else listed it might be a good place to start. Dare I say they have been *gaining traction* and a playerbase in the TF2 community, having all of the "subcategories" of TF2 under one org wouldn't be awful. While I'm sure no one here really has taken RGL seriously thus far, I'm sure many people have messed around in one of their leagues, and maybe this could be a chance for them to prove themselves.
I wonder if the strat is to just blow a bunch of money for the prize pool on the first season cause once everyone migrates over you can lower it and it's unlikely everyone will leave
I wonder if the strat is to just blow a bunch of money for the prize pool on the first season cause once everyone migrates over you can lower it and it's unlikely everyone will leave
I really really really really want RGL sixes to actually be everything it says it'll be, but with sigafoo, who knows. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now though.
I really really really really want RGL sixes to actually be everything it says it'll be, but with sigafoo, who knows. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now though.
https://twitter.com/TF2League/status/1122950907694657536
where did rgl even get that much money? if it's from sponsors that's impressive but how is that much money possibly sustainable every season regardless of where it's from
where did rgl even get that much money? if it's from sponsors that's impressive but how is that much money possibly sustainable every season regardless of where it's from
YeeHawwhere did rgl even get that much money? if it's from sponsors that's impressive but how is that much money possibly sustainable every season regardless of where it's from
The same way as esea.. pay to play
[quote=YeeHaw]where did rgl even get that much money? if it's from sponsors that's impressive but how is that much money possibly sustainable every season regardless of where it's from[/quote]
The same way as esea.. pay to play
YeeHawwhere did rgl even get that much money? if it's from sponsors that's impressive but how is that much money possibly sustainable every season regardless of where it's from
This is what I'm curious about, and the right answers will definitely catch my interest.
Where did this money come from, is it sustainable, is it just NA or will it be EU too, same question on the LAN front, how much legwork is done.
Basically my question is is this a 1 time prize pool to kill the competition and then dial back after one season, or is this a genuine regular option.
[quote=YeeHaw]where did rgl even get that much money? if it's from sponsors that's impressive but how is that much money possibly sustainable every season regardless of where it's from[/quote]
This is what I'm curious about, and the right answers will definitely catch my interest.
Where did this money come from, is it sustainable, is it just NA or will it be EU too, same question on the LAN front, how much legwork is done.
Basically my question is is this a 1 time prize pool to kill the competition and then dial back after one season, or is this a genuine regular option.
Sidularhttps://twitter.com/TF2League/status/1122950907694657536
this sounds good. too good. how does your org plan on accomplishing this without an extremely large amount of resources?
[quote=Sidular]https://twitter.com/TF2League/status/1122950907694657536[/quote]
this sounds good. too good. how does your org plan on accomplishing this without an extremely large amount of resources?
Hello,
I would like to collect some data to see if people would play the ESL TF2 NA League, details here.
I'd like to add a personal comment. There is going to be a major split in the community, no matter which way we go about it. There is a mix of free and paid leagues and unfortunately, it's like an election, it's your choice. Whoever you go with will affect the TF2 community, positive or negative.
Hello,
I would like to collect some data to see if people would play the ESL TF2 NA League, details [url=https://forms.gle/sdRmP6eE56wyCG5j9]here[/url].
I'd like to add a personal comment. There is going to be a major split in the community, no matter which way we go about it. There is a mix of free and paid leagues and unfortunately, it's like an election, it's your choice. Whoever you go with will affect the TF2 community, positive or negative.
while it's nice seeing leagues willing to throw money into na 6s, there seems to be a very good chance to end up fracturing the playerbase which would be very worrying
while it's nice seeing leagues willing to throw money into na 6s, there seems to be a very good chance to end up fracturing the playerbase which would be very worrying
sidular couldn't even keep his open team from dying, you think he can run a league?
sidular couldn't even keep his open team from dying, you think he can run a league?