You guys have got to get over whether or not the kill was technically difficult. TF2 is different than quake because of classes like spy/heavy/pyro, and in my opinion it's better for it. These classes emphasize the importance of tactics and strategy by being easier to use but also situational.

You can't justify banning a weapon because it's too easy to use. If it doesn't significantly impact the game then the question of banning it should never even come up. All it does is make the spy slightly more dangerous, and that's not going to make any crazy waves in the meta.

Conch is a little bit sexier each time I look at it

Why do they keep buffing the CaC? Diamondback seems cool now but I don't see why anyone would use any other gun.

ALSO YOU CAN NOW PUT A MISC IN YOUR HAT SLOT

Let's have a discussion on how CEVO should handle weapon adjustments mid-season (and all the time).

The way the Quick-Fix was handled was pretty crappy, but it's hard to blame ESEA for that one because there was never any precedent for them to follow. So how do we want CEVO to handle future changes?

I think the time with the Quick-Fix was actually very healthy for tf2 (maybe minus the effects on LAN, but I don't lay all of that at QF's feet). We, as a community, played with QF for an extended period of time, and we played 100% seriously. We learned a lot about the weapon, and for once made an informed decision as to whether or not we should play with it. Not that I'm saying the decision was necessarily correct, but it was based off of actual experience with the weapon instead of reading the stats. Personally I think the QF justified a ban, but it took a while for me to be convinced of that, and I probably never would have been without the time we played with it.

I propose that every adjusted/new weapon be automatically legalized for a 3 week period starting after the change/introduction (barring significant bugs). This is enough time for everyone's knee jerk reactions (good or bad), acceptance that they have to play with it for at least a short time, and informed discussion about it. At the end of the 3 week period, there would be a vote as to whether or not the weapon should remain legal.

If a weapon is not used, at least for a short while, by the best players playing to win, then it will never be truly tested. UGC players generally aren't capable of bringing a weapon to its full potential, or creating strategies to counter them. Messing around with them in pugs doesn't help much either.

The most obvious concern with this proposal is allowing untested weapons into official matches. I believe that a team's ability to manage a new element in the game is an important facet of that team's overall skill. All players would have access to the weapon at the same time, so no one would be disadvantaged.

This could do a lot to build relations with Valve, as we could provide more experienced feedback, and pub players, as we couldn't be said to ban every weapon without trying them anymore. It would also create fluctuations within the meta, which can help avoid a chess-like skill meta, where 90% of the game is already figured out and there's almost always a right move.

Actually that's egalitarianism.

Feminism is the movement to deconstruct the patriarchy, which they define as a system designed by men for the exclusive benefit of men. It also doesn't exist.

I think gender roles and society are fascinating and spend a lot of time listening to talks and reading articles about them. But feminism is more or less a joke inside these areas of study.

Hating feminism and hating women are two different things

Part of the kickstarter promise was that the game would be worked on by veteran game designers and programmers who have experience with megaman in particular. It also promised complete transparency in the development process, and the backers a voice in developmental decisions.

The woman does not meet any of those qualifications and the community has almost universally rejected her. She has demonstrated a complete lack of PR or community management skills by deleting her initial tweets about having never played megaman, and responding extremely poorly to all of the questions directed at her.

Top it all off with her being a feminist (not her saying female protaganist for gender equality, she has a history of vocal feminism), and it explodes into another feminist controversy, with feminists claiming the community rejection was misogyny, and not for any of the reasons listed above. They say this despite the fact that there are other women on the team, notably the woman creating the games soundtrack, who is there because she has many years of experience and has worked on previous megaman games.

Backers have every right to be upset about this. If it were an independent studio with their own funding they could hire whatever terrible community manager they wanted. But they promised their backers certain standards, and their new community manager doesn't meet any of them.

tl;dr Feminists are claiming that the community manager is being rejected because she is a women/feminist, when the reality is that she doesn't meet any of the standards the kickstarter promised their backers.

That's a pretty awesome idea. I'll donate I think. Glad to have you back

Dolphin has recently become wifi compatible, so by using the wifi safe install of Project M, you can play with other people that way.

https://dolphin-emu.org/docs/guides/wii-network-guide/
http://afriendlyfox.com/2013/07/22/project-m-super-smash-bros-brawl-mod-on-the-dolphin-wii-emulator/

Melee netplay actually works very well but you need to make sure that you and your partner are using the same revision of Melee or you'll desync a lot.

Anyone managed to make servers work? Mine keep shutting down immediately after generating the world

That roster almost beat iT? What was the score?

We all know you're here to do b4nny and Lauren just do it

What I'm suggesting is the equivalent of Fog calling his DM servers tf.tv servers. Tf.tv doesn't actually pay for those servers, because tf.tv is of course not a person. They're free advertising for the community and for this site, which is nice of Fog to do so. But most of the time advertising isn't free, which is why I asked about the revenue generated via subscribers.

The iT community is pretty popular and consists mostly of the same players in the tf.tv community. I feel like it's a worthwhile endeavor for tf.tv to get its name on the set of servers that will almost inevitably take iT's place.

When I said tf.tv this is what I meant. Is this more clear?

I'm not saying I need the servers but am not willing to front the money to run them. I haven't used the iT servers in quite a while, minus mge iT. This is a good opportunity for an active community to fill need and get their name out there. Regardless of what happens I won't really be affected. So when I say tf.TV, I mean tf.TV.

Is there any possibility of tf.tv filling the void with some servers of their own? Are there enough funds from subscribers for something like that? Might be a good opportunity to get tf.tv's name out there.