make direct hit legal on the NY one

well the heavy would be running around with the GRU and the sniper would either be spamming jarates so everyone was mini-crit or would be a pyro and shooting flares at everything... while reflecting rocketjumping into the enemy comb....actually this doesnt sound so bad, lets do it

oh man, Tagg is gonna be so stoked

exactly.

An improvement to HL in the realm of more advertizing and a drive to improve unlocks is an improvement to 6v6 on the merits that players will always trickle up to the higher level of competitive. We'll get better unlocks and more players in the end without sacrificing for a lesser level of gameplay.

In the event HL got so huge that Valve held a lan for it, then fuck it, we can all go join HL teams and win.

I would like to say that I think this proposed shift is a wholesale of dumb ideas.

I put up a wall of text in Killings thread about the merits of our current format (page 3, post 89). I will add here that "unlock-meta-fortress" (which is what 1 class and all unlocks allowed would become...not going to entertain idea of 2per class) is a far weakened "product" then what we currently have. What's more, with HL likely going the way of the HL in-game lobby, why at all would a pub player choose the 6v6 version over the 9v9 version where all classes are going to played, at all times, guaranteed? HL + unlocks will always be closer to pubs than 6v6 + unlocks. So I think the idea shoots itself in the foot before it even starts. How do you advertize our product over highlander? What makes it discernibly better? Because you can get 6 players to lan easier? I don't think pub players stumbling into competitive are worried about a lan. Having a LAN to go to is only a competitive preoccupation...unless of course we mean to cosplay.

Look, Valve sandboxed the unlocks. They dumped them into the game seemingly withholding inspiration and balance... Qaunity > Quality in such disparate measures. Now they ask for feedback and this is great, and we should help them, but there is no need to blow a fuse and fall into identity crisis. Best case scenario: we introduce more people to playing TF2 with purpose (comp HL lobby on start page) while gathering unlock data for valve so they can improve those weapons. This all trickles up to improve what we have now.

You want to spice things up in 6v6? Play a new map. Test new maps. Revisit old maps. Entertain the idea of the other gametypes.

I frequent a 32 person pub (the Voogru crazy-house). Yeah it is a shit-ton of players, but I find the level of play here wildly more advanced than your average pub. Yet when the map changes to a 5ptCP, no one has any idea how to play the map. That is the biggest barrier to entry between competitive and pubs. CP is not a pub format, and yet whenever a different format is suggested people lose their collective shit. Broaden the gametype/map pools (which again HL already does creating another reason for pubbers to always go HL first). A majority of pub players I run into believe badlands is garbage. It always stalemates at a teams choke, or scouts run around on the flanks destroying everything.

We might want to do something that recognizes and reconciles that before we flip everything upside down wondering if it's easier to take a piss while standing on our heads...

tagg, is there going to be a new killzone shown at e3...do you know? Please respond.

I got you, Crespi...

My dumb opinion is that the 6v6 community should resist the doom and gloom implications any of this might have (if any), happily assist in the great HL balance weapons experiment, and go about our merry way of carrying on with business as usual.

From a casters perspective, the 6v6 community has finally come such a long way, top to bottom, with intelligence towards the meta and DM execution that it would be foolish and a shame to shake things up on the basis of a theoretical eucatostrophic shift from Valve. Our game works. It doesn't just work, it works with a unique simplicity I can't find in any other game. Valve made a cool class based fps. This community made an intelligent and highly competitive system within that FPS.

-The Uber dynamic adds a continuous time keeping meta.
-The classes add a unique "best tool for the job" meta.
-The physics of the game add the necessary DM emphasis. Which, as we've seen players improve across the board, is actually quite strong.
-Our 6v6 player restriction has created a unique team-intensified format.
-Our rule restrictions has (for the most part) allowed for growth within our system.

The beauty is that all of these things, at any moment, compete for dominance within a match. Teams needs the perfect level of DM, class makeup, uber management, teamwork, off-class/unlock understanding to win rounds and ultimately that match. The unlock/rule restrictions are a part of what makes our game our game. Barring a slight off-class bias, the unlocks allowed have always been handled as they should...filtered slowly into the game, contingent on what they bring to our meta. There is no need to upturn that system (in 6v6). Why shift the balance and emphasize a discernibly non-competitive system of unlock-meta? This trips up the DM and teamwork aspects which are so vital to a competitive FPS.

6v6 used to be "pick a class you are good at, join a team with dudes, see which 6 guys on these classes can out DM these other 6 guys on some other classes. At that time, perhaps unlock-palooza might have added something that nudged that game toward a path of improvement.

Now there is no need. It has already changed.

We don't have 2 scouts, 1 medic, 1 demo, and 2 soldiers anymore.

The improving meta has always been driving to the finally realized point of 1 brute/heal player, 1 flank/ceanup, 1 Pocket, 1 Roamer, 1 damage doer/caller, 1 medic/uber-meta tracker. That is the makeup of a perfect team: the classes within the classes: the roles that must be filled.

With this makeup, your team can win rounds and matches. As we know the 2 scout/2soldier/1demo/1med system accounts for this makeup most of the time. That doesn't mean that there aren't 5 other tools in the box that can help at others. With regards to unlocks, they should all be looked at in the light of how they improve this meta of affecting these player roles. That is the hard approach, but it is entirely worth it for the next gunboats/kritzkrieg/boston-basher/ubersaw.

This unlock/Valve discussion has become an overreaction. The only way to expect valve help is to make them money. Unlocks are not the way.

So, TLDR: 6v6 is fine. Could use help from Valve? Who couldn't? But there is no need to fret over unlocks. Let HL work-out the balance. Assist with the effort and hope for better unlocks that can improve what our game is about. The better balanced HL lobby system will serve as an introduction to competitive TF2, and so long as 6's remains as the upper echelon of competitive TF2—and it will so long as the best players stick to playing the best format (and they will since 6v6 is the only format that allows for all the things I outlined that make tf2 a competitive success), there is nothing to worry about. Competitive minded players will naturally trickle up to us as we continue to grow and hone this unique sub-game we've created. But that's my opinion, and I am dumb, so...

I think I graduated to this thread, this may have been mentioned but:

The way I understand it, Valve wants feedback on what works and what doesn't correct? Meaning if something is banned over and over again, it will be nerfed/fixed/looked at. My suggestion is:

1) Start with the UGC whitelist, focus first on all weapons currently banned and let players start to pick/ban from those items (only) in pugs. When people consistently ban the ones universally disliked (should be all of the already banned HL ones) those will be the first on the fixing table at valve.

2) Then talk to experienced HL players about weapons that are annoying/could possible be bannable and begin the process again for round 2.

3) Keep going

There should be a bottom up approach. Begin on equal footing where everyone can agree X weapon should be banned, then start to get into the muddier waters. Basically this allows you to focus on groups of unlocks at a time, starting with the most disliked and moving up. That should greatly reduce the chaos of the whole process.

Valve should then see that certain weapons universally disliked (and thus voted out) need a look. Conversely, if all of a sudden player keep voting in something HL bans, then maybe HL leagues need a second look. Am I understanding this correctly?

#464

That was my initial point. Luckily for the 6's scene (and likely due to HL players being themselves half 6v6 players/players who come to respect certain skills) 6v6 is sometimes held up as holier than thou, and while this hurts with respects to how pub players view us, it seems to help with how dedicated HL players view the scene. Meaning, many (thought not all) see 6v6 as the next rung on the ladder.

Since HL will basically be legitimized this should start that "trickle-up" process of incoming players: Pub to pub star, to Highlander system, to Highlander league, to Highlander star, to 6v6. This is what we should be excited about, and we likely have to do jack all to our rule-set to attain this. Being smarter with unlocks would be wise and probably quicken the process, but for now this is really just a HL thing.

So in that regard (and what people seem to have been getting at among the noise)it seems sort of simple...

1) Start with the UGC whitelist, focus first on all weapons currently banned and let players start to pick/ban those items in pugs. When people consistently ban the ones universally disliked (should be all of the already banned HL ones) those will be the first on the fixing table at valve.

2) Then talk to experienced HL players about weapons that are annoying/could possible be bannable and begin the process again for round 2.

3) Keep going

There should be a bottom up approach. Begin on equal footing where everyone can agree X weapon should be banned, then start to get into the muddier waters.

#381 so scathing, it stings. Your have the wrong idea about many things and your attitude is unfortunate. I'm not going to get into a shouting match with you in this thread or any thread, but you can keep trying

while I will admit I did not know it was no longer banned, I will also admit when I made my argument it was banned...but anyhow that really has nothing to do with anything, I just wanted to set the record straight with 2sy who gets all tingly trying to undermine me

I'll bite. My argument was always framed around soldier unlocks allowed versus scout unlocks banned.

1) If the blackbox is legal, so should the scout candy cane

2) The blackbox gives "15 health points per enemy hit, regardless of how much damage is dealt" and only has 1 less rocket (oh no, I have to wait for autoreload to do it's thing)

3) The candy can gives only 25Hp back and the scout needs to completely kill a player for that to happen, and he has to run over to the dead body to pick up the health vile (which anyone on any team can grab) AND he is 25% more vulnerable to damage from explosives with the weapon equipped

4) How is the blackbox legal when the candy-cane is banned?

The blackbox is a fine sidegrade... but it's "downside" is hilarious compared to the candy-canes downsides and yet the latter is banned and the former is not...

before pro viaduct, a sniper could sit on balcony well hidden from the other sniper and charge body shots pretty easily while hitting everyone damage + jarate

It would be much different now on pro-viaduct, while still viable. But there you have a prime example of people jumping to conclusions.

The battalions backup, on the other hand, is probably best left banned, though testing it and nerfing it heavily could help.

edit: i forgot about the charge buff the sleeper received...that would need to be nerfed

Most of the time people don't even want you to off class in a pug, at risk of upsetting the status quot: "others will off class and then I might have to fight a pyro :'[" or "but you could probably be doing more to helping the team win on scout"

the highest level will be the most rigid and difficult to sway, imo

I'm not 100% against it, but stemming from my cynicism, I'm trying to maintain a certain grasp on how hard the comp community will push back and I just can't ever get to the point that someone will go pyro to counter when a sniper might throw his jarate and think players will be okay with it.

I think there are some unlocks that have flawed concepts. Jarate, in my humble opinion, borders this line as it has a huge reward for minimal risk. Note the reward isn't just in the weapon perks, as I see it it is mainly in the weapon use. It's a throwable, it requires little to no aiming. This is my main problem with it. It carries very big implications for very little effort.

Something like the sydney sleeper on the other hand provides similar bonuses but is a completely viable side-grade, imo. Combined with the buschwaka you could have some fun moments... but again jarate, the way I see it, bypasses something core to the competitive format