http://puu.sh/uCxxI/24c1eb4d6f.jpg

personally i find it best to use mouse1 for jump, numpad 6 for firing, and left foot green for crouch.

snip

theoretically you could decompile the viewmodels and then just replace the reload animation with the idle animation (keeping the reload animation ingame but just replacing the animation itself with its idle variant). then just use the existing workaround for viewmodels to load them onto servers (by loading a pure 0 map/server on game startup)

This will require a knowledge of decompiling and recompiling files however, as well as something that can load and edit the models and their animations. like blender.

If you wanted to get really creative you could also reanimate the reload entirely to just take up less space, but that's a whole nother project.

who said anything about asking for funding? I mentioned that they don't fund tournaments, but that was an observation, not a complaint.

I think saying valve doesn't like the meta was a bad way of phrasing, which in hindsight I regret not rewording. I know valve's decisions are driven by what the wider public is open to and the only reason they're hesitant of community competitive is because they know throwing it to a mass audience probably won't catch a bite. My intention with that intro was to just simplistically say valve has decided alternative options rather than just adopting the existing scene. I think it would have been a good idea to elaborate more on that, sorry I didn't.

This is an interesting perspective too, that hadn't even crossed my mind as a problem that needs discussion. I'll keep that in mind for the future.

*laughs* you're kidding, right? that WOULD be devastating if it wasn't for the fact that you have an extra clip size. Think about it, an entire clip from the stock rocket launcher, 4 rockets remember that, is a maximum total of 448 damage. but in the time it takes to shoot 4 rockets and reload another one, it takes the SAME amount of time to shoot all 5 liberty launcher rockets! people always compare 4 rockets of the stock to 4 rockets of the liberty launcher but you have to compare the time between each clip rather than just the side-by-side. drudhafter the fourth rocket from the stock. is shot and as he is reloading. the liberty launcher has another rocket to screw you over in the midst of your weakness. sure, the maxum damage for a liberty launcher rocket is 84 per rocket, but but instead of timesing it by 4 let's times it by 5 and you get a whopping 420 damage which is a whole 28 damage less. than what the rocket launcher can do. that's only taking the maximum amount. the lower you go in terms of damage the closer it scales meanng that the damage penalty is basically countered by the extra clip size chomphletely. since there are really no downsides the liberty launcher is a direct upgrade in terms of long-term use. to stock with extra projectile speed and HALF a gunboats effect to make you run a shotgun or a banner, which is also a neat little upside. dont get me wrong, in the immediate scheme of things the rocket launcher does immediate damage which is more important to the moment, but in the long run the liberty launcher can live up to the rocket launchers inthense standards and act just like it toO. we've done the testing, and we've debated it hardcore, but it's clear as day that this weapon goes ABOVE the stock rocket launcher.

what was made clear? that they view the classes as specific generalists and specialists? Also is there any citable link on that quote from one of the visitors?

Thank you, I tracked it down and also found a similar one on the hydro commentary too.

This is absolutely perfect. It's part two around 13 minutes in, for those curious.

I'm looking for documented interviews/examples of times valve took reference to generalist/specialist treatment of classes. I remember somewhere in a commentary node somebody on the early dev team discussed certain classes being situational while others are more well-rounded, but I can't find it.. I'm also interested in text interviews and anything else.

It doesn't matter whether they're saying they like specialists or not, I'd just like to get some research and collect citations for a project. If you know of any official words on the matter please let me know.

To actually answer the question, people probably ran into the thread through link or search and didn't realize it was old, so they habitually responded before checking post date. And sometimes people do it fully aware just hoping to be funny by intentional necro.

looking forward to it just don't get mad at people for using direct hit a day after they play a team that went fulltime direct hit -______________-

https://wiki.teamfortress.com/w/images/5/57/Cm_sniper_pregamefirst_6s_05.mp3?t=20160711000156
https://wiki.teamfortress.com/w/images/d/d9/Cm_engie_pregamefirst_6s_01.mp3?t=20160710094055
https://wiki.teamfortress.com/w/images/1/13/Cm_sniper_pregamefirst_6s_03.mp3?t=20160711000144

I don't think the issue is that they view existing community 6s as unfun. It's that it puts more than half of the classes on the sidelines majority of the time, and they'd rather try to rebalance the entire game to change that than they would embrace the existing balance. Which is both noble and foolish goal.

Remember that our 6s settled based on what we're forced to work with. They have the power to completely retool classes for a new purpose. The only catch is that they more than likely won't be making any drastic class changes which will, like you say, lead to a similar conclusion of what type of 6s is best suited for the game. One would hope they'll use all this worktime to change the game enough to warrant such a wait. But if the pyro update releases and all they did was fix flamethrower particles and tack on a few new weapons, then we know they really don't want to try too hard.

I know valve is stupid but come on concluding they're going to implement sigafoo cup because a few pubbers survey answered that they don't like 6s is an irrational conclusion. I'm not worried about them making drastic changes like changing playercounts, but I am worried they'll hinder progress by dragging out testing no class limits and rebalancing all weapons and classes over the course of what's on track to be years of silent gaps rather than the ideal progress update every few months.
They're going to dillute the meta to be more casual friendly no matter what, and I doubt they even want to. But it's the only way you're ever going to convince people to play 6s in their hat simulator when most players can't grasp the concept of a meta as it exists already. I think appeasing a wider scale playerbase is better for growth, so long as it keeps the core aspects of 6s in tact.

But again, good luck seeing that progress any time soon.