I'm definitely interested in whatever balancing valve may do in the future, but I would like to point that whatever changes valve makes will most likely be incredibly slow to bring to fruition. We all know about the preeminent concept of "valve time", and it seems that while we set up an experimental league or format, it might take valve months (dare I say, years?) to execute on the requisite changes to make 2 of each class a stable and balanced format with enough ties to casual play that it satisfies valve's criteria.

Essentially, I'm all for changing a format if it improves it, but I would be a little bit more skeptical of the change if it is based entirely around "valve will fix everything", especially given their track record with item re-balancing in the past (see the equalizer fix, which many people advocated for repeatedly, but took years (?) to actualize).

What would the item list for this cup be? Go fuckin nuts and just unban everything?

What..?

If you want maps like this to exist, maps which shift or alter based on player population, thats fine. But, you should probably come up with an example map that illustrates that such a tactic is feasible. Essentially, like any good idea in game design, if you think it would make for a superior experience then you should get to work! The only way to prove if its a good or bad idea is to play it, and it can only be played if its made.

I'm not particularly interested in making something like this. I've got plenty of other projects and applications to work on as it stands, and the idea sounds somewhat redundant compared with just making a new map. If you are just expecting other mappers to come in and make these sort of changes, you'll probably be waiting a while. The best way to get a system like this set up is DIY, and prove how awesome it is.

And as far as badlands is concerned, if you think you can make a superior version of badlands, good luck! I don't think you'll be nearly as successful making a version of the map that caters to casual, HL and 6s at he same time. The amount of love that 6s players have for badlands borders on the grotesque and unseemly, and any attempts to change it seems to misunderstand how much they love it.

I think its pretty short sighted to imagine that "conditionally good" means bad or not as good as it could be.

Here is an example: Magic the Gathering is both a very potent casual game, but also an amazingly popular competitive game. However, what makes the game function in those two different environment is quite different, and many Magic designers admit that they design cards very specifically for different audiences. Its actually part of the design process; should this card be designed for comp play or casual play? Do we have enough cards in this set for casual players (life gain cards, dragons, angels, etc)? Should we buff this card so it shows up in competitive environments? Are there enough incrimental advantage cards that require precise thought for their usage (comp players), while at the same time enough big stompy cards (casual)?

What designers of Magic the Gathering DON'T try to do with every single card, is design them so they work perfectly in every single environment. Obviously, such cards exist and come about with a fair bit of frequency (gravelpit), but they are often pretty bland and safe. They don't really stretch any real limits, and mostly just function as role players, rather than "build around me" cards (cards which an entire deck is built to support and which the entire strategy is built around).

If you required that every single card in Magic was built to be perfect for both comp and casual, you'd end up with a bunch of shitty boring cards that don't satisfy either camp adequately. But, by splitting the cards up and focusing your efforts in different directions, you end up with cards that satisfy both parties, allowing for a game that can be both casual and competitive at the same time, in different regions.

What this means is that if you are designing your maps for TF2 and expecting that they satisfy every single audience equally and without any room for argument, you are ultimately making (in my opinion) a much weaker and less interesting map. By splitting your resources and really aiming to satisfy one core audience (casual, highlander, or 6s) I feel like you end up with a much stronger map in general.

Think about this: How many actually "good" maps are there by your criteria fubar? Gravelpit? It gets played in 6s, HL and casuals, but what else exists from there? Granary? Good in 6s and HL, but not very much fun in pubs unless your pub group is super organized (and at that point, isn't that just HL?). 6s means you have to exclude all Payload maps (wow! thats a lot of pretty good HL maps gone in an instant), all ctf maps, and anything strange that people can't quite seem to get a good grasp on (HI STANDIN!).

If you choose to only accept play experiences that are acceptable in all formats, you end up with very few actual maps that exist, and I don't think thats the sort of environment that I'm happy mapping for. I prefer making maps that satisfy particular audiences very well, rather than making a pretty bland or even broken experience (gravelpit) that satisfies all groups, but only sort of.

Agreed. Badlands is an amazing map for sixes, atrocious in highlander, and sort-of-okay-but-not-really in pubs. I'm sure someone could come up with a way to make it more viable in highlander, but at that point you're probably better off just making a new map.

This idea that a good map is a good map is a good map, in my mind is a pretty delusional concept. Badwater is not a good sixes map, but its amazing for highlander. Dustbowl is not a good comp map, but its amazing on pub servers, etc etc etc.

I think TECHNICALLY SPEAKING this is possible, with the right set up and a series of entities working in the background. The map ctf_deliverance toyed around with this idea, adjusting spawn times based off whether or not it was a 6s match or a pub server. However, those entities wouldn't be able to discern between 6v6 and highlander based off any metric besides player count, so if someone picks up the map and starts playing it on a 12v12 pub then you are stuck with the doors open, and if the pub drops below a certain number of players the doors close. Which I'm assuming would be super confusing, and more trouble than its worth.

From a mapmakers perspective, it sounds like tc_hydro or some other overally complicated map that has received little success: the idea sounds nice, but by the time you implement it in an actual map built to support it (instead of just ramming into whatever map happens to be popular at any given time), it would turn out to be an ultimately flawed concept that players find unappealing.

Whoopee, check your formatting on the links. I don't think they are going where they should.

Another reason for evaluating the vitasaw has to do with what it does to the medic metagame. Basically, if I want to run ubersaw and the medic on the opposing team elects to run vitasaw, it is generally the case that the enemy medic will inherently have a significant uber advantage over me throughout the match. Any time they die, they get an instant 20% (or less, but 20% is more likely throughout, as medics tend to die in the middle of combat after charging with someone from spawn, thus usually getting at least 20% if not more before dying), which means that dying gets a free 20% charge they wouldn't have otherwise.

What this means, is that if I want to maintain uber parity with the opposing medic I need to 1) Play better and not die as much as the medic (which is still the case if both medics are using stock or ubersaw), 2) use the vitasaw. Seeing as how its very hard to guarantee that your play will be superior to the enemy medics (barring significant skill gaps), the switch to vitasaw is almost universally the correct choice, and your team will yell at you if you don't switch.

Since we are talking about competitive play, its important to note that the vitasaw requires no actual action on your part to net an advantage, where a weapon like the ubersaw requires you to initiate a melee attack, which under most circumstances is quite difficult. Basically, ubersaw is a skill based weapon, but vitasaw is a prisoner's dilemma that forces more skilled players to play more conservatively because their opponents decided to use it.

I think thats the primary problem with the vitasaw: it forces people to play a less fun medic game, because the other player equipped it and is gaining uber advantage just by having it equipped. The -10 health, while meant to balance the weapon, really only acts to further aggravate the medic who was forced to equip it because of metagame issues.

MAP NOW READY FOR PRIME TIME!

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3492731/Funnies/Aintnobodygonnakeepmedown.jpg

Today? If he is referring to the past, then yah it was banned at some point, but now it isn't progress in motion.

Might want to check the latest banlist: http://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/Competitive_item_restrictions ctrl + f candy cane

I personally don't think Jarate is too bad, but I think the majority argument for its ban is that its way too easy to throw. You don't have to chill at a choke and wait for the enemy team to walk into it in order to toss your load, you can just sit back near spawn doors or behind your team and get a reasonable arc that dowses several members of the team. Pushing into a sniper with jarate is a pain, because they can just wing it somewhat close to you and get free damage for their team.

Its not a headshot or bodyshot level of skill or aim, just click in the general direction and hope for the best.

Sleeper was banned because x6 would run it to neutralize heavy classes on viaduct. Oov, who isn't a particularily good sniper (by his own admission) would run it and just charge up a shot and jarate either heavy, soldier, or demo. At that point, that class is pretty much out of the fight entirely. You can't walk a soldier with 50-150 hp into the middle of a fight wearing a jarate coat.

If someone lands a sick snap headshot or a charged shot from sniper rifle, hey thats cool takes some skill and timing, but just adding a free jarate on top for a really easy bodyshot really doesn't appeal. Add onto that the fact that it charges FASTER than regular sniper.