1) Yes the general architecture exists, for a completely different game with completely different set of balancing mechanics. I already referenced DOTA 2 and TF2 weapon bans in another post.

2) Valve asked us to come up with a pick/ban system in a week through playtesting in pugs and scrims. Of course we are going to use mumble to implement that, unless some crazy wizard comes up with an IRC script in two days. Whatever system they end up using, we would have to construct it from the ground up. Of course the ingame system would be easier, but we have to come up with the system first before they put it into the game.

3) Who is talking about Valve testing a map? I'm talking about me and comp players testing a map, and highlander players playtesting the pick/ban system. Valve asked us to playtest and figure out something that works, they aren't just going to magically give us something to use.

4) Valve can't collect data from a pick/ban system if no pick/ban system exists!

I'm going to crash for the night. I'm not opposed to testing this in a pug setting, people should feel free to do whatever. But, with my experience running playtests and trying to get feedback on improving things for comp play, I have to say that this system doesn't seem destined for much success.

1) Valve is slow, glacially slow, when it comes to rebalancing weapons. Anyone who has played this game over the years knows this. We only just recently had the equalizer split, which people had been clamoring for since, what, ESEA LAN S6? Even with all the metric data in the world, it seems incredibly ridiculous to assume that they would be able to rush through a system where people would be able to play all weapons in highlander.

2) League players are resistant to change, and have been playing a version of this game much like the one we are currently playing for a long period of time. If anyone (Valve, Sal, people running Highlander leagues, pub players clamoring for a highlander ingame lobby system) expects the competitive community to latch on to a pick/ban system IN A WEEK (like seriously, until next Saturday??) they are delusional. Thats not even considering the possibility of getting that system implemented in any league whatsoever, let alone the time Valve would have to spend programming such a system and then fixing the bugs once it came out.

3) The unlocks that Valve has introduced over the years are not necessarily "broken" in the sense of leading to disproportionate victories (we won because we used Jarate!! or enforcer, etc etc) but they do stretch the gameplay of competitive TF2 in directions that many competitive players don't enjoy or care for. We put many items on the blacklist not because they break the game (disproptionate wins), but because they break the game that is Competitive TF2 by slowing it down or hindering it. I don't think there is a balancing redirection that Valve can do that would satisfy people, except on a select few items (wrangler, enforcer, pomson). I mean, we aren't going to let people use those god damn holiday boxing gloves. We have a philosophical problem here, not an imbalanced system in need of a few tweaks or adjustments.

The insanity is that you've reduced the diversity of unlocks down to one option, while the system that valve is trying to implement wants to increase diversity.

Even in 6s you don't have any classes that have only one unlock available

What I understand from what has been communicated in this thread, the system we would end up using would go something like this:

1) We implement a community based pick/ban system. We spend a ton of time (pug after pug after pug) figuring out a system that works, and that every highlander player would be okay with. We then start using that system.

2) Valve implements a matchmaking system that caters to that style of picking/banning, so that they can see what items are problematic and thus in need of adjustment. If Wrangler gets banned every pug/scrim/match then clearly it needs to be adjusted. They gather huge amounts of data from this, and competitive TF2 is bettered.

3) Highlander player's go along with this system, putting it into play in their leagues (I'm not sure if this is supposed to come before or after they implement the matchmaking system, but I'm assuming it comes before, or they wouldn't be comfortable splitting up the competitive community).

Here is why this is a huge problem:

As you may have figured out, I used to spend a great deal of time and energy trying to get map playtests going. I would try to convince high level players to come in, provide feedback, and adjust the map based off that feedback. Sometimes those playtests would be fairly low level (low im and open players pugging the maps), sometimes higher level (invite level players), etc etc.

It is almost impossible getting people to scrim maps. I mean, seriously, it is the most obxnoxiously difficult thing to get happening. Even just pugging new maps can be a chore for some people (can't we just play badlands???). And thats using the formats that people already know, that requires no second thought in terms of actually getting to the point where you are playing the map and seeing if its any good. All you have to do is pass around the download link (if the server doesn't already have fast download set up), load up whitelist, exec the config, pick teams, good to go.

Implementing an entirely new, untested pick/ban system? Holy shit. Those playtests are going to be HELL. Getting 18 people into a mumble, looking through a list of 200 items and making choices about what to use, what to ban, remembering what items are available/unavailable, who picked what, whose turn it is to pick. ETC ETC.

Tldr; If testing maps is almost impossible, testing a pick/ban system is going to be miraculous.

Regardless, I think there is still a completely ridiculous gap between implementing a pick/ban system, valve making a matchmaking system, and it being implemented in a league setting.

Medic gets one item? Soldier gets one item?

What about demo or scout? In 6v6 thats fine, hey scout chooses basher, demo gets pain train. But in Highlander? One item for scout would be borderline insane, given how many viable and interesting unlocks they have.

But they don't need a ban system to see that. All they have to do is watch some highlander matches.

If they don't want experienced player feedback, they shouldn't be asking high level highlander players to implement a pick/ban system in their pugs.

If they are concerned about what items never see play in comp matches (in order to improve them somehow) I don't see what a pick ban system is going to do. I mean, how many items in a typical match will never see play out of 200? Are they really going to trawl through that list and see what doesn't get played? I don't really think so. The number of unlocks used in a typical match (highlander) is probably about 12 or so, give or take (I might be wrong).

The difference between an item in TF2 and a character in DOTA 2 is vast.

First, the characters in DOTA have clearly defined portraits, so you know who or what your clicking on before you do so, allowing you to weigh the various options presented by each pick or ban. Items in TF2 are not nearly as distinct; I mean I often times look at my backpack in bewilderment, wondering what half the items I've accumulated do based purely off the icon.

Second, a character choice in DOTA is permanent; once you have a character on your team someone is playing that character for the entire game. With TF2 items, you have the ability to switch out at will, which leads you to weighing the available options based not only on what item you want someone on your team to run 24/7 (equalizer, ubersaw, boston basher), but also what items you want to run occasionally (kritzkrieg, paintrain, gunboats [if you're memphis von]), what items you don't want to see at all (natascha, those christmas gloves, jarate rifle, jarate, GRU, pomson, wrangler, liberty launcher, that rocket stacking rocket launcher, mini sentries... THE LIST GOES ON AND ON AND ON), what items you think the enemy team is good with that might not fit into the lists mentioned above... I MEAN MY GOD!

Third, you are essentially filling a roster of 5 characters for you and 5 for the enemy team in DOTA. In TF2, if its just a ban system (which seems the most logical given our current meta) you still have 190 items available after (what I'm assuming are) 5 bans from either team. If it is a pick/ban system, then you are reducing the number of available options to 12, which might not be bad (its probably fairly close to what we are currently using), but it just seems fairly counter-intuitive for a system meant to improve diversity of tactics and options, to reject 180+ items in a single swoop.

I have no problem or issue with HL getting a ingame lobby system before 6s, if anything I'm all for that. But for the system that Valve implements to impose an artificial limitation on what items are available, one that doesn't mesh particularly well with the mechanics of the game or with the current state of competitive play seems silly to me.

But why ruin perfectly good pick up games with this kind of system? If they wanted that kind of feedback they should just implement some sort of voting system on a webpage titled "Which weapons are bad for competitive play?", not force people trying to play a competitive game to sit around trawling through a list with 100+ items on it in order to figure out EXACTLY which items they don't want for that particular scrim/match/pug.

Even setting up that website isn't even necessary, because we have that cumulative data established in our whitelists, setting the tone for what items are too powerful or have aspects which make them annoying to play with/against.

I don't have a solution, because I think the current system (a community agreed upon whitelist/blacklist) is more than adequate. Trying to overcomplicate competitive play with a really redundant ban/pick system is just absurd, especially when the game people are playing currently works just fine.

You should probably count the number of items available in TF2 if you really want to implement this. Think about scrolling through a web menu with EVERY unlock that is currently available and can be clicked on. Sounds like a nightmare to me.

WE AIN'T GOIN BACK TO 1998 NO MATTER HOW GOOD ICE TEA LOOKS!!

Pretty much my opinion in a nutshell. I mean, I'll be the first person to defend items and unlocks, but man they've really dropped the ball over time.

Splitting up competitive communities is a terrible idea. If you have an ingame matchmaking system that does things one way, a competitive league that does things another, and a group of players stuck inbetween its incredibly damaging for the game.

Obviously, Valve doesn't shut ESEA down just because they implement a matchmaking system. The reason I'm concerned is because they seem to want to jettison a fundamental way that TF2 is played (community made black/white lists) in favor of something completely untested, created by a team who doesn't seem at all involved in competitive play AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS. How can you make a competitive format for TF2 if you don't even play or watch the current meta?

Unless, of course, you think that meta is terrible and needs to be replaced, which I'm assuming the majority of people on this forum don't tend to agree with.

EDIT: Obviously, see above for a response, this was typed while that was etc etc.

This is a very lame reason for justifying there activities. I'm fine with them focusing on highlander, after all that's where a ton of players are, etc etc. What I'm disagreeing with is the insistence that our game is "stagnant" and that if we want to be involved in Valve's vision of what competitive play is for TF2 we have to jettison years worth of competitive experience, focusing on a seemingly random set of pick/ban criteria that no one has ever used in TF2.