Oh no, did I disagree with your video game opinion? That must suck. Tell me all about it. How does it feel? Can you sleep tonight?

So you're saying you're being creepy because...you disagreed with my post.

lol.

That's even worse.

This is an innocuous discussion post about 6v6 class limits. People have been pretty nice when actually discussing this post and I have had no issues. We all wake up on the wrong side of the bed every now and then. It might be best for you to close the computer for today and come back tomorrow with a fresh mind. :)

...

Yes.

Pretty much title. Checked his account, didn't catch anything too controversial or offensive. Found some random posts about people complaining about semicolons and frametimes. Weird.

This is a bit unrelated, but why is the community here so creepy? Looking is fine, but this type of behavior is just really, really weird.

https://imgur.com/a/6UUA6Ul

Agreed. A lot of things aren't fun, but that's life. I'd recon Heavy wouldn't be played if other team constantly runs Sniper, but depends on the map and point, too. I don't really understand what's wrong with matches being dependent on which player is better, care to elaborate?

Weird line of inquiry. I want 6v6 to be a good competitive format. I don't know my intentions any more than that, I guess I just find competitive things neat.

No idea why you think I'm from the "outside", but that place is pretty neat. They are called "blades" of grass but they're actually very soothing to touch. Seriously though, of course I'm "new" to these forums, most players don't use these types of forums (and by the amount of creepy replies just on this post, even less would probably want to more than once)

This is creepy behavior. It is fairly okay (if a kind of sad) to look at people's accounts or other posts. It is weird and creepy to search extensively through different accounts as if you're trying to find something.

That all aside - I just came here to talk about 6v6 class limits. Do you understand how creepy your behavior is? You understand that stalking, even online, is pretty weird behavior, right?

Anyway, you're weird. Just go to the reviews and comment on those, I don't remove comments. If you want to talk about 6v6 class limits, this is the thread to do so.

Knowledge is an ability that is applied in a single situation. You know a time it takes to run across a flank path so you know when to expect a scout that disappeared into the backlines. You might know the distance you can rocket jump. Or you might know what rules have been changed.

Inversely, a skill is an ability that can be applied it in any situation. You probably have never trained for a specific airshot, or done a specific rocket jump before, but you have the aiming and rocket jump skill to apply different inputs in different order and achieve the intended result.

What I meant, is that gaining skill is where the "fun" of competitiveness should strive from. If someone's sense of "fun" goes against these principles, that's completely fine - But that fun is not competitive. I said this because it's very easy to accidentally go "this is fun" without noticing you're arguing against competitiveness itself: Yeah, x100 mods are fun, but not a good change to 6v6 because they are not competitive; Yes, Medic is stronger than Soldier, but having more Medics isn't more competitive.

I would define competitiveness as something along these pillars:

1. Interaction. (Players should have meaningful interactions with each other that affect the outcome of matches.)
2. Skill. (Players should always be improving their skills and expressing that skill is what should affect the outcome of matches.)
3. Community. (basically, be nice, have integrity, no cheating, etc.)

That's not a good balance ideology. There are also x100 mods, they are great fun too. And we discussed the issue with that above. You don't want to design around "fun" at the expense of competitiveness in a mode that tries to brand itself as the "competitive TF2" mode.

You misunderstood what I meant by overcentralization. I meant is the circular logic of "opponent probably plays the best class, so I should too." That's the reason people would run 2 medics. Not because it's fun, or because it expresses more skill: Because it would the new meta.

A healthy meta isn't one with constant changes to the rules, a healthy meta needs no changes to the rules. Look at chess, last update few hundred years ago - New opening strategies still invented to this day. CS2, outside of incredibly small changes, the game is basically "finished", yet pro matches look different every year. This isn't happening in 6v6, and as everyone here knows, is intentional: The meta is intentionally overcentralized around Soldiers and Scouts.

The point of the medic example was that this issue of overcentralization is a known issue. We all know "pick best weapons" doesn't work. We know "pick only the strongest classes" doesn't work.

I am not lying in my post - my only goal is competitiveness, not "pub"-like experience. There already is a lot of rules that decrease the strength of certain options or classes: Scout weapon bans, banning double medic, etc. Second roamer was inherently worse than a second medic - and format trickery saved it.

Thats a weird inconsistency, though: Overcentralization is the intended outcome of having no class limits. But people disliked playing with medic overcentralization, so that was banned... And now, it's not anymore about how competitive the format can be, but how much the current fanbase "likes it". But heavy mains would probably also like being able to play the format. Why is their fun less important? 6v6 isn't focusing on "more fun", just "my fun" - And that's just not very nice - or competitive mindset.

True. I meant "mistake" as a misplay. Soldier has bigger "action pool" than pyro or heavy: In 10 seconds, Soldier can be in a lot more places and states than either class. If soldier does a misplay (such as rocket jumping too far/too close, taking a risky peek, escaping too soon, etc.) the soldier has more outs than a pyro.

In a stalemate, both teams aren't playing perfectly. But with a higher action pool, individual misplays can matter less than with lower action pool. As I said: Class' exploitable weaknesses are a great way to enforce skill expression: Making less misplays is a skill. Strong, fun characters can express that less.

We did a full circle and returned to my original point: It is easy to say that getting less punished by misplays is fun. But that type of fun goes against competitiveness.

I am not saying we should ban Soldier - I still think TF2 classes don't have balanced skill expression. But all of those classes still need skill, and nobody has yet played a perfect game of Heavy. It's disingenuous to imply that the skill required to play Heavy is so low that it was the sole reason the format was constructed around double Scouts and Soldiers.

that's very creepy.

That's creepy.

That's not true. As you yourself said: "standard setup is what works best both for maximizing winning potential", that's what meta means. But deciding which "standard setup" to allow and which to ban through item bans and class limits seems to have been an arbitrary decision compared to the alternatives. Banning double medic makes sense - But as I claimed in my original post - double any class is problematic. The exceptions for other classes seem very arbitrary for the reason we have both outlined: It makes double Soldier and double Scout mandatory. We agree on this. That "fun" of some players was prioritized over others. That sounds awfully arbitrary.

I agree with this, that's what I also wrote. And as you stated too, your original argument that 6v6 is currently maximizing skill expression is disingenuous.

As previously stated: I understand the sentiment that fun comes first, but that goes both ways: Why would non-Scout players and non-Soldier players find it fun to play a format that focuses so much on those classes? You're not maximizing fun by making people play Soldier.

Medic is also probably stronger than Soldier, so why has your point suddenly shifted to current 6v6 being unfun because we don't play 2 Medics?

Finally, I understand that you're probably having a bad day, and that's fine. But your recent posts have begun to be very disingenuous and disrespectful. Take a walk before responding, thanks.

I'll focus on the main part of your reply: You are defending the current arbitrarily constructed meta by pointing out that it has not been constructed arbitrarily at all: Instead, it is intended to maximise skill expression. That is a very interesting idea.

Skill expression in 6v6

I do agree that TF2 classes do not have balanced skill expression: Classes like Demoman, Pyro, Soldier, Scout, and Spy all have deep and unique skill expression in their weapons and movement, while classes like Medic, Heavy, Sniper and Engineer do not have much else than the ability to shoot and basic movement. (Medic and Engineer both even have a form of autoaim)

So then, why would there be an exception for Medic? Medic is the most important class in the game, but far from the most skill expressive. Without medics, lot of stalemates would never even happen. After all, you are less punished from taking damage when you have a medic in your team. Wouldn't that be a source of negative skill expression? Medic makes the game easier, and patches your mistakes.

But that leaves us back in a circle: Even when looked at the lens of skill expression, the ruleset is still arbitrary and seems to exist just to enforce the current meta, even at the cost of some skill expression

Weaknesses as skill expression

You also mentioned that Pyro has weaknesses that Soldier doesn't have, and therefore it makes no sense to switch to Pyro. And that's a perfect explanation for why 6v6 games tend to slow down: As you said, the current arbitrarily chosen meta (2 scouts, 2 soldiers) revolves around the fact that Soldier and Scout have very few weaknesses to exploit.

6v6 has an unique issue of the game slowing the down upon the slightest change. But in retrospect, that might make perfect sense: Allowing 2 extra strong classes with few exploitable weaknesses decreases the importance of individual mistakes across the board: Punishing Soldier's mistakes when he can easily reposition himself is harder compared to punishing Pyro's or Heavy's mistakes, when they can't. Your explanation of weaknesses gives an eloquent explanation to the source of stalemates, giving light to how stalemates might be solved: By weakening team compositions.

Your response has been very enlightening. Class' exploitable weaknesses are a great way to enforce skill expression. Kind of like Highlander, Spy: The weakest class - But that's what makes a good spy player so important, to be able to turn a low kill count into something more.

Just got called aimisadick alt on my first post here for some reason. Checked his profile, pretty basic posts: didn't seem to be anything controversial or crazy. Maybe I missed something.

Found this post - People complaining... at the use... of semicolons...? Yeah this is not normal behavior.

I think I've missed a lot of context here. I am in firm believer in the "cyber bullying doesn't exist because you can just close your computer" mentality, but you guys are really changing my mind here.