vanillaThank you, JaguarFiend, you see my point. Who gives a shit if one class is underpowered overall? You can make that argument for 6s as well, so there's no point in making it for highlander if you can make the exact same for 6s.
Highlander is great with 1 of each class, it's balanced that way and spy and pyro make a big difference with those limitations. See? Same goes for 6s, the class limitations work and are great within that framework. Different format, but both have limitations. No point in arguing about that.
No. no, no, no, no, no.
You see? this is why I keep arguing.
What Jaguar said was reasonable and perfectly fine. He essentially said "yeah, so some classes are generalists and some are specialists? so what? it's still funsies!"
That argument is fine because it ACKNOWLEDGES what I am arguing to be true, and yet says that it does not matter as much as I say it does. I can totally agree to disagree with him.
Your problem is that you are still in denial of the BASIC TRUTH that has to be accepted, that 6s is balanced such that every class is always useful and hl isn't. You say "you can make that argument for 6s as well". As I have said, with the way class limits function in 6s, you CANNOT make that argument for 6s. Why dyou think class limits are 2 for some classes and 1 for others? it's for balance, to prevent this.
Then you say "Highlander is great with 1 of each class, it's balanced that way and spy and pyro make a big difference with those limitations." Again, not true. Highlander is not limited at 1 per class for balance, it's limited 1 per class for inclusiveness, as I said. It would be a fantastic coincidence if having one of every class just HAPPENED to balance the game so each class had an equal influence on it, especially when Valve themselves have pointed out that the game was designed around generalists and specialists.
I had no intention to drag this out into such a huge debate, because I have no problem with people saying they think my priorities are in the wrong place and having each person on a team being equally useful is not actually that important. The problem is when people refuse to even acknowledge that much.
IN HIGHLANDER, SOME CLASSES ARE BETTER THAN OTHERS. THIS IS MUCH LESS TRUE IN 6S, BECAUSE OF THE DIFFERENT NUMBER OF PLAYERS/CLASS LIMITS.
If you can acknowledge that statement above to be true, we can end this debate. As I said, that should not be the root of what we're arguing about, the core of the argument should be "does the above fact matter?" I'm fine with people thinking it doesn't. However, you can't just say it's not true, when it blatantly is.