It's frustrating to play against the wrangler because the skill required to use it effectively is extremely significantly lower than the skill required to counter it in any situation, directly because of its mechanical attributes. I'm willing to point out some thing which are individually bad for balance in the lack of any flaws with which to counter them:

- Dealing damage is significantly harder, but healing it isn't (especially: stickytraps which could kill a wrangled sentry are trivial to blast away because of the time required to set them)
- The manual aim extends the sentry range past its normal bubble with no form of falloff whatsoever, making it one of the best long range damage (think badwater sightlines) sources in the game

and then i lost my train of thought entirely

target classloadoutpanel.res for an immediate fix

- Network interpolation and update convars can no longer be changed when playing. To configure these convars, players must not be connected to a server or must join the spectators
You can change it by going spec then going to your class.
Good luck doing it in leagues.
Why didn't they make it change on respawn?

The enforcer's still OP?

1) If they can't remove the holes in the bridge at mid, then at the very least they need to be made symmetrical.
2) There are a million ways to fix the "stickies in doors" problem, right? From invisible brushes to making them solid (if they even have a collision mesh) and so on
3) I don't see there to be any reason not to smooth out the random hump that messes up pogosurfs, IIRC there were other minor problems with badlands for jumping but I don't remember them.
4) Some of the aesthetic props are important, but some of them are pointless. Since Badlands is "the #1 competitive 6s map", can more optimization be done about pointless rendering?
5) Also it would be really really cool if you made it so that the wrangler didn't shoot through the "invisible" tool texture (it blocks every other htiscan)

#38 If you can keep complete track of the changes you make and email relevant people at valve exactly how to do what and how it improves gameplay (having something to back up that it really helps would help the case a lot) I'm sure they'd make the same changes to the stock version.

You're right, we should get valve to change the stock version instead.

#27 Most of spire is a prop/model so that would probably be harder than normal clipping. What's wrong with it?

I'm having an argument with a stupid forum admin for a game I work on right now so I'm going to link someone else's spiel about it instead, hope that's OK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9notxSwwdY#t=9m55s

#17:
I'm just going to note that TF2 isn't consistent with that list's "Solid to bullets". For example "Invisible" blocks most hitscan. Doesn't block the wrangler though. I did test this.

Make it so that sand is still predominant, just have grass on the fringes of the map and in places where it would seem reasonable like the sides of the bottoms of valleys and pits (see: koth_badlands's water)
Also pls pls pls smooth out all the random bumps that make complex rocketjumps impossible

>see vitasaw, phlog, pomson.
Wait, exactly what could the vitasaw and pomson contribute to meta aside from fucking with the only non-spatial advantage system in the game?

The target audience of DX:HR was console players.
DX:HR was a console game.
Do you really think you know what the target audience of DX in general is supposed to be right now? Do you work for Eidos?

Did you pay attention to the video? The interface is dynamic and there are multiple paradigms to input what you want to do (incl. the targeted/locked on one and doing it manually). It's also shown off as a cover based shooter just like DX:HR obviously designed. I really don't see the problem.

It looks reasonable.

I feel like we should get some "great guide to what we're thinking about" together (even if it's heavily summarized) if we're going to do this very well. I'm giving it a shot, but I know I'm not the best at these things since I literally just list stuff.

Matchmaking concept:
These are my original thoughts.
- People may sign in to play Highlander (in the future, perhaps and/or: 6v6 and "esoteric" formats like 4v4 and 8v8) as a starter exclusively or also as a sub/backup (which will put them into active lobbies/games which have lost or kicked a player matching their settings)
- People may sign in to whatever classes they want to predominately play (keep in mind that locking people onto classes is a naive idea, just keep classlimits in place and have some sort of grief reporting system if necessary)
- People may sign in to what kinds of map they want to play (CTF, Payload, A/D, "small" 5CP [like gullywash and badlands] or "large" 5CP [like foundry and well])
- People are matched according to whatever the best criteria are available to judge them by: performance in what level of matchmaking game, presence of league medals in their inventory (since it's the closest thing to an official steam-side tournament link -- fix me!), hours spent playing TF2, etc. If this is a bad idea, by all means, ignore it!
- There are no captains, players are placed into a lobby once their match is made and they've accepted it. Matches are started simply by everyone connecting fully with a small pre-game period like DotA 2's hero selection system to sit in the lobby, during which weapon voting can be done.

Weapon voting concept:
There are a bunch floating around, but I'll do my best to summarize the main ones.
- A nominate/vote system, working similar to some servers' map voting. When you get into the lobby, people are asked to nominate weapons they want to ban, which are put to vote. This would probably provide data and expand meta roughly evenly.
- A raw democratic system, where people vote ban/keep on each item in the game at the start of each match. There several ways to handle the threshhold for banning and to handle tiebreakers. This would probably provide data and expand meta roughly evenly.
- A save/ban system that emulates DotA 2's general idea of a pick/ban system, but with some kind of dynamic that changes depending on how same-y the banlist is -- if everyone in queue is treating the same items as first-saves/first-bans and second and so on (making it seem static), the length of the voting system would expand; if it seems like people are treating it random/arbitrary, it would shrink.
- Some system that starts with a list based on the general state of whether people ban-or-not each item, and then gives one of the above systems to deviate from that list. Would especially work with the nominate/vote system, and is similar to what ESEA's process already [socially] does. This would probably provide good data more than expand meta, but depends heavily on what other system is used with it.
- A rotation system where every class gets X guarenteed items and Y "extra" items that are rotated through/scrambled through the item pool. Some number of items is somehow banned from this basis item pool. This would probably expand meta more than provide good data.