Forum

The reason he says that, is because we already HAD 1000 unlock threads. And I really HATE unlocks. I HATE publics because of what they become. I don’t want unlocks in ETF2L except the standard medic unlocks.

Lets not discuss unlocks, reskins, whatever. Competitive gaming should be standard clean rules and inventory. I certainly will leave ETF2L and TF2 when they allow unlocks again.

*angry face*

Quoted from Andee

I certainly will leave ETF2L and TF2 when they allow unlocks again.

*angry face*

2.2.1 Allowed Weapons: Standard weapons, Blutsauger, Kritzkrieg, Übersaw and Crusader’s Crossbow
All of the standard weapons are allowed to be used.
Allowed unlocks: Blutsauger, Kritzkrieg, Übersaw and Crusader’s Crossbow
All other non-stock weapons are banned, including the Original.

welp. see ya andee. don’t let the door hit you.

perhaps the issue with all of these people who have very strong ideas on unlocks isn’t due to the fact that they’ve never been able to get out of div4 *coughmonkehcough*. perhaps the issue is that these people can’t read.

Bagged & Tagged.

I think the subconscious reasoning for the status quo of specific unlock regulations is that we have this idea about TF2 that has been spawned by Valve themselves, namely that every class has it’s specialty, and that this means that any class can be at a clear disadvantage pitted 1v1 against a different class in specific situations. This promotes teamwork and smart distribution of tasks. This is what makes TF2 stand out from almost any other FPS currently out there.

We ban almost all unlocks because they generally give each class more “allround” power, making them viable in situations where they’d normallly need assistance from another class or needn’t be at all. People complaining that they can only use a heavy at last point because he cannot be fast to mid, and doesn’t have his sandvich to play “agressively” (hi Alx) don’t understand that there is great value being put into TF2 being a game where certain classes have clear specialisations and uses. That’s the reason we want to steer away from allowing unlocks that give classes functions like self-healing, radical modification of damage range or spike damage, travel speed, or any other parameter that makes a class suddenly viable in all kinds of situations it previously wasn’t.

No matter what we allow for the medic, his core task will always be that of playing the mobile dispenser. No matter what melee or projectile weapon you give him, he’ll be running around with the medigun (or kritz obviously) most of the game anyway. This is important, because this establishes that we will never change medic gameplay in any radical way by allowing a certain new slot1 or slot3 weapon, unless those weapons give the medic such a distinct new function or advantage that we can collectively agree on it “breaking” the gameplay. The crossbow gives the medic the power to heal at distances he previously couldn’t, in exchange for wasting precious ubercharge time. It changes the offensive power of the medic to spike damage instead of high dps over a longer period of time, which is no real radicalisation either.

As for allowing kritz, that is a different story. Kritz doesn’t have as much to do with the medic as it does with the team. Kritz changes the team mechanic (their strategy; positioning, timing), and we seemingly have implicitly agreed that this 8 second charge-time difference dynamic of critical damage versus invulnerability provides for interesting and fair game scenarios.

So yeah I kinda tried to establish why we are playing with the unlocks we’re playing with right now, and why allowing the Original shouldn’t be a big deal. It does not change the impact of the soldier on the enemy team and does not change the way soldier is being played. It does not conflict with abovementioned seemingly implied reasoning behind the current unlock ruleset.

And yes, this also means that the door for discussion on ANY unlock is basically opened, as anyone can claim that “unlock X” fits abovementioned criteria for being a fair unlock in the consensus competitive environment. The reasoning behind the ruleset might be clear, but the exact borders will always be arbitary. And why not? People have been arguing for unlocks ever since Valve gave us them, and most of the time people lost the argument. It’s hard to find an unlock whose unobjectability is easier to argue for than The Original or a medlock.

Quoted from Trane

[…]

Well done on misconstruing my sentence to it’s extreme, and inferring I said something that I didn’t.

I’ll do the same then:

Let’s make a thread for every single available unlock, and make a poll on each. Let’s not only do that, but let’s discuss the impact on meta-game and available tactics when using any possible given combination of unlocks on 5cp maps.

Yeah.

Hmm, rereading your original post I seem to have indeed interpertated it’s meaning wrong. My apologies.

Considering the extensive debate thats been going on about The Original (I think most views both against and in favour of it have been laid out now) can we perhaps get a response from the admin team as to where they stand or wether they are reviewing this taking the arguements from this thread into consideration?

right now (21:45 CEST) one of the hosts of epsilon vs infused praised that we here in europe don’t play with rubbish unlocks XD

Please remind yourselves of the rules stated at the start of all feedback threads:

The thread will be closely moderated and punishments given out relatively easily. Keep it civil.

Several users have been banned. For questions or complaints, please contact an admin: http://etf2l.org/etf2l/support/