Forum

Not sure a 6v6 highlander is the way to go myself. People get attached to their soldier or scout buddies and I don’t think such a radical change would work out well either.

I’d suggest trying a mini league with US rules, first to 5 in 2 30 minute halves, and ESEA unlock rules. If it’s working for them then it might work for us huh?

That is this shizzle here:

All packs that come out during the season are automatically banned. Additionally, all sets are banned. If you complete one, intentionally or not, the punishment will be the same as using a banned weapon. The bans are as follows:

Soda Popper
Bonk
Mad Milk
Sandman
Atomizer
Wrap Assasin
Liberty Launcher
Cow Mangler
Batalions Backup
Concheror
Reserve Shooter
Disciplinary Action
Phlogistinator
Manmelter
Third Degree
Loch n Load
Splendid Screen
Ullapool Caber
Persian Persuader
Natascha
Brass Beast
Tomislav
Sandvich
Steak Sandvich
Family Business
Gloves of Running Urgently
Warrior’s Spirit
Fists of Steel
Eviction Notice
Holiday Punch
Pomson 6000
Wrangler
Short Circuit
Gunslinger
Eureka Effect
Vita-Saw
Solemn Vow
Sydney Sleeper
Machina
Jarate
Enforcer
Diamond Back
Spy-cicle

The class restrictions are:
2 Scouts
2 Soldiers
2 Pyros
1 Demoman
1 Heavy
1 Engineer
1 Medic
2 Snipers
2 Spy

I feel this list removes all of the seriously off putting weapons and leaves a lot of tactical variation to play around with. Sometimes less = more.

Quoted from freshmeatt

I asked myself, why would you work from bottom up like that, but I guess we have to experiment a lot.

I don’t see why we have to experiment when the US scene has been experimenting for us for years!

I will stop posting that list now…maybe. It is a good list though.

Class limit 1 was discussed in recent times in a post by Quad, but I can only imagine it would produce an even slower more methodical game.

“Oh my one scout is dead?” Capping spire is no longer a feasible option.
“Oh my one soldier is dead?” Defending spire is no longer a feasible option.
I would suggest that having class limit 2 actually provides more tactical flexibility and a more forgiving game.

Sure, I’m over simplifying but I don’t think it is hard to see that you are substituting two very versatile classes (1x sol 1x sco) for some combination of utility classes that are all but useless in a lot of common situations.

The dog in the street knows that frequently running snipers and heavies forces teams and their opponents to play a much more mechanical and methodical style. In fact have one less scout and soldier actually accentuates the power of the sniper/heavy, forcing you to run your own sniper/heavy (or spy if you like to gamble).

The current format is much more flexible, allowing you to maximise the utility of all the classes rather than arbitrarily force you to use them. The situations where classes are worth while are the situations we currently see them being deployed. Does that not make sense?

class limit one would eventually just devolve into heavy+pyro instead of soldier+scout

Quoted from Admirable

Class limit 1 was discussed in recent times in a post by Quad, but I can only imagine it would produce an even slower more methodical game.

“Oh my one scout is dead?” Capping spire is no longer a feasible option.
“Oh my one soldier is dead?” Defending spire is no longer a feasible option.
I would suggest that having class limit 2 actually provides more tactical flexibility and a more forgiving game.

Sure, I’m over simplifying but I don’t think it is hard to see that you are substituting two very versatile classes (1x sol 1x sco) for some combination of utility classes that are all but useless in a lot of common situations.

The dog in the street knows that frequently running snipers and heavies forces teams and their opponents to play a much more mechanical and methodical style. In fact have one less scout and soldier actually accentuates the power of the sniper/heavy, forcing you to run your own sniper/heavy (or spy if you like to gamble).

The current format is much more flexible, allowing you to maximise the utility of all the classes rather than arbitrarily force you to use them. The situations where classes are worth while are the situations we currently see them being deployed. Does that not make sense?

Hmm, I kind of disagree. The problem is, that soldiers and scouts are such good classes, that they make the others no longer viable for general gameplay, and turn them into situational classes that are still completely optional. In the event of it being class limit 1, you have to use additional classes, so you have to find uses for them. Additionally, because you have class limit 1, certain classes are going to be considerably more valuable in some situations over others. For example, capping spire as you mentioned, scouts and soldiers are going to be essential at this time, so teams should focus on either keeping these classes alive, or eliminating them if they are the other side of the coin.

The current system means that you can be reckless with these high value classes, because you have another one spare. In this format, focus doesn’t always need to be on the kill the enemy medic, as you might find it more beneficial to eliminate the high few high mobility classes that they are allowed.

You also would get some nice, hard-counter class wars going on.

Scouts going for snipers.
Spies going for heavys.
Pyros protecting from spies.
Engineers stopping scout backcaps.
Heavys stopping jumping soldiers.
Demomen…. er… *ahem*

Just theory of course. You are right in saying that the current system allows for a more forgiving game, it would, but then, wasn’t the equaliser banned because people thought that if a player makes a mistake and commits with a rocket jump, they shouldn’t be able to have a free escape mode? Some of the unlocks might balance this out.

However, with the vast number of combinations available (not everything will be viable), I’d rather just, try to see it in action (over attempting to predict things), see how people exploit all of these new options, and see how the game plays out, at all skill levels.

Quoted from freshmeatt

I asked myself, why would you work from bottom up like that, but I guess we have to experiment a lot. The idea is neat, simple and fresh, certainly changing the way people would think about approaching certain (notabene completely new) situations. From your description, only one thing smells like uncertainty:[…]
Don’t you think that, over time, this setup’s evolution is bound to slow down and eventually settle on a snail-like speed, just like the usual 6v6 did?

[…]
Can you stop posting that list in every topic regarding unlocks, please?

It could very well slow down and be a much worse game than the current 6v6 setup, in fact, the removal of a couple of high mobility classes will no doubt slow the game down a little, but the use of some unlocks also can speed things up, so I’m hoping it wouldn’t be ‘too’ noticable.

I’m not even suggesting this as a replacement to the current 6v6 setup. I’m actually just curious to see how it plays out, as a ‘small side project’. Maybe a separate league with a maximum of 2 divisions so that people don’t just abandon the main 6v6 league (splitting things in two would be even worse than just leaving 6v6 how it is now).

For the class limit 1. There’s a 7v7 league that wireplay runs for years.

It’s fun and versatile.

From what i remember from my season there a lots of custom map, ctf/koth. Pretty difficult to master since you don’t know what you’re gonna face, so that add randomness to the game, and random is bad for competitive gaming.

Quoted from Phrozen

[…]

TL;DR FOR CRASHSITE’S POST GUYSSSHHH

sorted