Forum

Same for the rule: “teams are free to agree to limit unlocks further”. That shows a lack of confidence. You want to make everyone happy because the etf2l staff cant decide for themselves if these unlocks are balanced or not. Just allow or not. If div1 players wants a ‘gentlemen rule’, thats up to their choice. But having a sort of ‘gentlemen rule’ when both teams agree in your official rules is fooling everyone. It is a sign that a lot of teams disagree with the rules and that you want to keep them happy with a stupid agreement.

I agree on your general point, but there’s also an advantage for this particular rule. By listing it in the official rules, a scenario like this becomes easier to handle:

1. Team A wants to play with medic unlocks only and posts about it on the match page
2. Team B agrees
3. Game starts
4. Team B has a soldier that switches to DH in the middle of a match
5. Team A notices it and points out to the deal they made and demands a penalty for team B
6. Team B says it was just a private agreement and although it was morally wrong, they won’t accept a penalty.

Now, if the rules say that the teams can agree to limiting unlocks further, team A can just point to the match page and the rules to make their case.

Let me understand: teamA want to play with all unlocks and teamB doesn’t….who chooses?

I can see in the future…and i see…an EPIC FAIL about this admin’s choice regarding the new weapons!

Go on guys, you are just teamkilling this great game!

“I haven’t a clue about the FaN’s current state because I don’t play public and teams I play against don’t use it.

Also we’ve seen this time and time again in the past; it didn’t speed up the gameplay and in fact forced the opposing scouts to camp an advantage point in situations where they normally wouldn’t. It never sped up anything. We’ve discussed these things time and time again and I doubt we can ever resolve this argument if “your side” continues to willfully ignore “my sides” arguments (this is starting to sound like a civil war in the making, instead of the nerd bitchfest it actually is).”

This point by Bash nailed the anti FAN argument. I’ve never agreed with Bash but this is a very good point. I don’t necessarily think the FAN should be banned, but I can understand this argument against it. Focussing on the point above it (which is completely irrelevant) to ignore the excellent point below has been noticed!

Jones put *~ in front of your tag, pro

Let me understand: teamA want to play with all unlocks and teamB doesn’t….who chooses?

I can see in the future…and i see…an EPIC FAIL about this admin’s choice regarding the new weapons!

Go on guys, you are just teamkilling this great game!

Try reading what Jimmy Breeze typed

You follow etf2l rules unless both teams aggree not too in match notes. If both teams aggree no sandman and one team uses it in game thats a breach of the game rules even though the league allows it.

Seems that etf2l staff has a lack of confidence in themselves. Its like fooling the whole etf2l community including yourself. First the 1 weapon limit of the unlocks. Why can we play with two soldiers with two normal rocket launchers, but 1 direct hit allowed. Why would 1 dh be fun and 2 dont? Nobody can answer that question. Same for buff banner and other unlocks. You are just unsure about the consequences, but with a 1 weapon limit you will at least reduce the impact. But it lacks any solid reasoning behind it. Everybody knows whats wrong with the unlocks, except for the etf2l staff. The only reason why not everyone is for unlock bans is that they exploit these bugs for their own advantage.

Same for the rule: “teams are free to agree to limit unlocks further”. That shows a lack of confidence. You want to make everyone happy because the etf2l staff cant decide for themselves if these unlocks are balanced or not. Just allow or not. If div1 players wants a ‘gentlemen rule’, thats up to their choice. But having a sort of ‘gentlemen rule’ when both teams agree in your official rules is fooling everyone. It is a sign that a lot of teams disagree with the rules and that you want to keep them happy with a stupid agreement.

Absolute bollocks quite frankly.

The weapons were bugged to an extent where we provisionally set a 1-weapon limit rule for some of them. We did this in the knowledge that Valve had promised us an update before the start of the season, which they have now started giving to us. If the weapons are not fixed or had no update been forthcoming, there would not be a problem in banning the aforementioned bugged weapons.

The point of provisional rules, is to get some feedback on ideas and to give players an idea of our intentions for a season. We don’t just sneeze on a page and decide “hey, that looks like a good ruleset…let’s go with that and piss everyone off”. The attitudes of people like you Waster to provisional rules, where we are actually listening to the community and getting feedback BEFORE any rules are finalised, absolutely disgust me.

Furthermore your comments about a lack of confidence are woeful and terribly out of place. It is very disappointing that teams in Division 1 want to play without the unlocks. I felt they could have waited a bit longer for Valve’s update to be released, before making such a knee-jerk reaction. Our provisional rule ideas have been announced for 4 days. There’s still 25 days before the season starts – i.e. plenty of time for things to have been changed and reviewed.

Personally, I feel that if two teams want to agree to play their game with an extra unlock disallowed or whatever – they can go ahead and do that. The one thing I will point out to this is that I am pushing very hard for us not to give any support in Admin queries arising from this. For example, Team A and Team B decide to play Vanilla. Team B uses unlocks that are not vanilla and Team A cries about it. In this case, it’s a gentleman’s agreement between two teams. It’s nothing to do with our rules, and I will be expecting our Admin team not to take any action if something like that occurs. A gentleman’s agreement is exactly that. It is not creating a definitive rule for ETF2L. The ETF2L rules are clearly in place on the rules page. Those are the rules that we will help people with when there are problems with a match.

As a final comment – the Admin team this season are trying very hard to listen to every single player about their thoughts and feelings. There are clearly going to be things that not everyone agrees with, but could you at least try to consider the fact that we’re listening and adapting our ideas based on feedback from players? This is something that has not been done to this scale in any previous season. So instead of insulting people who volunteer their time to help to make this the best league in Europe, why not try to actually get involved in a helpful manner?

It was D1 that helped to enforce demo limit 1 and D1 that first had a go with fixed maps. Both of those rules are better for TF2, only the QQbrigade would disagree with that. Why then is there such uproar that D1 wants to play without unlocks? It’s not like it has immediate ramifications on players outside of D1 either.

The answer I guess can be summed up by the image I linked on P7 of this thread.

edit: for everyone whining about D1 having their own rules, where were you when D1 alone had fixed maps?

It does have ramifications if d1 teams dont play d2 teams because they use unlocks (low div1 high div 2 not much difference)

And why would anyone whine about D1 having fixed maps last season lol? I think its a good idea, the fact it doesnt actually influence or change the game of tf2 at all is not a good example for you to pick if your suggesting we’re whineing about D1 team having different rules.

I dont care if you have different rules like fixed maps, that doesn’t fundamentally change the game everyone plays at all unlike unlocks.

As for demolimit 1 i cant remember how why it all came about but im sure it wasnt just D1 teams “fighting the good fight” to get it removed, i remember wotr^ fucking loved 2 demos ;) byte and TG locked everything down. The rest of us in wotr fucking hated playing 2 demo teams and always protested against it.

I personally went thru all the div1 teams to get the demolimit to one. In the end the decision was made by the “elitists”. Which forced ETF2L to change the rule.

What evil said before, just cos some div1 players have decided they want almost vanilla doesn’t mean the same thread can’t be made all div2,3,4 etc ect. Just cos someone from div1 took the initiative cos its what they wanted/thought was best. If all div1 want to play like that then why does it matter if other people outside div1 don’t want to then just don’t. Looks like they’re just doing it so they don’t have to post on everysingle match page on med uinlocks and confirm it everytime….just really doesn’t seem like a big deal

Eh D2M, this most recent update actually buffed the FAN and BB and didn’t address any of the real issues surrounding the InstaDeathAntiAirCannon TDH.

If this was the reason behind wishy-washy unlock limits instead of outright bans, then I’m climbing on the Vanilla wagon! :<

I didn’t say I agreed with the new update or that we had made any decisions on the updated weapons from last night yet :) They always fuck something up when they update TF2. We’ll be discussing the weapons this weekend in the Admin team.