I've been playing competitive TF2.
I've been playing a lot of competitive TF2.
I've been playing a lot of competitive TF2 and since the last thread I've noticed that the flaws I stated have become great gaping holes. Let me get a few things straight here.
Competitive TF2 is run in 3 formats - 9v9, 6v6 and 8v8.
The class limits are:
6v6
1 Demoman
1 Medic
1 Spy
1 Heavy
1 Engineer
2 Pyros
2 Snipers
2 Soldiers
2 Scouts
8v8
Same as above, but with 2 demomen.
9v9
1 of each class only.
Before you ask - yes, there have been tournaments that have abolished these restrictions and allowed teams to play 8v8 or 6v6 with class setups however they want. It leads to a huge clusterfuck at best and skirmishes based on nothing but luck at worst.
And as a preface, I really don't give a fuck if you think TF2 should be played competitively or not. Please don't let this thread degrade once again into that kind of argument. There are now several competitive ladders where cash is offered as a prize (GotGames and nGR Invitational in Australia as an example).
My thoughts are based on 6v6 mainly as most leagues now have abolished 8v8.
#1. Ubercharges
A lot of teams now time their offensive push with their ubercharge, and the defensive team counters with an ubercharge. For the eight or so seconds in which both (generally) Soldier-Medic combos are ubercharged, the two charged players attempt to kill as many other players as possible. But the 6v6 combat is based around the Medic, and as long as the other team's Medic is alive, it'd be useless to push in. The Medic will jump behind walls to avoid Snipers. The Soldier will stick with him, and with vent contact make sure Spies are hard to be found.
There's a problem here - the tactical push out relies on one team losing uber before the other. While 6v6 is Medic-centric, this centralisation of the game forces the central X+Medic combo to try and kill the other X+Medic combo. This leaves 4 players - most teams run 2 Scouts or 1 Scout and 1 Sniper, a Demoman and another Soldier - to try and kill each other so the push will be made easier.
I know it sounds vague but what I'm trying to get at here is that this leads to stalemates that can be won only by a huge difference in skill or a team tactically outmanoevering the other. It's usually the latter, and this relies hugely on the two Scouts or Scout/Sniper. If you don't believe me, go and watch the demos of Pandemic and MAD DOGZ playing on GotFrag.
#2. Maps
There are a lot more community maps since I last brought this up. But I've seen a few problems on the numerous scrims I've played on maps that were actively designed to support 6v6 - mostly that corners and choke points become an incredible clusterfuck. The control points in small maps are incredibly tight and I love it - now, Soldiers and Demomen need to watch their shots for self damage, can't rocketjump out the wazoo and spam is reduced mainly on control points. On choke points however, the clusterfuck becomes huge, popping your head out of the side will get you spotted and shot at almost instantly. It seems that the only way this will work is with large spaces in tiny maps and while this sounds paradoxical to a point, within the map itself, the control point areas are proportionately massive compared to choke points and the area surrounding them.*
*It's a bit vague and I'm wondering if I should rethink this, but if someone could inform me if I'm making a point or just whining about close range combat with splash damage versus long range combat with splash damage I'd happily restructure what I'm saying here.
#3. Defensive and Offensive Mechanic
I've said before that one of the two things that win a game - one being a ridiculous difference in skill and the other being tactical superiority. I recall a quote from the earlier thread with degraded into a fight over casual versus hardcore and that would be something like "making these changes will turn it into a bland CS clone". This is partly the problem. We haven't made the changes, but the more I play competitive matches, the more same-y it gets.
Don't get me wrong - the introductory skirmish of mirror maps is still probably the most exciting event of a game and I've had some brilliant fights starting on the midpoint of cp_granary or cp_badlands, but after one team has the middle point it usually means that they've just got tactical superiority. I see the same routes being taken through cp_gravelpit, the same Soldier and Soldier+Medic routes through cp_badlands, the same Scout reliance on cp_well.
I realise, once again, that these may be a bit vague and being quite tired right now I might not have thought out these as well as I could. These are just glaring issues. Don't get me wrong - TF2 still has the ridiculous spontanaeity that only imbalanced classes can provide, but it's the mapping and tactical areas that has become bland, especially through mirror maps.
Oh, and by the way - crits are always off.
I've been playing a lot of competitive TF2.
I've been playing a lot of competitive TF2 and since the last thread I've noticed that the flaws I stated have become great gaping holes. Let me get a few things straight here.
Competitive TF2 is run in 3 formats - 9v9, 6v6 and 8v8.
The class limits are:
6v6
1 Demoman
1 Medic
1 Spy
1 Heavy
1 Engineer
2 Pyros
2 Snipers
2 Soldiers
2 Scouts
8v8
Same as above, but with 2 demomen.
9v9
1 of each class only.
Before you ask - yes, there have been tournaments that have abolished these restrictions and allowed teams to play 8v8 or 6v6 with class setups however they want. It leads to a huge clusterfuck at best and skirmishes based on nothing but luck at worst.
And as a preface, I really don't give a fuck if you think TF2 should be played competitively or not. Please don't let this thread degrade once again into that kind of argument. There are now several competitive ladders where cash is offered as a prize (GotGames and nGR Invitational in Australia as an example).
My thoughts are based on 6v6 mainly as most leagues now have abolished 8v8.
#1. Ubercharges
A lot of teams now time their offensive push with their ubercharge, and the defensive team counters with an ubercharge. For the eight or so seconds in which both (generally) Soldier-Medic combos are ubercharged, the two charged players attempt to kill as many other players as possible. But the 6v6 combat is based around the Medic, and as long as the other team's Medic is alive, it'd be useless to push in. The Medic will jump behind walls to avoid Snipers. The Soldier will stick with him, and with vent contact make sure Spies are hard to be found.
There's a problem here - the tactical push out relies on one team losing uber before the other. While 6v6 is Medic-centric, this centralisation of the game forces the central X+Medic combo to try and kill the other X+Medic combo. This leaves 4 players - most teams run 2 Scouts or 1 Scout and 1 Sniper, a Demoman and another Soldier - to try and kill each other so the push will be made easier.
I know it sounds vague but what I'm trying to get at here is that this leads to stalemates that can be won only by a huge difference in skill or a team tactically outmanoevering the other. It's usually the latter, and this relies hugely on the two Scouts or Scout/Sniper. If you don't believe me, go and watch the demos of Pandemic and MAD DOGZ playing on GotFrag.
#2. Maps
There are a lot more community maps since I last brought this up. But I've seen a few problems on the numerous scrims I've played on maps that were actively designed to support 6v6 - mostly that corners and choke points become an incredible clusterfuck. The control points in small maps are incredibly tight and I love it - now, Soldiers and Demomen need to watch their shots for self damage, can't rocketjump out the wazoo and spam is reduced mainly on control points. On choke points however, the clusterfuck becomes huge, popping your head out of the side will get you spotted and shot at almost instantly. It seems that the only way this will work is with large spaces in tiny maps and while this sounds paradoxical to a point, within the map itself, the control point areas are proportionately massive compared to choke points and the area surrounding them.*
*It's a bit vague and I'm wondering if I should rethink this, but if someone could inform me if I'm making a point or just whining about close range combat with splash damage versus long range combat with splash damage I'd happily restructure what I'm saying here.
#3. Defensive and Offensive Mechanic
I've said before that one of the two things that win a game - one being a ridiculous difference in skill and the other being tactical superiority. I recall a quote from the earlier thread with degraded into a fight over casual versus hardcore and that would be something like "making these changes will turn it into a bland CS clone". This is partly the problem. We haven't made the changes, but the more I play competitive matches, the more same-y it gets.
Don't get me wrong - the introductory skirmish of mirror maps is still probably the most exciting event of a game and I've had some brilliant fights starting on the midpoint of cp_granary or cp_badlands, but after one team has the middle point it usually means that they've just got tactical superiority. I see the same routes being taken through cp_gravelpit, the same Soldier and Soldier+Medic routes through cp_badlands, the same Scout reliance on cp_well.
I realise, once again, that these may be a bit vague and being quite tired right now I might not have thought out these as well as I could. These are just glaring issues. Don't get me wrong - TF2 still has the ridiculous spontanaeity that only imbalanced classes can provide, but it's the mapping and tactical areas that has become bland, especially through mirror maps.
Oh, and by the way - crits are always off.
