Major Update Speculation V35 - A Distinctive Lack of Communication - Games

[QUOTE=Blackavar;51629698]literally the reason we want to implement highlander is to bolster playercount. people don't like 6s because it heavily limits the usage of 5 classes, all of which are incredibly popular to play at lower levels of skill. it isn't something new players can even fathom enjoying.[/QUOTE] except newer players have never been exposed to actual 6s, because that doesn't actually exist in the game right now. [quote]also, i'm not really sure how much valve cares about tf2 becoming a spectator esport considering what they've done with comp mm so far. besides, with a few buffs to certain underused classes, highlander might actually become significantly faster (see my suggestions for class buffs to pyro and heavy that i've discussed many times).[/quote] [B]highlander's playercount + fulltime Heavy and Engineer mean that regardless of what changes you make, it's going to be slow. it's hard to kill enough players at one time to do a push without an uber, and by the time an uber is built for a push to happen, the opposing team often has an uber of their own and can kite it out and maintain their hold.[/B] highlander is simply too slow. [quote]and not even acknowledging highlander right now is a horrible choice for tf2 because new players aren't playing 6s at all because [B]they don't like it[/B],[/quote] really hard to have a developed opinion of a thing you've never played, or might not even know about. [quote]and creating teams and playing ugc or etf2l 6s is too much of a hassle for a casual player.[/quote] absolutely, which is why having a functional matchmaking mode with class limits is key for any tf2 competitive format to succeed. [quote]i enjoy watching 6s, personally, but i also enjoy watching highlander, which in some ways is far more intricate, if often chaotic. [B]tf2 should embrace a gamemode that utilizes all 9 classes, and should balance the classes so that it isn't incredibly slow.[/B][/quote] so...we could just make the changes to Competitive Mode that would make it a proper adaption of 6s and be much more playable/watchable for it...or we could count on Valve of all companies to completely rebalance the game's classes in a way to make Highlander [B]not[/B] a slog? yeah, sorry, that's not going to happen. you're legitimately delusional if you ever think Highlander could be fast enough for spectating. [QUOTE]again, we can fix the "slowness" of highlander by balancing the classes properly. make pyro faster and do more damage at a higher skill level, remove heavy's ability to knockback midair classes while increasing damage done and giving him more mobility while revved, reducing demoman's ability to dominate everything by left/right clicking, things like that.[/QUOTE] see: the previous point I made about why Highlander is inherently slow and you can't really do anything about it [QUOTE]growth comes [I]through[/I] highlander. because of how matchmaking is at the moment, there is no fixing its popularity unless a MASSIVE overhaul update is made, that includes highlander [B](the intuitive gamemode people like way more than 6s)[/B]. i don't disagree that 6s should be made the primary format, but highlander is the only way to make comp mm popular now.[/QUOTE] whole lot of unsubstantiated claims you're making there. got any statistics to back it up? [QUOTE]no, they did try, and failed. new players don't see the abhorrent balance of current comp 6s as anything meaningful. what they experienced was veterans yelling at them for not changing from sniper to medic, from spy to soldier. they didn't get to play the class they wanted to, so they didn't have [I]fun[/I], plain and simple. and if you're not having fun, why stay? so everyone just left comp mm in a fit of rage and never came back. and so now it is dead. class limits won't change that. for 6s to become popular, new players MUST be separated from veterans, or it CANNOT work. yes, there need to be class limits for 6s to function properly as a gamemode, and we need a TON more balancing for it to not require weapon picks/bans of some sort, [B]but new players DON'T LIKE 6S.[/B][/QUOTE] nobody played comp mm because it's a straight downgrade to pubs in every concievable way, not because some new kid got their feelings hurt. there's almost always a fulltime Spy/Sniper whenever I play Comp MM, even now, and no level of asking them to switch or outright telling them they're deadweighting changes anything about that. [QUOTE]throwing out the wheel entirely would be to only support a gamemode that only people decent at the game enjoy. not to say highlander is "easier", but it's more inclusive. remove the ability to play your favorite class the ENTIRE game and people won't enjoy it. TL;DR new players hate 6s. making 6s better won't change that fact. and the base of people who do play 6s isn't enough to support valve's homemade matchmaking system, which will never be better than tf2center, faceit, pugchamp, etc etc. the only way to get new players is to allow a competitive gamemode that lets new players play the classes they want to play, fulltime[/QUOTE] there's no basis for any of your claims: that newer players hate 6s by nature, that HL is more popular than 6s (it's factually not- take a look at playercounts in leagues to verify), or that HL will spur growth.

TF2 was never meant to be an Esport.

contra back at it again with 0 chill

-snip-

[QUOTE=Blackavar;51629844]again with the assumptions. yes, i've played 6s and highlander, but of course it's not going to matter to you because "Awesome. I've played Highlander for the past 4 years, going on 5 once this new season starts, in leagues. I might know a little bit more about the format and what does and doesn't work about it than you do."[/QUOTE] i was referring to the "new players" you were speaking for, who most certainly haven't played 6s and most of whom haven't heard of it. reading comprehension. context. pick it up.

[QUOTE=Contra132;51629851]who most certainly haven't played 6s and most of whom haven't heard of it.[/QUOTE] besides the annoying and needless negativity, why do you think a new player would enjoy playing 6s if comp mm were proper 6s? they can't play sniper fulltime they can't play spy fulltime they can't play heavy fulltime they can't play pyro fulltime those classes are a great portion of any new player's early playtime, because they're similar to what they're used to (sniper), interesting and different (spy), iconic (heavy), and simple (pyro) but you can't play them fulltime in 6s. gotta go fast, gotta get to mid as fast as possible or you get rolled. I can't name a single comp mm game I played during the time it was slightly active where both teams had the proper 6s setup, and I played that at least a good like 40-50 times with a friend or few. class limits aren't going to keep a new player from continuing to play sniper, spy, heavy, pyro, or engineer. there is 0 way to stop it except for some cancerous feature valve would add that only lets players play an "offclass" for 2 minutes at a time, or removing the classes from the list entirely. thankfully they aren't that stupid.

[QUOTE=Oizen;51629829]TF2 was never meant to be an Esport.[/QUOTE] Maybe not, but it has the depth of mechanical skill to make it a good one. Should the TF Team embrace and integrate it properly, which they haven't and they probably won't. MyM was an attempt to modernize TF2, and Competitive Mode, unmitigated disaster it was, is a part of that. I'm pretty sure the TF Team at least recognizes what the game needs to grow, but whether they're willing or able to do it is another story entirely.

[QUOTE=Contra132;51629751]Awesome. I've played Highlander for the past 4 years, going on 5 once this new season starts, in leagues. I [I]might[/I] know a little bit more about the format and what does and doesn't work about it than you do.[/QUOTE] Well no offense but your arguments aren't as sound as they should be then. But if we're turning this into a pissing contest, have you ever made a game? Even a tiny one? Or merely researched that kind of shit? I'm not the greatest gamedev alive but I've been at it for the past 3 years and released 5 games on the side. A lot of research went into them and I got a lot of feedback from them and it was an experience that fixed a lot of my shitty beliefs and assumptions about game development and generally gave me a more realistic outlook on what players want from games and why developers do what they do. Most of all it requires a fresh outlook and not just basing one's assumptions on "what works in other games" and "but a competitive game needs to be a watchable eSport because they're all that way" and "but highlander is BAD because it takes a long time to set up with shitty third party tools that we had to use up until now" Sure experience is nice (and I'm not as devoid of it as you might think) but it's also important to look at the problem from multiple angles. 6v6 might be good for you right now, but there is a wealth of players are not looking for that kind of experience. We need a format that allows them to grow in a familiar environment that allows them to play their way.

I'm bewildered as to how anybody still thinks that highlander is (or was) remotely viable in any way at this point.

[QUOTE=pepetoads;51629893]I'm bewildered as to how anybody still thinks that highlander is (or was) remotely viable in any way at this point.[/QUOTE] Some evolution might be necessary, but whatever the gamemode ends up being it should be able to support class maining, highlander gets the closest to this goal and it's a tried gamemode so it's a good reference point.

[QUOTE=Drury;51629864]Well no offense but your arguments aren't as sound as they should be then.[/QUOTE] Then...address them? Address the weakness in my argument. If they're weaker than yours, that shouldn't be an issue. [QUOTE]But if we're turning this into a pissing contest,[/QUOTE] the point wasn't a pissing contest- my opinion of Highlander is factually more developed than yours. I have magnitudes more experience with the format than you do, and that's a very key point that contextualizes my arguments and where they stem from. [QUOTE]have you ever made a game? Even a tiny one? Or merely researched that kind of shit? I'm not the greatest gamedev alive but I've been at it for the past 3 years and released 5 games on the side. A lot of research went into them and I got a lot of feedback from them and it was an experience that fixed a lot of my shitty beliefs and assumptions about game development and generally gave me a more realistic outlook on what players want from games and why developers do what they do.[/QUOTE] cool gamedev stuff, but that's not what we're talking about and changing the subject doesn't make a "sound" argument. [QUOTE]Most of all it requires a fresh outlook and not just basing one's assumptions on "what works in other games"[/QUOTE] it's crazy, but all the biggest games right now have these common threads. coincidentally, tf2 does not have these threads. could tf2 stand to benefit from learning from industry leaders? I don't know, dude. There's literally no basis in the idea that learning from your competitors or providing features and incentivies to compete with the best of the best in your field will have [I]any[/I] benefit. [QUOTE]and "but a competitive game needs to be a watchable eSport because they're all that way"[/quote] see again: common threads in top games that TF2 lacks should TF2 learn from its competitors, or should it turn a blind eye to what works in the modern game industry? [QUOTE]and "but highlander is BAD because it takes a long time to set up with shitty third party tools that we had to use up until now"[/QUOTE] highlander isn't bad, it's a lot of fun. but it's also really slow. and unwatchable. and, in those fashions, not something that could reasonably spur growth to compete with the biggest games out there. [quote]Sure experience is nice (and I'm not as devoid of it as you might think) but it's also important to look at the problem from multiple angles. 6v6 might be good for you right now, but there is a wealth of players are not looking for that kind of experience. We need a format that allows them to grow in a familiar environment that allows them to play their way.[/quote] I can't entirely disagree with this point. Again, I'm not against Highlander matchmaking as a concept, I'm just saying that it can't be our primary format and it can't be implemented until 6v6 has been and the game has grown. Of course, we're both theorycrafting to some extent here- I recognize the possibility I could be wrong, but I think it'd be a lot easier to take the steps I recommend- making Competitive Mode actual 6v6 and sponsoring a few tourneys to see what happens- than to take the ones you and Blackavar want to, which involve completely overhauling Competitive Mode and class balance. I think it's just smarter to take the quicker, easier step first and see what happens, as opposed to throwing away the wheel again for something that might not even work. If 6s fails, try HL, sure, but actually give 6s a chance before you declare that it has failed. Because it hasn't had that chance.

[QUOTE=Drury;51629864] and not just basing one's assumptions on "what works in other games"[/QUOTE] This is a very valid and great point. As an example this game had a great item labeling system prior to colored tiers. It was easy to remember all vintages are blue, genuines are green, stranges are orange, and collectors are red. The tier system is extremely confusing as now we have non collectors, red-texted unusuals and unique items having blue text instead of yellow. The way counter stike has tiers work for that game, and can work for other games if the item system is designed incorporating it, but is extremely toxic to TF2's existing item system which was not built with that in mind. I would really like to see the tier colors changed to act like Limited! items with their appropriate colored tier text. That would be much more friendly to the existing item system.

[QUOTE=Blackavar;51629859]besides the annoying and needless negativity, why do you think a new player would enjoy playing 6s if comp mm were proper 6s? they can't play sniper fulltime they can't play spy fulltime[/quote] their team won't like it, but with class limits implemented they absolutely can more importantly, they'll also stay in lower ranks if they don't learn that isn't viable [QUOTE]they can't play heavy fulltime they can't play pyro fulltime those classes are a great portion of any new player's early playtime, because they're similar to what they're used to (sniper), interesting and different (spy), iconic (heavy), and simple (pyro)[/QUOTE] again, class limits wouldn't prevent either of these, and thanks to unlocks being allowed in Competitive Mode, both of these classes would be much more viable. I do think it's a negative for game pacing overall, granted, but I only proposed class limits, not weapon bans. [quote]class limits aren't going to keep a new player from continuing to play sniper, spy, heavy, pyro, or engineer. there is 0 way to stop it except for some cancerous feature valve would add that only lets players play an "offclass" for 2 minutes at a time, or removing the classes from the list entirely. thankfully they aren't that stupid.[/QUOTE] implement a 1-class limit on Spy and Sniper at any time, and you prevent outright deadweighting. implement the 6s class limits everywhere else, and you prevent the Medic/Engie/Heavy-stacking that currently breaks Competitive Mode and makes it completely miserable to play.

[QUOTE=Blackavar;51629859]besides the annoying and needless negativity, why do you think a new player would enjoy playing 6s if comp mm were proper 6s? they can't play sniper fulltime they can't play spy fulltime they can't play heavy fulltime they can't play pyro fulltime those classes are a great portion of any new player's early playtime, because they're similar to what they're used to (sniper), interesting and different (spy), iconic (heavy), and simple (pyro) but you can't play them fulltime in 6s. gotta go fast, gotta get to mid as fast as possible or you get rolled. I can't name a single comp mm game I played during the time it was slightly active where both teams had the proper 6s setup, and I played that at least a good like 40-50 times with a friend or few. class limits aren't going to keep a new player from continuing to play sniper, spy, heavy, pyro, or engineer. there is 0 way to stop it except for some cancerous feature valve would add that only lets players play an "offclass" for 2 minutes at a time, or removing the classes from the list entirely. thankfully they aren't that stupid.[/QUOTE] You know if 6s ran something other than 5CP, I could see Heavy,Sniper and Engineer being viable fulltime.

Just allow people to make their own lobbies in-game and make their own rulesets, choose their own maps, and make people able to join specific class spots, like TF2Lobby.

[QUOTE=Contra132;51629917] compete with the biggest games out there. [/QUOTE] TF2 will never compete with CS:GO. TF2 will never compete with DOTA 2. TF2 will never compete with Overwatch. These are facts, and we have to accept them. TF2 has anywhere between 40-70 thousand people online, playing at once. CS:GO and DOTA 2 often have up to 10 times as many people playing at once. There isn't a possible way we can fix that, and it's honestly not a problem. TF2 will forever be a game with a cult following in comparison. [QUOTE=Contra132;51629917]making Competitive Mode actual 6v6 and sponsoring a few tourneys to see what happens- than to take the ones you and Blackavar want to, which involve completely overhauling Competitive Mode and class balance. I think it's just smarter to take the quicker, easier step first and see what happens, as opposed to throwing away the wheel again for something that might not even work. If 6s fails, try HL, sure, but actually give 6s a chance before you declare that it has failed. Because it hasn't had that chance. [/QUOTE] I haven't disagreed that we need 6s to be the main competitive format. But yes, all the classes need balancing. Every class has broken/bad weapons, and many of the classes could use some core changes too. If that ends up making them viable enough to be run fulltime in 6s, so be it. If that ends up making Highlander fast enough to not suck to watch (I still don't get this), that would also be great. But we need Highlander too. New players want to contribute, but they also want to play their favorite class, something they won't get to do in 6s all the time depending on who their favorite class is. You still haven't answered the question: "Why do you think real 6s will draw in new players?" Though I think a better question is: "After Valve absolutely failed at bringing us a viable competitive gamemode, why do you think any changes at all will bring new players in?"

The "wealth of players" are looking for a competitive game mode, I don't think they'll find that if you drop people into a 9v9 shitshow where each class is arbitrarily forced to be run full time. You say that highlander has been tried, and it has definitely been played extensively, but a format like 6s has [I]not only[/I] been tried, but has undergone changes and modifications to make it the best possible competitive game mode. Nothing about it is arbitrary, and I think for that reason alone it's a far better option. Players should not be able to "main" a class, they should be able to acquire a competitive knowledge of the game by being able to play every role a team needs when a team needs it. I don't know where you're getting this "new players love HL more than 6s" stuff, the only reason that may even be remotely true is because they've never played it due to its stigmatization by more casual audiences. I also believe this is the case with all kinds of competitive TF2 in general, but specifically six versus six; I experienced something similar until I saw a b4nny stream or something and got incredibly interested in competitive TF2 despite previously thinking it was for "idiot tryhards lmao." And at that point I was an engineer main, and the fact that engineer was nearly entirely reserved for last holds did not turn me off at all. Personally, I think the biggest reason any casual player would be turned off to competitive is not at because of the format (though some may be confused as to how a highlander format was competitive with large teammates, slower gameplay, etc.) but because of Valve's ineptitude in telling players what the fuck competitive TF2 is in the first place. Case in point, the video for the competitive update was 30 seconds of the TF2 characters taunting on a fucking stage instead of something that showcased how fucking cool competitive TF2 is, whatever the format. edit: I am not trying to say that highlander is a bad game mode in and of itself (though I don't personally like it, I'd rather play it than pubs), I just believe that it does not come close to other formats in terms of how close it is to TF2's competitive skill ceiling, and is therefore not nearly as good of an option for TF2's matchmaker

[QUOTE=Blackavar;51629985]TF2 will never compete with CS:GO. TF2 will never compete with DOTA 2. TF2 will never compete with Overwatch. These are facts, and we have to accept them. TF2 has anywhere between 40-70 thousand people online, playing at once. CS:GO and DOTA 2 often have up to 10 times as many people playing at once. There isn't a possible way we can fix that, and it's honestly not a problem. TF2 will forever be a game with a cult following in comparison.[/quote] It's better than all of those games, though. I believe that given the right format and the right treatment by the TF Team, that more people will see that. Pipe dream or whatever, sure, but there you go. CSGO used to be smaller than TF2 was until Valve got their shit together and started giving it the support it deserved. I'm just hoping TF2 will get that, too. [QUOTE]I haven't disagreed that we need 6s to be the main competitive format. But yes, all the classes need balancing. Every class has broken/bad weapons, and many of the classes could use some core changes too. If that ends up making them viable enough to be run fulltime in 6s, so be it. If that ends up making Highlander fast enough to not suck to watch (I still don't get this), that would also be great.[/QUOTE] I agree with fixing things that make certain classes problematic or too weak, but at the same time I don't want every class to be equally viable. For instance, if Spy were buffed to the point of fulltime viability, the class' design would be so changed that it'd lack the challenge and the thrill that made it fun to play to begin with. While I believe in, say, buffing Pyro and Heavy to not being deadweight outside of 6s Last, I also don't believe in buffing them to the point where they're forced to run fulltime (because pacing), and I also don't want to see their original design so tainted that they lose what made them appealing in the first place. [quote]But we need Highlander too. New players want to contribute, but they also want to play their favorite class, something they won't get to do in 6s all the time depending on who their favorite class is.[/quote] I don't think we need Highlander in TF2, but if we are going to have it now is simply not the time. [quote]You still haven't answered the question: "Why do you think real 6s will draw in new players?" Though I think a better question is: "After Valve absolutely failed at bringing us a viable competitive gamemode, why do you think any changes at all will bring new players in?"[/QUOTE] I think real 6s offers the pacing and exposes the true depth of skilled play that's available in TF2 but isn't otherwise exposed by pubs, and is exposed to a lesser extent by Highlander. I also believe with Valve-sponsored 6s tourneys- even just a few- in addition to a relaunch of Competitive Mode that makes it what it was meant to be, that many people will be drawn in by the spectacle and latch on once they see what TF2 can really offer at a high level of play.

[QUOTE=pepetoads;51629988]Personally, I think the biggest reason any casual player would be turned off to competitive is not at because of the format (though some may be confused as to how a highlander format was competitive with large teammates, slower gameplay, etc.) but because of Valve's ineptitude in telling players what the fuck competitive TF2 is in the first place.[/QUOTE]The moment they launched competitive matchmaking Valve decided what "competitive" play would be. 6v6 with no rules whatsoever. Did the already existing (And legitimate) competitive community adopt it? Thankfully not.

[QUOTE=Dreamscape;51630090]The moment they launched competitive matchmaking Valve decided what "competitive" play would be. 6v6 with no rules whatsoever. Did the already existing (And legitimate) competitive community adopt it? Thankfully not.[/QUOTE] Technically they had 9v9 in there as well, which could be highlander. But it was blocked off. Could also just be 9v9 without class limits as well though for all we know.

[QUOTE=Contra132;51630023]It's better than all of those games, though.[/QUOTE] even if i agree, it's a minority opinion. and no, people won't see it, because it won't get popular. it's too old. what old games have made a resurgence that multiplies the active playerbase by a factor of 10? [QUOTE=Contra132;51630023]I agree with fixing things that make certain classes problematic or too weak, but at the same time I don't want every class to be equally viable. For instance, if Spy were buffed to the point of fulltime viability, the class' design would be so changed that it'd lack the challenge and the thrill that made it fun to play to begin with. While I believe in, say, buffing Pyro and Heavy to not being deadweight outside of 6s Last, I also don't believe in buffing them to the point where they're forced to run fulltime (because pacing), and I also don't want to see their original design so tainted that they lose what made them appealing in the first place.[/QUOTE] So, it's thrilling and fun to... play a weaker class? Spy has a lot of potential to be better while keeping the same general design. You of all people should know that. Pyro could make the game significantly faster if balanced properly, and, well, you said you didn't believe in weapon bans for comp mm, so gru + whip heavy often is already rather powerful (not to say he isn't a weak class, because he is, with no method of dodging projectiles or really any fire), so buffing him would only increase the potential for quick rolls. [QUOTE=Contra132;51630023]I don't think we need Highlander in TF2, but if we are going to have it now is simply not the time.[/QUOTE] Well if they never add it, I have a feeling all further changes to matchmaking, no matter how good they are, will still be seen as fixes to a dead gamemode instead of an actual overhaul making it a viable source of competitive play. I also have a feeling comp mm will never be a viable source of competitive play, but that's just my pessimism coming out. [QUOTE=Contra132;51630023]I think real 6s offers the pacing and exposes the true depth of skilled play that's available in TF2 but isn't otherwise exposed by pubs, and is exposed to a lesser extent by Highlander. I also believe with Valve-sponsored 6s tourneys- even just a few- in addition to a relaunch of Competitive Mode that makes it what it was meant to be, that many people will be drawn in by the spectacle and latch on once they see what TF2 can really offer at a high level of play.[/QUOTE] I have a feeling Valve isn't interested in sponsoring tourneys for a 9 year old game that doesn't even peak 100k players at a time for a gamemode that most of the playerbase hasn't even touched. And even then, when they put things in the news tab of teamfortress.com, do most new players even look there? If we wanted such a thing to work, Valve would need the game to be COVERED in advertisements, and even still I doubt it would gain a microscopic blip in views in comparison to a Valve-sponsored CS:GO tourney, etc. tl;dr valve sucks too much for comp mm to ever be good, highlander or not. sucks to suck

[QUOTE=Kitt Stargaze;51630101]Technically they had 9v9 in there as well, which could be highlander. But it was blocked off. Could also just be 9v9 without class limits as well though for all we know.[/QUOTE]Yeah they had 9v9 as an unusable option in the ui during the beta. I was referring to competitive's release in MYM, which did not have the 9v9 format added. (And also removed the greyed out 9v9 checkbox from the ui.)

Making all the classes viable all the time would either make them not fun to play against or copies of other classes. OW does fine without having all the classes viable all the time. It's pretty much set in stone that the generalists are the core of tf2 gameplay. Highlander might do okay as a pub gamemode, but it's not a great competitive gamemode given the difficulty to get 18 people into the same place, communication, and classes being situational. Casters rarely show engineer gameplay as if the engineer is playing right, he is on the edge or out of combat, not in the center. I don't think actual 6s would be bad for new players if it was setup right. While people quickly pick a main, its never really set in stone and a lot of skills transfer over between classes. If it put people of similar skill in games it could be decent. At this point the 6s crowd isn't really any more toxic then the rest of tf2. In the last two months on tf2center I went from 10 lobbies to 90 lobbies joining lobbies with the majority of the players having 300+ lobbies and in a lot of cases where people were toxic, it was totally deserved by the person in question. What did they expect would happen when they joined an American lobby from Europe with little experience and ignored everyone's tips and suggestions as they repeatedly ran in and died in a lobby with people full of experienced players. I'd rather people tell me when I'm being dumb then ignoring it and just playing it when the goal is to win and get better. With similar skill matching there could be more patience, but at the end of the day competitive gamemodes are not friendly to people who don't want to learn and refuse to acknowledge that not all gameplay styles are viable.

[QUOTE=Hell-met;51629733]I'll never believe tf2 can get out of its stagnancy until valve starts balancing shit near weekly.[/QUOTE] This is honestly a severely underrated sentiment. I can't fathom how anybody could accept that a handful of mostly forgettable rebalances once every 7 months could be considered anything beyond a cataclysmic failure on valve's part.

[QUOTE=Punchy;51630163]This is honestly a severely underrated sentiment. I can't fathom how anybody could accept that a handful of mostly forgettable rebalances once every 7 months could be considered anything beyond a cataclysmic failure on valve's part.[/QUOTE] like why don't they just ask us for help why is it always silence on the tf2 page why can't we suggest the actually good rebalances that we often come up with, and why don't they respond to them and add them if they're actually good why can't we have the beta back with all the unlocks as stock weapons so we can playtest weekly rebalances and major updates before they're released so bugs are handled beforehand TF2 could be so much better but Valve just seems to be putting such little effort into it

Unrelated; but it kinda sucks because I want to continue to make content for TF2 but I also feel like I'm a contributor at the one of the worst times possible; as some people are losing interest in the game.

[QUOTE=Rageguy;51630208]Unrelated; but it kinda sucks because I want to continue to make content for TF2 but I also feel like I'm a contributor at the one of the worst times possible; as some people are losing interest in the game.[/QUOTE] By "some people" do you mean the tf2 team?

[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;51630220]By "some people" do you mean the tf2 team?[/QUOTE] Partially the TF2 Team and partially older players or players in general that have lost the interest due to the updates the team is providing. I'm not saying that *every* player is losing interest; but I just feel like I'm a contributor at what seems to be one of TF2's weakest years/points. I really appreciate what the TF team did for the game for the past few years; and I highly appreciate the fact I finally got the chance to have my own work featured. I feel as if updates have lost their charm however. I do appreciate all the things valve has done so far and I would imagine it would be tough to provide more content given the size of their team.

[QUOTE=Punchy;51630163]This is honestly a severely underrated sentiment. I can't fathom how anybody could accept that a handful of mostly forgettable rebalances once every 7 months could be considered anything beyond a cataclysmic failure on valve's part.[/QUOTE] I like how both the Quickfix and the Soda Popper are still insanely overpowered in matchmaking, when they were the two biggest problematic weapons in the beta.

[QUOTE=Blackavar;51630181]like why don't they just ask us for help why is it always silence on the tf2 page why can't we suggest the actually good rebalances that we often come up with, and why don't they respond to them and add them if they're actually good why can't we have the beta back with all the unlocks as stock weapons so we can playtest weekly rebalances and major updates before they're released so bugs are handled beforehand TF2 could be so much better but Valve just seems to be putting such little effort into it[/QUOTE] then fucking email them has anyone worth their salt even tried that? im sure if some prominent figures sent rebalance ideas theyd at least read it like why the fuck does nobody bother to try? there's no negative consequences if you do I think you all have an absurdly wrong perspective of how valve works. they dont read your silly fucking meme forums, contacting them and influencing their decisions isnt about shouting and pissing as loud and far as you can, email them your concerns in volume, they're going to mean something.