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

[QUOTE=Kitt Stargaze;51516609]Technically, Mad Milk and Jarate can be seen as grenades as well...[/QUOTE] But they do not apply direct damage. They give debuffs.

[QUOTE=lateguy;51516621]But they do not apply direct damage. They give debuffs.[/QUOTE] Conc Grenades were a think in QWTF and TFC, neither of which did damage either and only distorted ones vision while launching them far away from the grenade. Flash Grenades in other games are also labeled as Grenades, and all they do is blind those who see it go off. They're all still grenades...

[QUOTE=Kitt Stargaze;51516626]Conc Grenades were a think in QWTF and TFC, neither of which did damage either and only distorted ones vision while launching them far away from the grenade. Flash Grenades in other games are also labeled as Grenades, and all they do is blind those who see it go off. They're all still grenades...[/QUOTE] Fair enough. As for the molotov, i always saw scorch shot as a flare version of it thanks to the radius it has. Of course not including the knockback. Point is it should be different from TFC

I don't see any reason why pyro would not have a throwable weapon. There's throwable weapons with scout, sniper as mentioned too, so making a small throwable for pyro that renders that spot unusuable for a little while and causing fire damage if someone is standing there is just something that could be usable.

[QUOTE=ics;51516642]I don't see any reason why pyro would not have a throwable weapon. There's throwable weapons with scout, sniper as mentioned too, so making a small throwable for pyro that renders that spot unusuable for a little while and causing fire damage if someone is standing there is just something that could be usable.[/QUOTE] All i imagine is a team full of pyros throwing molotovs at a payload. Its not a bad idea but im worried about how it would be executed.

[QUOTE=ics;51516642]I don't see any reason why pyro would not have a throwable weapon. There's throwable weapons with scout, sniper as mentioned too, so making a small throwable for pyro that renders that spot unusuable for a little while and causing fire damage if someone is standing there is just something that could be usable.[/QUOTE] Pyros spam molotovs on cap, enemy team can't block the cap without getting damaged badly. Thus the rest of the pyro's team can just cap without contest since no friendly fire. It'd be incredibly annoying to fight against, on CP and KoTH. Payload at least has wide room for classes like Soldier to defend at a distance. Just pointing that out there. Only way for such a thing to be fair is adding multiple ways to extinguish the flames made from the molotov impact. (Explosions and airblasts come to mind).

[QUOTE=lateguy;51516640]Fair enough. As for the molotov, i always saw scorch shot as a flare version of it thanks to the radius it has. Of course not including the knockback. Point is it should be different from TFC[/QUOTE] I pushed for one a while back as a pyro secondary. Throw the Molotav and it'd make an area around the size of a Point ( the circular disk ) on fire, dealing fire damage and applying afterburn for 3-5 seconds. Has a cool down after being toss like jarate/milk do, maybe different on how long it charges and pyro can swap back to a primary along side the molotav to deal damage in addition. Maybe a longer cool down but Pyro can toss 2 before needing to wait? Cool down would keep it from being spammable on control points to make it too dangerous to try and take them. Same with the short timer to keep it from slowing down the game too much. [QUOTE=X marks it;51516688]Pyros spam molotovs on cap, enemy team can't block the cap without getting damaged badly. Thus the rest of the pyro's team can just cap without contest since no friendly fire. It'd be incredibly annoying to fight against, on CP and KoTH. Payload at least has wide room for classes like Soldier to defend at a distance. Just pointing that out there. Only way for such a thing to be fair is adding multiple ways to extinguish the flames made from the molotov impact. (Explosions and airblasts come to mind).[/QUOTE] I think my molotav wouldn't be that problematic. I don't actually have an issues if pyro's airblasting the fire could get rid of it either. Same with Jarate and/or Mad Milk as well. Pyro actually had a molotav like grenade in QWTF, gimme a sec and I'll show you in all it's glory how shitty it was and why every server used the other variant instead lol. [t]http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/97222190051661223/140CC7A1C123BC30DD4A49244A7F821601A2228F/[/t] Yes, it just shat out fire particles everywhere that were easy to avoid lol. Version 2 of the napalm grenade acted more like a frag grenade, once it "rested" it exploded multiple times, could hit people through walls and applied afterburn. The version every server used because it wasn't complete garbage hah... Also, for the hell of it. That's one of the final versions of 2fort ( specifically 2fort5r ) to come out for the game, but eh.

You guys should really make your own bingo cards not just guess which one of my predictions will be right. ;) [QUOTE=X marks it;51516688] (Explosions and airblasts come to mind).[/QUOTE] I was thinking airblasts, jarate and milk could extinguish it. [editline]12th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=ics;51516642]I don't see any reason why pyro would not have a throwable weapon. There's throwable weapons with scout, sniper as mentioned too, so making a small throwable for pyro that renders that spot unusuable for a little while and causing fire damage if someone is standing there is just something that could be usable.[/QUOTE] I was thinking maybe it would work as a temporary area denial weapon, which is something the pyro doesn't really have and give a different type of playstyle to the pyro.

[QUOTE=ComodoreBluth;51516707]I was thinking maybe it would work as a temporary area denial weapon, which is something the pyro doesn't really have and give a different type of playstyle to the pyro.[/QUOTE] Area denial (for a lot of competitive players) tends to be a big nono. As it [I]'slows down the game'[/I] like Heavy and Engineer being able to deny enemies in a large area if played right, and thus stock engineer is frowned upon in comp and heavy receives nerfs constantly. If the game wasn't taking a big competitive focus lately, I would of been fine with such a weapon if thought was put into balancing it and making it counter able. But everyone prefers a fast-paced, good to stream game rather than a fun to play and well balanced one. And with the running track record of TFTeam's [I]'rebalances'[/I] I have very little faith in such a weapon being well balanced and not brokenly good or absolutely useless.

[QUOTE=lateguy;51516656]All i imagine is a team full of pyros throwing molotovs at a payload. Its not a bad idea but im worried about how it would be executed.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=X marks it;51516688]Pyros spam molotovs on cap, enemy team can't block the cap without getting damaged badly. Thus the rest of the pyro's team can just cap without contest since no friendly fire. It'd be incredibly annoying to fight against, on CP and KoTH. Payload at least has wide room for classes like Soldier to defend at a distance. Just pointing that out there. Only way for such a thing to be fair is adding multiple ways to extinguish the flames made from the molotov impact. (Explosions and airblasts come to mind).[/QUOTE] I was thinking the throwable to be a weapon such as razorback, you have once chance to throw it and that's it. But there is that chance that for example in dustbowl last, the last cp would be burning nearly all the time since people run back and forth to rescue closet. But it wouldn't be an issue koth maps. I guess better idea would be to just change that molotov to just throwable gasoline that breaks and spreads around and pyro could flame that up within 10 seconds or it "dries off". So, you could throw it around like jarate on people or on cp but only lit it up with flaregun or flamethrower. Otherwise it woudln't do any damage.

I hope that, if we get a new campaign with contracts and decorated weapons in the Smissmas update, Valve will accept community contributed skins. Even the most middling of them look nicer and are more fitting than 90% of the ones Valve have made.

[QUOTE=Kitt Stargaze;51516626]Conc Grenades were a think in QWTF and TFC, neither of which did damage either and only distorted ones vision while launching them far away from the grenade. Flash Grenades in other games are also labeled as Grenades, and all they do is blind those who see it go off. They're all still grenades...[/QUOTE] No, they're not grenade, they're respectively Piss and Milk in a JAR.

[QUOTE=ApertureXS200;51517527]No, they're not grenade, they're respectively Piss and Milk in a JAR.[/QUOTE] Molotov isn't a geenade, just sone oil in a bottle. Grenade is also just explosives in a container.

I do wonder if the new Weapon will have an entirely new mechanic or just be "slightly different yet still different" like the iron bomber

[QUOTE=Fluury;51517615]I do wonder if the new Weapon will have an entirely new mechanic or just be "slightly different yet still different" like the iron bomber[/QUOTE] the latter is less likely to break the game. and the best designs are usually the "boring model addons" such as kritz or backburner

[QUOTE=Nebrassy;51517582]Molotov isn't a geenade, just sone oil in a bottle. Grenade is also just explosives in a container.[/QUOTE] by your logic, a coca cola bottle or a milk jug is literally a grenade. What you're saying doesn't make any sense.

[QUOTE=Hell-met;51517758]the latter is less likely to break the game. and the best designs are usually the "boring model addons" such as kritz or backburner[/QUOTE] Well, it's true. I really love the iron bomber and the Quickielauncher, since they are both pretty viable while being not as insane. However Valve's policy with new weapons is to make new weapon equal an entirely different playstyle, which is why they changed the iron bomber and quickie in the first place.

[QUOTE=ApertureXS200;51517767]by your logic, a coca cola bottle or a milk jug is literally a grenade. What you're saying doesn't make any sense.[/QUOTE] No, by definition the mad milk and jarate are grenades. Just googling "grenade definition" brings this up [QUOTE] 1. a small shell containing an explosive and thrown by hand or fired from a rifle or launching device. 2. a similar missile containing a chemical, as for dispersing tear gas or fire-extinguishing substances. [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ApertureXS200;51517767]by your logic, a coca cola bottle or a milk jug is literally a grenade. What you're saying doesn't make any sense.[/QUOTE] He was using your logic, dude.

[QUOTE=Killbane;51517806]No, by definition the mad milk and jarate are grenades. Just googling "grenade definition" brings this up[/QUOTE] What. I can't even believe this definition. Oh well, i'm wrong as i see, sorry for the inconvenience. It's pretty strange.

If a coke bottle or milk jug were to be thrown or modified in a way that enables them to reach a target and subsequently break or release a substance in order to injure or hinder it then yes it can be considered a grenade.

[QUOTE=Fluury;51517789]Well, it's true. I really love the iron bomber and the Quickielauncher, since they are both pretty viable while being not as insane. However Valve's policy with new weapons is to make new weapon equal an entirely different playstyle, which is why they changed the iron bomber and quickie in the first place.[/QUOTE] their first versions weren't different enough to you?

[QUOTE=Hell-met;51517926]their first versions weren't different enough to you?[/QUOTE] Thq quickie certainly wasnt, while imo the Iron was fine. Again, not saying that's an issue, but I can see why valve changed them.

if anything they made the quickie more similar to stock than before by removing the vanish timer. unless holding down mouse1 at the floor counts as a playstyle

[QUOTE=Contra132;51512971]and like other idiots who talk vaguely about wanting X to great again, you have only a vague idea of what the actual problems in TF2 are and falsely-assign blame to parties (Competitive players)and like other idiots who talk vagu that serve as easy targetsely about wanting X to great again, you have only a vague idea of what the actual problems in TF2 are and falsely-assign blame to parties (Competitive players) and implementations (weapon skins) that serve as easy targets[/QUOTE] Regarding weapon skins he does have a valid point. Prior to gun mettle specular maps were not used to give detail aside from dictating reflectivity on models. If a model were to have scratches on it they would have to be created through the base texture. Gun Mettle changed this logic and added scratches to specular maps, where they previously did not exist and the art style did not allow. This was a major art style change/break akin to lime and pink paint, which the original art style also did not allow. Breaking the logic and use behind specular maps shows how little the tf team cares about preserving the original content and intent that TF2 launched on. We have seen this mind set in a few other mechanics recently, notably the bison "bug fix" and the entire bastardization of casual matchmaking. [QUOTE=Oizen;51513561]Casual had better quality matches for like, 2-3 days. then they went to shit.[/QUOTE] Casual had a lot of potential as a new way to play TF2, notably as a more competitive 12v12 pub with some competitive rules, but the TF team has made terrible decisions regarding it. Here are the following ways Casual launched and the experience it intended to provide. [QUOTE=Casual Matchmaking TF Blog]Matchmaking is also changing the way TF2 can be played casually. Now, instead of jumping randomly into an in-progress game, you'll be matched into an unranked 12v12 game with players of similar skill. This means no more auto-balancing—you'll be playing a match from start to finish, with actual winners and actual losers. [/QUOTE] From this statement we can discern the experience casual promised and quickplay did not. 1. You will play a match from start to finish. (You likely won't.) 2. You'll be matched into a 12v12 game. (Not true. The matchmaker was updated to start with a minimum of 6v6. Probably a good change though to reduce queue times.) 3. An unranked game "with players of similar skill." (A blatant lie on many levels. The entire point of being unranked is to not have any ranking system. Anyone who has played casual knows being matched with players of similar skill is not true.) 4. This means no more auto-balancing—you'll be playing a match from start to finish, with actual winners and actual losers. (I don't really consider winning a 12v5 to make me an actual winner.) Casual had a lot of promise to be a more competitive pub and I think that its introduction was a great idea. Some players would like a more competitive pub without autobalancing and late match joining and don't like the alienating rules of normal competitive play. Valve's biggest mistake was removing Quickplay. This upset players whose way of playing tf2 (Joining friends in a game, voting for a new map, being able to swap teams, dropping into a game in progress, etc.) was completely removed. Instead of giving legitimate casual players what they wanted, which was Quickplay, they decided to attempt to appease legitimate casual players by completely bastardizing the intent of casuals launch, which was at the expense of players who wanted to play pub tf2 more seriously. It may have been Valve's intent to give a system providing the best of both but it ended up producing a system combining the worst aspects of both. I would absolutely love a more competitive pub, and casual made great progress, but their horrible decision to remove Quickplay caused true casual players to become upset which in turn led to Valve removing the core principles and experience that was the entire point of casuals launch. Until Valve realizes this we will probably be stuck with this awful state of the casual system failing to satisfy two different players needs instead of two great different systems properly satisfying two different needs. TL:DR? Casual was a great addition to TF2 but the removal of Quickplay was a big mistake. Instead of Valve giving true casual players what they wanted (Quickplay), they decided to update Casual to suit their needs at the expense of players who wanted a more competitive pub to play on. Now both players don't have a way of playing tf2 how they enjoyed playing the game.

[QUOTE=Dreamscape;51518006]Regarding weapon skins he does have a valid point. Prior to gun mettle specular maps were not used to give detail aside from dictating reflectivity on models. If a model were to have scratches on it they would have to be created through the base texture. Gun Mettle changed this logic and added scratches to specular maps, where they previously did not exist and the art style did not allow.[/quote] the art style doesn't allow...scratches? when the stock weapons already have scratches on them already? ok, dude. [quote]This was a major art style change/break akin to lime and pink paint, which the original art style also did not allow.[/quote] TF2's art style has been dead since Demopan became a thing, and honestly outside of the [B]super[/B] obnoxious paints and skins, most things in the game still look perfectly fine. Super-tight theming had to be lost so this game could continue to support itself through cosmetics. I'd rather have current TF2 than a TF2 that died around when the F2P update originally hit because we couldn't maintain enough of an audience to justify continuing to support the game. [quote]Breaking the logic and use behind specular maps shows how little the tf team cares about preserving the original content and intent that TF2 launched on.[/quote] not really. they found a new use for a feature. [quote]We have seen this mind set in a few other mechanics recently, notably the bison "bug fix" and the entire bastardization of casual matchmaking.[/quote] the bison's pass-through-same-person-multiple-times thing was always a glitch, and it was only in the game as hint text because those were contributed by the TF2 Wiki additionally, I read a while back that the bison was "fixed", not because the bison itself was broken or anything, but because it actually did fire damage (hence its ability to light huntsman arrows). direct fire damage, coincidentally, had the added attribute of greatly reducing heal rate from mediguns. running theory I've heard is that this is why the bison was changed- even though it was a very minor glitch and the weapon still isn't all that powerful. [quote]TL:DR? Casual was a great addition to TF2 but the removal of Quickplay was a big mistake. Instead of Valve giving true casual players what they wanted (Quickplay), they decided to update Casual to suit their needs at the expense of players who wanted a more competitive pub to play on. Now both players don't have a way of playing tf2 how they enjoyed playing the game.[/QUOTE] quickplay was always garbage and I'm glad it's dead all casual needs is the ability to do ad-hoc connections off friends, opt-out rematch (instead of opt-in), end-game map-vote (a la CSGO's own Casual) and an autobalance that only activates when there's a severe player disadvantage for X amount of time. bam, casual is now better than quickplay ever was. as far as the "pub server" experience goes, community servers have always been a superior option, and as long as Casual stays in its own fucking lane and out of the server browser, I'm hoping some improvements to said server browser brings more traffic toward community servers in the future. (before anyone says- I'm not going to take Exor's friend-of-a-friend-heard-this thing as fact until I see the next update.)

Anyone having problems joining comp or casual? It says 0 players nearby are in games.

[QUOTE=Ace_Rimmer;51519030]Anyone having problems joining comp or casual? It says 0 players nearby are in games.[/QUOTE] TF2 Service is on "normal" - so should work fine.

[QUOTE=Fluury;51519045]TF2 Service is on "normal" - so should work fine.[/QUOTE] I asked a guy in my friendslist and he can't either. And im playing with a mate and it's the same for him :S

[QUOTE=Contra132;51518143]the art style doesn't allow...scratches? when the stock weapons already have scratches on them already? ok, dude. [/QUOTE]The TF artstyle [B]does[/B] allow scratches. The original artstyle allowed them through [B]texture maps[/B], not [B]specular maps[/B]. Ask any workshop artist or anyone who has experience with graphic design what the difference is. There is a big difference between both implementation and in game appearance. [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specularity[/url] AFAIK before gun mettle specular scratches did not exist on weapons by default. Some update enabled them by default. Correct me if I am wrong. [QUOTE=Contra132;51518143]they found a new use for a feature. [/QUOTE]Not true at all. Specular maps have been used and employed for quite some time in game design. If the current team really didn't know that they could introduce detail via specular maps then they are complete morons and have little knowledge of graphic design. Considering Valve is one of the best and innovative game developers in the entire world I highly doubt they would hire graphic artist with no knowledge of such a basic graphical mechanic. [QUOTE=Contra132;51518143] TF2's art style has been dead since Demopan became a thing, and honestly outside of the [B]super[/B] obnoxious paints and skins, most things in the game still look perfectly fine. Super-tight theming had to be lost so this game could continue to support itself through cosmetics. I'd rather have current TF2 than a TF2 that died around when the F2P update originally hit because we couldn't maintain enough of an audience to justify continuing to support the game.[/QUOTE] The addition of cosmetics had a lot of merits including what you have mentioned. However cosmetics had many, many other reasons for their addition to the game. Firstly team fortress 2 is a casual game where in game roles and mechanics are designed to be intertwined with players relationships to each other. One core principle is player identification. When you play TF2 you are not playing with random strangers, you are playing with actual people. (One example being the kill feed showing players names.) Valve saw how classes in a game could be used to show players value judgements and they decided to focus on making tf2 a casual game where players could learn about each other through value judgements. By playing as the soldier you are showing other players that you value playing soldier. By playing a class the team needs you are showing other players more about your personality, in this case that you enjoy attempting to win and help the team do so. Cosmetics were added as they both increased player identification (You could identify players via their cosmetics.) but it also showcases even more value judgements, a core principle of the game. By wearing hats you are showing other players what hats you think look good. This means you can learn more about other players playing with you by seeing what they value. The system gets even deeper with levels, again by seeing a lv 100 item collector you can discern that they value level 100 cosmetics/items. By seeing a players painted cosmetics you can see that they both value a cosmetic and a certain color/appearance of it. You can also discern that they care enough about team fortress 2 to even procure a hat and paint to change its color. A player with god tier unusuals, australiums, stranges, killstreaks, players can discern that they care about tf2 greatly, they love the game enough to spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars on the game. I wrote a post a while back containing more information about how value judgements, cosmetics, respawn times, classes, and quickplay provided more information into players value judgements. I will link it if I can find it. [QUOTE=Contra132;51518143] the bison's pass-through-same-person-multiple-times thing was always a glitch, and it was only in the game as hint text because those were contributed by the TF2 Wiki additionally, I read a while back that the bison was "fixed", not because the bison itself was broken or anything, but because it actually did fire damage (hence its ability to light huntsman arrows). direct fire damage, coincidentally, had the added attribute of greatly reducing heal rate from mediguns. running theory I've heard is that this is why the bison was changed- even though it was a very minor glitch and the weapon still isn't all that powerful. [/QUOTE] Even if it was a bug hitting multiple targets was one of the most interesting mechanics of the weapon. No other soldier weapon had the punishing power against retreating enemies the bison had. It was a unique weapon with unique attributes, even if one of its greatest was a bug. Perhaps I am wrong and it was a bug. Did it really need to be fixed though? Regarding fire damage that could have been a bug as it used particles to deal damage. The Christmas 2015 update buffing flamethrowers at range in-advertantly buffed long range bison shots. [QUOTE=Contra132;51518143] quickplay was always garbage and I'm glad it's dead [/QUOTE] Quickplay was designed to further enhance players value judgements and enhance the effectiveness of other systems (waved respawn times, the cosmetic system to name two). By voting to extend the map you are showing other players that you value the current map. By voting to scramble the teams in an unbalanced situation you are showing other players that you value balanced matches. Casual would have enhanced tf2's value based judgements by adding more depth to it. By playing casual you are showing other players that you value a more competitive pub. [QUOTE=Contra132;51518143] all casual needs is the ability to do ad-hoc connections off friends, opt-out rematch (instead of opt-in), end-game map-vote (a la CSGO's own Casual) and an autobalance that only activates when there's a severe player disadvantage for X amount of time. bam, casual is now better than quickplay ever was. [/QUOTE]This is breaking many of the core principles that casual launched on. Casual was not to have autobalance, or mid game connections to encourage "actual winners and losers." Making these changes is turning it into Quickplay, Casual was launched to offer a [B]different[/B] experience to Quickplay, not the same. [QUOTE=Contra132;51518143] quickplay was always garbage and I'm glad it's dead [/QUOTE] Earlier in your post you made a point that Team Fortress 2's cosmetics provide value to the developers as it provides them capital to update the game. Yet you are also ok with removing the primary way players play Team Fortress 2? Even if you hate Quickplay and never use it you do actually benefit from its existence. If players enjoy playing TF2 and spend money on it it gives Valve capital that they can use for further development of the game. Players spending money on hats encourages artists to create hats for TF2 for [B]you [/B]to wear, which creates more hats for players to spend money on. (Further adding to the core principle of value judgements as a core tf2 mechanic.) Valve can use this money to add new mechanics (contracts.) fund tournaments, and hire staff to balance weapons along with creating Valve updates. Removing Quickplay caused a lot of players to quit the game as they no longer enjoy it. If a player does [B]not like the game[/B] then they will [B]not spend money on it[/B] because [B]they will not be playing it[/B] which means that the developers have [B]less money[/B] to update the game for [B]your enjoyment[/B]. As you enjoy playing competitively I am sure you would appreciate Valve sponsored tournaments as it could have [B]prize money[/B] for [B]you[/B] to win. Yet removing Quickplay removed a source of capital Valve gained from "filthy casuals" to update the game, fund tournaments, investigate balance, pay artists, and study mechanics. Lets also keep in mind that players who don't enjoy the game are less likely to try competitive, who are players you are likely to compete against. Are you really still ok with removing Quickplay? Contra, I am not trying to be rude to you so my apologies if it comes off that way. I am just attempting to explain some economic principles that many would not understand since they don't have the time to study economics. Even if players hate Quickplay and never used it, they got a hell of a lot of value out of it by other players who enjoyed it, not value from directly playing with them, but value in that it provided Valve capital to improve the game for [B]everyone's[/B] benefit; Quickplay pubbers, streamers, content artists, youtubers, Valve itself, tournaments, etc.