Final Major Update Speculation V37 - This is the last MUS thread. Speculate in General Chat. - Games

[QUOTE=Robot Agent;52407021]200 ref isn't really worth even the cheapest unusual, also, this would make unusuals worth less, since it would cause inflation.[/QUOTE] But eventually refined would become worth enough that it would be cheaper to just buy the keys with the refined [editline]27th June 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=ikes;52407046]can i use a collector's scrap metal to make an unusual weapon[/QUOTE] sure why not

All this talk about metal made me wonder: Why do metal still take a backpack slot per unit instead of stacking on the same slot?

[QUOTE=Drury;52407022]The problem with class limits isn't that it's not a solution, it's that it's a crummy solution. It's like fixing a flat tire by filling it with cement. Amazing solution, never going to have that problem again, right?[/quote] I mean...the problem solved by class limits is class-stacking and its associated balance issues. So, yes, it is an amazing solution to the problem, because it literally eradicates it. [QUOTE]long and complex solutions for the problem[/QUOTE] Or...and hear me out here...we could just go for the simple version that doesn't make the game any more confusing than it already is, and will only minimally impact player experience? [quote]Menu tweaks could go a long way. Overwatch-style "game telling you what to play" system is often mentioned. It's a bit on the side of class limits in that the game is telling you how to play it rather than just letting you play it, but meh at least it's not restrictive.[/QUOTE] overwatch has a class limit of 1 in quickplay and competitive alike, after they came to the (right) conclusion that the game played better for it bad example to provide in an argument against class limits, since overwatch is a better game for it. the downsides of class limits are minimal, especially in comparison to the upsides provided by it.

[QUOTE=JackingApples;52407071]All this talk about metal made me wonder: Why do metal still take a backpack slot per unit instead of stacking on the same slot?[/QUOTE] Because you have keys, Valve looks at it being like "Dude, a key is worth like 30 ref, just use that instead of stacking ref in one slot" and never look at it again.

Always wondered what would happen if they did something like the golden wrench where crafting a hat had the extremely rare chance of crafting a special weapon. Say, maybe a Silver variant of aussies perhaps or a skinned weapon? At least on par with the unboxing rate of an usual to get one of these weapons. Maybe less since metal is still a "free" source, which would also mean the special weapons would also stay rarer for much longer... I've always wanted silver varients of weapons as well, even more so then gold/australium...

[QUOTE=Contra132;52407091]I mean...the problem solved by class limits is class-stacking and its associated balance issues. So, yes, it is an amazing solution to the problem, because it literally eradicates it.[/quote] No, the balance issues still exist, you just swept them under a rug. [QUOTE=Contra132;52407091]Or...and hear me out here...we could just go for the simple version that doesn't make the game any more confusing than it already is, and will only minimally impact player experience?[/QUOTE] I thought my suggestions would be quite intuitive in practice. I did a horrible job explaining them since I made them up as I went, but I hope I got the point through. Fix the problems rather than limiting players from playing the game because it's made too shittily to allow them.

[QUOTE=Contra132;52407091]I mean...the problem solved by class limits is class-stacking and its associated balance issues. So, yes, it is an amazing solution to the problem, because it literally eradicates it. Or...and hear me out here...we could just go for the simple version that doesn't make the game any more confusing than it already is, and will only minimally impact player experience? overwatch has a class limit of 1 in quickplay and competitive alike, after they came to the (right) conclusion that the game played better for it bad example to provide in an argument against class limits, since overwatch is a better game for it. the downsides of class limits are minimal, especially in comparison to the upsides provided by it.[/QUOTE] overwatch also has 4 viable healers, so if one retard is playing Mercy you can still play lucio, ana, or zenyatta in TF2, if some dumbass who doesnt know "how does shoot??" locks the medic and doesnt know how to open the class selection menu, congrats fucker you've lost the game

[QUOTE=ikes;52407167]overwatch also has 4 viable healers, so if one retard is playing Mercy you can still play lucio, ana, or zenyatta in TF2, if some dumbass who doesnt know "how does shoot??" locks the medic and doesnt know how to open the class selection menu, congrats fucker you've lost the game[/QUOTE] then make the class limit 2? Anything to 2 works in Pubs, and anything over shouldnt be needed. That way, even if you have maksim.degronavez13 on medic, someone else can take his place. I'd also much rather take him on med than have 6 of them on spy.

[QUOTE=Fluury;52407179]then make the class limit 2? Anything to 2 works in Pubs, and anything over shouldnt be needed. That way, even if you have maksim.degronavez13 on medic, someone else can take his place. I'd also much rather take him on med than have 6 of them on spy.[/QUOTE] except then you're not even fixing the "issue" of class stacking. most stacking strategies dont need more than two of the same class anyways, and wasting two slots of a 12-player team on spies and another two on snipers is still a detriment

[QUOTE=ikes;52407167]overwatch also has 4 viable healers, so if one retard is playing Mercy you can still play lucio, ana, or zenyatta in TF2, if some dumbass who doesnt know "how does shoot??" locks the medic and doesnt know how to open the class selection menu, congrats fucker you've lost the game[/QUOTE] Probably should've specified that I meant a class limit of 2, as I've stated in previous posts on this topic. [QUOTE=ikes;52407183]except then you're not even fixing the "issue" of class stacking. most stacking strategies dont need more than two of the same class anyways,[/quote] you've clearly never seen a four-stack of engies on any ctf map or payload last point. engie-stacking works based on sheer numbers, not any prevalence of strategy or skill. [quote]and wasting two slots of a 12-player team on spies and another two on snipers is still a detriment[/QUOTE] still better significantly better than what we have right now. that's eight remaining players still basically required to play a useful class.

My money's on the 29th.

Is a deadweight sniper a deadweight because they're a sniper? Will they cease being deadweights if they are no longer sniper? [QUOTE=Contra132;52407091] the downsides of class limits are minimal, especially in comparison to the upsides provided by it.[/QUOTE] Removing player choice is far from minimal. Imagine booting up TF2 to relax and play some MvM. You try to select it, but get denied because too many players are playing MvM. Looking at the big picture, restricting a gamemode is different from restricting a class. But to the user, it's very much the same: they can't play what they want to. Remember autobalance? That's forcing the user to do something whether or not they like it for the sake of balance. It's the simple solution to the teams being different sizes: move players from one team to the other until they're even. Currently we have a more complex solution which asks the users if they want to switch and tries to find more players looking for a game. Which one is more efficient? Which one do players prefer?

[QUOTE=Blade Rx69;52407251]tries to find more players looking for a game.[/QUOTE] i don't think i've ever seen a new player join a casual game when the system is looking for more people when a bunch of players ragequit. the system really doesn't work at making games "balanced". yet for some reason i often end up in games right before they finish

[QUOTE=Blade Rx69;52407251]Remember autobalance? That's forcing the user to do something whether or not they like it for the sake of balance. It's the simple solution to the teams being different sizes: move players from one team to the other until they're even. Currently we have a more complex solution which asks the users if they want to switch and tries to find more players looking for a game. Which one is more efficient? Which one do players prefer?[/QUOTE] Actually most people I know seem to miss autobalance now, especially since nobody ever switches over if they're on the winning team. One sided Casual games remain quite common despite the implementation of this system. Additionally, community servers have long found the secret to good autobalance: implementing it between games instead of shuffling everyone around mid-game. Additionally, setting Casual apart further from stock TF2 in a way that encourages some teamwork will encourage players who goof off to hop on a community server instead.

[QUOTE=Blade Rx69;52407251]Which one is more efficient? Which one do players prefer?[/QUOTE] I have to admit autobalance is way better than what we have right now, on a pub nearly nobody wants to help out balancing the teams

[QUOTE=Contra132;52407266]Actually most people I know seem to miss autobalance now, especially since nobody ever switches over if they're on the winning team. One sided Casual games remain quite common despite the implementation of this system. Additionally, community servers have long found the secret to good autobalance: implementing it between games instead of shuffling everyone around mid-game. Additionally, setting Casual apart further from stock TF2 in a way that encourages some teamwork will encourage players who goof off to hop on a community server instead.[/QUOTE] i think the game should just scramble the teams every round, trying to give each team an even distribution of players with high points/high rank

[QUOTE=Contra132;52407266]Actually most people I know seem to miss autobalance now, especially since nobody ever switches over if they're on the winning team. One sided Casual games remain quite common despite the implementation of this system. Additionally, community servers have long found the secret to good autobalance: implementing it between games instead of shuffling everyone around mid-game. Additionally, setting Casual apart further from stock TF2 in a way that encourages some teamwork will encourage players who goof off to hop on a community server instead.[/QUOTE] nobody misses autobalance, people just dont like the current solution to it because it's functionally weak in comparison

[QUOTE=ikes;52407183]except then you're not even fixing the "issue" of class stacking. most stacking strategies dont need more than two of the same class anyways, and wasting two slots of a 12-player team on spies and another two on snipers is still a detriment[/QUOTE] You can deal with two sentries on barn last. After 2 it becomes insane. You can deal with 2 Heavies. After 2 it becomes insane. (Keep in mind we are talking Pubs.) 4 Tards doing nothing on Sniper and Spy is still better than 7. You seeing the point of this? The issue is both that class stacking can be cheap and stupid, and that new players are often fond of being the 5th sniper. Both are fixed by limiting it to 2.

[QUOTE=ikes;52407287]nobody misses autobalance, people just dont like the current solution to it because it's functionally weak in comparison[/QUOTE] There are quite a lot who are missing it, just because you dont like it doesnt mean nobody likes it.

[QUOTE=Robot Agent;52407117]Because you have keys, Valve looks at it being like "Dude, a key is worth like 30 ref, just use that instead of stacking ref in one slot" and never look at it again.[/QUOTE] Then there are people saving up for a Gold pan, like me. 250 keys takes up so much room, let alone what 1000 would be like. On that note... what if there was a Gold fire axe added in the update? Like the Gold wrench, but tradable.

[QUOTE=BanthaFodder;52404274]See I can deal with the explanation we got in Meet the Pyro, since it's essentially just "this lunatic thinks they're doing the right thing when as far as anyone else is concerned, they're the most monstrous of all" done in a more comical way. Heck, I even think the Magical Mercenary is pretty funny, just because of those great voicelines. But I'd be lying if I said I didn't feel the bile rise in my throat whenever I see a Scout (it's always a Scout) running around with a set named, painted, and decal'd after Pinkle-Dinkle's Marshmallow Bumhole. They introduced that shit at exactly the wrong time (or exactly the right time, if you look at it from the perspective of people looking to make a quick buck off the Brony meme).[/QUOTE] [T]https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/857222840949730916/5A7D857C552BBF2E199FF2BFF56F7C8BD02BACF5/[/T]

[QUOTE=Contra132;52407207]you've clearly never seen a four-stack of engies on any ctf map or payload last point. engie-stacking works based on sheer numbers, not any prevalence of strategy or skill.[/QUOTE] But does a 4-stack of engies work [I]everywhere[/I]? On an open part of the map where sentries are easy to expoit, stacking engies is just asking to get steamrolled over that point. If we balanced engie to have more viable weaknesses in these closer-quarters situations, stacking engies would be just as unviable as anywhere else if the enemy was able to exploit them. Mess with sentry knockback to prevent stacked sentry fire from being too problematic for Ubers. Mess with nobuild boundaries to prevent some troublesome quirk spots from being abused. Lower the effectiveness of team-healing buildings to prevent high levels of tanking. Rebalance weapons that contribute to this problem, such as the Rescue Ranger and the Wrangler. Perhaps we could also work to redeisgn the maps at those trouble spots. etc. Such that stacking engies would only be viable if the enemy team wasen't fielding classes capable of being effective against engies. [QUOTE]still better significantly better than what we have right now. that's eight remaining players still basically required to play a useful class.[/QUOTE] And if the situationally useful class is occupied? A countersniper would be nice to hit the PITA sniper on the enemy team, but our snipers are occupied by a huntsman and a fresh-install who can't aim. A spy would be useful to soften the Nest pre-push, but our Spies are a C&D waiting in the corner, and the poor sod who uncloaks for a failstab, and gets demolished. An engie would be useful to get teleports and linebacking, but our engies are a last-pointer, and a combat engie who's too focused on plopping minis to provide that support. Short of kicking them, what is there you can do to ensure that role is properly utilized?

The best way to fix metal sink is to remove UNIQUE weapon unlocks from the game (aka make them accessable like any stock weapons) -> no more weapon drops -> no more metal will be generated [sp]*cough* "hat drops"[/sp] Ok, but you may say: "Some people have a 'money' put into those." Well, Valve can make it so that those weapons wouldn't just dissapear, but will be automatically converted into metal / vintages (why not?). [QUOTE=Doodle966;52407420]7.99 $ Bison[/QUOTE] That's a comedy and drama gold at the same time somehow...

[QUOTE=Jhejh poT;52407410]The best way to fix metal sink is to remove UNIQUE weapon unlocks from the game (aka make them accessable like any stock weapons) -> no more weapon drops -> no more metal will be generated [sp]*cough* "hat drops"[/sp] Ok, but you may say: "Some people have a 'money' put into those." Well, Valve can make it so that those weapons wouldn't just dissapear, but will be automatically converted into metal / vintages (why not?).[/QUOTE] Yup, but then they have to remove the 7.99 $ Bison from the mann co store

So why does VNN think the update is this week? If it does happen, I guess Thursday is the last possible day the update could drop?

For the key maker tool to work, it would have to be a lower price than the price for a key directly, have some special quality that makes it better than a normal key, or keys would have to be removed from the store from being bought directly. If I was given the choice of buying a loaf of bread for 2.50 or a mass of raw dough for 2.50 which i would then need to bake, I would definitely save the time and effort baking and just buy the loaf outright, unless the dough had some sort of bonus. I will say though, it feels very "in-character" for Hale to say something like "We found it cheaper to manufacture the machines used to make keys than to make keys themselves, especially since we don't have to pay for the raw material."

[QUOTE=Ace of Butts;52407500]So why does VNN think the update is this week? If it does happen, I guess Thursday is the last possible day the update could drop?[/QUOTE] Either today or thursday, When you mean this week

VNN is just another dude - his speculation has the same worth as any other member of the community. While I'd jump circles and have a stroke of happiness if tonight or thursday was the night, I wouldn't expect it, personally. The 6th on the other hand...

Yeah we better settle down now and just wait, since there's not much info to base those predictions out of

[QUOTE=tekt;52404779]So, every so often I see people referring to the "invasion disaster" and how it was an absolute shitfest. Where can I find info on this?[/QUOTE] [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLg8Ekn08fM[/url]