If a competitive side to this game does take off...

Skill gives an "unfair" advantage because you can't rule skill out. If there is an unbeatable team-setup it'll be found some time and then we can think about limits, that point in time is not anywhere near now

I can get on board with Grimbar. Like I said, give it time and place harsh restrictions if they are needed.

My original idea was that highlander seems perfectly suited to this game, and it would ensure that:

A. Every class gets used
B. The game doesn't become dominated by one or two tactics

Which are two major problems with competitive TF2. (Yeah sure, it works in TF2, but 50% of the game's content is completely ignored)

It also ensures that as both teams are using the same line up then the ONLY variable will be skill. Which is what a competitive shooter should be about.

Not everyone uses every single weapon in Quake, your argument is invalid.

No, but everyone in quake has the same movement speed, jump height/length, and access to all the same weapons.

Anyway a large part of Quake (especially 1v1) is having control of the pickups to try and make sure that you have all the best ones and your opponent doesn't. The game was intentionally designed like that. In TF2 3-4 out of 9 classes are NEVER used in a competitive match, which isn't the way the game was designed.

(Oh and completely unrelated, is your avatar the PSG from Warrock?)

My Avatar is the regular Heckler and Koch PSG

Access is a nice term, is there anything that hinders you from picking a class in MNC? The answer is no. Is there anything that hinders you from switching class to accomodate a lack in composition? No there isn't provided you're not shallow enough to fail the economics in this game.

I've played more than enough TF2 to know that all classes are used, sure there is the standard rollout that about every low clan does for all eternity but there are reasons for that: their use is situational, just like the quake weapons (map control is a factor that doesn't concern weapon usage) are situational, just like the Pros are situational.

A Spy is good for breaking defense on last
A Pyro is good for defending the more confined last points
A Heavy is a point of focus
An Engineer is hilarious on any portion of the map (shoutouts to G1deon for being the best Engineer in all of EU)

I could list the use for the Quake weapons but this doesn't add anything.

My point stands.

What about overtime, juice, and juice buying?

1. Sure
2. No.
3. + An initial warmup round. This was needed previously due to the fact that most teams could not be set up fast enough in the before round timer, so a quick warmup match was played where all teams were just left as they were. The next would be played normally. This is probably unnecessary if a "ready function" is implemented.

Also I believe that BCN has had scrims without overtime, typically 20 minutes long, and juice/bullseye enabled. Considering the complaints around juice buying, it may be a necessity to remove the spawners (however much I disagree with it, since I think it's a core gameplay mechanic.) Bullseye/FRUIT F*****!!!! should stay as they create a new objective on the map, and change up the routine of the round. This is fine.

I'm definitely opposed to OT for competitive. Too often it lends itself to crazy undeserved comebacks. Juice should be turned on but I'm open to opinions on whether or not juice buying should be enabled. I agree 100 % with Zanarias in keeping Bullseye and Fruit ****** though.

I doubt everyone will come to a consensus about class restrictions so we may need to have two separate ladders: perhaps one unrestricted (or limit 2~3) and the other highlander style (there can only be one!)

I'm still fully for Highlander in theory, but I'd like to play with more relaxed limits too so that I can actually see what's more fun and more balanced.

Juice - Yes unless it proves to be OP. IMO it's a pretty key game mechanic.

Juice buying - Initially I'm thinking no, but this could lead to interesting strategies where teams are forced to manage the money of the entire team, have one guy set aside to have enough for the annihilator, people who buy turrets, people who buy juice and people who spawn extra bots - all based on class of course (which is another reason why I think highlander would be great... but nobody else seems to agree with me on that one)

Overtime - Not needed if it's going to be best of 3 anyway.

Mascots - Yeah. No reason why not.

Let overtime stay, teams rarely reach that anyway unless there is some supreme trench war going on, overtime solves these things. This is not pub where overtime will most likely end due to hidden assassin throwing shurikens all over the moneyball.

Juice buying should stay, team economics is a factor that should be practiced by people (and it's not as simple as "you save for turrets, I save for this")

To rephrase what I implied throughout this thread. There should be no arbitrary rules or limitations before we haven't carefully and thoroughly evaluated the current "meta"-game (as much as I dislike that term).

Throwing in rules now is nothing but short-sightedness without having any kind of data to back that up, and that would be a shame.

Highlander in TF2 is 9v9 not 6v6 so every class did get used. It's very boring and slow paced, hardly anyone enjoyed it. Forcing every team to use same comp will get stale VERY quickly in this game as well.

Not sure how I feel about juice buying, it'd be like having instant uber in TF2 without building for it.

That comparison is flawed since you need money to purchase juice which you get through either waiting (which is pretty much what the Medic does in TF2) or through doing something which helps your team. For example: killing stuff.

http://www.ugcleague.com/rosters_tf2h.cfm

That seems like quite a few people signed up for something that "hardly anyone enjoys". And that's just one single league...

ESEA or ETF2L are pretty much the only leagues people actually give a damn about (sorry aussies, you're too isolated to count. Love pv though)

On the xbox, most competitive matches are default rules and the best teams contain: 1 assassin, 1 sniper, 2 assaults and a support or tank.

40oz just played Bacon again, we used the same rules and I think they're good.

15 minute round/2 minute OT
Limit 2 of each class (sorry BCN we didn't mean to limit Assassin to 1)
No Juice Buying

The game is very enjoyable without Juice becoming spammable. Even in pubs I see a lot of games where, when the players can stay alive, it actually gets TOO JUICY.



Also and on a slightly related note, we've played GrenIII and AmmoMule so far and they both seem well-suited to comp. I feel pretty strongly that Spunky Cola is an awful map, the single lane dynamic is so predictable and therefore abusable. Tank pushing is an almost completely reliable way to push on Spunky, instead of using it in conjunction with the Annihilator (aka requiring more teamwork and adding more dynamics/complex elements).

My observations right now are that Assassin feels balanced now, and I'd like to see the other turrets buffed to compete with Rockets. With no variety in turrets this game can get pretty stale for the offense.

I have been a comp tf2 player for almost 3 years, and it is really obvious you know nothing at all about it. First, every class, at times is used, just most of the classes are very highly situational.

Now I'm an aussie comp tf2 player, not sure about other leagues, but in ours their is like 6 weapons banned, that is hardly 50% of the content, I see what you are saying about it not being used but that is simply because it is more situational and not as useful, not because it cannot be used. As others have said, most people find highlander gets extremely stale after a short amount of time.

Your second point is what led me to realise how you know absolutely nothing about comp tf2, their are a very large amount of strats you can run in comp tf2, so it is obvious that you have never played it.

Also on a more MNC related note, how would limiting the classes to 1 make the game have a more diverse amount of "tactics", when everyone is locked into specific positions, like you assume about TF2 as well. If anything having no limits would add more diversity to the gameplay. And its funny how you contradict yourself, saying that their needs to be a diverse amount of "tactics" but the only variable should be skill.

Oh well, probly just wasting my time.

3. - Best of 3, using a different map for each round (either randomly selected or chosen by teams, whatever)

1. Yes
2. No, standard team formats will eventually come about there is no point limiting the game to one of each role.
3. Yes, possibly first two maps chosen by teams then third random?

What has this got to do with anything regarding how many players MNC will fill? just because of the 6v6 format? That's like saying cs is a 5v5 game that fields players for hours a day therefore every game with that format should, invalid argument.

The game may seem like TF2 but its not the same game and has a different playerbase i do however agree the format should be 6v6.

An earlier argument was 5on5 because it's supposedly easier to schedule, my comparison to TF2 was valid in that regard, have a nice day.