Sign-Ups for The Escapist's TF2 Tournament now live

[Spinwhiz]

I'm kind of surprised by the tournament format. It seems that you're running a certain number of Chicago based servers for the matches? Why not let the server config be open so folks running their own servers can run their matches at their leisure? Just require demos to be submitted with win/loss results.

Also, 5v5 seems like a weird choice. The staple of the TF2 competitive community is 6v6 with unlocks (except the Sandman) allowed.

The 5v5 is a twist to the usual, that is for sure but I wanted something different and to level the playing field as much as possible. If we had said 6v6, then there would be an unfair advantage to those who play in those tournaments. Changing the setup by just one person changes strategy just enough to be different, without taking away from the game.

 

[VoyagerI]

May I make a few suggestions?

1. Crits should really be off if you're going to be handing out prizes. It's one thing to go on a RNG-enabled killing spree in a pub where your victims can just laugh it off, and something else entirely to lose several hundred dollars worth of hardware because your Medic got killed by a crit scattergun from halfway across the mid point. No league has been successful with crits enabled, regardless of format and even when catering to the most casual of players who can be bothered to participate.

2. 5v5 won't work the way you intend. Speaking as a 6v6 player, I can tell you that it will merely shift the balance of power even more heavily towards the Scouts, and 6v6 teams will very likely have better Scouts than others. If a decent 6v6 team joins this tournament and wants to win, they'll just drop their roaming Soldier and basically play as normal. If you'd like to shake things up a bit and make the 6v6 teams play outside their comfort zones, then I'd recommend limiting all classes to one.

3. For the love of god, please get rid of sudden death. All it does is promote standoffs. Count this for double if you keep crits on.

4. Your rounds system is...weird. 20 minutes isn't very long to play on any given map, especially since Granary and Well are prone to lengthy standoffs attacking 2nd and last. It'll make going up 1-0 and riding out the timer a reasonably viable strategy, and I don't think that's something you want to encourage. I'd recommend having it be one map per match, with either a set round limit or a longer time limit or two halves with a tiebreaker if necessary or whatever.

5. Gravelpit isn't going to work to a flat 20-minute timelimit. You need to use stopwatch. This means Gravelpit will probably also take longer than 20 minutes to play if you do more than one round of it, which could be quite tiresome if those teams then have to play two other maps.


I'm interested in participating in this tournament, but I'll have a hard time talking any of my buddies into it under the current ruleset.

 

[Blind0bserver]

Okay, I'm going to touch base on both this...

I can understand that but your reasoning is correct. We want to have a level playing field as possible and make it fun for everyone, not just TF2 vets.

... and this...

The 5v5 is a twist to the usual, that is for sure but I wanted something different and to level the playing field as much as possible. If we had said 6v6, then there would be an unfair advantage to those who play in those tournaments. Changing the setup by just one person changes strategy just enough to be different, without taking away from the game.

First off, there's no way to say this without sounding "snide": are you guys trying to run this tournament differently just for the sake of being different? I honestly don't see how team size in any way relates to "veteran" status of a player. They can either play the game/a class/whatever well or they can't. Individual skill like that isn't affected by team size, so you might as well stick with the proven 6v6 method. Class restrictions to avoid things like the scout rush would be a good move as well.

Second, I know where your coming from on the subject of unlockables. I now want you to know where I am coming from, and where I'm coming from is that I think where your coming from it wrong. Again, sounds snide, I know. Still, the unlockables exist for a reason: to be used. They're even balanced with the "standard" equipment so there's a clear-cut advantage and disadvantage for every weapon and a trade-off for every choice. Sure, the game existed just fine before they ever existed, but that isn't the point. Some players having them and some not doesn't destabilize or unlevel the gameplay considering how balanced everything is.

If you want to double-back to the "tactics" part of the debate using unlockables adds more depth to strategy and tactics. For example, if you don't put in some kind of class restriction to prevent a scout rush the Heavy's Natasha can at least slow them down so the team can deal with them. The Scout's Sandman can help them stop a rampaging group of players with an Uber right in their tracks. The Medic's Kritzkreig could provide just enough of an advantage to help take out that sentry in that hard-to-reach spot. You get the general idea. The playing field already is level. The only people that are going to cry "unfair" are some of the ones that don't have them themselves. As much as it pains me to say this (and it really does), if it's that big of a problem they can go to one of those farming servers and just unlock them that way.

 

[Cprice]

I don't see how banning unlocks is going to level the playing field to be honest. I mean if a newer team is playing vs an experienced team that can triple air shot and such, then their going to get rolled with or without the unlocks. Its not like you can't go into an achievement server and get every unlock in the game in 30 min anyway.

Also I can see the reasoning for 5v5, but crits aren't fun for anyone since the better teams will get more of them, and it will just end up in a snowball effect.

Lastly, I don't see the point of sudden death, its not part of the game in pubs, or any other comp I've ever even heard of. I would suggest you all actually play a few practice rounds with these settings before you start pulling rules out of right field just to be "different".

Other than that, it looks to be shaping into a nice tournament that will give some of us a break from the 6v6 style of game play.

 

[_antipathy]

Hi there. The majority of the TF2 competitive community has dismissed this tournament despite the nice prizes. If you wish to get this tournament recognized here are some suggestions:
1. Spinwhiz actually watch a TF2 competitive game.
2. Get input from actual regular players of the game not just arbitrary kids who want to increase their post count on the forum.
3. Include some other popular push maps like cp_follower and hell if cp_well is on there you might as well throw in cp_freight.
4. Remove crits and random damage. It just debases the game to a series of dice rolls to determine a winner, you might as well give a draw for the prizes then.
5. Implement 6v6, nothing is really achieved by using a 5v5 layout all you end up having is the loss of the roaming soldier as a previous poster stated.
6. Include unlockables, (other than the sandman).
7. Hell just use the CEVO ruleset and work from there.

Increasing the number of skilled players competing could and would not negatively impact on this tournament, rather more people would follow it and with it more advertising for the escapist magazine site.

Thanks

antipathy