1 #1 Buttnose 15 Frags – + Salamancer TESTING AND FEEDBACK.



By no later than this Saturday, everyone should try to play in a pick/ban PUG. The tactical questions, I leave to you. Should each team ban 5 weapons for the game? Should each team pick 9 non-stock weapons that become their only choices? Should defaults be in play for bans? Have a chat about this and run some PUGs with different rules. See what works, what's fun to play. Do so with the knowledge that you are essentially alpha-testing a competitive lobby system for TF2. Wanted to get an open discussion about developing a pick/ban game-mode going, without talking about why valve have chosen this direction. I've taken some of the suggestions from the other thread to put in here. Some of the basic possible outlining rules:

*Use ETF2L/UGC whitelists as a template, pick/bans come afterwards?

*Stock weapons always allowed?

*Picks overrule bans or vice versa?

*Bans only with no picks?

*Pick/bans apply to both teams?

*# of pick/bans per team?

*How to decide which team pick/bans first? (coinflip, heavy-fist fight, simultaneous but other team can't see your choices. etc)

*Team captains assigned on each team decide pick/bans or random chance of players being selected to choose a single pick/ban.

*Take turns pick/banning till # of choices are exhausted or have a round of bans followed by picks. (dependent on pick/ban overrule choice)

*Ban set hats -flakx

*Map vote before weapon bans -pudding_cup

*Always allowed unlocks? (e.g kritz) -rawrspoon More advanced/weird rules:

*Locked/unlocked loadout for the duration of the map?

*Pick/ban visibility to the other team (To allow for possible tactical pick/banning)

*Multiple pick/bans of the same item allowed? (Tactical pick/banning, e.g BLU really want to play with deadringer spy so they pick it 3x, RED don't mind playing against deadringer so they spend their bans on degreaser/wrangler/spycicle instead) Personally I think the following rules would make for a pretty fun system:

*ETF2L whitelist template,

*Stock weapons always allowed,

*Bans overrule picks,

*Bans apply to both teams,

*6 pick/bans per team,

*Coinflip,

*No captains/random individual players choose pick/bans,

*Take turns pick/banning,

*Unlocked loadout,

*Visible pick/bans,

*Single pick/ban. Hope I haven't made any logical mistakes :D TL;DR Post your ideas for the rules that would make the best pick/ban HL game-mode! I'll add to the basic outlines/possible advanced rules as we go. Hopefully we'll come up with a bunch of different possible game-modes that people can try out in PUGs/mixes. http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/mix108.com/files/2013/02/142593650.jpg [quote=Salamancer]

TESTING AND FEEDBACK.



By no later than this Saturday, everyone should try to play in a pick/ban PUG. The tactical questions, I leave to you. Should each team ban 5 weapons for the game? Should each team pick 9 non-stock weapons that become their only choices? Should defaults be in play for bans? Have a chat about this and run some PUGs with different rules. See what works, what's fun to play. Do so with the knowledge that you are essentially alpha-testing a competitive lobby system for TF2.[/quote]





Wanted to get an open discussion about developing a pick/ban game-mode going, without talking about why valve have chosen this direction. I've taken some of the suggestions from the other thread to put in here.



[b]Some of the basic possible outlining rules:[/b]

*Use ETF2L/UGC whitelists as a template, pick/bans come afterwards?

*Stock weapons always allowed?

*Picks overrule bans or vice versa?

*Bans only with no picks?

*Pick/bans apply to both teams?

*# of pick/bans per team?

*How to decide which team pick/bans first? (coinflip, heavy-fist fight, simultaneous but other team can't see your choices. etc)

*Team captains assigned on each team decide pick/bans or random chance of players being selected to choose a single pick/ban.

*Take turns pick/banning till # of choices are exhausted or have a round of bans followed by picks. (dependent on pick/ban overrule choice)

*Ban set hats -flakx

*Map vote before weapon bans -pudding_cup

*Always allowed unlocks? (e.g kritz) -rawrspoon



[b]More advanced/weird rules:[/b]

*Locked/unlocked loadout for the duration of the map?

*Pick/ban visibility to the other team (To allow for possible tactical pick/banning)

*Multiple pick/bans of the same item allowed? (Tactical pick/banning, e.g BLU really want to play with deadringer spy so they pick it 3x, RED don't mind playing against deadringer so they spend their bans on degreaser/wrangler/spycicle instead)





Personally I think the following rules would make for a pretty fun system:

*ETF2L whitelist template,

*Stock weapons always allowed,

*Bans overrule picks,

*Bans apply to both teams,

*6 pick/bans per team,

*Coinflip,

*No captains/random individual players choose pick/bans,

*Take turns pick/banning,

*Unlocked loadout,

*Visible pick/bans,

*Single pick/ban.



Hope I haven't made any logical mistakes :D



TL;DR Post your ideas for the rules that would make the best pick/ban HL game-mode! I'll add to the basic outlines/possible advanced rules as we go. Hopefully we'll come up with a bunch of different possible game-modes that people can try out in PUGs/mixes.

[img]http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/mix108.com/files/2013/02/142593650.jpg[/img]

2 #2 Flakx 1 Frags – + I think the number of weapons banned per game should be at least 10.

as there are 5-6 completly broken weapons that will have to be banned every single round, and if we make the banlist too small there wont be particularly interesting feedback to give to valve. (as it would be the same every game.) also the medic, sniper & spy item set bonus' should be disallowed. also can you explain what you mean by picks? I think the number of weapons banned per game should be at least 10.

as there are 5-6 completly broken weapons that will have to be banned every single round, and if we make the banlist too small there wont be particularly interesting feedback to give to valve. (as it would be the same every game.)



also the medic, sniper & spy item set bonus' should be disallowed.



also can you explain what you mean by picks?

3 #3 Buttnose 0 Frags – + your choices of what items should be in the match your choices of what items should be in the match

4 #4 Flakx -1 Frags – + Buttnose your choices of what items should be in the match I don't understand why you would need to specificly pick items though, surely it's just everything that is Not banned. [quote=Buttnose]your choices of what items should be in the match[/quote]



I don't understand why you would need to specificly pick items though, surely it's just everything that is Not banned.

5 #5 Buttnose 0 Frags – + I just re-read the original thread and it seems like I didn't notice the emphasis on valve using the pick/ban system to get feedback on weapons, I got quite into the idea of pick/ban HL as a gamemode in itself. I just re-read the original thread and it seems like I didn't notice the emphasis on valve using the pick/ban system to get feedback on weapons, I got quite into the idea of pick/ban HL as a gamemode in itself.

6 #6 aiera 11 Frags – + lol lol

7 #7 Nin2246 3 Frags – + Make it like Dota2. You see Player A pick scout Player B pick Pyro after Player C ban X weapons for classes picked (If wanted you can go all Engi bans or so instead of mix and match) do this 3 times or 4 times. Make it like Dota2.



You see Player A pick scout Player B pick Pyro after Player C ban X weapons for classes picked (If wanted you can go all Engi bans or so instead of mix and match) do this 3 times or 4 times.

8 #8 pudding_cup 8 Frags – + Disregarding the sniper and spy set hats, UGC has 13 weapons bans so it makes logical sense to have 6 weapon bans available to each team. So each team is allowed to ban 6 weapons (I think the sniper and spy set hats should be autobanned). This lobby system I think should ideally have an option that people can check to say they want to be a captain or not so when they get into lobby it'll randomly pick from the pool of people who have that option checked. Then obviously the captain will decide the bans with input from the rest of his/her team. The map choice should either be set by valve or voted in by the players but that will have to be done before the weapon bans. As far as what's in the running to be banned, I think the stock weapons should obviously be exempt, but other than that I don't see a strong reason to have anything else be exempt. Maybe someone has a reason why certain unlocks should be exempt? Like what purpose would someone have to ban kritzkrieg or degreaser over something like wrangler or phlog or whatever. The thing to be kept in mind is that this process/system is completely separate from UGC/ETF2L so none of what happens in this system will affect those leagues. It's evident that valve wants to use this as a way to identify what weapons need tweaking so that we can unban them in actual comp, as well as providing a platform to promote competitive in general. Does anyone think there is a fear that valve might change a weapon that doesn't really need changing (like for instance a degreaser nerf)? Disregarding the sniper and spy set hats, UGC has 13 weapons bans so it makes logical sense to have 6 weapon bans available to each team. So each team is allowed to ban 6 weapons (I think the sniper and spy set hats should be autobanned). This lobby system I think should ideally have an option that people can check to say they want to be a captain or not so when they get into lobby it'll randomly pick from the pool of people who have that option checked. Then obviously the captain will decide the bans with input from the rest of his/her team.



The map choice should either be set by valve or voted in by the players but that will have to be done before the weapon bans.



As far as what's in the running to be banned, I think the stock weapons should obviously be exempt, but other than that I don't see a strong reason to have anything else be exempt. Maybe someone has a reason why certain unlocks should be exempt? Like what purpose would someone have to ban kritzkrieg or degreaser over something like wrangler or phlog or whatever.



The thing to be kept in mind is that this process/system is completely separate from UGC/ETF2L so none of what happens in this system will affect those leagues. It's evident that valve wants to use this as a way to identify what weapons need tweaking so that we can unban them in actual comp, as well as providing a platform to promote competitive in general. Does anyone think there is a fear that valve might change a weapon that doesn't really need changing (like for instance a degreaser nerf)?

9 #9 RawrSpoon 5 Frags – + There needs to be always-allowed unlocks too. The thought of a pyro without degreaser is awful to think about, and the ability to go kritz is absolutely fantastic and adds depth to the game. There needs to be always-allowed unlocks too. The thought of a pyro without degreaser is awful to think about, and the ability to go kritz is absolutely fantastic and adds depth to the game.

10 #10 Kaeyel 2 Frags – + There will always be the edge case of someone not owning anything but the stock weapons, so stock weapons can not be banned at all. Even if they were, there would have to be a gateway system of sorts before you're "allowed" to enter the lobby system, and I don't think that's a wise use of resources. To add to this... There could/should be a rental system for weapons deemed absolutely crucial by the community, such as the Kritzkrieg. There will always be the edge case of someone not owning anything but the stock weapons, so stock weapons can not be banned at all.



Even if they were, there would have to be a gateway system of sorts before you're "allowed" to enter the lobby system, and I don't think that's a wise use of resources.



To add to this...



There could/should be a rental system for weapons deemed absolutely crucial by the community, such as the Kritzkrieg.

11 #11 Buttnose 2 Frags – + Kaeyel There will always be the edge case of someone not owning anything but the stock weapons, so stock weapons can not be banned at all.



Even if they were, there would have to be a gateway system of sorts before you're "allowed" to enter the lobby system, and I don't think that's a wise use of resources.



To add to this...



There could/should be a rental system for weapons deemed absolutely crucial by the community, such as the Kritzkrieg. I've not tried it, but I remember hearing something about being able to try out items from the mannco store for free...

Yep: http://youtu.be/aspqE6Cprog?t=27s [quote=Kaeyel]There will always be the edge case of someone not owning anything but the stock weapons, so stock weapons can not be banned at all.



Even if they were, there would have to be a gateway system of sorts before you're "allowed" to enter the lobby system, and I don't think that's a wise use of resources.



To add to this...



There could/should be a rental system for weapons deemed absolutely crucial by the community, such as the Kritzkrieg.[/quote]



I've not tried it, but I remember hearing something about being able to try out items from the mannco store for free...

Yep:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/aspqE6Cprog?t=27s[/youtube]

12 #12 aiera 2 Frags – + lol lol

13 #13 Radman 1 Frags – + If we're talking Highlander, then there has to be certain locked unlocks. Shit like the GRU, degreaser, gunboats. I think its fine to leave stuff like the flare gun out. A weapon that is balanced well like that most likely wont get banned. And if it does, that means they let an actual broken weapon through. If we're talking Highlander, then there has to be certain locked unlocks. Shit like the GRU, degreaser, gunboats. I think its fine to leave stuff like the flare gun out. A weapon that is balanced well like that most likely wont get banned. And if it does, that means they let an actual broken weapon through.

14 #14 Flakx 0 Frags – + ToastyTHT RawrSpoon There needs to be always-allowed unlocks too. The thought of a pyro without degreaser is awful to think about, and the ability to go kritz is absolutely fantastic and adds depth to the game. Yeah, I agree. I think etf2l's legal weapons sound fine for a base. pretty sure the degreaser still isn't allowed, unless it was added this season? [quote=ToastyTHT][quote=RawrSpoon]There needs to be always-allowed unlocks too. The thought of a pyro without degreaser is awful to think about, and the ability to go kritz is absolutely fantastic and adds depth to the game.[/quote]

Yeah, I agree. I think etf2l's legal weapons sound fine for a base.[/quote]



pretty sure the degreaser still isn't allowed, unless it was added this season?

15 #15 aiera -5 Frags – + lol lol

16 #16 aiera -7 Frags – + lol lol

17 #17 pudding_cup 4 Frags – + Radman If we're talking Highlander, then there has to be certain locked unlocks. Shit like the GRU, degreaser, gunboats. I think its fine to leave stuff like the flare gun out. A weapon that is balanced well like that most likely wont get banned. And if it does, that means they let an actual broken weapon through. I just don't agree with this because if we're going to say that the UGC/ETF2L whitelist (or parts of it) is offlimits for banning then what will be left? It kind of defeats the purpose of picking weapons to be banned. The whole point is that the decision to ban certain weapons is left up to the players. If we just come in and say no you can't ban those then what's the difference between that and us just implementing preset banlists. [quote=Radman]If we're talking Highlander, then there has to be certain locked unlocks. Shit like the GRU, degreaser, gunboats. I think its fine to leave stuff like the flare gun out. A weapon that is balanced well like that most likely wont get banned. And if it does, that means they let an actual broken weapon through.[/quote]



I just don't agree with this because if we're going to say that the UGC/ETF2L whitelist (or parts of it) is offlimits for banning then what will be left? It kind of defeats the purpose of picking weapons to be banned. The whole point is that the decision to ban certain weapons is left up to the players. If we just come in and say no you can't ban those then what's the difference between that and us just implementing preset banlists.

18 #18 Flakx 0 Frags – + ToastyTHT Flakx ToastyTHT RawrSpoon There needs to be always-allowed unlocks too. The thought of a pyro without degreaser is awful to think about, and the ability to go kritz is absolutely fantastic and adds depth to the game. Yeah, I agree. I think etf2l's legal weapons sound fine for a base.

pretty sure the degreaser still isn't allowed, unless it was added this season? Wasn't referring to degreaser cutie. It's OP as hell, almost as bad as pre-split equalizer. I don't think that's fair, sure it's a much better option than any of the other pyro unlocks, but pyro is so underpowerd in most situations to begin with because of his lack of movement options and low dps. [quote=ToastyTHT][quote=Flakx][quote=ToastyTHT][quote=RawrSpoon]There needs to be always-allowed unlocks too. The thought of a pyro without degreaser is awful to think about, and the ability to go kritz is absolutely fantastic and adds depth to the game.[/quote]

Yeah, I agree. I think etf2l's legal weapons sound fine for a base.[/quote]



pretty sure the degreaser still isn't allowed, unless it was added this season?[/quote]

Wasn't referring to degreaser cutie. It's OP as hell, almost as bad as pre-split equalizer.[/quote]



I don't think that's fair, sure it's a much better option than any of the other pyro unlocks, but pyro is so underpowerd in most situations to begin with because of his lack of movement options and low dps.

19 #19 MultipleEntendre 1 Frags – + Stock weapons have to be allowed at all times or else a new player has nothing to play with if something gets banned. Stock weapons have to be allowed at all times or else a new player has nothing to play with if something gets banned.

20 #20 aiera 0 Frags – + lol lol

21 #21 aiera -2 Frags – + lol lol

22 #22 Radman 0 Frags – + pudding_cup Radman If we're talking Highlander, then there has to be certain locked unlocks. Shit like the GRU, degreaser, gunboats. I think its fine to leave stuff like the flare gun out. A weapon that is balanced well like that most likely wont get banned. And if it does, that means they let an actual broken weapon through.

I just don't agree with this because if we're going to say that the UGC/ETF2L whitelist (or parts of it) is offlimits for banning then what will be left? It kind of defeats the purpose of picking weapons to be banned. The whole point is that the decision to ban certain weapons is left up to the players. If we just come in and say no you can't ban those then what's the difference between that and us just implementing preset banlists. I didnt say the UGC/ETF2L weapons are off limits. But there are certain unlocks that seem to be necessary for certain classes to be viable. Banning gru, degreaser, gunboats, gunslinger is like banning the sticky launcher. Then there are weapons like the flare gun or dead ringer which provide a different option for certain classes. Those weapons should be left in the pool of bannable weapons, since a team that wants to prevent a spy from using the Dead ringer makes the tradeoff of letting another weapon that is potentially more game-breaking through. EDIT: if we allow the banning of ALL unlocks, players will just ban the most useful ones. At that point there will be a disparity between classes that are always amazing (demoman, scout) and classes that become viable with unlocks (engie). If you want to argue that every unlock should be on equal level, then you need to accept the fact that some unlocks were designed to make classes more viable, not just to give them more options. At that point you need to accept that certain unlocks are on the same level as stock, and therefore stock should be considered alongside unlocks for the banning phase. [quote=pudding_cup][quote=Radman]If we're talking Highlander, then there has to be certain locked unlocks. Shit like the GRU, degreaser, gunboats. I think its fine to leave stuff like the flare gun out. A weapon that is balanced well like that most likely wont get banned. And if it does, that means they let an actual broken weapon through.[/quote]



I just don't agree with this because if we're going to say that the UGC/ETF2L whitelist (or parts of it) is offlimits for banning then what will be left? It kind of defeats the purpose of picking weapons to be banned. The whole point is that the decision to ban certain weapons is left up to the players. If we just come in and say no you can't ban those then what's the difference between that and us just implementing preset banlists.[/quote]

I didnt say the UGC/ETF2L weapons are off limits. But there are certain unlocks that seem to be necessary for certain classes to be viable. Banning gru, degreaser, gunboats, gunslinger is like banning the sticky launcher.



Then there are weapons like the flare gun or dead ringer which provide a different option for certain classes. Those weapons should be left in the pool of bannable weapons, since a team that wants to prevent a spy from using the Dead ringer makes the tradeoff of letting another weapon that is potentially more game-breaking through.



EDIT: if we allow the banning of ALL unlocks, players will just ban the most useful ones. At that point there will be a disparity between classes that are always amazing (demoman, scout) and classes that become viable with unlocks (engie).



If you want to argue that every unlock should be on equal level, then you need to accept the fact that some unlocks were designed to make classes more viable, not just to give them more options. At that point you need to accept that certain unlocks are on the same level as stock, and therefore stock should be considered alongside unlocks for the banning phase.

23 #23 drought 1 Frags – + edit: quotes do not work how i want them to @toasty: the issue is that the degreaser makes playing pyro enjoyable for the vast majority of people edit: quotes do not work how i want them to



@toasty: the issue is that the degreaser makes playing pyro enjoyable for the vast majority of people

24 #24 aiera -6 Frags – + lol lol

25 #25 MultipleEntendre 0 Frags – + ToastyTHT Umm... No duh? I don't think anyone wanted to ban stocks, and valve is not stupid, plus doesn't want to screw over new players. Buttnose Some of the basic possible outlining rules:

*Stock weapons always allowed? The question was asked. [quote=ToastyTHT]

Umm... No duh? I don't think anyone wanted to ban stocks, and valve is not stupid, plus doesn't want to screw over new players.[/quote]



[quote=Buttnose]Some of the basic possible outlining rules:

*Stock weapons always allowed?[/quote]



The question was asked.

26 #26 pudding_cup 6 Frags – + Do people think it's likely that anyone would use one of their six weapon bans to ban something like the degreaser? Same goes for things like escape plan, kritz, etc. Is it necessary to make these items unbannable or will they naturally almost never be banned because why would they when there are lots of more egregious weapons out there? Honestly the more issues that get brought up, the more I start to wonder if picking bans is even such a great idea. At the same time though these bans don't really affect actual comp so do we have an obligation to honor that separation by allowing a much looser system or in the interest of preserving our gamemode as it makes the most sense to us do we force certain restrictions? At some point as well we have to respect that the final decision is up to Valve and from what Robin has expressed he seems to be really against restrictions. I think for now we'll test the picking without any limitations except for stock weapons. But we can probe Valve to see how open they are to allowing some unlocks to be auto-allowed. Another issue as far as testing goes is if we have comp players picking bans the logical conclusion will be that they'll pick all the weapons that are already on banlist. Of course if there are 13 weapon bans for UGC and only 12 weapons can be banned then automatically at least one of those 13 will be allowed. But that might not really be enough to see any drastic changes in gameplay. I guess experimentation in the range of 5-8 choices per team at the least is necessary to figure out what the right value is. Do people think it's likely that anyone would use one of their six weapon bans to ban something like the degreaser? Same goes for things like escape plan, kritz, etc. Is it necessary to make these items unbannable or will they naturally almost never be banned because why would they when there are lots of more egregious weapons out there?



Honestly the more issues that get brought up, the more I start to wonder if picking bans is even such a great idea. At the same time though these bans don't really affect actual comp so do we have an obligation to honor that separation by allowing a much looser system or in the interest of preserving our gamemode as it makes the most sense to us do we force certain restrictions? At some point as well we have to respect that the final decision is up to Valve and from what Robin has expressed he seems to be really against restrictions.



I think for now we'll test the picking without any limitations except for stock weapons. But we can probe Valve to see how open they are to allowing some unlocks to be auto-allowed.



Another issue as far as testing goes is if we have comp players picking bans the logical conclusion will be that they'll pick all the weapons that are already on banlist. Of course if there are 13 weapon bans for UGC and only 12 weapons can be banned then automatically at least one of those 13 will be allowed. But that might not really be enough to see any drastic changes in gameplay. I guess experimentation in the range of 5-8 choices per team at the least is necessary to figure out what the right value is.

27 #27 Radman 1 Frags – + pudding_cup I think for now we'll test the picking without any limitations except for stock weapons. But we can probe Valve to see how open they are to allowing some unlocks to be auto-allowed. That seems to be the best option, but I still forsee bans affecting certain classes more than others. But if valve is looking at competitive balance again, its a non-issue. If its a problem, it will be recognized and fixed. [quote=pudding_cup]I think for now we'll test the picking without any limitations except for stock weapons. But we can probe Valve to see how open they are to allowing some unlocks to be auto-allowed.[/quote]

That seems to be the best option, but I still forsee bans affecting certain classes more than others.



But if valve is looking at competitive balance again, its a non-issue. If its a problem, it will be recognized and fixed.

28 #28 aiera -4 Frags – + lol lol

29 #29 jake_ 0 Frags – + First off, I agree with mustard CEVO has the best banlist. Valve could also create a list of the "new stock" weapons that are universally agreed upon as legit (basically all 6s allowed weapons). Stock and basically stock (think kritz/DH/escape plan) weapons -> always allowed can't ban.

Everything not on this "protected" list -> Team captains (highest level player on each team) take turns banning maybe 10 weapons each. Match proceeds as normal, players can vote (somewhat similar to dota) on how much they enjoyed the banlist. Valve can aggregate this data to complement a voting system in which each week every player (in tf2) selects the weapon they deem most in need of a nerf and the weapon most in need of a buff. This would help balance tf2 in general, because honestly weapons that are overpowered in pubs are overpowered in competitive. EDIT: ALSO CHANGE EVERY VALVE SERVER TO NO CRITS NO SPREAD, AND MAKE QUICKPLAY REQUIRE NO CRITS NO SPREAD. This is both critical to the success of competitive (shrinking the gap) and very easy to do. First off, I agree with mustard CEVO has the best banlist. Valve could also create a list of the "new stock" weapons that are universally agreed upon as legit (basically all 6s allowed weapons).





Stock and basically stock (think kritz/DH/escape plan) weapons -> always allowed can't ban.

Everything not on this "protected" list -> Team captains (highest level player on each team) take turns banning maybe 10 weapons each.



Match proceeds as normal, players can vote (somewhat similar to dota) on how much they enjoyed the banlist. Valve can aggregate this data to complement a voting system in which each week every player (in tf2) selects the weapon they deem most in need of a nerf and the weapon most in need of a buff.



This would help balance tf2 in general, because honestly weapons that are overpowered in pubs are overpowered in competitive.



EDIT: ALSO CHANGE EVERY VALVE SERVER TO NO CRITS NO SPREAD, AND MAKE QUICKPLAY REQUIRE NO CRITS NO SPREAD. This is both critical to the success of competitive (shrinking the gap) and very easy to do.