The role of sentries in maps and how it's affected by map design

[Nineaxis]

Your evidence goes against your argument. Yes, indeed, VALVe did choose 24 players as the optimal server size because it is the most profitable. You know what makes a game profitable? People buying it. You know why people buy games? They find them fun. And at VALVe HQ, they spent nine years making a game, and they know it best out of anyone on the face of this planet, and they said themselves, '24 players is the best'. Yep, 24 players is fun, and therefore profitable. It's balanced, people enjoy it.

If 6v6 with 4 classes was how the game was meant to be played, you know what? There would be 4 classes and a stock server size of 12 players. But there's not. You have zero evidence to back any claims you have made. Good job.

 

[Mar]

How the hell can you dare to claim 6v6 is the real game?
"My" 24 and 32 man servers? Let me tell you, I don't set foot on 32 person servers, nor have I ever stated in this thread anything about higher than 24 being good.

How dare you claim 12v12 is the real game. There is no evidence on either sides of the argument to back up our claims.

Most profitable? ALL the GoldSrc games and ALL Source games up UNTIL TF2 had the player limit capped at 32 because of engine code reasons. Valve specifically and artificially reduced the limit to 24. Why do you think that was? Certainly it would have been more profitable to leave it at 32, after all people hacked it into the game and valve ended up caving in to them anyway.

Maybe they reduced it to 24 because it was more balanced then 32. But that doesn't mean 24 is more balanced then 12.

Time tested? I think it's just some sort of retarded 'tradition' that comp players hang onto and refuse to change. My other forms aren't time tested? Are they tested at all? Can you point me to larger leagues that existed previously? If so, why did they fail to be popular? Prove to me it's because they are "wrong".

Tradition? When the pyro update came out, we tried out the pyro and some people use him for some maps, like GPit point C. We are open minded. You just keep on saying we're not, but we are. We probably have some bigots, but you do too. But no comp team is going to ban you from their server if you challenge their ways. Also their are highlander leagues, and 8v8 leagues, but 6v6 is the most popular form becuase it works, it has the least amount of spam, and is the truest expression of skill and teamwork. 1 person dies, your team feels it. Your medic dies, your screwed. But the same doesn't hold true to 12v12.

You claim that 24 people means you have a spamfest without skill. Are you saying when valve has an internal playtest using 12 on 12 they just spam and don't have any skill? I think this is another case of you confusing one thing with another. You see most of the pub servers with the moronic majority spamming and tout that to be fact of how the game is at that size. This would imply that in a 12v12 league all your oh-so-awesome competitive players suddenly fall prey to some spam-daemon and stop playing skillfully with aim and intent and just spam crap all over.

Valves play testing came up with the +50 health for the back burner. Enough said. With Valve I always expect the worst.

And dustbowl and hydro and goldrush where not designed for 24 people. Even with 6v6, they are a narrow, spammy, choke point maps.

Also, in 12v12, people's death are not as heavily felt, and you can resort to spam, becuase you have enough people that the resulting spam would clog up a passage. 1 demo= 8 stickies = one path blocked off. 3 demos = 24 stickies = 3 routs blocked off.

]And I don't think all pubs are bad. I think the pubs that are similar to the steam forums are bad. And the most popular pub is the 32 man goldrush server, but does that make it right? (go on game tracker, the highest ranked servers are 32 man servers.)

I still can not get over your audacity to claim 6v6 is "the way it was meant to be" without any evidence other than "the clans do it", at least I have evidence based on things the developers did to back up my claim

The devs did it for money. They are a business. We did it for fun, and to make the game as balanced as possible.

 

[MrAlBobo]

1. I find it funny you want to resort to dueling. This isn't Elizabethan England, ya know. And if you want to duel, I'll find you some comp players that want to duel.

Pesh, when someone refuses to acknowledge logic you begin to think of other ways you can reach them, I decided to skip the middle stages and jump right to the bottom primal urges to fight, as I gathered this would be the most efficient way to get a point across with you. And I do not want to battle any other people, I wanted to battle you so I can prove that your arguments lack merit, nothing is accomplished by me playing other people who likely know the game far better then you.

2. I played the game for +150 hours (about 110 of them on the xbox) before I started playing competively. I've explored all the aspects of tf2. And I do play in 12v12 pubs, but they aren't that fun because of spam.

Fine you play your servers, ill play mine, just don't claim yours are better.
And if it really matters I have over 400 hours on tf2 with no class exceeding 90 hours.

And my whole point is that engi has a low skill clieing, so most good engis move to another class.

I am amazed that people can actually play as only one class, I don't main as anything, I use everything based on what would help the team the most.

 

[TMP]

How dare you claim 12v12 is the real game. There is no evidence on either sides of the argument to back up our claims.

Uh, other than the fact there are 9 total classes with varying abilities and a stock max of 12v12?

Maybe they reduced it to 24 because it was more balanced then 32. But that doesn't mean 24 is more balanced then 12.

See class dependence on number. 6v6 is only balanced if you use only half of the classes.

Tradition? When the pyro update came out, we tried out the pyro and some people use him for some maps, like GPit point C. We are open minded. You just keep on saying we're not, but we are. We probably have some bigots, but you do too. But no comp team is going to ban you from their server if you challenge their ways. Also their are highlander leagues, and 8v8 leagues, but 6v6 is the most popular form becuase it works, it has the least amount of spam, and is the truest expression of skill and teamwork. 1 person dies, your team feels it. Your medic dies, your screwed. But the same doesn't hold true to 12v12.

Yeah, in 6v6 if a player dies, you feel it, but in 12v12, you have task forces of players basically. Instead of venturing alone as many 6v6 players do, most stick in forces. Also, in 12v12, you have more potential with other classes, like the spy, engi, and pyro. Oddly enough, it also benefits your soldiers and demos, and even medics.

Valves play testing came up with the +50 health for the back burner. Enough said. With Valve I always expect the worst.

1. Why play a game from a creator you expected the worst from?
2. Valve fixed that mistake. Perhaps if one class was a mistake they would fix it too?

And dustbowl and hydro and goldrush where not designed for 24 people. Even with 6v6, they are a narrow, spammy, choke point maps.

HAHAHAHAHA.

Sorry, had to laugh. Those maps play well on 32 player servers even. (Well, not hydro, but that's because of the diagonals.)

Also, in 12v12, people's death are not as heavily felt, and you can resort to spam, becuase you have enough people that the resulting spam would clog up a passage. 1 demo= 8 stickies = one path blocked off. 3 demos = 24 stickies = 3 routs blocked off.

Sacrificing? Also, the spam isn't THAT bad. It's kinda the way the game was designed. At least they took out grenades. Truth be told, if you want to go to a game that doesn't have spam of ANY SORT, good luck finding it! If you do, it certainly isn't popular.

And I don't think all pubs are bad. I think the pubs that are similar to the steam forums are bad. And the most popular pub is the 32 man goldrush server, but does that make it right? (go on game tracker, the highest ranked servers are 32 man servers.)

I happen to be a regular on one of them (Voogru Crazy House 32 man) and, despite hating fast respawn, love the players. They are certainly not like the steam forums, they actually tend to be like competition players.

The devs did it for money. They are a business. We did it for fun, and to make the game as balanced as possible.

I personally find stock more fun than 6v6 comp, and a lot of people do too. So what if they did it for the money? I find it more fun than stripping crits and making my favorite classes downright useless because they require more people to do their jobs effectively.


If it sounds like I am disdaining the entirety of 6v6, I'm not. I'm just creating a counterargument for what you are saying. I truthfully do not like 6v6, as I said it makes my favorite classes useless due to the size of the teams, but I'm not going to say that it shouldn't be played, just that the arguments you are using for it being the true method of play tend to be very skewed and based on play with only competitive players. Amongst those clambering for skill base, then yeah, it probably is the best. For the rest of us, it isn't. And trust me, the casual base is much more grand than the competitive base. Very surprising for how long the game has been out. I mean, you can't say that valve has done a bad job with appealing to the casual and skilled and the mix, I mean, the game has remained one of the most popular games for over a year now amongst a wide variety of gamers. That is truly a feat to be amazed at.

 

[Mar]

Your evidence goes against your argument. Yes, indeed, VALVe did choose 24 players as the optimal server size because it is the most profitable. You know what makes a game profitable? People buying it. You know why people buy games? They find them fun. And at VALVe HQ, they spent nine years making a game, and they know it best out of anyone on the face of this planet, and they said themselves, '24 players is the best'. Yep, 24 players is fun, and therefore profitable. It's balanced, people enjoy it.

If 6v6 with 4 classes was how the game was meant to be played, you know what? There would be 4 classes and a stock server size of 12 players. But there's not. You have zero evidence to back any claims you have made. Good job.

No, its the most fun to new players. New players are the one who pay the entire fee. And once you've bought it, they don't carry that much about you. And once you play it enough, you'll realize that the original game was designed around new people, not competitive ones. Make a good, balanced game for the competitive crowd, and that goodness will trickle down to the pubs.

 

[Nineaxis]

I've bought TF2 twice. First in the Orange Box for PS3, where even after 4 months playing it every single afternoon, it was fun. With engies and spam and crits. I loved it so much I bought it for PS3 when the Gold Rush update was released, since Sony are a bunch of morons who won't let free DLC onto the PS3.

And I still had fun.

Over a year later, I still have fun, and would buy it again if need be. Because it's fun. Because it's fun in vanilla form. 24 players, nine classes, crits.

 

[Mar]

Truth be told, if you want to go to a game that doesn't have spam of ANY SORT, good luck finding it! If you do, it certainly isn't popular.

Any game with pure hit scan (CS comes close) has no spam. And single player games have no spam.

personally find stock more fun than 6v6 comp, and a lot of people do too. So what if they did it for the money? I find it more fun than stripping crits and making my favorite classes downright useless because they require more people to do their jobs effectively.

Well I find the opposite fun. So I play 6v6, and you play 12v12.

 

[TMP]

And single player games have no spam.

HINT: Don't bring Single player games into a multiplayer game debate. Not a smart move.

Anyways, agreed with you, don't really care, just don't expect the 6v6 to "trickle down". It's not superior, it's just different. Nor is it my cup of tea.

 

[Mar]

I've bought TF2 twice. First in the Orange Box for PS3, where even after 4 months playing it every single afternoon, it was fun. With engies and spam and crits. I loved it so much I bought it for PS3 when the Gold Rush update was released, since Sony are a bunch of morons who won't let free DLC onto the PS3.

And I still had fun.

Over a year later, I still have fun, and would buy it again if need be. Because it's fun. Because it's fun in vanilla form. 24 players, nine classes, crits.

I played the xbox for +110 hours. It was fun too. But the server size limit was 6v6, until they updated it to 8v8, but almost no-one could lost a not-laggy 8v8. And then I joined the PC, and I've enjoyed playing competively even more.

But this is all personal opinion.

 

[NovaSilisko]

 

[Mar]

I don't mean to insult anyone, but you really can't argue about comp play if think dustbowl is a great map, becuase if you do think this a great map, then that shows that you really don't understand the comp scene.

I don't mean any offence but we are both coming from different sides and are having a hard time understanding each other. At this point we are arguing for arguing sakes.

/thread

 

[MangyCarface]

Any game with pure hit scan (CS comes close) has no spam. And single player games have no spam.

Evidently you don't remember the backdoor in 1.6's assault, where HE nades were constantly exchanged and people blasted para rounds through the walls in attempts to score hits on people outside. Hitscan weapons can be spammed too- "spray and pray" after all

 

[TMP]

Anyways, time to move on to sentry and how they are affected.

I personally think a lvl 3 sentry should not be downright easy to take out (IE, placing one somewhere like the bridge of 2fort on your side of the area. See the gaps.), but should not be invincible (No example here, maybe Dbowl 3-1 alcove is best example I can think of? Not really invincible though). It should have a decent mix of cover and area. I personally find Gold Rush and Well two great mixes of it. With Well, you can cover the final point decently, but have it taken out pretty simply by a soldier who is out of reach (Who can be in turn stopped by teammates pretty simply). Perhaps a better thought though is the Next-To-Final Alcove sentry spot, where it covers a part of the point but is hard to take out. It's able to be taken out by a sneaky demoman, a heavy, and whatnot, but it still requires some work due to the amounts of people there.

Goldrush 1-2 and 2-2 have very nice examples of sentry spots that are well-balanced. The spot on top of the battlements to the left of red spawn facing outwards (Normal RED sentry spot) covers a nice amount of ground while allowing for a good way to take it out from a distance barely, or a good ubercharge. Same goes for GRush 2-2 area.

Basically, a good location for a sentry in a map is generally on higher ground, but has some way to take it out from a distance of about 1300-1500 units normally. It should also have decent area control, but not be over-the-top. It should always have some way to take it out by an unseen route, but it should cover the main route. That is normally the guideline you must follow when creating a good sentry spot for a map, no matter what kind.

 

[Mar]

Dustbowl 2-2 A Case Study

(I will be quoting my own material for easier reading purposes)

The cons of a sentry nest: Ex. Dustbowl 2-2

We all know this spot, its next to the CP, right on the sign with the small health and metal pack, and its a straight shot right out from Red spawn.

It seems balanced enough doesn't it? It can't shoot past the rocks and BLU will have a height advantage against it. So this works out? Wrong.

The first thing we need to establish is the basic mentality surrounding a sentry nest. A sentry nest provides health and ammo, and with the level 3 dispenser it is very effective at doing that. This health and ammo will keep people around the nest, causing it to have a very high population density

A high population density effectively negates the spy and his sapper, which rules out one of the major counter to the sentry. Another problem is that all these people will absorb and counter attacks meant for the sentry.

A soldi behind the rocks on Dust 2-2 should be able to kill the sentry because he is out of its range, right? But due to the ammo that the dispensers provides, the other team can just spam the rock and pyro's can airblast shots away, completely negating this counter.

The sentry gun is on a health pack and metal pack.

This allows the engineer to build his stuff up without too much hassle, which is fine. But once you have a lvl3 dispenser up, there is too much health, and too much ammo, and a gun humping engie can survive a standoff against a heavy with all this supplies.

The sentry nest is also extremely close to spawn.

This lets the engi build very rapidly, and is too much when you add on the preexisting metal and health. The engineer has too much supplies next to him and can turtle extremely well.
This also allows team mates to escape ubers, while the uber is busy with the sentry

BLU has a height advantage, which should allow them an easy time with the sentry.

The height advantage is actually one of the biggest problems with it. The height causes most ubers to run off the ledge, but if you fall off, the sentry will hit you in mid-air and send you flying away, nullifying the uber. The height advantage is terrible.

You have the wall blocking the sentry from you.

The problem with the wall is, is that projectiles (stickies and rockets, which are the most effective tool against sentries) shoot from your right hand, and the wall is on your right. So you can't effectively "edge" against the sentry, instead you have to pop the full way in and out, leaving you more exposed to sentry fire, and extremely exposed against spam from the defense.

There is the fence blocking it from hitting you on the CP.

The fence only saves a bit of the CP, and a good sentry nest should never be that close to a CP. A good nest blocks a route to the CP, but doesn't cover it, meaning that defenders must stay back to protect the CP from scout and spy ninja caps.


To counter act most of these problems, a good sentry nest should be good becuase of their location, not the metal. The metal should be further away forcing engis away from their nests, leaving them vulnerable, and to prevent them from turtling. If they build their sentry right next to the metal, that spot should be a very bad spot. The wall blocking the player from the nest should be on the attackers left hand side. And the nest should not be directly covering the CP.


But the most fundamental problem with the nest that you cannot counter with just the map is the fact that people huddle around these nest to grab the health and ammo, and that this health, ammo, and large group of people keep attackers at bay, and spies (the hard counter) away.

 

[AWESOME-O]

if you dont like the game, why do you play it??

 

[GrimGriz]

"It's almost been 2 years and pub-only players still think comp. players are elitist simply because they know the game."

~Gman

Nah, I'm pretty sure it's because they act like pricks.

My favorite part is the way you use 'we' as if the intelligent competitive players agree with you and have appointed you spokesman.

It seems balanced enough doesn't it? It can't shoot past the rocks and BLU will have a height advantage against it. So this works out? Wrong.

Actually, it does work out. BLU gets their chit together and works as a team and wins, at least damn near all the dustbowls I've played on. Usually spy+uber. Since the nest is so close to spawn, most of the red team usually advances past it to pin down the enemy at the entrances to the area.

Now, there's a balance problem on instant respawn and maybe even fast respawn servers, but if you play the game the way it's meant to be played teamwork+red's slow respawn make for sure victory.

 

[Nineaxis]

http://www.steampowered.com/status/tf2/death_maps/cp_dustbowl_deaths.jpg

Woops, looks like that 2-2 sentry isn't doing much.

 

[Ezekel]

been silent over this thus far, but i think i'll stick in some thoughts here.

1st off:
whereever you place metal, control points are hubs for activity. that means, even if there's no metal nearby, you'll always have sentries going up in a corner nearby.
2ndly:
when there's a swarm of players around an engi-nest, it can actually be easier for a spy to slip in. there's too many people in a small space to be able to see the tree for the forest.
crowds of players packed together equals confusion.
- this is something any medic will be all to aware of (when you just can't lock your heal beam onto the guy with the red health bar).

the example of dustbowl 2-2's engi spot is perhaps a little biased. you keep quoting it as the crux of your arguement, however, i'd lean more towards believing it's the company you play with.
i've seen 2 sentries go up there, and i've seen sentries go up elsewhere.
whenever i'm playing engie, i always put my dispenser behind the point, to assist/encourage heavies/pyros/snipers to stay on the point, i also rarely build my sentry in the corner, but instead place it on the small bump of land on the other side of the opening leading up to the point. after i've got it to lvl2, i usually wander off to kill something.

my point is, that there are many different ways to build a sentry up at dustbowl 2-2, whether you plan to turtle or not. but at the end of the day, depending on server size, a single uber, or 2 combined will be enough to disorient and dismantle any sentry setup. just try to attack from the left, keeping to the right of the rock next time you go in with an uber. if engies are all turtling in that corner, a demo or soldier will either kill off the sentries, or the engies. if either one go down, the other often swiftly follows.


and my bigger point is that this was only me talking about 1 situation. there's enough info to debate about it on it's own. so it stands to reason that every sentry spot needs to be examined individually, rather than setting a blanket conclusion based on just 1 sentry location.

 

[Mar]

I was just using this one nest as an example of what I think is a bad nest due to the difficluty of destroying it.

And more people is harder for a spy becuase a spy can't run through people.

 

[Mar]

if you dont like the game, why do you play it??

I like the game, and I do play it, I just want to see this game become a better one.