Nice @

Rumour has it Robin Walker has offered something similar for the Nethack dev team if they release a new version of NetHack.

Their response was 'You first.'

That's the old passage to tc_hydro. We don't go there anymore.

Welcome. Welcome to Team Fortress 2!

You have chosen, or been forced by a bear-strangling Australian, to relocate to one of our finest free to play games. I thought so much of TF2, that I elected to establish this thread here, on the forum so thoughtfully provided by our benefactors.

I am proud to call TF2 my game. And so, whether you are here to stay, or passing through to parts unknown, welcome, to Team Fortress 2. It's fun here.

Broken home

The Family Business: A shotgun which fires 8 shots instead of 6, with a 15% damage nerf.

Sounds pretty straightforward.

Until you realise the original shotgun can reload and fire a 7th shot before the Family Business can fire it's 8th.

8 * (1 - 0.15) = 6.8...

Robin Walker, when asked, said "We can't do maths."

Edit: Neither can I.

Broadly boasting

Valve announces 7th weapon to have the initials BB. Robin Walker boasted "We wanted to mimize the number of keys on the keyboard you had to use, and noticed that Pyros, especially, were wearing through keys on the left hand side of the keyboard. By forcing forum goers to use the letter B more frequently, we hope to reduce green house gas emissions required from purchasing new keyboards...."

(Previous weapons: Backburner, Buff Banner, Battalion's Back-Up, Black Box, Boston Basher, Brass Beast. Hats: Backbiters Billycock, the Berliners Bucket, the Blighted Beak, the Brain Bucket and ye olde Baker Boy. Maps: Barn Blitz)

Now they finally fixed the first one...

In a shocking turn of events, Valve decides to release a TF2 secondary weapon that can kill people. Robin Walker, when asked, said "We've only done it once before, with the Flare Gun, and I was worried it would affect the balance of the game. Luckily, we've spent all of our development efforts since the original Flare Gun release balancing it, so I'm confident that we'll only have to spend another 12 months or so getting this new secondary fixed..."

My Pyro Life (part two)

Valve has a habit of deleting old posts from the TF2 forums, so I'm preserving a thread I started here for posterity. You can see the original thread here.

Reliability vs. Opportunity

A mistake a lot of people make when talking about weapon balance is the difference between reliability vs. opportunity, and these are concepts which apply particularly to Pyros. An opportunistic weapon is 'Last week I was in situation x with weapon y and I did z to get a kill.'. A reliable weapon is 'Every time I get into situation x with weapon y and I do z to get a kill.' I'm wary that a lot of balance discussions around the pyro degenerate into lists of 'no he can't do this' vs. 'yes he can'. What I want to hear are arguments of the form 'yes he can every time', not just yes he can.

An example: A Pyro is a reliable spy checker, because he can set alight a spy every time with his flamethrower, even if that Spy is cloaked or invisible. A Pyro is an opportunistic rocket reflector, because he cannot reflect rockets every time. But note you can modify this statement to say 'A Pyro is a reliable reflector of long range rockets, because he can reflect rockets fired from a distance every time'. So it is possible that situational use can turn an opportunistic weapon into a reliable weapon (e.g. airblasts for environmental kills on the bottom bridge of Double Cross). The problem with situational use is that it makes weapons map dependent.

Hitscan weapons are intrinsically more reliable than projectile weapons, because they only take into account player skill - whereas a projectile weapon is dependent on predictive factors which are only partially under the control of the player. Note that this is not always the case: assuming perfect accuracy, the Soldier's Rocket Launcher is reliable at inflicting some damage up to x HU away from the soldier for an enemy moving at 100% speed: the limiting factor is the speed of the rocket times the width of an enemies's hitbox / the target's maximum movement speed (300 HU per second). The Soldier is also able to convert near misses into reliable damage by bouncing enemies into a predictable kinetic path, which he can follow up with one or more additional rockets for reliable damage.

Juggling enemies is a clear example where skill can be used to escalate the payoff of a particular weapon in a reliable fashion. The Sniper Rifle is another example: by aiming for a smaller, harder to hit target, the Sniper can triple the damage this already reliable hit scan weapon can produce. The additional damage that the Sniper Rifle does with a headshot doesn't make the Sniper rifle more reliable, but it is a payoff for increasing your skill level with that weapon, and through increased skill you can make headshots more reliably.

The Pyro feels underpowered and frustrating, because many of the Pyro weapons are opportunistic not reliable, and I've tried to with the testable side grades file to modify the designs to make them more reliable.

Quote:

Pyro starts with 200 health instead of 175 health. Degreaser -25 health

Valve have tried buffing the health of the Pyro previously, with the +50 health bonus for using the Backburner. I'm suggesting a less severe buff, but increasing the survival rate of the Pyro - particularly the Backburner Pyro - is high on my list of requirements. Since I'm balancing these changes against the Degreaser - Shotgun - Axtinguisher Pyro, the complement to increasing the Pyro health is nerfing this bonus on the Degreaser. It also helps distinguish the Flamethrower from the Degreaser more clearly (more health & afterburn against faster weapon switches).

My main motivation for the 200 hp is that complex, and at the moment overly one-sided, balance between the Soldier and Pyro. At the moment, the Soldier dominates with rockets, and without the Degreaser, the Soldier will have the initiative on switching to Shotgun. To compensate, I feel that the Pyro must clearly dominate Shotgun vs. Shotgun. With 175 hp, this is too close to call, with your superiority speed and maneuverability, balanced against the Soldier's superior hit points. Yes, the Soldier will have lost hp rocket jumping, but you will have lost some by being edged or with mistimed reflects. Starting with 200 hp is an attempt to push the Pyro towards dominating this phase of the encounter.

Another approach suggested recently was giving the Pyro innate explosive resistance. I've toyed with this idea before, but decided you want to encourage Soldiers to try to kill you with an opportunistic rocket, precisely so that you can get the chance to use reflects. If every Soldier switches to Shotgun when they see you, you will lose this, in favour of a Shotgun fight you are less likely to win than with the hp buff I've proposed.

Quote:

Backburner On kill: Guaranteed criticals for 3 seconds +100% ammunition consumption

My first reaction to editing the items_games.txt was giving the Backburner back the air blast, but increasing the ammunition cost. I'm not alone in suggesting this, but testing with the Airburner pointed out one significant flaw with this design: you rarely run out of ammunition, because you rarely live long enough if you're on the front line air blasting back rockets. The other flaw is that the weapons merge into each other: the Flamethrower Pyro already plays like a gimped Degreaser Pyro, without giving the Backburner the only ability which distinguishes him.

Is it possible to make an intelligent play style for the Backburner? I think it is, and a mention in the Heavy forums of kill chaining using the KGB suggested the above change. The difference between a regular Backburner pyro and the buffed Backburner I've suggested, is how a beginning Pyro approaches the ambush. A regular BB relies on the opportunity of someone facing the wrong way when they approach, falling back on spamming the group so everyone is alight and the afterburn has some effect while they respawn. This buffed BB helps you focus on getting the next kill; because as soon as you do, you can reliably kill chain through the rest of the nearby enemies. In terms of balance, 3 seconds of guaranteed criticals is no more powerful than silent backstabs, and in a Medic - Heavy pair, the overhealed Heavy still has enough time to turn and kill you before you can take him out with the criticals the dead Medic gives you.

The +100% ammunition consumption is designed to discourage W+M1, and make the Backburner Pyro actually run the risk of running out of ammunition. But didn't I just state that ammunition consumption didn't apply to Backburner Pyros? It does with the critical buff. You will find you run the real risk of having to switch to your secondary, because you actually are capable of killing a cluster of multiple enemies in quick succession using your primary without getting killed in return.

Quote:

Flare Gun +50% burn damage. Minicrits become crits which means you crit against burning targets at all ranges.

My initial concept of buffing the base flare gun damage worked really well, with one important exception. I buffed the flare gun to 66% additonal damage, that is 50 base damage, 67 minicrit damage, 150 critical damage, and it didn't feel at all overpowering. You get flare hits on targets at long range infrequently enough that the critical damage feels like an appropriate reward, and the increase in spike damage from 90 hp to 150 isn't that noticeable because the vanilla flare gun takes out most of the low hp classes with that hit anyway - it is only soldiers and heavies who are at higher risk from the high base damage flare gun. More importantly, you start to get to useful DPS territory in the short and medium range, and the minicrit becomes a more meaningful spike, but mostly because the base damage is that much higher.

But there is one significant problem with a flare gun that does 50 hp base damage: it is feels too effective against sentries. But why? A 50 hp flare is less effective than a 90 hp rocket, and Soldiers can fire rockets more frequently and less accurately to take sentries out. But bumping the flare gun base damage brings the flaregun to within 30% of the effectiveness of rockets. [Edit: Removed text about ramp down. As several people have pointed out below, buildings are unaffected by rampdown].

Instead, I've tried to make the Flare gun at least justifiable, by bumping the afterburn damage and allowing crits against burning targets to apply at all ranges, so it is a useful alternative to a puff and sting axtinguisher or shotgun attack, while having longer range utility.

Quote:

Homewrecker +40% sentry damage resistance

What is so noticeable about this homewrecker buff, is that it is not actually as useful as it looks. Sure, you get effectively as many hit points against sentries as a heavy - the problem is that you don't have the damage output of a heavy at anything except point blank range, so taking down a sentry nest is much harder. The homewrecker buff is therefore to try to give you a bit more survivability in a situation where you end up with engineers aggressively using minisentries, or to rush a poorly positioned level 2/3 sentry and come off not quite as badly as you would otherwise have done.

tl;dr

These are design notes. They are notes about design for people who like reading.

My Pyro Life (part one)

Valve has a habit of deleting old posts from the TF2 forums, so I'm preserving a thread I started here for posterity. You can see the original thread here.

I'm a pub player, not a pro and one of those folks who are in love with the Pyro. I main Engineer/Spy/Pyro with a side of Medic, but of all of them, the Pyro is the most fun to play when I'm doing well...

How I play the pyro and how successfully depends on which map. The Pyro feels balanced on the Arena and KOTH maps where the smaller spaces that play to the strength of the Pyro and increased deadliness of afterburn - even with all the afterburn removal effects in play. Here I'll go Degreaser-Shotgun-Axtinguisher for the most part, and Degreaser-Shotgun-Powerjack if I'm feeling like a change.

The Pyro is great fun only on CTF and CP maps with lots of verticals or opportunities for environmental kills: Double Cross, Eqypt, Badlands. Maps like Well and Granary are playable, provided I'm getting my shotgun kills and reflects right, but I need to be playing with a pretty relaxed pub crowd before I'll consider it. I'll definitely skip Pyro on Well and Granary if there is any competent enemy engineering going on.

Yukon is a special case, as is Watchtower. These are the only maps where I'll switch to Flare Gun - because of the long gently curving corridors and slopes and lack of sniper nests - and I'll stay at mid range and use reflects to counter soldiers and work on picking targets off with flares.

On AD, PL, PLR maps, where there is a defined front to the game, playing a Pyro gets much more complicated. I've got three choices on these maps. Firstly, I can keep the Degreaser-Shotgun combo, stay near the front and harass and reflect. This is generally unsatisfying, because I'll achieve little, and tend to die in the spam. The other option, short of changing class, is to switch to Backburner-Shotgun-Homewrecker. This is an interesting combination: because it paradoxically forces you to hang back when the front is static or being pushed forward or back. You can't be effective on the front lines with a Backburner - you'll just die, so instead I hang back and spam shotgun and get lucky with the odd de-sap if an enemy spy manages to take out a friendly engineer.

What I'm waiting for is the front to either hit an ambush spot such as exiting the tunnel on Badwater, where the Backburner comes into play, or for the front to "break down": where we've either killed enough players (on defense) that most of them are heading back from respawn, or we've just captured a point and more paths have opened up (on attack). Whether the Backburner is more useful than the Degreaser in these open situations is debatable, but if I end up behind the enemy front after its reformed, then it is highly effective.

A key indicator on whether the Backburner can be useful is if you have more enemy heavies than soldiers on an AD, PL, PLR map. A heavy will kill you in 'open play' if you have the BB: his spin up time will finish you off before you can burn him with the flamethrower, unless you can hit him point blank from behind, but on these maps his attention should be on killing your compatriots in front of him, not you sneaking up behind him.

The Degreaser Pyro is IMO balanced with the map caveats I've given - you just won't get kills with your primary weapon, except for environmental kills, with the odd reflection thrown in. At the moment, there is no point switching to Flamethrower, and the loss of the airblast you get with the Backburner makes this weapon feel a lot more one dimensional and only suits certain maps or defensive positions as I've discussed.

Since the Polycount pack, I've also switched back to the Shotgun after an extended period of using the Flare Gun, and much like an ex-smoker, I feel the need to point out how inferior the Flare Gun is in almost all situations. The best possible situation to use the Flaregun - where you are consistently hitting burning opponents at long range with a shot every 2 seconds - does a maximum of 51 DPS including afterburn - that is, 20% worse than the short to medium range DPS of any other weapon except the L'Etranger. Sure, damage ramp down means you are doing more damage at this range than most other weapons and you'll end up occasionally getting lucky 2 shot kills on the 125 hp and 150 hp classes, but there is a class for fighting at long range which can one shot any of these classes a lot more reliably, and you give up the ability to be at all effective for the 2.3 seconds you need to rush a target from the edge of medium range to flame thrower distance (assuming they don't move).

I suspect people love the the Flare Gun is that it feels really effective - a chunky plastic design, and satisfying animation and sound fx - but since switching, I get two to three times the kills with a Shotgun than with flares on most maps. In fact, I'm almost Shotgun primary, flicking to the Degreaser only if someone gets in flame thower range, or I need to do a reflect.

I particularly have a problem with the decision to have the Flare Gun do minicrits to burning opponents at short to medium range. There are only three situations where a minicrit on a burning opponent helps you: if the extra 11 hp damage will allow you to kill someone in the next 2 seconds, if every possible target up to 120 HU further away is on already fire, or every nonburning enemy is standing next to a Pyro who can airblast the flames off. In any other situation, you are better off setting a new target on fire for for a minimum of 12 HP afterburn damage over the flare gun reload time, instead of 11 HP from the minicrit.

The Axtinguisher with the Degreaser will win you fights, but I'm finding myself more drawn to the Powerjack at the moment, because of the opportunity you get to chain kills against lighter classes while not having to find health to recover from the inevitable damage you sustain in close combat. The Homewrecker again is strictly defensive, or where your Engineers are having problems with incoming spies.

tl; dr

I play Pyro, but there's only 1 effective primary, and 1 map limited primary; 1 effective secondary and 1 map limited secondary; 2 effective melee weapons and 1 map limited melee weapon. My instinct is to try to balance the less useful weapons up.

The key to balancing games is making a change and playing with that change, then revising based on feedback - a model of game design that Valve have mastered. We as a community should be copying that process and adopting it - there's no point filling the forums with unlocks and arguments about relative power levels without any proof one way or the other that the idea is good. And a DPS chart isn't proof - in game testing and server logs are.

Luckily it is relatively simple to modify the weapons - done here by editing the items_game.txt file - and testing the changes by playing in offline mode. This means we can start to have this kind of discussion without relying on Valve giving us access to an open beta. It is not possible to test every kind of suggestion this way - advanced movement being an excellent example - and I'm limiting myself to not changing any other file at this stage; just to see if the process is worth doing and whether people on this forum find it at all useful. If it is not useful, and no one else feels like contributing to this effort, then I've not wasted a huge amount of time.

TF2 sidegrades mod

It appears I cannot truly appreciate a game until I redesign it.

Thrown away

By way of a John Carmack blog post, I am reminded again of some pithy words by Joel Spolsky which people working on the pyAngband project would well take heed of...

As for the lack of blogging, I am in the full force of a terrifying Team Fortress 2 addiction. All my spare time and money is currently being spent acquiring name tags for items to prove how unrelentingly clever I am. Think of it as a 40 character twitter for the first person shooter.

A more regular service should hopefully resume at some point.

The Problem with Pretty Damn Quick

The agony and the ecstasy of Valve is they don't release until they're ready. When this goes badly, it could be a recipe for timid over-design that boils out the essential flavours, but when it goes well, such as the recent Engineer update, it makes genius games. In fact, Valve at the moment feel like they are on a whole different level of game design from other companies and Team Fortress 2 is the boiler room in which they sweat out their best work.

Take one design which has been simmering in beta for over a year - the Pretty Damn Quick. This is the engineering wrench which allows you to build buildings faster, at the cost of not being able to upgrade them. It is an 'obvious' design, in that it makes a net improvement to one parameter, while removing another. And there is no hint of the PDQ in the actual release.

Or is there?

Surprisingly, there is the reverse: the Gunslinger. The Gunslinger allows you to build and upgrade all buildings normally - except the sentry, where it allows you to quickly build a sentry which cannot be repaired or upgraded at all. The inversion in this design is that it is the building that cannot be upgraded, rather than the ability to upgrade which is removed. The reason why is obvious in retrospect: an engineer with a Gunslinger is still able to upgrade the buildings of engineers he works with, but an engineer with the PDQ is not able to assist his team mates - and the Team in Team Fortress 2 highlights why the Gunslinger design is the better choice.

(As for why it is only the sentry which is modified by the Gunslinger design: the tf2 blog post about the Repair Node is a lessons learned on why the teleporter and dispenser should not be messed with).

If you look at the other class updates in this light, the balance of unlockable weapons favour team play over individual prowess: the Jarate and Huntsman allow the sniper to move up alongside his team to assist, bleeding weapons highlight enemy Spies to other team mates instead of improving instant kill chances, the poorly received Scout update improving the ability to distract and harass instead of assassinate, the Scottish Resistance providing superior area denial abilities.

So what next?

If you've missed the analysis on the forums, the Polycount update will include community weapons with new abilities and the underlying message is don't worry about the game design - Valve have got that covered. Despite the forums being filled with back seat game designers, like myself, none of them are at a stage where we can conduct wide spread testing and analysis of games to the same depth that Valve is capable of. I find this a little surprising: play testing is something that should be easy to crowd source by distributing a server side mod, but the combination of community organisation and technical ability appears to be beyond most forum members. I suspect this is because game design is ultimately dictatorial - which is why the variant model used by Angband development (a gateway drug which is easy to edit leading open access to the clean source code combined with lots of bad game design) works so well. In order to organise external testing for Team Fortress 2 of the sort required to match Valve's game design abilities, you'd need to find the group organisation, game design and reverse engineering skills in the same individual or tight knit team, virtually fully formed.

But it turns out what is next is actually Alien Swarm, the free to play source mod released with source code, a tile based generation tool set which includes procedural level creation tools and access to the AI director. Alien Swarm is an entirely different kind of boiler room, and seen in the light of the misdirection of the PDQ beta I believe Valve are putting a number of free tools out there to see what the community can do with them.

We know that Valve are experimenting with procedural content generation, because Gabe has told us so, in an editorial written for Edge Magazine in December 2008. At the time, everyone assumed he was talking simply about the AI director in Left4Dead, but he must also had in mind Alien Swarm - the team of which Valve had hired the previous year - and was 'thinking aloud' about whether procedural content generation was possible for level design as well as pacing.

The procedural generation in Alien Swarm is about as simple and generic as you can make 3D generated levels - so simple at the moment it doesn't necessarily guarantee connectivity. It is template-based, much in the same way Torchlight builds it's levels, although at a lower level of detail, and the view angle deliberately prevents more complex 3D geometry such as bridges and subways which would complicate the level generation algorithms. It does do some clever design with tags for various room templates to allow the random levels to be closed correctly to avoid players being able to fall off the edge of the world - an issue which 2D level designs don't face.

What it does give you is source code, the Source engine tool set and a design vocabulary to build on - and I believe Valve wants to see what is possible with that combination. What won't be possible with Alien Swarm is more complex 3D geometry - and you should ignore the temptation to port your favourite 2D roguelike level generator to the Alien Swarm source code. But, as Mad Tinkerer points out, there is real scope for creating a procedural Zelda-like - go here, destroy these things, get this door key, then go here - something that no one has tried to build using a roguelike engine. The tag system appears ideal for procedural puzzle building, there is enough of an in-game vocabulary of gates and triggers, and the possibility of using Source engine physics should be enough scope to (procedurally) build something beautiful.

Worship the new god

Just to wrench you away from Unangband for a moment: a good summary, the confession, and yet people don't understand how random numbers work. If you generate them in advance, they're still random - unless that information is leaked. And provided you don't peek.

I crafted my backpack away last night so that I only have hats left. It feels... liberating.

The Blockenheal

I note in passing that Valve have returned their Overhealer design to the TF2 beta. The Overhealer is a Medigun that allows the overheal effect to persist. Previous iterations have allowed overhealing up to +100% of hit points - which allowed, among other obscenities, 600 hp Heavies which could ignore a 500 hp backstab - while the latest version merely allows a persistent +50% healing.

The downside is -50% healing rate, instead of previous versions which had a greatly slowed Ubercharge rate.

The Overhealer is an interesting weapon design for a class that has been underserviced by unlocks since the initial release. (The Spy is the only other class which has only 3 unlocks at present - the 4th will possibly be a flame proof suit which replaces the Revolver). During normal play, where the Medic is positioned slightly behind the front line of battle, the Overhealer will unlikely provide much difference to his alternative weapons. At this point, the Medic has a hard time healing characters quickly enough for persistent healing to take effect.

The Overhealer might make a difference between respawns, particularly if the Medic respawns with 2 or more others. That way, the race to the front should allow the medic to get several classes over healed.

But the most interesting time to use the Overhealer is during set up. At the moment, the out of the gate response to a medic is almost always an invulnerability Ubercharge whereas the Kritzkrieg tends to be used during unstructured play.

But the Overhealer is an ideal alternative during set up because it becomes possible for the Medic to overheal the entire team, providing an interesting alternative to an Uber rush.

When considered in this light, giving the Overhealer an invulnerability uber as well doesn't make a huge amount of sense - because the Medic gets both the overheal benefit to the entire team, and the benefit of this initial Ubercharge. I suspect Valve has been tuning the Overhealer rates primarily for this set up time, to either prevent the Medic healing the entire team, or getting the Ubercharge straight away.

The Blockenheal avoids this problem by giving the Overhealer an alternative Ubercharge effect. When charged, right-clicking with the Blockenheal immediately overheals the target and the Medic to 200% of their maximum health, regardless of how much damage they have sustained. This appears as a zap of electricity which shoots up the medigun beam to the target.

For the next 8 seconds after this instant heal effect, the Blockenheal heals at +200% rate - that is three times as fast - up to 200% overheal. Players healed beyond 150% health have noticeably larger overhealed particles surrounding them. The healing above 150% decays at the normal Overheal decay rate after the Blockenheal uber finishes.

The Blockenheal recharges at +100% the speed of the Medigun - that is twice as fast. More importantly, the Blockenheal starts out charged, so that the Medic has the ability to be a useful choice during the dying seconds of the match, without being an overpowered one. The Blockenheal normally heals targets at the same speed as the Medigun and Kritzkrieg.

The Blockenheal allows the ridiculous ways of breaking the game by having 200% health, while requiring the Medic keep a watchful eye on the class he is supporting. The Blockenheal uber doesn't provide the same level of punch that the Kritzkrieg or Medigun does, but benefits more players around the Medic than the Uber or Kritzkrieg is capable of helping. The instant heal effect can also be used defensively, to protect a Heavy from an incoming spy, crocket or distant sniper, or if the Medic becomes isolated.

A Heated Debate Over Balance: Part Two (Viability and Validity)

In part one of this article series, I outlined some ways of balancing games in reaction to a nerf to Team Fortress 2's Pyro. Since then, the Pyro has been (mostly) unnerfed by tweaking the percentages and duration of various values but the Team Fortress 2 Pyro community remains dissatisfied with class as it currently plays. It's time to revisit this discussion.

In the various Team Fortress 2 articles I've written, I've come up with a variety of weapon unlocks and suggestions for the classes in the game. I've not especially worried about the numbers, on the basis that these values require extensive testing - but I was proud of the variety of different ideas I'd come up in isolation.

But reading the Steam TF2 class and balance forums after these suggestions is a little disheartening. It looks like everyone has lots of ideas to contribute, and they're all prepared to go into lots of detail about these ideas, defending, tweaking and trying to balance them based on the opinions of even more people willing to label them as OP or UP (overpowered or underpowered). My thoughts are bound to get lost in the noise. And there is a lot of noise.

(I'm reminded of a Penny Arcade cartoon about the evils developing an MMORPG.)

It is hard to balance the Pyro because Valve hasn't given enough statistical information about the game as a whole, so any set of numbers anyone comes up with exists in a vacuum. It is incredible difficult to work out if a change is viable as a result. The way I get around this in Unangband is through algorithmic balancing: by running short artificial simulations to attempt to determine the degree of difficulty of a monster, and where to place it in the game. There are a lot of built-in checks and balances to allow this in a roguelike; most of which of these are absent in a multi-player game.

Especially critical for balance purposes is whether a choice is viable at high level play. High level competitive play in Team Fortress 2 is usually 6v6, with two soldiers, 2 scouts, a medic and a demo on each team. This structure has emerged organically from the interactions between the variety of TF2 classes and shows that the choice of class is important, and balanced in a way that is interesting and useful in tournament play. Making a class that was too viable by itself would disrupt the delicate balance that has evolved.

Last night I finally got a Team Fortress 2 drop I had been waiting for: the Scotsmans's Skullcutter. This is a recent addition to the game from a community contribution with the following stats: +20% damage, -15% speed, longer weapon reach.

So how can I determine if this choice presented to me is a viable one? Well, I can reasonably be assured that it is unlikely to be used in high level play: because at that level, a large part of the game is about mobility, and a speed reduction is a significant nerf at that level (although the demoman has other ways of quickly getting around). I can look at the percentage of players choosing to equip the item at tf2stats or try to get a recommendation on the Steam forums either from the Demoman forums or the victims of Demoman forums. I can also compare simulations of combat between the skull cutter equipped demoman against other classes, weighting the probability of getting a crit against the maximum or average hit points of a particular class.

But what a chore.

It was far easier for me to switch to the Demoman class, equip the weapon (along with the Chargin' Targe) and rush out and sever heads. 8 heads in 3 minutes later, I could confidently declare 'The demoaxe is OP' before switching back to whichever class I was intending to play for the evening.

That is because I'm not trying to find out whether the Skullcutter is a viable weapon - because I'm not able to run a controlled statistical trial or simulation. What I am looking for is for anecdotal evidence that the Skullcutter is a valid weapon to use at all. When we talk about interesting choices in games, we are not trying to determine whether the alternatives are equally viable, but whether the alternatives can be easily validated.

What do I mean by this? Let's take the Pyro's Homewrecker. This weapon has it's damage nerfed against players in return for increased damage against enemy buildings, and the ability to knock a Spy's sappers from friendly buildings. The Homewrecker is not an especially viable weapon. The damage nerf is too high and there is limited opportunity to use its special abilities.

But people still use the Homewrecker: 39% of them when given the choice. This is because it is easy to validate when the Homewrecker is useful - by knocking sappers off a friendly building. Everytime you do this, you are unconsciously reinforcing the correctness of the decision to use the Homewrecker. And if you see sapped buildings when you don't have a Homewrecker equipped, you are immediately reminded of the presence of this other choice.

Any time you are forced to make a decision you are immediately also creating a doubt in your mind about whether you have made the right choice, so you are unconsciously attempting to look for evidence to support the decision. People play games not for the choices, but for the validation of those choices.

So we have a contrast of types of decision: viable decisions are only important at high level play, where the percentage amount damage or movement is changed by are critical, but validated decisions are important at all levels of play. Equally, you can present lots of interesting choices which are not viable, but are still valid - the fact there are nine classes in TF2, only five of which are viable, but all nine of which are valid. A lot of balancing work, and statistical analysis, and heated debate is put towards trying to make decisions viable - but it is far more important to make sure decisions are valid.

I've suggested there are two ways that a decision can be validated: you can have either negative or positive reinforcement. The negative enforcement - where you are shown to have made the wrong decision - is weak in the sense that it reminds you of the presence of alternatives, but also creates frustration about the choice you have made. But positive reinforcement, that you have made the right decision, is much stronger because we actively seek it out, and allow our gut instincts in doing so to overcome our rational, viable, decision making processes. And it is particularly the feeling of mastery, where you feel unbeatable against others who have made a poor choice, that is important in multi-player games.

So how does this apply to the Pyro?

Let's take another Team Fortress 2 class which is not viable at high level play: the Spy. The Spy isn't used much competitively because his abilities rely in part on the incompetence of other players: his attacks are situational, he has limited ability to move unexpectedly and limited damage output.

But importantly, the Spy has a lot of opportunity to demonstrate mastery - the backstab being the ultimate expression of dominance over another player. Each successful backstab reinforces the decision taken to be a Spy, as does sneaking around behind enemy lines, avoiding detection while being disguised and sapping buildings. A Cloak & Dagger spy has his decision to equip this item validated every time he hides in a corner and does nothing - surely a contrast in a decision being validated, while being completely nonviable for him and his team. A Dead Ringer spy has his decision to equip this item reinforced every time he (apparently) dies. Beginner spies are drawn to sap buildings like flies to honey simply because they can.

Even the simple act of jumping up and down on the spot can validate the choice to be a Spy if you're disguised as a Scout, and the enemy makes the mistaken assumption you are one. And no other class has a 'validate my Spy-ness' button like the Spy's call for medic while disguised.

Similarly the Engineer is rewarded for their engineer busy work alongside sentry kills and the Sniper for head shots, even though fully charged body shots are a much more viable decision. (The Razorback is another great example of a decision which is not especially viable but is frequently, and usually negatively, validated).

What creates the most heat about the Pyro is the fact the class has so few opportunities for mastery. There are two clear examples:
1. Air blasting an uber charge
2. Setting a Spy on fire

In addition, I regularly experience two additional types, which are situational and can be difficult to achieve:
3. Killing an enemy from behind using the Backburner.
4. Reflecting rockets at medium range against a Soldier.

There are more (Puff & Sting, finishing with an Axtinguisher, Flaregun criticals, corner rushing a sentry nest, the Homewrecker example I gave earlier) but these have the same problems of unreliability and situational complexity.

Equally there are situations that the Pyro primary weapon design implies should give them mastery, but in fact do not, such as setting lots of enemies on fire and ambushing an enemy. Each time the Pyro fails to perform in these situations, the player is negatively reminded of the choices that they could have made (e.g. pick another class) but did not.

The challenge in a Pyro redesign is to validate their decision through feelings of mastery, by appealing to the intuition of the player, without necessarily adjusting the viability of the class. I don't expect the Pyro to be used in high level play, so I'm not focused on increasing the top end skill level. I would suggest a design which does the following:

1. Rewards setting multiple enemies on fire.
2. Reduce the penalty for missing nearby rocket and grenade reflections.
3. Increased survivability in close quarter combat.
4. Reduce the penalty for choosing the Backburner while increasing the skill required.

These are chosen to try to minimise the negatives for a wrong decision, to allow the situations I outlined earlier to emerge more frequently and validate the decision to play a Pyro. I believe these can be achieved without requiring additional art or animation assets, or new features be added to the game, as follows:

1. Rewards setting multiple enemies on fire.

The only benefit the Pyro receives from the after burn is an increased chance of criticals, which ramps up slowly as the after burn DoT accumulates (and is vulnerable to after burn removal from a variety of sources). The minimal change to benefit the Pyro would be to apply the total DoT credit to the critical chance immediately, instead of accumulating the damage as the enemy burns i.e. every enemy the Pyro has on fire counts for +0.6% chance of criticals every second for up to 30 seconds after they were last hit by a flame particle.

As noted, Backburner criticals create a sense of mastery - by crediting the Pyro prematurely for fire damage they will inflict, there is an increased likelihood of experiencing this feeling against a large group of enemies.

2. Reduce the penalty for missing rocket and grenade reflections.

Grenades and rockets both deliver explosive damage, so the simplest solution without affecting the balance of the Pyro against other classes is to give the Pyro innate explosives resistance - an alternative would be to reduce burst damage but which doesn't address instances where the Pyro is directly hit (likely given they are moving into the proximity of the weapon). A the moment two close range rocket or grenade direct hits will kill a Pyro: to boost this to three requires they have at least 224 health, or approximately 1.3 times their current health. A critical rocket does 270 damage, a critical grenade does 280 - 300 damage.

So the Pyro should have 30-60% additional resistance to explosive damage. This can be justified in game by the suit the Pyro wears. At 30% resistance, an overhealed Pyro will be able to resist a single critical rocket or grenade so I'd suggest this as the baseline (compare this to the Targe's 40% resistance).

3. Increase the survivability in close quarters combat.

The biggest risk to the Pyro in close quarters combat is from rockets or grenades which they are unable to reflect in time - all other enemies can be set on fire and then puffed away. The increased resistance to explosive damage should be sufficient to address this.

4. Reduce the penalty for choosing the Backburner while increasing the skill required.

The choice of Backburner is penalized every time the Pyro is presented with the opportunity to do an Air Blast - which is frequently. I suggest the situations where the Backburner gets mastery are so limited (from behind, and sometimes against other Pyros) that the complete elimination of the air blast is too significant. So I'd change the Backburner to have the following changes from the Flamethrower:

+15% damage
Criticals from behind
Reflected projectiles do not minicrit
-50% ammunition capacity

At 100 ammo, the Backburner still has over 8 seconds of burn available, but each air blast uses twice the effective ammunition and so is a significant choice to make.

Brb: Engineering

From the Kritzkast interview with Robin Walker:

One of the other things we tried was a secondary weapon that instantly teleported the Engineer to his teleport exit. So Engineers could leave their sentrygun for a bit to skirmish or collect metal, and be able to immediately teleport back to the sentrygun if something bad happened. It did work at achieving those goals, but we didn’t like the side effects. Teleporters stopped being much of a team focused tool, with Engineers placing them in places that made sense for their personal use, and not necessarily for the team. We also felt it was too easy for Engineers, almost eliminating the risk inside the decision of whether they should leave their nest to grab some resources. Both of these were solvable issues, but while testing this we found another idea that played much better, attacked the same problem of Engineers being rewarded for moving out from their nest occasionally, and had lots of other interesting applications.

Ah well. It was worth a suggestion.

Meet the Handbag: Pyro Secondary Weapon Unlock

Brought to you by the leading fashion houses Un-Nerf QQ and W+M1, the handbag replaces the secondary weapon (shotgun or flaregun) in a style to complement your primary weapon and make your Pyro the close combat champion (s)he once was.

+25% Flamethrower damage
+50 health with Backburner equipped
Increase the afterburn of your primary weapon to 10 seconds


Nearby burning enemies heal the Pyro as per the Medigun, up to 150% of his health.

[Edit: Amended since Valve mostly unnerfed the changes shortly after this was written].

A Heated Debate Over Balance: Part One (Rebalancing)

I have this bitter, metallic taste in my mouth, like I've just bitten down on my tongue after being slapped in the face... or drinking meths.

I'm angry. They've nerfed the Pyro and now expect me to be happy with this buff?

Let me back up a bit.

For those of you not aware, there has been some light and fury about the recent changes to the Pyro class in Team Fortress 2. Valve has chosen to decrease the direct damage and after burn effects (damage over time) effects of their primary weapon - the Flamethrower - in return for improving the effects and frequency of use of its alternate fire - which allows you to push enemy players and reflect projectiles using a puff of air (Some irrate players now want the class to be called the Aero). This was released in a patch to the game about a week ago, without comment as to why, as part of a number of changes in this constantly evolving game.

Team Fortress 2 is perhaps unique in commercial games - outside of the MMORPG genre - in that it has received constant tweaks since release in game balance. This isn't just a matter of releasing new content (multiplayer maps), but significant changes to the overall balance of classes - and with the class updates - significant changes to the way some classes play. It is a bold experiment, permitted by the digital distribution technology Steam, and a pioneering glimpse at a way some games can continue to be relevent years after release.

Team Fortress 2 is not the first game to receive a dedicated following - Starcraft, Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo, and Valve's own Counterstrike are the first three examples that spring to mind. What two of these games - Starcraft and Street Fighter - have in common is longevity has been maintained through the incredible balance between the moving parts in the system.

Unfortunately balance isn't something you can just design in: it is very much a matter of incredible luck as it is about deliberate design. If you consider all of the computer games ever made, there is only an extremely limited number which are still being played more than 15 years on from their inception (this holds less true now with change with the recent trend in retrogaming). And it is entirely possible that game designers may not even understand what it is that made their game successful. See this analysis on some of the micro issues in Starcraft 2 to get a feel for the level of accidental design detail that contributes towards game balance.

But there are some principles of game design that hold true when it comes to balance - worth reiterating here:

1. Always balance upwards

The most powerful character in a game is probably almost the most fun - especially when you are playing that character and your opponent isn't. As a result, you should use this as a yard stick for where you buff your other choices up to. But be careful not to overshoot when improving them, because:

2. It is much harder to scale down and take away than to scale up and add

Much like cooking, it is much harder to take away ingredients to a game than it is to add them. Particuarly once a game is released, human nature is ingrained against removing functionality and decreasing ability. Programmers have written code, art assets have been designed, people have played with the ability at a particular level. There is nothing like the cry of nerf to rally the forums. But if you are going to take away functionality, be sure to:

3. Change one variable rather than scaling across the board

If you think about balancing a game by playing it, you are really conducting a series of experiments and seeing the results. And science works best when you can vary one value and leave the other variables as fixed as possible. So if you have a character which does three things too well, leave two of them at the level that is overpowered, and reduce the third and then see if that leaves the character balanced against the other choices. Of course, this is easiest when you:

4. Keep your variables independent

The Mutalisk in Starcraft was incredibly hard to balance because it uses the same attack to attack both air and ground units. During testing and post-release patching, if it was too effective against air units, reducing the attack strength would make it ineffective against ground units. And vice versa. Creating two separate attacks would have allowed the game designers to better balance this unit - at the cost of increased art and animation assets required to do so.

5. Statistics and mathematical analysis is incredibly important

If you consider playing as a series of experiments, then the other tools of scientific analysis: statistics and mathematical modelling are obviously critical to get an understanding of how the game works. Unangband balances its monsters by modelling a simulation of 10 rounds of combat and seeing how much damage the monster inflicts. This model is as simple as taking the highest of (chance of attack * damage inflicted * 'typical player resistance * 10) of each attack the monster is capable of but works remarkably effectively. And I don't have to get this exactly right because Unangband, like many games:

6. Provide plenty of resets

A reset is a way of either player recovering from a situation by using up an exhaustable resource. Guilty Gear has an incredible cast of characters with bizarre attacks but also has a number of ways of recovering from the effects and traps of any of these attacks. The resets act as a negative feedback mechanism to dampen the risk of any positive feedback interactions between abilities getting out of control. I've written more about resets and traps in my series on designing a magic system.

7. Intuition and fun are the most important mechanism for balance

Balancing a game is like finding the most effective pay out on an almost infinitely long multi-armed slot machine. You have so many variables to consider that a complete mathematical analysis of most games is impossible. Luckily there is one computer capable of solving these kinds of problems, and that's the one between your ears. But experience is a requirement here. You need to play lots of other games - especially games with depth to them - to appreciate how to balance your own.

8. Ignore (almost) all player feedback when it comes to 'too powerful' abilities

There are an incredible number of people who are prepared to label an ability in a game as being too powerful or cheap, without understanding the ramifications of that ability at high level play. So as a rule you should ignore them. The exceptions are those players who are at the top of their game. You are then permitted to listen respectfully, and then ignore their feedback unless there is other evidence to back up their anecdotes.

9. Your players will figure out the numbers so make the maths available to them

One of the most useful things the phenomenon of crowd sourcing has produced are endless wikis for games of detailled statistics of in game play. If your game becomes popular, the players will figure out the numbers, so you should make them available. Surprisingly, this happens infrequently outside of the strategy game genre - where tables of numbers are a typical characteristic of in game documentation.

So how do the above principles help when it comes to discussing the Pyro changes that Valve have made?

The Pyro class was one of the earliest to receive a class update from Valve - only the Medic preceeded it. But balancing the Pyro was immediately problematic. Within a few weeks of the class update, the new primary weapon the Backburner got its first nerf. Previously it had provided +50 health (and glorious were the days on the servers when the Pyro update came out). Then Valve added back some of the damage drop off that they had removed with the Pyro update to the Pyro's flamethrower.

Since then, the other updates have added various ways of putting out the Pyro's afterburn effect: the Sniper's Jarate, the Pyro's airpuff, the Heavy's sandvich, the Spy's dead ringer (although the cloaked spy can be immediately set on fire again). These have been both thematic improvements and Valve providing a number of reset options to the afterburn effect.

Discussion on the Pyro prior to the most recent changes on the forums has revolved around 2 main areas of contention: the Pyro still being underpowered, and the criticism of the W+M1 still of play of so-called noobs - those people who play a Pyro by running forward with the flamethrowing and not otherwise thinking. Neither of these suggest serious balance issues, and the criticism of 'cheapness' can especially be ignored.

Valve themselves have acknowledged issues with the Pyro at 'high-level' play. But Valve's statements to this effect have been contradictory in the past and may not necessarily point to the heart of the problem - they initially stated that the Pyro was intended for close combat, but the flamethrower has always had weak close in damage - now doubly so.

So is there any balance problems for the Pyro that we can establish empirically without anecdotal evidence or hersay? Looking at the information made available by Valve and third parties, I can see at least one imbalance, and one paradox, worth discussing further.

Firstly the choice between the Flamethrower and Backburner is heavily skewed in favour of the flamethrower. In fact, no other class has such a split between primary weapons (It is worth stressing that all the statistics on the main page are from players who only have both choices available). And how to rebalance? Balance up, of course. This suggests the backburner may need to be improved against the flamethrower some how.

More interestingly, the choice between Shotgun and Flaregun is almost a perfect split. So Valve's buff to allow the Flaregun to do minicrits against opponents on fire has been received well, which we'll use here as a proxy for the two choices being balanced against each other.

Finally the melee weapon selection is biased heavily against the default axe, and towards the Axtinguisher. With the Homewrecker, there is the possibility of novelty or bragging rights factor that may influence the frequency it appears in the short term. Again, we should balance the default Fireaxe up if there is a balance problem - but we don't have the statistics to suggest that this is the case.

From checking the preferred weapons we can see that no other class favours one weapon choice any less for the primary and melee weapons - the Soldier's Equalizer is a straight upgrade to the Pickaxe and so there is no reason to ever not use it if it is available. So we have a clear imbalance between some of the choices that the Pyro has available. This does not necessarily mean that there is not a situational advantage to the weapons which are least selected, but the situation advantage must occur rarely. As always, the suggestion is to balance the unfavoured choices up so that they become more preferred. But this is not itself an indication of whether the Pyro is a balanced class, and so we do not have evidence yet that the class has been nerfed.

Looking at the class distribution choices, the Pyro falls towards the bottom of the range of those chosen. But interestingly, despite being relatively unpopular, the flamethrower damage percentage of total damage inflicted is the second highest behind the grenade launcher. And it has the second average longest range of any weapon (including the Sniper Rifle) except for the minigun. But we know that the flamethrower damage output is incredibly low. There is definitely a paradox here, and one caused by the aggregation of flamethrower damage, and afterburn damage in the same statistics.

And this is the main problem with the publically available statistics. There's not enough detail to have a viable discussion about the Pyro 'nerf'. In fact, the statistics Valve releases aggregate all the weapon statistics together, so it is not even possible to say which weapon choice does more damage (You can see this from the Sniper SMG - actually the Jarate - being the fourth highest source of damage, and the Fireaxe - actually the Axtinguisher - having such a high critical rate). It is not clear from the statistics page but this appears to be a limitation of the way TF2 collects stats.

Without Valve coming out and providing more detailled information about the decision making in making the Pyro changes, the outrage of the forums will continue to boil and players will continue to come up with suggested buffs and nerfs without a deeper understanding of the process that went into making these decisions. Mathematical modelling of the Pyro damage drop off isn't enough to explain the paradox of the flamethrower having the second highest percentage damage output.

So my request is not to buff the Pyro back - it's to improve the communication process and statistics collection. That way we can have a much more useful discussion about the changes to one of my favourite classes.

For the record though: I'd like to see the Pyro back to what they were on the release day of their class update... just for a week, or as a mod. But my biggest problem isn't a Pyro's damage output, it is their longevity. They need something to survive a few seconds longer: perhaps the Backburner should trade increased protection against bullets for increased knockback (allowing an onrushing Pyro to be pushed back by a Heavy's gun) and the Homewrecker should reduce knockback when wielded.

For those of you interested in a more indepth discussion of balance in games, I recommend David Sirlin's excellent four part guide on game balance, as well as his website in general.

I've also written a follow up part two to this article.

Valve reduces their carbon emissions profile

Also designs games better than Zynga, CCP (makers of Eve Offline).

Re: Engineering

I've came up with suggestions some time ago about what alternate weapons the Team Fortress 2 Engineer should have. But since then, Valve have released several subsequent updates which have considerably changed how the Sniper, Soldier and especially the Demoman play and a beautiful crafted fan page has suggested some alternate turret weapons. And, in case you've missed it, the last major update to Team Fortress 2 added a chocolate bar for the Heavy and several melee weapons (One for the Pyro and one shared between the Demoman and Soldier).

So the scope is there for the Engineer to have more than a few additional items added: either as a part of the update, or in further releases.

Looking back at the suggestions I made: the Quik-R-Ratchet, or a variant thereof has already been tested in beta as the PDQ; the Scout order book suggestion existed at one point as a backpack but was not adopted; the I-Spy-Shooter is fine, but not amazing - and having played my first 35 point Spy game yesterday, I now feel qualified to state its hard enough already to sneak up on an engineer that I think there are better alternatives; and the BRB still feels distinct enough to be useful - perhaps also allowing the engineer to teleport even if his exit is sapped.

I'm still not convinced that the engineer needs alternate buildings - the only one from the fan page that feels 'right' is the multi-mode flying turret - and Valve themselves have pretty much ruled out replacing the teleporter or dispenser. Buildings that provide various buffs (kritz, minicrits, invulnerability) make the buffs that other classes provide less special, and similarly turrets that provide alternate attacks lessen the uniqueness of class weapons. And anything that affects the small window of opportunity between backstabbing an engineer and having the turret turn and shoot you while you try to sap it, is going to affect the balance of Spy vs Engineer encounters - which of the ways of taking out turret emplacements is the most interesting and least frustrating for the Engineer.

Here are some more Engineer item suggestions:

Gone Again Guitar: While playing the Gone Again, the engineer and all nearby friendly buildings become invisible and do not have any effect or attack enemy players. The Gone Again plays as a taunt animation for a fixed duration with a cooldown. Why: There needs to be a guitar based weapon for the Engineer, and something which allows the Engineer to build in an open location and then draw in the opposition should be fun. Especially since you'll be able to hear him play, but not know where he necessarily is. Replaces the Shotgun.

Ranch Home Rivetgun: The Rivetgun is a ranged weapon similar to the medic's primary weapon, but with a slower rate of fire, much smaller magazine capacity and more damage per shot (about 25% more DPS than the medic). However, the Rivetgun also repairs friendly buildings it hits - at approximately the same rate as hitting it with a wrench. Why: this allows the engineer to repair their buildings while not necessarily next to them - letting them roam with confidence. Since the repair depends on ammunition, it should be a shorter term improvement, and this is balanced against wrenching because the Rivetgun doesn't resupply buildings or remove saps. Replaces the Shotgun.

The Cowpoke: The Cowpoke is a crossbow with a barbwire drawstring and a red hot poker for a bolt. The Cowpoke has better range than the Sniper's bow, but does less damage, and has a much slower reload. Friendly turrets turn twice as quickly when tracking targets branded by the Cowpoke. The Cowpoke replaces the Shotgun. I had planned on making this a melee weapon but realized that a) hitting a building with a branding iron doesn't make a huge amount of sense and b) making this a ranged weapon encourages the engineer to run forward and tag upcoming targets. Note that this doesn't prevent a Spy from disguising or turning invisible - just when the Spy becomes a valid target they get tracked that much quicker.

Stand Tall Spurs: The stand tall spurs allow the Engineer to pick up and move his buildings. If the engineer is hit while moving a building, the building takes damage as well as the engineer. The Stand Tall Spurs replaces the Shotgun - left click to pick up, and then place the building using the original building placement commands. There is a short set up time when the building is placed again (2 seconds) before it comes fully active.

Well-done Arc Welder: The Well-done allows you to buff all nearby buildings temporarily which reduces damage to them by 50% for explosives and 25% for all other damage types, but means you take twice as long to upgrade your buildings. The buff lasts for 15 seconds with a 45 second cool down and appears to be a shower of sparks coming off the affected buildings. Why: an invulnerability buff is tempting, but would completely stop an ubercharge against a building in it's tracks. Whereas a buff may tempt both the attacker and defender to hang around. By biasing the damage reduction against explosives, it reduces the effectiveness of classes the most which don't have to expose them to direct line of fire of the turret to destroy it. Replaces the Wrench.

Good 'ol Grappling Hook: I've waxed lyrical about the next for a grappling hook in Team Fortress 2 long enough - hit a building or map section and you are pulled towards it, hit an enemy player and they are pulled towards you. This would completely unbalance the Engineer, allowing them to aggressively move forward and put turrets in unexpected locations, as well as drag an opponent into their turret's line of fire. I think the craziness would be worth it though - especially after the fun I had with the Demoman replacement weapons. To balance it: the grappling hook prevents you upgrading any building or speeding up construction because it replaces the Wrench. I'd hate to have to contend with a level 3 turret somewhere I hadn't planned on looking.

TF2 bug filed with Valve

The Scottish Resistance is too boring a weapon on many maps - placing the stickies and sitting around waiting is unnecessarily dull, especially when compared to the Eyelander.

The stickes should nag the Demoman in a wee high pitched voice - as if they were married to him, and Irish.

Soldier vs Demo

The second best thing about the pre-release hype for the Team Fortress 2 update has been sorting out my Internet connection and getting some time spent gaming online. The ADSL 2 connection I have at home has had persistent short drop outs for the last 9 months or so, which has been fine for using browsing the net but absolute hell for online gaming. I borrowed a Draytech Vigor 2820 from work last week (because this model sorted out a similar problem one of our customers was experiencing), and since plugging it in the connection has been rock solid. I don't normally mix work and pleasure - and have no interesting in astroturfing this blog - but I am impressed enough to pass on a recommendation.

After having stayed away from online gaming for so long, I expected to be rusty, but the time away turned out to have made my heart grow fonder and made the experience seem fresh and alive. It helped that there was a map update while I was away and I suspect that the line "Significantly reduced the amount of network traffic being sent." from that update has made network play much smoother. I achieved 2nd milestone for the Heavy, Spy and Sniper - with an Uberectomy of a medic standing amidst five of his team mates - and spent plenty of time soloing as a Heavy with Natasha and a sandvich.

(As an aside, it looks like I've glitched on several achievements - I've definitely achieved Does it Hurt When I do this, and I've somehow caused no damage as a Pyro).

As for the Soldier and Demo weapons - the sword and shield leave me cold, and I'll have to play with them to get a feel for how they change the game, but the Scottish Resistance sounds exactly like the Sticky Bomb gun that I want. The Soldier weapons seem more pedestrian, catering to higher skill players - although a banner rush will be a challenge - and to be honest, since the scout update I've been playing less Soldier than Scout. I'm sure there'll be plenty of happy soldiers ready to assplode me with their crockets.

In the big scheme of things, Valve has done an incredible job balancing the introduction of so many new weapons into an already finely tuned game. Only the Sandman aka nerf bat has been rejected by high level players and it's still a fun weapon to use for those of us who are less skilled. Of the remainder, the Heavy, the Spy and (if I could shoot that damn bow) the Sniper have all had viable alternate builds added to the game, without harming their core 'feel'. The introduction of the alternate fire for the Pyro has added well needed depth to that class to the point where I think the Back Burner needs to be unnerfed (+50 health) to compete.

The Medic has suffered the most, being the first class with weapon upgrades, and the Bonesaw and Syringe Gun need to be differentiated further from their replacements (the Syringe gun should boost uber at a rate moderately faster than healing a wounded player if all shots hit at maximum rate of fire; the Bonesaw should make the medic's weapons kritz or perhaps minicrit if it hits twice in a row - similar to the KGB, but obviously with much less potential for damaging the opposition).

As for what to look forward to, I still can't think of anything more compelling than the Quik-R-Ratchet and the Big Red Button, or whatever it is Valve ends up designing for my favourite class. And whatever the 10th class is, I'd like it to be something from the list I suggested (Even if I stole them all from Dystopia).

And the best thing about the pre-release hype for Team Fortress 2's latest update? Tom Francis getting the weapon he so rightfully deserves...