Class Based Ruleset


(Guilte) #1

This is a discussion, not a flame war.

Classes

Assualt - 1 Per Team
-Rhino
-Thunder
-Fragger
-Nader

Support - 1 Per Team
-Skyhammer
-Stoker
-Arty
-Kira

Engineer - 1 Per Team
-Bushwacker
-Proxy
-Fletcher
-Turtle

Medics - 2 Per Team
-Aura
-Sawbonez
-Sparks
-Phoenix

Recon - 1 Per Team
-Vasili
-Phantom
-Amy
-Red Eye

*Mercenary swap can only be made within classes, unless it’s engineer. One engineer can be in play at a time.

Example:
Player spawns in as Skyhammer, but bomb is planted. Player can switch to engineer when needed.
Player can also switch to Arty, Stoker, and Kira.

Team Loadout Example:
Assault: Rhino, Fragger, Nader OR Engineer
Support: Skyhammer, Stoker, Kira OR Engineer
Medic 1: Aura, Sawbonez, Phoenix OR Enginner
Medic 2: Aura, Sawbonez, Sparks OR Engineer
Recon: Vasili, Red Eye, Amy OR Engineer

Reasonings:
The problem with the “One Mercenary Ruleset” is that it allows for potentionally over powered combinations.

Pros of a “Class Based Ruleset”:
Class limits prevent people from rotating out Skyhammers to have airstrikes constantly available.
Reduces potential overpowered combinations (Fragger + Nader, Fragger + Rhino, Bushwacker + Fletcher).
Promotes consistency within the game.
Still allows for switching mercenaries, without being restrictive.


(T0K_) #2

To my mind, the “1 merc per team” is better.


(Guilte) #3

Can you give a reasoning?


(Gi.Am) #4

I also prefer the “1 merc rule” over both your idea and what we saw in the last cups.

Before I argue for the 1 Merc let me preface a view things.

I’m not factoring in Playerskill and Merc preferences. I’m mainly looking at idealized Merc stats based on what is perceived as strong right now.

Comp play means 5 vs 5 meaning at every given time a team has to fill 5 Slots.

One very important part is killing the opposition to make a play. Therefore the overall Killing potential (KP) of a team is always important.

With that to the different systems.

Yours is simple. You allow 1Slot per class and 2 for the medic classes. And have the engineer on rotation with all classes.

So I start out by picking every class (the engineer is important and I will have him up almost all the time) however since the medic increases both my (KP) and my objective solving capabilities (people stay alive longer / more time for plays) so I will bring two medics.

There are only two decisions left to make what class takes up the engineering slot and what mercs do I bring.
Assault, Engineer, Medic is a given so I will rotate my enigneer slot most likely between the support and the recon.

Merc selection dead simple (KP) is important so I take those that do their class jobs and improve my (KP) the best.

That lineup looks like this (Fragger, Bushwacker, Sawbones (2), skyhammer/vassili)
Unsurprisingly that lineup looks very familiar.

Which brings me to the current Dirtycup system.

It allows all picks except assault class. Unsurprisingly the base composition looks the same (It is simply the best for most situations right now).
If I need a certain role I will simply doubledown on the same merc twice that does the job (except fragger). Need stronger objective game double up the bushwacker. Get the EV down more often add a second skyhammer. Need a second medic here comes the Sawbones twin.
Because choosing them will increase your job power without affecting your (KP).

And because of that Team compositions stay very similar and predictable (the mercs only change if patches changes the pecking order of the mercs).

Now the 1 merc rule starts out with the same composition, except you can’t have that second Sawbones. So you have to pack Aura.
But she doesn’t have the killing potential and is more situational.

That creates a slight opening in the team that can be exploited. Maybe pack a Nader or a Fletcher, to counter the Aura (instead of a second medic). Same goes for objectives. If I can’t use a second bushwacker I have to make a decision fletcher or proxy.
Both are not perfect in every situation adding more openings against your team.

Imho this leads to more interesting matches (and faster since defenses are less watertight). Adds a strategic component to merc selection and will promote merc counter picks. Resulting in more merc varity in tournaments (and who doesn’t love to see their favourite merc played by pros).
Maybe even crazy stuff like 4 assaults + enigneer for certain moments in a match to trow the opposition off.


(coruscate) #5

I aggree with you on the most points but I would go with having the Engineer as “utility” who are allowed to switch between Sup/Recon/Engineer so you get a bit more air for teams having a big variety of tactics.


(sparklingMuffin) #6

+1


(velan) #7

Looks great, more structure without damaging Merc flexibility in competetive play. Having this would also give a better viewing experience on cups and tourneys, as the Meta is “structured but flexible”.


(RazielWarmonic) #8

[quote=“Coruscate;22490”]I aggree with you on the most points but I would go with having the Engineer as “utility” who are allowed to switch between Sup/Recon/Engineer so you get a bit more air for teams having a big variety of tactics.
[/quote]
These are based on what the devs classify the mercs as.


(coruscate) #9

[quote=“Warmonic;23177”][quote=“Coruscate;22490”]I aggree with you on the most points but I would go with having the Engineer as “utility” who are allowed to switch between Sup/Recon/Engineer so you get a bit more air for teams having a big variety of tactics.
[/quote]
These are based on what the devs classify the mercs as.
[/quote]

I know in a competitive sense I would like the Engineer to swap around to recon/sup not every other one to Engineer that limits the actions of the battle right now (most Utility players are playing Sniper/Sup)


(Guilte) #10

[quote=“Coruscate;23286”][quote=“Warmonic;23177”][quote=“Coruscate;22490”]I aggree with you on the most points but I would go with having the Engineer as “utility” who are allowed to switch between Sup/Recon/Engineer so you get a bit more air for teams having a big variety of tactics.
[/quote]
These are based on what the devs classify the mercs as.
[/quote]

I know in a competitive sense I would like the Engineer to swap around to recon/sup not every other one to Engineer that limits the actions of the battle right now (most Utility players are playing Sniper/Sup)[/quote]

I’ve actually been thinking about it, and the more I think about it, the more I don’t see a problem with it.


(art1er) #11

i like B)


(MULKMULKMULKMULKMULKMULKMULK) #12

or go 6v6. its better


(goodField) #13

Gonna have to go with GI.Aim on this one. The One Merc rule makes you have to really think about your composition. I’d even take it further that you shouldn’t be able to change Mercs while in game, which makes your Merc and Loadout choice a serious point of thought. You can get a RHINO, Skyhammer, and Sawbones… but you’re sinking a lot of focus into RHINO’s Minigun which isn’t the best option in every game, hell even on every objective.

Also, with 5v5 why would the rules allow you to drag two medics along, the game is about teamwork – not chain-rezzing.


(Guilte) #14

[quote=“goodField;24665”]Gonna have to go with GI.Aim on this one. The One Merc rule makes you have to really think about your composition. I’d even take it further that you shouldn’t be able to change Mercs while in game, which makes your Merc and Loadout choice a serious point of thought. You can get a RHINO, Skyhammer, and Sawbones… but you’re sinking a lot of focus into RHINO’s Minigun which isn’t the best option in every game, hell even on every objective.

Also, with 5v5 why would the rules allow you to drag two medics along, the game is about teamwork – not chain-rezzing. [/quote]

What do you mean think about your composition, it ends up basically the same every time.
2 medics
1 heavy
1 engi/vasili/sky
1 field ops


(zfzmikey) #15

They just need a pick/ban phase before each match. ez