Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Team Fortress 2 Stats Confirm Every Suspicion

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the bloody-snipers dept.

Games 110

Valve has released another round of stats, this one concerning all that Team Fortress 2 playing we've been doing. They have things broken out along a couple of different metrics, including lifespan, kills, assists, captures, and even just damage dealt. As Rock, Paper, Shotgun's commentary notes, the stats confirm every suspicion you've had about your fellow players. "Yes, there are more rushy-bastard Scouts than any other class. Yes, campy-bastard Snipers earn the most points. Yes, hitpointy-bastard Heavies get the most kills. Yes, hidey-bastard Engineers live longest. And so on. What's slightly odder is the breakdown of which side wins most frequently on each map. BLU has the edge in every killing field except Dustbowl and Gravelpit. Why? How? I thought we were all the same! Damn you for not being neater, demographics." We previously discussed Valve's stats release on Half-Life 2: Episode 2 .

cancel ×

110 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Frosty Piss (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21662277)

In your mouth.

Blue, definitely (1, Insightful)

Orleron (835910) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662289)

I've noticed that too: Blue wins alot more on most maps. I wonder if it has anything to do with which side of the map they start on? Perhaps it's not so much the class design but the terrain which gives them an edge? Compound that with the momentum you get from winning the first round almost every time?

Re:Blue, definitely (3, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662585)

The reason is obvious: the game designers are part of the great liberal conspiracy. Sure, right now it's just "blue always wins," but the next thing you know Hillary's in the White House and we're all paying 95% tax rates for substandard health care and rising up against the proletariat.

Re:Blue, definitely (1)

saxoholic (992773) | more than 6 years ago | (#21664097)

Isn't it the proletariat that does the rising?

The proletariat (from Latin proles, "offspring") is a term used to identify a lower social class; a member of such a class is proletarian. (Wikipedia.org)

Re:Blue, definitely (1)

eln (21727) | more than 6 years ago | (#21664467)

Yah, that was an error that I knew someone would call me on eventually. Just pretend I said "bourgeoisie".

Re:Blue, definitely (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21668499)

I took it as a joke that the many would oppress the few, a la 'Atlas Shrugged'. The proletariat would demand universal health care, and the crushing burden of taxes coupled with the cushy welfare state would smother innovation and create a sterile status quo that, ironically, is just what liberals believe needs fixing in our current state.

Remind me not to let myself ramble anymore.

Re:Blue, definitely (2, Funny)

saxoholic (992773) | more than 6 years ago | (#21669651)

Or, you could just change wikipedia so the definitions are swapped. Then you would have been right in the first place.

Re:Blue, definitely (2, Insightful)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663967)

Hydro's not at all symmetrical, so that's understandable. Red's final CP is ridiculously easy to cap, while blue can hold out for a long time in their little basement bunker. Granary and 2fort are so close to 50% to be irrelevant, but I'm very interested about the Well statistic. That map is completely symmetrical, except for a lot of the theming and coloring in each sprawling base.. could there be a psychological effect? Also those kill-density maps are nonsense, there's no way that more snipers get killed on the tower platform in dustbowl stage 1 than blues die taking the upper hallway.

Re:Blue, definitely (1)

oxidiser (1118877) | more than 6 years ago | (#21670119)

It's because Blue are the aggressors on maps that aren't symmetrical. Attacking is easier than defending so... As far as symmetrical maps go... who knows? Maybe red shirts are easier to pick out from the background.

Blue more likely to win (5, Insightful)

ThePlague (30616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662293)

It doesn't surprise me that Blue wins more consistently than red. Red stands out more on most maps, thus giving the blue opponents a slight edge in spotting the enemy. You definitely see this same thing at play in Halo, and I would suspect it may be even more prevalent there due to the brightness of the colors.

Re:Blue more likely to win (4, Funny)

corsec67 (627446) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662483)

Hmm, then a game where the colors for the 2 sides was "clear" and "blaze orange" would be even more lopsided?

Re:Blue more likely to win (1, Interesting)

ThePlague (30616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662655)

Presumably.

You have to remember, this is not a killer advantage assuming all other things being equal. However, I suspect that people who play a great deal may have noticed the edge, and thus are more likely to choose blue if they can. Consequently, the average skill may likewise be higher for the blue in both games.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

fbjon (692006) | more than 6 years ago | (#21669817)

That's self-selecting then, if good gamers choose the blue side because they merely think it'll give an advantage.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

djasbestos (1035410) | more than 6 years ago | (#21671563)

Maybe it's like the "geniuses choose green" thing? Perhaps it's more than just visibility...

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21670809)

It does affect reaction times which can mean life or death in an FPS.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

Ironsides (739422) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662851)

I've seen this in other games as well. In dark maps, blue is harder to see. I wish what they would do is let each player set the actual color of each team individually. i.e. a player, regardless of what team they were on, would see teammates as blue and opponents as red or whatever colors they choose.

Re:Blue more likely to win (2, Insightful)

Cheesey (70139) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663021)

Yes, it's strange that they don't do that. They've made some maps symmetrical - why not also take the easier step of always making the enemies the same colour! It would also reduce the mistakes made by drunk players: "what team am I on again?"

I think America's Army did something like this. No matter what team you join, you're always an American fighting against the terrorists. (That way, America never loses, even when the insurgents win.)

Re:Blue more likely to win (2, Interesting)

vaderhelmet (591186) | more than 6 years ago | (#21665667)

This was an option in Perfect Dark: Zero and IIRC Gears of War (long time since I played that). You could set "all enemies red/all teammates blue" / "team always blue/enemies normal" / "normal"

Whenever we'd play a game that used the new color schemes it threw people off and they complained like mad. Perhaps these innovative changes get pulled out of more popular titles because the majority of users aren't interested in change...

Though I know I would love to see it appear in Halo. (Red/Green colorblindness is oh-so-cool in Halo or COD where enemies are red on green grass. The radar in Halo is useless most times for me.)

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

yoyhed (651244) | more than 6 years ago | (#21667631)

To the GP, yes that's true, but with TF2's abundance of orangish-red desert textures, the same could be said about Red.

To the parent, while that'd be nice to always have the opponent be the same color, they'd have to drop the whole Builders League United and Reliable Excavation Demolition branding thing that they have the maps branded with (something I think gives the game a nice bit of personality) - unless they could find a way to dynamically load the textures, which I don't think they can do with Source and the BSP format.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

CowboyBob500 (580695) | more than 6 years ago | (#21668411)

Certainly in Halo 3 I chose white for my Master Chief colour and I found that I was doing well in Snowbound but not quite as well on other maps. So as an experiment I changed my Master Chief to brown and my overall stats have raised a little. It doesn't make a huge amount of difference, but it's enough to get that split second edge.

Bob

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

Seakip18 (1106315) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662957)

Especially on shady maps. Red stands out making it far easier to see them trying to snipe. High ground and Valhalla are two that immediately come to mind. Even better, change the brightness/contrast on your tv and never miss red again. Just how it is I suppose.

Re:Blue more likely to win (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21662963)

The human eye is actually very bad at picking up blue shades. It blends more easily with most backgrounds. If you have an image editing program you can verify this for yourself. Try for example to apply a blur to the blue channel and compare it to the blurring the other two channels.

Re:Blue more likely to win (2, Funny)

Hatta (162192) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663243)

Or try playing nethack sometime. Those floating eyes are near impossible to see.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

mink (266117) | more than 6 years ago | (#21674897)

I blame my losses on tetrachromats [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Blue more likely to win (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21663177)

Yep, back in the day when I used to play games (Quake2/3, etc.) I would always look for the skinniest (often female), darkest (browns and grays are the best) character model available.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663731)

I play female characters (even though I'm a guy) in dark shades for a different reason: the other guys get really pissed off at seeing a female character with a hot sniper rifle. ;)

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

i.r.id10t (595143) | more than 6 years ago | (#21669815)

Did the same in Quake2 - the female models were just a tad smaller *looking* so they were harder to see...

Re:Blue more likely to win (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21663571)

Whenever I play RTS games I always make myself blue, and the enemy red, bright green and other easily visible colours. On the main screen it doesn't make much difference, but it makes it much easier to see the enemy on the mini map.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663899)

This is why I like games like Rainbow Six or (maybe obscure personal favorite) Navy Seals for Q3, where the two sides are, say, "urban camouflage" and "slightly different urban camouflage". Not only then does neither team enjoy an advantage in spotting the enemy, they also have no advantage in separating friend from foe!

Accidental team-kills: the great equalizer.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

Ponzicar (861589) | more than 6 years ago | (#21666769)

Red has the advantage on dustbowl and gravelpit because they only have to defend on those maps, and it's a lot easier to set up a bunch of sentries than it is to coordinate some ubers to take them down.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

Filbertish (1086451) | more than 6 years ago | (#21666985)

I don't know how many people are, but I'm color deficient. For me reds stand out little more than browns, but blues stick out moreso. So the answer is to make more people color deficient.

Simpler than that (1)

DingerX (847589) | more than 6 years ago | (#21668725)

The Blue Door is in the middle; the Red door is on the right side of the screen. When teams are unbalanced, one door is locked. When teams are balanced, the player chooses between the door in the middle of the screen, or the one to the right. The result? A significant number of players pick the middle door more often, leading to a Blue power play.

How to test this hypothesis? Randomize the color of the two doors each time, and see if the advantage evens out.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

ircharlie (317640) | more than 6 years ago | (#21669425)

I recall seeing an outstanding bug list for TF2 that said a major bug existed where blue engineers could build teleport entrances inside the spawn locations. This could be enough to give a small advantage to blue. Even if this has been solved it could be responsible for the skew in stats.

Re:Blue more likely to win (1)

Wardad (1140999) | more than 6 years ago | (#21675217)

So this is how the United States won its freedom? The Red Coat's always lose. Well at least on this map they did. Red Coat is a term used to refer to a soldier of the historical British Army. Wardad.

Hilarious (2, Funny)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662375)

I think it is hilarious that the most deaths in 2Fort are right at the spawn points.

Re:Hilarious (4, Insightful)

ErMaC (131019) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662589)

Something to remember about the 2fort death map...

The big red hot spot has 3 levels of height in play: there's the area right outside the spawn, the area below it just before the ramp room, and the area with health in the sewer pathway. All three occupy the same x,y coordinates on the map. I think this contributes to the heat of that particular spot. Would be interesting to see a vertical cross-section of that one area.

Re:Hilarious (1)

stewbee (1019450) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662657)

There you go, trying to apply logic to this argument. I believe it is a conspiracy of those that play the pyro to have easy pickings! And there you go ruining it!
I would like to take this opportunity to complain about those lousy camping pyros hanging out around the respawn points. Yeah, you know who you are! Knock it off! How is a medic to defend himself?

Re:Hilarious (2, Informative)

Ambiguous Coward (205751) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662685)

I think you mis-read that map. The most deaths (the red spots) are just inside the entrance to each team's base, just before you head out the doors or wander into the courtyard. This is the largest choke-point both when a team is laying siege to your fort, and when you are doing the same to the enemy team.

There is a slightly higher density outside the spawns. This is probably because a *lot* of scouts run over the bridge cover and meet sentry guns covering the courtyard right there. The same is true for soldiers and demos, and the occasional lost spy. Alternately, that density is actually on the level *below* the spawn, which is the space just before the courtyard. Not many people like to go the alternate route, as it's a long straight hallway with no cover or escape. So, they go the other way, which makes for minor skirmishes in that one room.

If only they had this density map in 3 dimensions, we could tell what was *actually* going on. I have a hunch that the vast majority of those deaths are actually on the ground floor, rather than actually being outside the spawns.

What's *really* interesting is that the deaths at the main entrance occur on the same relative side. That is, it implies people tend to go in the right door when attacking, or possibly out the left when leaving. I have a hunch it's the former, since that leads to more deaths (people die more when attacking the enemy base, less when leaving their own). But, again, we're trapped in this 2D map. I believe the sewer-room is directly below that red splotch, which would also make for a higher count on the map even though the two locales are unrelated.

-G

Re:Hilarious (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 6 years ago | (#21664689)

I blame snipers for the red spots. Whenever I've died there, it was a sniper that killed me. A good reason why the other two corners aren't red would be that one of the two spawn points is closer to the battlements... with the other spawn point I'm more likely to go fall through the hole in the floor and end up in the middle of my base instead.

Re:Hilarious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21666017)

C'mon, now, if you've ever been a sniper on 2fort you would know this. Those red points are a direct result of snipers. When snipers walk out onto the battlements they are staring directly at their opponent's "red spot", it's the place on the enemy battlements where everyone runs out from the spawn. I sat at that very point last night and got 40 pts with the sniper in a half hour. People come out and run straight at you for an instant, that's when you pull the trigger.

Re:Hilarious (1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 6 years ago | (#21671787)

Well most times I play the snipers are not that good. If I happen to play a game where one gets me I stop going that way. Usually though, going that way as a scout or soldier means I get to kill a lot of snipers because I can hop up to their battlement and catch them looking through the scope.

OMG! (4, Funny)

Ambiguous Coward (205751) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662441)

in regards to the bit about scouts, snipers, heavies, engies, etc...it's almost as if each class has certain strengths and weaknesses put in there intentionally! I know it sounds crazy, but maybe, just *maybe*, there's more of a difference to each class than the character model! WOW!

As far as the RvB thing goes, it's obvious. BLU is best. Also, maybe the red jackets of those Red Bread losers wear makes them stand out more? Just a thought, but I bet a bright red jacket against a concrete wall is an easier target to lock in on than a blue jacket against the same wall.

-G

Re: OMG (1)

Arcanis the Rogue (910060) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662921)

Good point about the jackets, but on most levels (well, on 2fort, but that's all my friends seem to play) each side stands out on the opposing side's base and blends in in their own base. The Red Base has barn-style decorations and The Blue Base has bluer walls and more shadowed areas.

Personally I want to see the current stats put up against the next batch of stats. How many more people will be playing Blue now that it is revealed to be the team that wins most often and how will this affect their winning streak?

Re:OMG! (2, Insightful)

ctr2sprt (574731) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663095)

in regards to the bit about scouts, snipers, heavies, engies, etc...it's almost as if each class has certain strengths and weaknesses put in there intentionally! I know it sounds crazy, but maybe, just *maybe*, there's more of a difference to each class than the character model! WOW!

I think it was more a commentary on the relative popularity of the classes than their strengths and weaknesses. For example, if you look at the full stats from Valve, you'll see that scouts are the most popular class, but also one of the least effective (fourth-worst in points gained, second-worst in kills earned). Looking at it from the other side, heavies are probably the most effective class overall, but they're the fourth-least popular class. Unsurprisingly to anyone who's ever played TF2, medics are the least popular class by a wide margin -- but they are also the entire reason that heavies are so good, and that's reflected in their scores (almost three times as many assists per hour as the next-highest class, and it's enough to make them get more points per hour than demos and engineers, and almost scouts!).

My only gripe about TF2 has nothing to do with the game, and everything to do with the players. I always end up being a medic because nobody else will do it. I don't get it. Medic is by far the easiest class to play. You'd expect the noobs to gravitate to it, just like they do in CS to the AWP (the easiest gun in the game, since it's the only one that shoots straight). Yet they choose probably the hardest class -- scout -- for some reason.

Anyway, it'd be great if these stats made people realize that all the classes are very special-purpose, and that it's retarded to have more than two or three of each class on any given team, no matter the situation. But that won't happen. So oh well, at least they have pretty pictures.

Re:OMG! (1)

Ambiguous Coward (205751) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663433)

What you quoted above was really just poking fun at the attitude of the summary...claiming every class is using bastard tactics, when they ought to be playing fair and such. I mean, seriously, what class does the author play as? Paladin? :P

-G

Re:OMG! (1)

jaxtherat (1165473) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663701)

My only gripe about TF2 has nothing to do with the game, and everything to do with the players. I always end up being a medic because nobody else will do it. I don't get it. Medic is by far the easiest class to play. You'd expect the noobs to gravitate to it, just like they do in CS to the AWP (the easiest gun in the game, since it's the only one that shoots straight). Yet they choose probably the hardest class -- scout -- for some reason.


Easily explained. Most people playing online shooters do it for the crazy action and carnage. Noobs don't want to play something as unglamorous as a medic.

Re:OMG! (2, Interesting)

AndrewHowe (60826) | more than 6 years ago | (#21666243)

You don't go Scout to kill people, but for point capping and intelligence runs - which ought to score more points. Also I'd say that the Spy is by far the hardest class to play, not the Scout.

Re:OMG! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21666303)

That's just it. The scout SHOULD be for killing people. If there's no general job for a scout on a team then just get rid of class balancing altogether, because they're purposefully avoiding a class.

Honestly, what a scout is for in terms of combat (you know, the game) is killing medics, snipers, and the other occasional person who isn't paying attention to what's going on around him. You know what we normally call those people? Spies. You something else? Spies can do other things related to combat.

So yeah, scouts are under-powered.

Re:OMG! (1)

AndrewHowe (60826) | more than 6 years ago | (#21671495)

So you see from the stats that Scouts are the most popular class, and you want to buff them? Let me guess, you work for Blizzard? ;-) (Sorry, cheap shot.)
No, the game is not just about combat, to win you have to achieve strategic objectives. Scouts are very good at that. They're also devastating in combat if played well - circle strafing and spamming you with their scatter gun or clonking you with the baseball bat.
In general, the whole point of stats like this is that Valve can balance classes according to cold, hard data. Not the whining of forum posters, for that way lies madness.

Re:OMG! (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 6 years ago | (#21668813)

Which is curious, because Medic is my favourite class. I'm rubbish at precision aiming, so I'd much rather run around helping the heavies lay waste to everyone.

Interesting stats (1, Insightful)

Foo2rama (755806) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662467)

The sniper get more points an hour then the Heavy which gets more kills per hour... As snipers are less likely to defend or capture I am curious as to why that is the case. Perhaps it is killing turrets...


Poor medics die fast... Not in my games!!!! NO ONE SHOOTS THEM THE NOOBS!!!!!!

Rocket launcher does the most damage but the not allot of kills for the soldier... Perhaps this is both the soldier and the turret for the engineer? As I do not see turret stats for weapon damage.

Re:Interesting stats (1)

ErMaC (131019) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662505)

A headshot gives 2 points.

Re:Interesting stats (1)

IdeaMan (216340) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663913)

Rocket launchers may do some damage, but it was the 1-2-3-4 punch soldiers employed in TFC that is missing here.
(1: Rocket, knocks them towards 2: your grenade aimed at where they were herded by your rocket which launches them into the air where 3: & 4: shotgun blasts finish their airborne bodies off. Could be 2 rockets before the grenade, depends on whether or not you'd entered the area primed.)
Seems to be a lot easier to get away from a soldier in TF2 than TFC, which is why you'd see them doing more damage but not more kills.

Re:Interesting stats (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 6 years ago | (#21664141)

heavies get more assists (only 1 point) since they do fast damage but still damage over a period of time and heavies do best when working with other classes, snipers sit by themselves and take down enemies with headshots and other solo kills

My own observations (2, Interesting)

stewbee (1019450) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662501)

The fact that heavies have the most kills could be misleading. How many of those kills were while the heavy was being healed simultaneously by a medic? A heavy does have real killing power, but because he is so slow he is easily killed by pretty much anyone outside of his rain o'bullets. Also, I usually see a good spy or soldier consistently at the top of the leader boards when I play. This could just be an artifact of the server that I frequent though.

Re:My own observations (1)

ravenshrike (808508) | more than 6 years ago | (#21667299)

Yeah, but those are the outliers. I've seen a spy at the top, and then two sitting on the bottom. For every guy who can awesome spy, there are three that purely suck, and won't stop playing one.

Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (1, Offtopic)

Sowelu (713889) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662605)

I'm a TFC vet planning to get TF2 soon. Any advice on servers to play, settings to use, or noob behavior to avoid? (Besides the obvious "Always shoot the medic first".) I bet I'll miss my grenades.

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (1)

stewbee (1019450) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662729)

I think that it is a pretty easy transition. I hadn't played team fortress for at least 3 years before starting TF2. It was a pretty quick transition. The biggest difference is that they made the maps more stylistic, so you may not alway be able to go to areas that you can see in the game. The best example of this is the map 2Fort. This map is exactly the same that was in TF1, but in the basement near the intelligence room (ie. flag ala TF1), it might look like you can get to other points.
After that, it's just a matter of finding what class you like the most.

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (1)

Ambiguous Coward (205751) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662829)

The Q rotation servers are usually pretty good. Good crowd, good map rotation, not too much bullshit.

A tip for Gravelpit: if you're a defending demo, put some stickies on A. Not on the floor, though. Put them up on the walls, above the doors. Put all eight of them all the way around the edge, Leave and go help defend B. At some point, A will start getting some BLU traffic. Don't set your stickies off yet! Wait for it. Usually, people set them off as soon as they see the point is being captured. Instead, wait until you see a good 7- or 8-count on the point. Yeah, they'll get some headway on the cap, but chances are, they won't bother to remove your stickies if you haven't popped 'em yet. Once they're good and thick in there, and everyone's on, go ahead and blow everyone up. Voila! Point defended, half a dozen kills on your score, and they're team is at half-power. Do that wherever you can. Just remember to give them a chance to group up before you set your stickies off. :P

I was never into TFC more than once or twice, so I can't speak to the specific differences, but send me a message (on here) if you want to tag along with someone. :)

-G

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21663083)

As far as servers to play on I would recommend the "CantStopGaming" group. No swearing, no spamming etc. and their admins clamp down on crap quickly. Players are mostly high quality.

Servers are usually full most of the time which is the only negative.

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (1)

acwork2 (267001) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663411)

Check out 72.5.86.56:27015 for a fun pub TF2 server. It is ran by True Grit the server is PG rated (No cussing, porn sprays, or disrespect) It is a fun server and any of the TG or tgt regulars will be happy to help you out getting used to TF2. Check out http://www.monsterserveronline.com/Forums/ [monsterserveronline.com] for more info about TG and that server and TF2 specific stuff.

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (1)

IdeaMan (216340) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663781)

My advice: Don't bother with TF2, all it will do is tarnish TFC's memory.
TF2 is Team FPS for little children and nooblets.
TF2 doesn't allow nearly as much skill-based improvement as TFC does. They removed grenades to get rid of spam, but completely forgot just how badly that screws over the medic and scout classes. It's sad too, in the trailer you clearly see the demo with a mirv.

Also TF2 is a huge lag-fest, rockets take longer to fire, players don't move smoothly etc, etc etc. And before you say I have a lousy system just shut it, I have SLI.
I guess I'm not so much down on TF2 as I am disappointed in it. The environment and graphics are so tremendously improved that to have the gameplay drop so badly makes me really sad.

What you SHOULD NOT miss is Portal. Oh my gosh, that was the most fun 5 hours I've had in years.

- [RiCE]EMPeror - Played TFC for something like 7 years

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (1)

Mr2001 (90979) | more than 6 years ago | (#21664181)

Also TF2 is a huge lag-fest, rockets take longer to fire, players don't move smoothly etc, etc etc. And before you say I have a lousy system just shut it, I have SLI.
Maybe you have a lousy ISP, or you're playing on the wrong servers. I've had no trouble with lag. (On the PC version, that is... the Xbox 360 is another story.)

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (0, Troll)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 6 years ago | (#21666971)

I was going to pay attention to your opinion, and then I hit the word "nooblets" and realized you're a retard.

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (1)

Ponzicar (861589) | more than 6 years ago | (#21667031)

The game runs smoothly for me. Maybe the servers you're playing on have bad tic rates?

Anyway, I played QWTF years ago, played a small amount of TFC, and started with TF2 the day it was released. I love it. I'm not missing what they got rid of, and they did a great job with balancing things out. Good riddance to bunny hopping, conc jumping, and grenade spam.

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (1)

default luser (529332) | more than 6 years ago | (#21673319)

I have to agree with this, as an oldie QWTF player (even played in clan matches back when I had spare time), I LOVE the new TF2 classes. The scout is now a potentially deadly class (if you can circle-strafe), instead of a conc-happy annoyance. The soldier sans grenades allows players to concentrate on good rocket tactics. The addition of teleporters and much faster output dispensers makes good engineers the crucial deciding factor on larger maps. The UBER medic capability lifts an otherwise unloved class out of the muck.

In the gameplay arena, the inclusion of stats and acheivements means players are tempted to try more classes. Probably the biggest improvement is the points system. This is big for two reasons: one, it encourages players to take down non-player objects, and two (this is key), it encourages players to WORK TOGETHER because everyone gets an assist point in a big takedown kill or a control point cap. In all the earlier incarnations of TF, kills were "stolen" all the time, and capping was largely a solo effort, so these points really improve the teamplay mechanic.

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (1)

wastaz (634441) | more than 6 years ago | (#21669497)

If you're having lag due to a lousy system, then you should just turn some effects off. My system is awful and can't run most new games, but after turning TF2 down to low quality textures and making it play in 800x600 resolution, it's not lagging a single bit. Sure, I don't get the best graphics possible (I've seen the ultra-high-awesome-quality-pictures floating around, and yes I'm drooling), but the game still looks really nice.

So, in my experience, this game scales really well and it's still enjoyable even if your computer generally sucks. Just don't expect to run it with the highest settings. :)

Oh, and about it tarnishing TFC's memory. TFC has been tarnishing the old Quake TF memory for years and people still play it. TF2 is, for me, much closer to the experience I had when playing old Quake TF. Sure, there are no grenades, adapt. This is a fun game, I loved old Quake TF, I totally -hated- what TFC turned it into, and now I'm finally home again, feels awesome :)

Portal still rocks though.

You aren't a vet unless you played TF. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21665761)

You know, the Quake mod. Bonus points for playing MegaTF.

Re:You aren't a vet unless you played TF. (1)

SirSlud (67381) | more than 6 years ago | (#21666719)

You know, the Quake mod.

Totally agree.

Bonus points for playing MegaTF

MegaTF was a blight upon the awesomeness that was stock Q1TF.

Re:You aren't a vet unless you played TF. (1)

mollymoo (202721) | more than 6 years ago | (#21669569)

AhAhhh, the days of getting pwned by LPBs with ISDN.

Re:Oldbie looking to get back into the game... (1)

elFarto the 2nd (709099) | more than 6 years ago | (#21670069)

If you are a spy, and cloaked, you can be made partially visible by being shot or bumping into an enemy. This took me a while to figure out why I was being killed when cloaked.

Rockets Rockets Rockets! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21662703)

The soldier class is played 15% of the time, and yet the rocket launcher accounts for 21.5% of the damage? The Minigun does not even come close, and heavy is played 2% more of the time. I've heard a lot of complaints about the rocket launcher, and yeah, these stats do confirm it might be a bit overpowered.

Every Suspicion? (4, Funny)

Skevin (16048) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662923)

Slashdot headlines are getting worse and worse, if not for the sake of sensationalism. So, Team Fortress 2 confirms:

- Elvis is alive
- Area 51 experiments
- JFK's *real* assassins
- The existence of the Illuminati
- Pharmaceutical conspiracies
- Chupacabras
- ECHELON-style monitoring

Sorry, Team Fortress Developers, Deus Ex beat you to the punch 5 years ago!

Solomon

Re:Every Suspicion? (1)

emeraldfoxx (1193353) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663531)

you forgot about 0 + 0 = 1 in binary (forget the 0 carrying part...) and how 3 is, in fact, an even number (at least it should be...). lol

....oh and you forgot the government. i think all of the items you mentioned above fit into their "category"...or thats what they want you to think... ;)

Re:Every Suspicion? (1)

Kingrames (858416) | more than 6 years ago | (#21664523)

Didn't you read the article? It confirms all of that!

Demoman not in there? (2, Insightful)

fuo (941897) | more than 6 years ago | (#21662953)

I'm surprised the demoman isn't in there for most points, or kills. When I finally got around to trying this class (after 2-3 weeks playing scouts and soldiers primarily) I racked up more points/kills in 30 minutes than I did with any other class in the previous weeks. All I did was sticky-bomb high-traffic areas and blow people up when they walked by... came to point where someone bothered to note how little skill I had (and I didn't argue, it felt cheap and I got bored with it after an hour or so).

Re:Demoman not in there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21663445)

You know, statistics isn't about showing which class you made the most kills with.

Re:Demoman not in there? (3, Interesting)

Ambiguous Coward (205751) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663765)

I bet your circumstances helped out there. More likely than not, you were either A) playing against a poorly-functioning team, B) playing with a very well-functioning team, or C) both A and B. If you were playing against a well-functioning team, they would have forcibly removed you from those high-traffic areas, and not allowed you to regain entry. If you were playing with a poorly-functioning team, you would not have been able to fool about camping hallways and such.

Any tactic that works for "an hour or so" just screams that one of the above situations it the case. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the truth is, there is more or less a response class for every class you can play. If you keep sticky-bombing a hallway, I sneak around as a spy and end your reign. If you keep sneaking around as a spy and ending people's reigns, I burn your face off as a pyro. If you keep burning my face off as a pyro, I mow you down as a heavy. If you keep mowing me down as a heavy, I drop a couple rockets near your feet. The list goes on. More or less, every class has at least one or two classes that can effectively respond to it. Since you apparently did not encounter the demo response classes for so long, there was something seriously wrong with your opposition. :)

Still, sticky-camping can be amusing for a little while. :)

-G

Rebalance Dustbowl? (3, Insightful)

RichPowers (998637) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663239)

According to the stats, Red successfully defends Dustbowl some 71% of the time. While I expect the defenders to win slightly more than the attackers, this percentage indicates that's something wrong with the map balance. Dustbowl is also ranked fourth based on time played (ahead of Well and Granary). This might not have anything to do with Red's skewed win/loss ratio, but it's worth pointing out.

(I've been playing Dustbowl since 2000 and it's the only reason I give a damn about TF, in case you're wondering.)

A mediocre Red team still has a decent chance of winning; a mediocre Blu team doesn't. Furthermore, a good player can still have fun on Red even if his teammates are idiots. Not so on Blu, where the entire team must work together to gain ground. Try advancing through the "death corridor" on stage 3 as your four offense engies refuse to switch to a more useful class or move their gear up. (As a side note, I've noticed that as more Blu players switch to engineer, the odds of Blu losing increase exponentially.)

To be sure, I've played some fantastic rounds on team Blu, but I often find myself server hopping to avoid wasting my time as an attacker doomed to defeat (hey, I don't have much gaming time these days and I'm not going to squander it getting raped.)

This trend is the reverse of what I saw in TFC: Blue would win the majority of matches thanks to skilled players pipe/nade jumping the flag into the cap, bypassing the entire defending team. In TF2, one player can't jump across half the map and save the day. In other words, there's a greater emphasis on teamwork.

One of my suggestions: redesign the first capture point on stage 3. Maybe narrow the bunker to give Blu a wider area to navigate and reduce the potency of Red demos. Any other Dbowl players think the map needs tweaking to even the odds, or is this simply due to offense requiring more coordinated teamwork, something in scarce supply on pub servers?

Re:Rebalance Dustbowl? (5, Insightful)

ErMaC (131019) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663469)

I play almost exclusively on 24/7 dustbowl servers, and I actually think the map is properly balanced. The problem comes from yes, you need more teamwork on offense and on public servers this is generally in short supply. However, I will say that "more teamwork" can come down to just 2 people, a medic and a demoman. You complain about those two parts in dustbowl pt3 being impossible to break. No matter how great the defense, it's pretty easy to just pick it apart completely with an uber demo. I've popped 4 sentries in a single uber in the first cap point in part 3, and then my whole team just rushes past and destroys the remaining defense. It just takes slightly better planning and communication.

I think the other problem is stupid instant-respawn servers. These totally unbalance the map in favor of red. I no longer play on any server like that, regardless of map, but it pretty severely impacts the two pure attack/defend maps, gravelpit and dustbowl, and I think this is reflected in the stats since those are the only two maps skewed in Red's favor.

Yes, I know it sucks to sit there for 15 seconds waiting to respawn when you're defending. But guess what? The other team has to travel the whole map to get to the cap point, whereas you spawn there. Instaspawn breaks the map.

Re:Rebalance Dustbowl? (1)

Mr2001 (90979) | more than 6 years ago | (#21664253)

I think the other problem is stupid instant-respawn servers.
Yeah... you want to see something insane? Get on a server playing cp_lazytown with instant respawn. Preferably a 32 player server.

TF2 is not your typical FPS, but that fact hasn't quite sunk in to the minds of custom map designers and server admins yet. Playing on a custom map, or to some extent, any server with custom settings, is usually a recipe for game breakage.

Re:Rebalance Dustbowl? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21663601)

I think the 71% is actually an indication that it is pretty well balanced. If it was 50/50 that would basically imply that the first two stages were way out of wack, and not worth playing. If each of the three stages was actually 50/50 then the total balance across all stages would actually be 87.5/12.5. Clearly the individual sections actually skew towards the attacking team a little, it's just that you need to win all three to win the whole map. Note that I'm talking here about being balanced enough to be fun in pub play. In competitive play the final result for the whole map needs to be 50/50 and as such....

Personally I think TF2 desperately needs a stopwatch mode (as in RTCW and ET). It would vastly, vastly improve Dustbowl and Gravelpit in my opinion, and actually make the worth playing in competitive play.

Re:Rebalance Dustbowl? (1)

metroid composite (710698) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663625)

I find the opposite--Blu wins more than Red on Dustbowl/Gravel Pit. This is particularly noticeable on Gravel Pit, where the offence wins, teams switch sides, and the other team's offence wins. (Repeat five times for the tournament match I watched in Gravel Pit).

The going theory I've heard is the instant respawn servers that I do my best to avoid. The attacking team by design is supposed to have a faster respawn timer, which instant respawn servers negate, and at any rate the defending team always spawns right next to their last point.

Re:Rebalance Dustbowl? (1)

putch (469506) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663657)

i dont know if it needs re-working. it's supposed to be a challenge for the attacking team. the first cap on stage 3 is practically impossible to hold for too long. and if you capture it quick enough you can give your team nearly 20 minutes to take the 2nd point.

you're correct that red need only be mediocre. but, i mean, it's called *TEAM* Fortress for a reason. two relatively coordinated teams will have GREAT skirmishes throughout.

if there's anything at all that needs nerfing it is the first trench in stage 2. because if red is nade/sticky spamming properly then it's effectively over after about 30 seconds because if blue doesnt make an effective and immediate push as soon as the gates open there's almost no way out. unless you can do a really coordinated and massive uber rush, which is practically impossible. not sure how you nerf it though. maybe add some gates kind like from stage one that prevents red from storming the trench.

Stats (1)

cvd6262 (180823) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663353)

It's not that Blue has the edge on most maps. Their edge is minimal, and probably not significant. It's the seemingly HUGE discrepancy in favor of Red on Dustbowl. Red wins over 70% of the rounds?!?

Re:Stats (1)

Gibberx (631490) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663561)

In Team Fortress 2, there are a number of asymmetric maps. On these maps, Red is always Defense, while Blue is Offense. When your team switches from one to the other, your color changes.

For example, Dustbowl is one of those maps where Red turtles like hell and Blue tries to organize a spike to capture each point.

You can glean some other facts, too. (1)

Wilson_6500 (896824) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663541)

Disclaimer: I'm relying on "big numbers" to make these "statistics" relatively accurate. I've done no actual analysis beyond looking at the numbers.

You can get some insight into the numbers behind the very non-numerical TF2 by inferring from these statistics.

If you look at the "average distance" stats, you notice immediately that the fireaxe appears to have a longer range than other melee weapons--and it appears to be a fairly significant extension, making the axe's averagekilling range nearly as long as that of the flamethrower itself. If we take the engineer's shotgun as representative of the average distance for any non-sniper non-melee individual battle (because it's the engineer's primary weapon, meaning it sees a lot of use, and probably the most generic weapon in TF2), we notice that flamethrowers tend to be lethal at close ranges (closer than that of the shotguns, at least), but the axe is lethal at comparably close ranges. It's an interesting result, since I (at least) wouldn't have assumed any of the melee weapons had longer or shorter ranges.

In the same graph, we can see that either syringe gun tracking is bugged, or that medics have a _very_ hard time aiming with their syringe gun--its average kill distance is just about the same as that of the melee weapons. The remarkable consistency of the melee weapons' ranges, now that I think about it, make me wonder if that's not the center-point-to-center-point distance between two players, and most melee kills are at absolutely point-blank range. When you compare the SMG and the syringe gun, it's easy to believe that people have a much harder time using the syringe gun because it has an arcing projectile, despite having a larger clip than the SMG and also doing slightly more damage-per-hit.

Looking at the critical damages table, it seems that--as this Soldier suspected--the RL gets more criticals than other weapons--except, surprisingly, the GL. Just as surprisingly, it's not as big of a differential as this Soldier suspected. I had the perception that the RL was consistently getting noticably more criticals than most other weapons, but it appears that's not really the case.

As we see from the same graph, the melee weapons all get far more criticals than other weapons. This probably accounts for some melee weapons being so high on the damage-per-hit graph. The highest melee weapons on the latter graph are the ones that inherently do more damage and also get more criticals, since the damage-per-hit graph doesn't appear to be corrected for criticals. It's interesting to note that it doesn't appear that the bonesaw and the bottle are much different in damage-per-hit, even though I feel there's wide perception that the bottle is useless and the bonesaw is the 'best' melee weapon. Offhand, I think the bonesaw swings faster than the bottle, but I don't remember the difference being too great.

Of course, since the SDK has been released I think it's perfectly possible for someone to go gather the coded data for each weapon. Still, it's interesting to dig a little into these statistics and see what ends up happening out in the field.

Re:You can glean some other facts, too. (1)

metroid composite (710698) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663977)

In the same graph, we can see that either syringe gun tracking is bugged, or that medics have a _very_ hard time aiming with their syringe gun
My vote is bugged. I get plenty of kills with the syringe gun, and usually at more than the maximum range of, say, the flamethrower. My guess is that the Fireaxe and the Syringe Gun got their tracking mixed up, or something to that effect.

I had the perception that the RL was consistently getting noticably more criticals than most other weapons, but it appears that's not really the case.
You also get more crits the better you perform, which is likely why a lot of good Soldiers comment on high crit rate. The Rocket Launcher crit tests I've seen [thecatacombs.net] show a 5% crit rate for people who haven't gotten a kill in the past 20 seconds.

As we see from the same graph, the melee weapons all get far more criticals than other weapons. This probably accounts for some melee weapons being so high on the damage-per-hit graph. The highest melee weapons on the latter graph are the ones that inherently do more damage and also get more criticals
Probably the variance is just due to criticals or variance--the damage tests I've seen [steampowered.com] put all melee weapons in the same range (Except bat and Knife).

And the reason melee weapons seem to be so high is because they have a much lower firing rate, and also because most weapons deal considerably more damage at close range anyhow. It's the same reason the Pyro's Shotgun seems to do less than everyone else's in Valve's chart--it gets used at longer range on average.

Offhand, I think the bonesaw swings faster than the bottle, but I don't remember the difference being too great.
I did some firing rate tests and all melee weapons seemed to have identical firing rate (except the bat) [rpgdl.com] .

No, the reason why the Bonesaw and the Bat are popular is because the Medic and Scout are the two fastest moving classes, meaning they can actually chase people with melee weapons.

Re:You can glean some other facts, too. (1)

RalphSleigh (899929) | more than 6 years ago | (#21664725)

I suspect people think that the rocket launcher gets more crits than other weapons because the brightly coloured Rocket O Doom(tm) makes it very obvious its a crit, unlike other weapons where a crit is less noticeable.

Re:You can glean some other facts, too. (1)

IndieKid (1061106) | more than 6 years ago | (#21672307)

Melee weapons probably seem to get more criticals as people will tend to switch to them after winning a map to finish off the other team in a humiliating way - all weapon hits after you win are critical.

Hey... (1)

mjhacker (922395) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663689)

Am I the only one here that read "BLU" and their first thought was "Blue Mage" from FFXI?

Easy fix for blue vs red visibility issue: (1)

mikeasu (1025283) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663819)

Make an update to the game such that friendlies always appear each player as blue, hostiles as red. I don't play the game, so don't know if there's more to team appearance than different colors. America's Army, the player ALWAYS sees their skin and same team members' skins as US Army (or allied indigenous forces), and the enemy as the hostile skin. There's still offense and defense for a given map, but the scenario is written, depending on which team you spaawn as, that you're always US Army, and the other team is a hostile-to-US force. Should be a feasible fix to the visibility disparity. What's interesting is how they handle weapons. AS I recall, if I'm playing as a basic rifleman, I have a M-16 or M4 rifle. An opponent sees me as a hostile (different skin) with an AK-47. Same in reverse. Now, if my oppponent kills me, he can take my weapon, which he now carries as an AK-47 - may be more damage, but less accurate in his hands. To him, he's US Army handling an AK-47.

Re:Easy fix for blue vs red visibility issue: (1)

jjohnson (62583) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663847)

The problem is that TF2 has very strong art direction that ties team color to environment, which is also divided between blue and red. You can't arbitrarily flip the colours without overturning a bunch of aesthetic and gameplay decisions.

Re:Easy fix for blue vs red visibility issue: (1)

IdeaMan (216340) | more than 6 years ago | (#21663943)

Actually most of the maps are symmetrical, so if you flipped the map around too or swapped map textures you should be able to keep all the aesthetic functionality.

One stat I wish they recorded... (1)

Vacardo (1048640) | more than 6 years ago | (#21664043)

Yeah, but which character class screamed out "MEDIC!" the most??

I tend to whine for one more if I'm playing a Scout...

Ahem (2, Funny)

Bugsquash (1175591) | more than 6 years ago | (#21664953)

I for one would like to welcome our new Blue overlords...

Easier to see? (1)

dreemernj (859414) | more than 6 years ago | (#21665709)

In other FPS games (I haven't played this yet) I always try to be on blue because I honestly have an easier time spotting Red. I usually play UT2K4 and on the average server, red's just easier for me to shoot at.

Red shirts (4, Funny)

Per Abrahamsen (1397) | more than 6 years ago | (#21668473)

Of course the red team die first, it is an established scientific fact [wikipedia.org] that wearing red shirts significantly shortens your life expectancy.

New maps for the 360??? (1)

martin_b1sh0p (673005) | more than 6 years ago | (#21672821)

I just want to know if Valve ever intends on releasing new maps for the 360? I play TF2 so much that I'd be willing to even pay for the new maps!

Knife? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21673123)

I assume knife is referring to the spy's weapon. What about the sniper's blade?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>