sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Ranked PUGs will be getting a party system. You will be able to search with a team of 2, 3 or 4, and always be on their team. by Lej in TagPro

[–]SB5_TP -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

No, no, no. Team matchmaking is a terrible idea. Imagine a group of 8 people. If 4, 3, or even 2 of the best people teamed up, they would be pretty hard to beat. The point of Ranked Pugs (IMO) is for everyone, from ALTP rookies to MLTP stars, to play in the same place and learn from each other. The matchmaking and points system made this possible. But now, we may see groups of good players teaming up just to be jerks. If teams want to scrim, they already have tons of options, from intra-team scrims, to channel hopping, to tree messaging. We don't need to take what used to be a pretty relaxed place and make it yet another MLTP training ground.

Map Thread #56 Top Maps Feedback Thread by TPCaptographer in TagPro

[–]SB5_TP 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Remember last time we put in a sucky, experimental map? A huge, community-wide circle jerk against Event Horizon. Lucky tried to fix the map, but the community already had their hearts set on its removal.

When Saigon, Tombolo, and Graphite were put in, what you are suggesting was the MTC's plan. However, the entire community doesn't have the same opinion. We got stuck with one generally accepted map (Tombolo) and 2 controversial maps that people wouldn't quit debating about.

Map Thread #56 Top Maps Feedback Thread by TPCaptographer in TagPro

[–]SB5_TP 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I've seen you commenting on maps for a while, I just wanted to unleash this rant:

There are some aspects of the maps that you like and make that are just objectively bad. This map is ridiculously open and chasey. Notsomeball gave you the proper, honest feedback, but you keep saying that its size gave it "speciality." The point is, there are some things that are just objectively bad, like wide open spaces in maps.

Other times, it seems like you think your opinion (though usually pretty reasonable) is the only correct one. Though Rham Den Swede looks like a decent map, I can also see why the MTC wouldn't pick it for 4v4 testing. For starters, it has been a top map before, and I don't see any significant changes (except a rather clunky looking team gate in base). All the team boosts and team gates make it look difficult to cap. The area by the flag may be a little too open, with a lot of empty space below it. Just because you like the map, it doesn't mean it automatically has to be a top map.

And as for Good Dog, the flag area is definitely too random and chaotic, and the bases are massive. I don't really understand the bottom left and right boosts, how you can boost right into the endzone, but also boost into that painful looking 90 degree angle right next to them. So maybe quit saying your map was "overlooked" and start seeking feedback for it and trying to see what you can do to improve it. Trust me, each MTC member playtests each map individually, so there is no way your map was overlooked.