While I enjoy quite a lot competitive TF2 I think that more classes being playable would lead to more interesting strategies and a more healthy competition.

Now, as we all know, it's not a matter of willing but of being able to run a certain class without losing because of it.

I think that the Pyro and the Heavy are pretty close to being played more often. And if that is not the case, knowing now will surely be helpful for me.

Given how well the Heavy plays in Well because he can get to the middle fight I think that giving him the GRU or similar is all that would be needed to make him appear in Granary, Freight, Fastlane and other 5CP maps that suit him. I main this class in my (low level) clan and when we are able to run him he is great. His limitation isn't his speed per se, it's his speed when it comes to reaching the mid fight.

On the other hand I think that the Pyro is limited by the slow speed of his airblast and his low damage that allows point-blank rockets even when he flanked succesfully.

I'm not talking about turning him into a insta-kill machine but I think a slight damage upgrade would help.

Do you think that him having a faster airblast would make him more viable? He would work great against spam and soldiers/demomen but he would still be weak against Scouts and the Soldier's shotgun.

He would still be situational and I don't think he would change the metagame a lot. But perhaps we will see him more often played in the whole Badlands or other good maps for him. Giving him a faster airblast will also increase teamwork both to take himdown and both to use him (Because he is not as versatile as a Scout).

In the end those two classes seem pretty close to being playable at a comp level, they are already played a lot to defend lasts points and other good places for them.

The other two classes (Engineer and Spy) are far harder to "balance". The Engineeer already does fine and he doesn't have his update out, I'm sure that once he has his update we will see him in CTF more often.

The Spy will always be situational and will always require a really high skill level. I pondered in the tf2maps forums if a camera that allows the spy to set up ambushes more easily would help him to see some solid situational play like defending Gravelpit.

So, what do you think?

Your suggestion for the heavy is good but I think you're absolutely wrong about the pyro. They pyro, can do 200 damage per second with his flamethrower, and his airblast is perfectly fine. Your suggestions would only make him overpowered. He doesn't need more than 200 damage per second and being able to airblast 2/4 rockets is fine. Just need to know how to dodge.

^I thought the damage was around 160 per second. Then if it's at that level, he is fine in that regard.

I see your point. What do you think the Pyro needs to see more play?

What makes the Pyro playable on a lot of maps also makes Comp generally not work to play. Pyro is Close Combat and cramped areas, something the comp world really dislikes by all accounts I have ever saw.

The pyro is useful as a surprise strategy, like if you've ran 3 rounds in badlands it can be useful to have a scout go pyro chances are the other team won't expect it so you'll be able to take mid easier*.

*Disclaimer, this can work but don't be surprised if it doesn't some teams adjust to strategies better than others.

I think it is actually great that some classes are situational, and no class is underpowered yet just considered "non-standard", as this allow for funky plays and for more focus on one class by players. Although I may be wrong because the European plays are in a way much better than the American cookie-cutter class roster, just look at the ETF2L recruitment section for example, it allows you to select any of the classes, and skill format is a bit different.

What was happening in Tribes/Tribes 2 was there really became set ways to approach things and the game became about execution over strats. To me this really made it a boring game and totally stagnated the multiplayer of the games from having any longevity.

The classes in TF2, some are situational, but we are slowly seeing some varying strats and different play styles even with the cookie cutter that each has a varying degree of success or failure. Throwing different off classes into the mix every now and then really gives teams a pause and may help the game overall from staling.

I am seeing Muscle Milk this season try some rather unorthodoxed strats in their matches, which is really making then an entertaining team to watch. They are also the biggest threat for a upset at the LAN currently, the main reason is that they appear to have a lot fo talent but also risk taking in the strat department.

The heavy can see a lot more play, it will just take some time to development something around the class and teams willing to risk the attempt.

I think one thing that more competitive players (perhaps those that have been absent from pubs for too long) need to realize that not all classes are created equally, and people have learned to cope with this at even the lowest levels of play. I think one of the main ways that pub play differs from standard 6v6 is the maps that are played (the most popular pub maps are A/D maps like Goldrush, Dustbowl, and Badlands, whereas comp favors push maps like Badlands, Granary, and Yukon). The average class arrangement that reasonably coordinated pub teams will use on A/D maps looks something like: 4+ soldiers and a handful of demoman, 2-3 medics, and 2-3 engineers on defense, with sometimes a sniper or spy thrown into the mix. Cut those numbers in half and you basically have the standard comp lineup for A/D maps.

Classes like spy and pyro are just as situational in pubs as they are in competitive play, the only difference is that you can get away with running them in pubs more easily due to how forgiving pub play is. (You have multiple medics, so allowing scouts to kill a medic is less consequential.)

I think that TF2 is a lot like CS in that there are some weapons/classes that are rather mediocre and situational regardless of what level you play them at, and using them at a pub level is still pretty dumb, but you can get away with using them on pubs whereas in comp play you'll get torn apart against an evenly-matched team. And if you look at server stats for CS, you'll find that weapon choices do mostly mirror what you see at high levels of play. TF2 is pretty much the same way, but due to its structure it's more forgiving than CS and as such you can get away with using mediocre classes for longer.

Quick question: Why would we want to see the heavy played more? It's just a slow moving damage tank. It's not entertaining to play with or against.

you know fish, I was just about to answer when I realized I didn't have an answer. Maybe it's just because we don't see any heavies in NA so we always think "OMG A HEAVY WEAPONS GUY!!!" whenever we see one

Quick question: Why would we want to see the heavy played more? It's just a slow moving damage tank. It's not entertaining to play with or against.

First of all it's your opinion, and your opinion only, that it's not fun to play Heavy or against it.

Second of all, more classes = more strategies = better competitive enviroment. For that matter, if you only had Soldier around the game would be much more boring and less competitive.

First of all it's your opinion, and your opinion only, that it's not fun to play Heavy or against it.

Second of all, more classes = more strategies = better competitive enviroment. For that matter, if you only had Soldier around the game would be much more boring and less competitive.
But running Heavy is already a strategy. What you seem to want is for people to main Heavy, which would make running Heavy LESS of a situational strategy.

But running Heavy is already a strategy. What you seem to want is for people to main Heavy, which would make running Heavy LESS of a situational strategy.

Running Heavy is a strategy when? For defending the last point in Granary? That is not a lot. Perhaps for Well, but not a lot. And the reasons you can't consider to main him in most maps is because you can't run to the middle fight with him.

The Heavy being main-able, produces a more diverse metagame. I mean, what's more varied having only Soldiers as Pockets or having both Soldiers and Heavies as avalible Pockets? Seems a no-brainer.

It would make him less of a situational strategy? No you can still run him in the situations as before but you can also main him. More possibilites than just defending the last point.

It's actually a much deeper problem with the class itself. Every class has some sort of gimmick that no other class has. For most of them, it's a movement technique: scouts have speed and a double jump, soldiers have rocketjumping, demos have sticky jumping, and even the pyro has a situational airblast jump. The rest of classes all have some sort of gimmick that while not involving movement, it allows them surpass the need for one. For example, the spy's cloak, or the sniper's ability to one-shot-kill from extreme ranges. The Medic doesn't have a movement technique but it is the second fastest class in the game and has regenerative health, and it's importance to the team is without question (unlike the heavy, who is in question).

That leaves the Heavy as the only class in the game (other than engineer) that is slow, ineffective from long range, and lacking a movement technique. This is the problem with the Heavy. He adds nothing to the table. He does absolutely nothing that another class can't already do. He takes too long to get anywhere, has no escape or chase mechanism, is a very 1-dimensional character with only hitscan weapons, and while being able to throw sanviches was a nice addition to his arsenal it wasn't nearly enough to make him into a valuable contributor to the team. The only thing he can do is fire away at enemies nonstop while being completely grounded.

His damage output is higher than any other class in the game, and unlike the engineer who can only build static defense, the Heavy can move about the map taking this insane damage output with him. But this is about as far as his pros go, the cons being a laundry list of reasons why you should be running a different class. He is too easily countered by too many classes. Sentries completely stop scouts from being the least bit effective, whereas a scout can take a heavy 1v1 with good aim if they get the drop on him alone. A good sniper makes a heavy nigh unplayable, while soldiers and demos each have simple ways to deal with a heavy given their projectile based attacks and higher mobility.

I actually think Heavy is a fun class and would love to see him become more viable in competitive play. I think the argument that he would slow down gameplay and make games boring doesn't hold much weight. But he does need some serious tweaking if he is to become playable in his current state. I don't know what I would do if I were Valve -- I'd probably start by tightening his spread and removing the quickswitch timedelay from the minigun or shortening the rev time a little bit, as it already takes way too long to rev up. He also needs whatever melee weapon they end up deciding on that gives him movement speed. Even after all of this I still don't think he will be that viable, but I don't know what else you can do without drastically changing the class. Add grenades? A primary unlock that is vastly different from the minigun/natasha? I have no idea.

First of all it's your opinion, and your opinion only, that it's not fun to play Heavy or against it.

Second of all, more classes = more strategies = better competitive enviroment. For that matter, if you only had Soldier around the game would be much more boring and less competitive.

Fish is not alone in his opinion. The heavy is strategically interesting, but watching the execution of a heavy play is not as exciting as watching any other class. It's pretty clear what the outcome of a battle will be from the start with a heavy, as opposed to a solly fight, where a juggle and airshot could mean your roamer just killed their pocket.

I can understand the argument that using a heavy increases the strategic options available, but only when you use a heavy selectively. If you had someone main heavy and not practice other classes, you would always have a slow moving combo with weaker spam (with the occasional option of flanking with heavy, but let's be honest, that won't work more than once).

As for the use of heavy, unless they give the minigun a colossal damage buff, the fact that a solly can spam you down at range will never change, so you'll always have problems in "the yard". On the other hand, if you have a soldier/scout who can play heavy (pretty easy), you can get one for pushes with uber against uber into small areas -- basically what a heavy is best at. Well mid, gran 4, follower 4, blands last, freight last are all pretty good places for a heavy if you have the foresight to get one in time. And of course, we'll always have heavies in blight's koth strat or MmM's B push.

Same argument applies to pyro and sniper, really. They have their uses, but when they're out of their element, they're useless. Scout/solly/demo can make a play in almost an environment, pyro/heavy/sniper can't. Unless every map turns into a cp_junction ripoff, I don't think we'll see people maining utility classes.

I agree that the heavy in particular could see more use, but I don't think any change is necessary aside from people recognizing good situations for one. Though I suppose the GRU couldn't hurt things.

Running Heavy is a strategy when? For defending the last point in Granary? That is not a lot. Perhaps for Well, but not a lot. And the reasons you can't consider to main him in most maps is because you can't run to the middle fight with him.

The Heavy being main-able, produces a more diverse metagame. I mean, what's more varied having only Soldiers as Pockets or having both Soldiers and Heavies as avalible Pockets? Seems a no-brainer.

It would make him less of a situational strategy? No you can still run him in the situations as before but you can also main him. More possibilites than just defending the last point.

The sheer amount of changes that would need to be made to the class to make it mainable would pretty much constitute Heavy being a whole different class. The fact of the matter is, Soldiers have no real one weakness, nor any one specialized strength. Heavy is based around being slow, having a windup time, having difficulty with verticality, having hitscan weapons only, and being limited to close range.

Besides, there are plenty of uses for the Heavy in Competitive TF2. (See Sigma's post above).

ineffective from long range

This is something I want to ask, what do you consider "long range"? Sincere question.

Because, in TF2 all classes except the sniper are ineffective at long range. And given 300 Health damage and a medic behind you those attacks do not ahrm you very much.

He does absolutely nothing that another class can't already do.

He is better at taking down combos than the Soldier, in my experience. However he is more situational and thus a direct comparison isn't perfect.


On "counters"

whereas a scout can take a heavy 1v1 with good aim if they get the drop on him alone.

Both have good chances on one another. Remember than in order to do good damage the Scouts needs to be close and half a second of minigun fire will destroy it.

Some people say before the Heavy sometimes is run in European Leagues because it's more Demoman-centered and the Heavy protects the Demo from Scouts.

A good sniper makes a heavy nigh unplayable

When Snipers are capable of hitting double jumping Scouts at close range it doesn't matter being slow, you are going to get hit anyways.

Any Sniper worth his slot is capable of killing Soldiers, you are not safer running a Soldier instead of a Heavy. If the other team is running a Sniper he is going to be capable of hitting strafing soldiers, if not, what is he useful for?

Also there are few maps where it's probable to see both a Heavy

while soldiers and demos each have simple ways to deal with a heavy given their projectile based attacks and higher mobility.

My experience suggests me that Heavies are pretty good at taking down soldiers. They are big targets and slow and the Heavy outdamages and outlives them.

Demomen are, in the end, a bit of matter of who shoots first and who retreats first mixed with a bit of random damage. It's quite complex because both kill each other very easily.

They do not "counter" the Heavy as the Pyro coutners Spies or similar. It's not that simple.

Fish is not alone in his opinion. The heavy is strategically interesting, but watching the execution of a heavy play is not as exciting as watching any other class. It's pretty clear what the outcome of a battle will be from the start with a heavy, as opposed to a solly fight, where a juggle and airshot could mean your roamer just killed their pocket.

Well, I don't think most players think of the Heavy as boring. I mean, the Sniper is at least as boring and the Scout and the Medic are pretty Straightfoward too.

Demoman and Soldier may be more interesting when it comes to deathmatching but I doubt that's the end of the world. Were it for entertainment value nothing is funnier than a Spy.

Also having him being playable too will attract more players.

If you had someone main heavy and not practice other classes, you would always have a slow moving combo with weaker spam

And how is that less strategically interesting than having a pocket soldier? I mean, having him as a playable character is AT LEAST as interesting as what we have now. Adding a new class to the metagame can't reduce the strategies unless that class is overpowered.

[quote[The sheer amount of changes that would need to be made to the class to make it mainable would pretty much constitute Heavy being a whole different class. [/quote]

The only change I think the Heavy needs is the GRU. He plays great in Well, I can see the GRU making Fastlane a second Well for him.

I think he is a bit underaprecciated, don't get me wrong, I know he will never see play in Badlands and I like that because he is not supposed to be good in such an open map focused on vertical terrain.

I think a good deal of the players (Not you, I'm talking as a whole) either never give him a chance or never learn how to overcome his weaknesses, prefering more rounded classes. It's fine, but there's no reason not to shake the metagame and make TF2 a better game.


PD: Excuse my bad mood, my head hurts a bit.

I don't really know where you're going with that last post. You go point-by-point through other people's posts, ignore the context, and argue as if we're saying heavy is bad. We all basically agree that the heavy is an interesting class to be pulled out from time to time, and sure, the GRU would make heavy use more common, but it's not like maining heavy is going to become a popular thing without huge changes.

I don't want to make this thread about picking apart each other's arguments, especially when we more-or-less already agree, but I really don't know why you would suggest that a sniper being able to hit strafing sollies/jumping scouts makes heavy more viable -- those shots are always harder, so no matter how good you are, you'll miss them more often than you'll miss a heavy. You're talking like this is an rpg rather than an fps on a lot of those points :confused:

Hey I'll bite. :smile:

This is something I want to ask, what do you consider "long range"? Sincere question.

Because, in TF2 all classes except the sniper are ineffective at long range. And given 300 Health damage and a medic behind you those attacks do not ahrm you very much.
Well, first of all, I think mid range would be when falloff damage is at about 50% sooooo... long range would probably be anything greater than that.

What I'm saying is that he is ineffective around mid to long range, AND he has no way to close the gap. Other classes have speed and jump maneuvers that they can use to get closer or to get away, and the ones that don't have a unique ability (cloak, headshot) that circumvents that problem. The heavy has exactly jack shit.

He is better at taking down combos than the Soldier, in my experience. However he is more situational and thus a direct comparison isn't perfect.
Uh... I don't really know what your experience level is at this game, but I think anyone who has ever played this game competitively at even a low/mid level would completely and utterly disagree with that statement.

Some people say before the Heavy sometimes is run in European Leagues because it's more Demoman-centered and the Heavy protects the Demo from Scouts.
Actually the reason why European teams use heavies is a lot more complicated than that, although protecting the demo is definitely part of it.

Historically speaking it is a holdover from the early seasons of TF2; The Europeans adopted TFTrue long before the US did, and so the US players played with criticals for much longer. It seems silly to think about now, but back then the chance of getting a crit rocket was a clutch factor that decided a lot of games (and the random crit percentage was MUCH higher than it is today). When the Europeans started using TFTrue many of them starting running a Heavy full time and pocketing both a Heavy and a Demo, as the heavy gave the oldschool powerhouse Demo more protection. This was also before a lot of standard maps were released, notably cp_badlands, and so many of popular maps at the time (labor and well for example) were and still are viable maps to run a full time heavy, whereas today the current rotation is much more fast paced.

Since then the game has just sort of evolved. The European game and the US game have gone their separate ways, each having a similar but distinct playstyle. I don't think many teams run full-time heavies anymore, even in Europe. I must admit however that I don't know a lot about the current European TF2 scene, I could be wrong about that.

Any Sniper worth his slot is capable of killing Soldiers, you are not safer running a Soldier instead of a Heavy. If the other team is running a Sniper he is going to be capable of hitting strafing soldiers, if not, what is he useful for?

My experience suggests me that Heavies are pretty good at taking down soldiers. They are big targets and slow and the Heavy outdamages and outlives them.
I'm sorry but this is just ridiculous, I'm just going to point to what Sigma said in response to these points.

I think a good deal of the players (Not you, I'm talking as a whole) either never give him a chance or never learn how to overcome his weaknesses, prefering more rounded classes. It's fine, but there's no reason not to shake the metagame and make TF2 a better game.
Like Sigma said I think we all agree here, the Heavy does have his place and while we may disagree as to whether he should see more or less play, I don't think his lack of usage can be attributed to players willingness to "learn how to play the class" or "give him a chance". I'd love to see the metagame shaken up a bit, but that's something that just happens. You don't have a lot of control over the metagame -- that's why it's the metagame. There may come a time when the Heavy sees more competitive play, but that day is not today, and there's not really any reason to try and force it.

@Sigma,ooh no I know you are not saying he is bad, I'm just explaining my opinion on his use and what he needs to be more useful. Sorry if I got carried away. Let me change my mind, ok?

I think we can have a more productive discussion if we try to see what makes him good on some maps and see what prevents him from being useful in others.


Probably we can agree that the Heavy is a good choice for those whole maps:

Well
Turbine

He doesn't need to run, the shooting ranges are very good for him and he is not as afraid of verticality as much as in other maps. He can also gather team support easily on those maps.

And we can agree that playing him in Badlands or Yukon is not a good idea because those are very open maps and he has a very restricted movement area. The enemies can shoot at him without getting close, so he should not be good on those maps. He cannot force them to come after him either.

Now, I think that if he had the GRU he could be used as often as in Well in Fastlane and Freight.

Do you think that even with the GRU he would not be useful in those maps? Why?


BTW, I wanted to answer this:

I don't think his lack of usage can be attributed to players willingness to "learn how to play the class" or "give him a chance".

It's just a part of it not the "main reason", so as to speak.

People copy the Cookie cutter without understanding it so they often ignore what other classes can do. Sorry if it sounded a bit like "YOU KNOW NOTHING, I AM BULLETPROOOOOF".

In fact, at first my clan didn't let me play Heavy in comp matches were he would be useful because of that effect.

I don't think it's really a matter of the heavy being good on a map and bad on another map. In my experience, the heavy is good in smaller areas without many corners/obstacles, and otherwise gets abused by people who can long-range him or peek corners to do damage. The areas I mentioned in my first post -- well mid, gran 4, follower 4, blands last, freight last -- all meet this criteria. Unfortunately, well's yard is too big for a heavy (though there's rarely action in yard thanks to the mid bats), and well's 2 has about as many peek+spam corners as possible*. The other areas suffer from similar issues, big yards or many corners.

So, to use a heavy effectively on granary, for example, you have to have someone who died from on the mid fight or yard push, and will spawn in time to make it to 4 before the other team takes back yard. That situation also requires the yard push to fail enough that you're unable to take 4 off of it, but succeed so that they can't just uber in and force you out before the heavy gets there. So, you have to gauge the situation pretty accurately to avoid having your heavy show up when they've already got soldiers in yard -- a play that would basically give up mid. Even then, the value of that heavy over a soldier or scout is not huge, and that heavy is not so useful for pushing last.

Most of other points I mentioned have similar factors that make it hard to use a heavy. In all of these, the GRU would make it easier to do the switch, as you'd only have to predict the need for one 20s ahead rather than 30s. So in answer to the questions you posed, yes, the GRU would make the heavy more usable.

*perhaps I should note here that since it's hard to do anything as a scout at well 4, and to a lesser extent freight 4, having a heavy follow your soldiers can be pretty strong. It's just that the heavy himself isn't useful until you actually fight your way to the point. Though, most of the time that I see a fight for 4 with a heavy (or two), it's because someone owned mid with that heavy, so there's really not much opposition.

You can use the Heavy more than you think, you just actually have to realize that you are USING a Heavy. It's situational, but you can do it. Look at the ESEA-I finals last year when Jaeger ran Heavy at Badlands mid. Blight runs a Heavy at Granary mid usually around once per match or so, and utilizies Heavies often when attacking 4th or final points.

The problem is that when people run a Heavy, they do nothing to change how they play. They do the exact same things they would normally do and don't account at all for the fact that you will start the battle man down, but after a few more seconds you'll get a 450 hp damage tank to play with. You actually have to adjust your playstyle, and most teams don't do that.

@Sigma

I actually like him for Well 2. It requires a change in playstyle but it has it's advantages. You force them to hide in certain areas making it easier for your teamates to spam them. They have two options, to hide in the corners (Where they have no space to move) or to hide near the point where you can obliterate them if you get there.

For defense it's also pretty good because you can time easily and the time you need to kill any player coming through the doors is smaller than the time they need to go to the stairs or retreat. I actually beat my Heavy lifetime record there after 16 minutes of constant defense (Bad tactics meant that we never got the middle point so we were constantly defending)

Yard fights in Well are pretty uncommon so it's not such a big loss as it may seem at first glance. Also if there's a yard fight it's probable that the middle fight was close so the Heavy may be dead and a switch may come handy.



So what about the Pyro? Where do you think he is useful other than Badlands? I do not have a lot of experience with him but there are several maps where he may come handy.


After some thought the Spy is very much like the Sniper. He forces 5v6, he is somewhat of a dead weight sometimes but if the player is really good he is worth it because he is going to be able to kill enough players so as to compensate.

I have only played with a Spy on my team in 2Fort (yay) and a couple of unimportant matches in Fastlane. I think the trick is attacking when they are attacking a teammate. If you can get some communication going you can get a lot of kills this way but I lack enough practise so as to see if he's worth it sometimes. What do you think?

If you are actually landing the head shots, a spy with the ambassador can be pretty devastating to a team. 1 hit brings a medic down to below 50HP, which forced the combo to either fall back for health or pop their uber. Could a scout consistently get close enough to do that? Snipers can do even better, but they are very predictable. There are only so many spots on a map that snipers can shoot from without being extremely vulnerable. Spies can be anywhere, any time.

If you are actually landing the head shots, a spy with the ambassador can be pretty devastating to a team. 1 hit brings a medic down to below 50HP, which forced the combo to either fall back for health or pop their uber. Could a scout consistently get close enough to do that? Snipers can do even better, but they are very predictable. There are only so many spots on a map that snipers can shoot from without being extremely vulnerable. Spies can be anywhere, any time.

Do you have any clips of a spy successfully doing this? Or is this theorycraft?(nothing wrong with that)

I've seen it happen a few times in TF2 lobby, but no clips. So for real comp games its theorycraft.

Revolver + Kritz can be devastating if absolutely necessary but considering both classes have such limited health it really isn't feasible.

Kritgeneer. Crit wrenches are devastating.

um....why would you ever crit a spy? It takes 2 hits to kill anything, when a solli or demo can kill half a team with one sticky or rocket.

The spread on the revolver is outrageously stupid and unreliable, hence terrible idea. Don't tell your scout and kritz him instead. Also on that spy note, I have 3 things to say.
Lopert
Daniel
DL


Anyways, to be honest, didn't take time to read but any decent player (see "not me") will tell you, every class has it's time to shine. Got time to be a douche or enemy has kritz? Go go engineer! Desperately gettin romped on badlands mid? Go go pyro fag!!! Playing Yukon? Pray one of your scouts can snipe! Playing well or freight and feel like being jaeger? I heard they can't outsmart bullets!

Look at it this way. If buffing your scouts halfway through a mid battle instead of your normal heal order can completely change a mid fight from the norm, running a different class can have a huge effect.
Your div 2/3 team may think they have some crazy ideas running weird ass classes, but go play a div 1 team and see how your amazing idea goes. There is a reason 6v6 has a 'cookie cutter' game play; to a certain extent of course.

TL;DR
TF2 is a vastly expansive and strategic game, however your crazy heavy granary mid super kawaii sneak strat will not working against good players, 92% of the time.



Random xensity motivation: NINETY NINE PERCENT ACCURACY

um....why would you ever crit a spy? It takes 2 hits to kill anything, when a solli or demo can kill half a team with one sticky or rocket.

Hitscan, but kritzing a sniper if you've got one is better, since it's 100% accurate.

P.S And it doesn't have to reload

P.P.S And he said to krit spies if absoloutely necessary

That comment offends me as a comp heavy player, aaron. Clearly you are just mistaken and thinking about noob heavies! A pro heavy complete with a team that knows how to work around with a heavy player can easily make up for or even be better than a soldier ;P
Just watch some of Riemu's demos and see how he decimates the entire enemy team at mid and how his teammates utilize him properly. Other "silly" classes can make for some amazing strategies. Although I'm against snipers personally, one or even two of them can win games at Yukon or Freight. Double engineer is also very fun to watch, and it works a lot of the time. Usually a combo goes after one sentry and forgets another when they uber onto the last point of blands, and even if they don't, I doubt their uber will last long to take them both out. Ever try double blands pyro? I've never seen this used other than the time that I used it. Basically have a scout and soldier go pyro, the team backs off to choke as to give the appearance that they are giving up mid, while one pyro goes through their craphouse and the other under the bridge, then to finish off the enemies on the point the rest of the team jumps them. This requires perfect timing and enough distraction to keep the scouts from checking out valley, but will work most of the time and very devastating when it does. Spy can be great too, I've had 2 times when I've used the Dead Ringer to make some interesting strategies. Once on Viaduct I've disguised as a friendly medic and died to a head shot so to appear that my team is uber-less, and once I jumped around a corner into a combo disguised as a friendly soldier to make them pop. They did, and I spycrabbed to humiliate them. Once I've seen the huntsman used in a very interesting way as well.Carnage in CompLexity's match against EG I believe it was on gpit on defense went huntsman sniper to A door out of spawn using that trick jump which I can never really nail. Although he didn't succeed in getting a kill after the gates opened, it's a welcome alternative to leaving a suicide scout or a rifle sniper at A to try to get a pick instead.

Learn to post so our eyes do not hurt and I never said anything bad about running a heavy @_@

however your crazy heavy granary mid super kawaii sneak strat will not working against good players, 92% of the time.

This was what I was referring to. Pardon my English sentence structure @_@

with my old team, i remember we kritsed our sniper attacking granary last, making their med drop + wounding like 2 people