RGL PUGs: Discussion and Feedback

Topic created · 51 Posts · 680 Views
  • Glad to see so many people as excited about this project as I am. The showmatches were really fun, and it was only a glimpse of the fully fledged system. Once everything is all up and running it should be even better. Seems that among the next steps will be to gather feedback, fix bugs, and eventually run a larger scale test to start calibrating the ranking system.

  • Serious question about the longevity of the site:

    The TF2 community, historically have had this habit of going out of their way to make a brand new PUGing system just to have it slowly bleed players because people just prefer to flock back to the sites their used to and most comfortable using. It happened to ESEA (it had a built in PUGing system), it happened to TF2Stadium, it happened to the In-Game Ranked, it happened to FaceIT (HUGE mistake imo as this was a real path to legitimacy), and i’m afraid it’s going to happen here. The primary issue to me seems to be that there simply isn’t that large of a player base to pull from so since most of the higher level players all know each other on a first name basis, they all just flock back to their usual groups and sites.

    So here’s my question: How can you guarantee it won’t happen again? What can you do to guarantee that when they go to hit their favorites button at the top of their browser it’s RGL and not PugChamp?

  • @LegendaryRQA Should note that ESEA, FACEIT, and Valve Matchmaking are not created by the TF2 community at all. All those services struggled, due to development bottlenecks. TF2 is a unique game in that aspect that pickup games rely on players being able to play certain classes. This is not the case with a game like CSGO, where you simply add up and queue.

    There are a lot more specific details about the pugging system that are not mentioned here but will be done so in a follow-up article.

    This site does not only offer exclusive captain draft style picking as you see in PugChamp, but many other types of drafting systems that will be more inclusive to players that may not have a chance to get picked. The fundamental reason that the majority of the community does not use such a service as PugChamp is due to the fact that an exclusive captain drafting system excludes many players from being able to participate in the games.

    The service will have a ranking system, different skill divisions, the support of many formats, and the flexibility of the different drafting styles (which will be mentioned in further announcements) which will allow for one seamless bridge where everyone can play on the same service.

  • With the sheer amount of modes and functionalities for drafting and queues, isn’t there going to be an issue of too few players playing the same mode, because they’re preferences might differ? If you have 14 players, but 6 wanna do exclusive and 8 wanna do inclusive, neither game can start due to lack of players. If there are too many queues, modes, and other such systems, then players may diffuse over too many of them and less games could be started overall.

    How will the site/RGL handle this, should it occur?

  • @Ampy As mentioned in the main post, the site is very flexible. You can pivot between multiple different drafting styles per-division and per-game type based on the best fit for that specific instance.

    So, hypothetically, you could just force a certain drafting style for all 3 divisions for a format, with the only separation being that players would be in different skill ranks to avoid sandbagging.

  • Any updates on RGL pugs development? Been a month since the original post and invite trial pugs that b4nny streamed.

  • @rastaronald Once we are in a stage that we are able to, there will be an update on this. All the developers and staff are doing this out of their own free time, so progress can only be made steadily.

  • @rastaronald I was actually going to ask this also.

  • @exa ok, looking forward to the release 👍

  • I’m waiting…



  • This post is deleted!
Log in to reply