I am by no means defining what fun 'is' and 'is not'. Hell, I admitted many times throughout the thread that people do find it fun to camp mid. Trying to make everyone happy is indeed idealistic, but limiting the unfairness in map design and class abuse is something completely different.
I'm not going to read every response in this thread, i just read your original post. I did not say you're giving fun a definition, i merely said people have different ideas on what's fun or not.
It really comes down to this; do we really prioritize the fun ONE person will have over the fun an entire group of 10-11-12 people do? When an engi camps mid, yes, he is having fun, but that comes at the expense of the team he is camping. I am not giving definitions of 'fun', I am merely pointing out to the blatant elephant in the room at this point.
I don't think it's fair to prioritize one fun over the other, the same logic goes to that i don't think it's fair to remove building from mid because it's prioritizing someone else fun. I don't see how it's only the engineer having fun, the team he's on should be having fun too. There will be outliers on both side as well.
I'm simply stating that there is a lot of unfairness entertained by this 'fun'. And that one's fun can and does limit the fun of other people. It's like someone has a lot of power and their power comes at the expense of other people's capacities and potential, then you say 'Well, who are we to define who is strong and who is not?'. That's why I'm having this discussion; to communicate the point of view that there must be some sort of balance here.
You say unfairness but if there's many easy solution to the problem, which means it isn't unfair at all.
How is it a bad idea when it disables other people from having fun? For the fifth time already, I am NOT against engi as a class. I love engis in the intel, and I can stand them on mid when my team is made up of people that know how to counter that. But it's a pub, you rarely get people who have an idea of what to do in a pub. If you can limit the amount of unfairness while minimizing the toll it takes, why not? If Skial mimics the unfairness that can be found in a pub, then why play there in the first place? What makes it different than your good old stacked koth_viaduct valve pub then? Not that much.
you're disabling someone ways of fun for someone else. I don't think it's fair to say they should stop because people don't like it. I don't care about your stands on engineer and i have not accused you being against engineer, i suggest you read what i wrote again. People play on skial because they have actual people to enforce the rules and decent servers with bare minimums of server plugins on real maps.
I'm not the judge on this. I am stating my opinion. The judges on this are the skial admins and whoever regulates server plugins. It's a suggestion that I am debating here because I want to see it happen. Nobody has provided any negative impact it would have on servers as a whole, either. Most of the arguments posted here consisted of: "Nobody is complaining about it, so it's not an issue", which could not be further from the truth. It's just like when they changed the EU turbine server to EU+ with no replacement and people with shitty PCs had a very hard time playing on their favorite server because of framedrops; nobody actually went ahead and openly complained about it, it was a general annoyance, though. Only that this time, it's a general annoyance that benefits one or two persons, and hurts the entire server.
Now, nobody has told me how it would cause harm to limit engi to building anywhere that is NOT mid. I'm still waiting for that.
If it was a suggestion then you could have at least put it in the right section. This suggestion is a gamble, but the problem is it doesn't only provide beneficial outcomes. This change harms on what players can or cannot do, which is a no-no for me. Also what the fuck is with the wall of text out for something that was 3 sentences long. Keep it short or something.
