Clan match setup for 6v6

So, I'm used to the TFC days when all maps were 8v8, and the 2Fort setup went something like this:

Offence:
4 x medics, balc-balc conc jumping in continuous offence, =BC= style.

Defence:
Top spiral soldier, bottom spiral soldier, top/bottom lift soldier (occasionally HW), engineer basement.

In the 6v6 clan match videos I've watched, it seems like it's more common to have only 2 defenders. So how does that work? Surely 4 attackers can smash 2 defenders any day?

What's the usual setup, and how does the game usually flow? Is attack or defence dominant? (in TFC, defence was always the dominant force, and every cap was a triumph!)

I have seen things such as 2 sollies, 1 demo, 1 medic, 1 engi, 1 spy or 1 scout.

There are really no O vs O rules, no back tracking rules etc as their may have been for you in TFC, so generally the team that is on the defensive will wait until they have the advantage and push (with some staying back to stop the scout/spy from sneaking out with the intel).

Granted, I haven't done any 6v6 2fort, but from the few matches I have watched, that is how it seemed for their main offensive force. They basicly had people always on D (1 or 2) and the spy/scout constantly on offense.

Typically you have the engy and/or demo always on D and the spy/scout always on O. Everyone else, ie. the medic and the rest of the muscle push between defence (if the enemy is in your base) and offence (if they're not). The goal is typically to push up to the courtyard and clear a path (or make a distraction) for the scout or spy to bring it out.

Ok, that's interesting - cheers.

I always found the "OvD, no backtracking" aspect of TFC rather annoying, as it felt like an unnecessary rule. (All kudos to DW when they decided to drop that convention for their crossover2 strategy and run 3 offensive sollies who shot enemies off the centre bridge.)

I'm glad to hear that clan matches in TF2 haven't gone down that path! I guess the respawn time dynamic kinda lends itself to that sort of pushing gameplay.

What does OvD no backtracking mean? I never played TFQ, FF or TFC so I haven't heard all of those old terms.

Typical 6v6 setup for 2fort.

2 soldiers, heavy/scout, demo, engi, medic.  Then, proceed as Kerinthious described.  Sometimes switch the heavy/scout to spy to refresh the intel.  2fort doesn't fit as well into TF2 as it did in TFC.  There are many better CTF custom maps out there that have different, yet similar strategies.  I think my team would say that controlling key areas of the map is more important in TF2 than it ever was in TFC since you could skillfully conc-jump past most defense.

Quote:

O vs D (if it is what I call No OvsO) basicly means that the offense for both teams never fought. So basicly, if you were to run accross the 2 fort bridge and run by an enemy medic, you could basicly only wave and continue on your way.

No backtracking was basicly, that you couldn't run off to go to offense, then decide "Oh I need to go defense" turn around and come up behind people and start shooting them.

Quote:

What was the reasoning behind this? it seems almost pointless to me.

Yeah I am shocked that those rules were followed. its WAR

You know how you feel when you see a new topic on criticial hits? Yeah. Topics on backtracking (chasing enemy attackers into your base) were the same way in TFC. It was very disputed.

The idea behind "no backtracking" was that there was no healing. While medics could medipack each other, they only replenished health, not armour, and even at 100 health, you were dead meat with no armour. So, an attacker damaged in midfield would never have a chance to successfully assault the enemy base and may as well go home.

Coupled with instant respawn, this meant that if you allowed backtracking, many games would end up with a small core of defence sitting in each base, a huge midfield deathmatch and weakened attackers trickling through into each base, easily picked off by the defenders. Yes, you could move defenders onto the attack, but you'd end up with 1 defender on each time, and success determined by luck - whether one 10-health scout could slip through and escape down the spiral.

The counter-argument was that it was possible to conc-jump (use the harmless explosion from a concussion grenade to jump long distances) over most defences, so it should be possible to counter backtracking.

The counter-counter argument was that, well, why make it so everyone has to use their conc-jump to escape midfield, expose everyone to random spam and generally just increase the difficulty of attacking with no real strategic benefit?

The counter-counter-counter argument just got silly.