Got any evidence that US games are on average higher scoring? I really don't follow it at all. Seems to me that low scoring games are often the most interesting because it normally means that CPs are actually changing hands rather than teams piling on win middle, autocap cp4, have uber advantage on CP5 rounds.

[...] Please watch a few games from ESEA-I first. [...] Waster has a point here. Besides, if you are losing and want to win, you gotta play the game instead of waiting for a miracle to happen. I guess the example of obscure is evidential here, since it's a map promoting a passive style, but for crying out loud, this isn't rocket science, this game is not as schematic as you think it is, just use your brain. Stop caring, start playing.

[...] not sure where i said this is influenced by NA because you know, it isn't even if its a similar idea

the only reason I would prefer this is #1 to stop any whine/advantages that come from playing BLU or RED, and #2 to make the game quicker (i.e if, as stark asked, a round is being playe for ages due to a stalemate on last, then the teams will have less time to do this, forcing some sort of risky move or shit)

You are missing the point of NA play style. They have halves only because the matches are meant to end with fifth round won by any team and therefore, to not make the game too long, they have also given an hour long timelimit broken down to halves. Since EU play style is based on timelimit 30 and quite a few decisions are already based on time left in the match, I'm against.

Right, so I would like to hear your thoughts about having halves in TF2 games - i.e 15 minutes (or more or less - blast away your suggestions) to make it as long as a normal map.

[...] What happens on a map like Obscure which can sometimes take 20 minutes a round?

Right, so I would like to hear your thoughts about having halves in TF2 games - i.e 15 minutes (or more or less - blast away your suggestions) to make it as long as a normal map.