My first major Team Fortress 2 Engineer essay was about the history of Highlander Engineer and how certain figures developed the class to what exists today. At the very end of it, I stated that I wanted to write additional content covering other interesting aspects of the Engineer but it was all on the backburner. One such area was a treatise on unorthodox Engineering, where it is now, and where it can be expanded. This is that paper.

Before I began writing this exposition, I was very excited about the endeavor. The topic at hand was particularly intriguing to me and I had the thoughts and ideas swirling in my head. One major obstacle that I faced when compositing this was the marriage of theory and direct correlation to Team Fortress 2. One major property of unorthodoxy is rarity and this made it particularly difficult to better ground my arguments and points. That said, because this area is considerably unexplored, it would make sense that its discussion would be more nebulous. Another significant issue with this is that unorthodoxy in general can be a contentious topic for certain people. My hope is simply that I present this material in a reasonable and honest fashion.

This is quite a long work of writing so I want to make the suggestion of reading it in chunks. With that, I want to personally thank you for your time. There is much content on the TF2 Engineer on the Internet, be it YouTube, Steam Guides, Reddit threads, etc. There is also other content not related to the TF2 Engineer or TF2 at all that you could be looking at but you are here instead. So I want to thank you for taking the time to read all of this and it is a privilege to have you here. Writing about the TF2 Engineer like this is a passion and something I very much enjoy doing. I had a lot of fun writing this and I hope you will find the material here at least interesting.

Unorthodoxy is something that is alluring by nature. We cannot help but draw our attention to that which is strange or unusual to our routine and what we are used to experiencing. A Ferrari in traffic calls for the attention of nearby drivers. A great rainbow in the sky captures our awe. A postmodern building draws the attention of passersby.

The same applies to strategies and methods in the video games we love. But not only can they be captivating, they can also be extraordinarily powerful when utilized correctly. This Steam Guide is about unorthodox strategies and concepts related to the Team Fortress 2 Engineer class.
I would first like to start by saying what this essay is not. This essay is less a step by step guide on how to play the Engineer but more a set of observations, thoughts, and theories, in respect of a particular region of play. I wield the meter stick of a schoolmaster less than the explorer’s binoculars and the scientist’s microscope. The closest I get to instructing is in the last sections of this Steam Guide, where I put my thoughts on how to formulate various unorthodox strategies.

The second thing I would like to do is define what I mean by unorthodoxy. Unorthodoxy means a method, way of thinking, or strategy that deviates or is different from the usual, common, and prevailing methods, thought processes, and strategies of the respective time. This “usual, common, and prevailing…” section of the definition will be called “the metagame” or “the meta” for the sake of brevity and its colloquial use in gaming communities.

The central idea behind Unorthodox Engineering is to cause confusion, delays, psychological impairments, and to diminish the effectiveness of the enemy through the strengths unorthodoxy provides. There are different ways or categories to achieving this and each will be explored. I believe that this area of the Engineer is largely untouched and not given enough inspection and research. My hope is that this essay will give it at least a modicum of consideration and analysis into its depths, to pique interest, and to encourage deeper thinking of the Engineer.

Lastly, I would like to consider the variable of time when it comes to the categories of unorthodoxy. The meta changes over time. The common sentry spots over 5 years ago in the standard maps are likely to be different from the spots now. If the orthodox is victim to the ticking of the clock, then so must what is unorthodox. I must also consider what the impact of properly executing the unorthodox will have as time passes. When a country makes a revolutionary weapon, its neighbors won’t all simply raise their hands in surrender nor will they all start crawling into coffins. They will attempt to formulate counters or take the weapon for themselves. The possibility of either option succeeding is something to consider.

When looking into unorthodoxy, I realized that they fall into categories or major groups. In accordance with the title, each of the 4 categories will be represented by an organism. All of them have varying degrees of quality in complexity, execution, and effectiveness. I want to demonstrate that these categories have existed in the world of competitive gaming and proven to enjoy levels of success.

These are the following:

• The Mantis: consists of surprise attacks, ambushes, suckerpunches, and all-ins.
  
• The Mongoose: exploits the fact that it has little to no natural and/or properly developed counters.
  
• The Mistletoe: exploits cracks, holes, or tendencies in the meta, engaging in a parasitic relationship.
  
• The Beaver: a paradigm shift, a fundamental change, and a radical upheaval of the meta, how something is played, and the ecosystem.

All who have played TF2 for a considerable amount of time have experienced this before. You are running around the map in an average day of TF2 when suddenly there is a Level 3 Sentry Gun in an unexpected position, ending your life instantly, if not bringing it close before you get into cover. It is also likely that you are not the only person to fall victim to that particular Sentry spot. While simple and cheap, it was a surprise and that is an element that can be very powerful and cause chaos that a predictable strategy lacks.

The Mantis is a strategy that works as a gamble but can be extremely successful depending on how unexpected it was. It is a suckerpunch. A sudden, unexpected attack. Despite the damage it can cause, it is quite easy to do in your everyday game:


Go to 2:08

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429033213/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK5ODIzsEmo
https://web.archive.org/web/20220429033403/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8g0z8yZ6FU

I understand that these aren’t extremely strong points of argument in favor of this style of play. The goal of Soundsmith’s video is mainly for comedy and entertainment and while there is nothing wrong with that, this isn’t exactly an Invite Highlander finals match. The point of this is to demonstrate that you do not have to be a competitive Engineer with multiple seasons of Highlander and a mastery of the class’ mechanics to properly execute an ambush strategy. All that is needed is creativity, improvisation, and a willingness to take risks. LazyPurple’s video demonstrates that unexpected Sentries can be even better with some additional forethought. The usual perception of the Mantis is that it is just a way to get cheap kills but it can actually be a viable strategy.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429034023/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BwCJgfmwkU

Meet ZeLoT, a StarCraft Brood War Zerg player in Korea. This is an interview of him and his group during the Afreeca Starleague (ASL) Season 7. The player talking before him, BeSt, mentions how ZeLoT has 80 all-ins, making him specially difficult to prepare for. 80 all-ins can sound like an exaggeration from BeSt but it doesn’t change the fact that ZeLot is a player that understands how to use a wealth of gimmicks with great success. I would like to point out that even making it to ASL is a massive accomplishment on its own. There are countless skilled players that can only dream of even qualifying for this tournament. There are even former professional players that get eliminated in the first round of the qualifiers. It really does show that even if your main strength is cheesing you can still rise to qualify in such a prestigious tournament.

ZeLoT’s methods aren’t mindless either. He is exploiting certain weaknesses in his opponents’ opening strategies, acting on specific timings, and using the element of surprise. The strategies and gimmicks also need to be executed properly in order to make them effective to the fullest, especially against ASL material players. With these attributes and the sheer quantity of all-ins mentioned earlier, ZeLot is a Mantis to a much higher degree than the rest of his kind. The Engineer can apply similar methods. He can have better suckerpunch execution through map knowledge, understanding of enemy attentiveness at certain times and locations, the state of their psyche, better deathmatch (DM) ability, and understanding the phase of the game.

Watch From 6:30-8:10

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429034930/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67G0-ks0uEo

We see glimpses this in Sigafoo. Consider what happens and what Sigafoo says during 6:30-8:10 in this video. Sigafoo’s team is pressured off of the hill defense hold on Upward 2nd. His Dispenser is destroyed and now the enemy Demoman is much too close for comfort for Sigafoo to hold his Sentry at the exit mouth of the tunnel. Since the BLU Demoman has the high ground, Sigafoo is forced to retreat into the tunnel with his Heavy to survive and regroup. Wishing to keep his Level 2 Sentry alive, Sigafoo grabs his Sentry with the Rescue Ranger into the tunnel and places it where he sees fit at the moment. Right after deployment, the Level 2 shreds the Scout, the Mini-Sentry, and the Engineer. There is a lot more gravity to these kills than it first appears. The optimal play for the BLU team in Highlander Payload is to have the Scout and Engineer push the cart for x3 (the fastest the cart will move) while damage oriented classes like the Demoman, Heavy, and Soldier take a reasonable amount of ground in front of the cart. By killing both the Scout and the Engineer, the BLU team is either forced to peel more impactful classes from the front lines if they wish to keep the cart moving or wait for the two cart pushing classes to respawn and work their way back to the objective. Either way, the RED team now has some breathing room. Ultimately, the Sentry was placed in an unexpected location that was a gamble but paid off by eliminating two classes BLU was not comfortable losing in the game’s context.

After the double kill, Sigafoo keeps his Sentry moving. He says that with aggressive Guns, it is important to remain mobile as it keeps the enemy guessing. This is exemplified when Sigafoo kills the recently respawned BLU Scout a second time with the Level 2, further delaying the push. He then wins a 1v1 against the enemy Engineer to eventually fall to the BLU Scout. By keeping the Sentry mobile, remaining unpredictable, and focusing on the objective, Sigafoo was able to buy time for his team and frustrate the enemy. At 7:42, Sigafoo talks about how important it is to pay attention to the game state and how the Level 2 is such an effective tool for eliminating the BLU Scout and the BLU Engineer that are tasked with pushing the cart in the Highlander meta. With his assistance, his team is able to regroup and regain the second point.

However, there is one thing about these suckerpunches that I find fascinating. It is that Sigafoo didn’t plan it. It was not premeditated. Sigafoo was not entertaining how to optimally execute an ambush Level 2 in his situation. At 6:41, he mills around the tunnel for a couple seconds and is unsure on where to put the Level 2. But what if a player like Sigafoo were to take this a step further and have these tactics on hand and a mindset to implement them? Think about how much more damage and frustration it could cause.

Let us see how one can premediate the tunnel Level 2 at 6:35 with a Mantis mindset and by reanalyzing the situation. At 6:16, Jarret (RED Demoman) gets backstabbed, depriving RED of a major source of damage. Nursey (RED Medic) dies to the enemy Soldier shortly after, leaving RED at an even more serious disadvantage. Taking advantage of this, the BLU team pushes, their Demoman flushing out Kresnik (RED Heavy) and razing the RED Dispenser. Given Sigafoo’s position and Kresnik’s retreat path, his safest retreat option is the tunnel. From this, one can come to the conclusion that the Level 2 is best served to ambush the Scout and Engineer, as they will coordinate with the BLU push to put x3 on the cart to optimize the capture time. They will not expect the Sentry to be a threat in the tunnel, let alone in an unorthodox position, leading to a likely double kill. This will ultimately lead to the BLU team peeling power classes from the front lines to push the cart or delay the cart push itself as the Scout and Engineer needs to return to the objective. Either choice buys precious time and space for the RED team to either safely retreat to third or to retake and regroup on second. At the very least, the Sentry will increase BLU’s capture time which will be an overall benefit to the RED team once it is their turn to beat their enemies' time. Salt can be added to the wound by moving the Level 2. Since the Scout and Engineer saw the Sentry near the tracks, putting it on higher ground and closer to the entrance of the tunnel would subvert their expectations twofold, leading to another likely ambush kill. Let's also consider what the enemy voice chat is like. It will be more difficult to communicate the location of a surprise Sentry than one in a more meta position, causing further confusion.

Yes. The paragraph above described the events of what happened during Sigafoo’s clip play by play. However, the possibility and thought I want to leave you with is the idea of a gimmicky Engineer play reinforced by reasoning and how it can potentially be more powerful because of it. I also want to point out that ambushes do not have to be improvised. The results of Sigafoo’s improvised Level 2 was phenomenal. I am under the impression that this can be taken further.

I want to now point out the issues with only pursuing this style of play. You can only deploy gimmicks so many times before the enemy begins to be wary and not fall for the same pitfalls, especially against exceptional players. In ASL 7, the very tournament that ZeLoT qualified for, ZeLoT didn’t even win a single game. Every one of his plans were foiled. He can take a game off of Flash, the best Terran player of all time, but if the two were to play 100 games against each other, it will be clear that Flash is the superior player. All-ins work or they don’t. There is no recovering or clawing your back in the game. For the Engineer, a failed surprise Sentry that doesn’t do enough damage can do more harm than good. That Sentry could have been positioned in a location that better protected his allies, the objective, or a key piece of real estate on the map. The player should also be competent in the meta so that the Engineer is still useful when strategically not ambushing.



Considering the passage of time, the strategies deployed would quickly stale. A surprise Sentry spot can be easily counted once it has been used and is expected. The enemy will have an immediate reaction to the effects of the play with a response or a counterattack. With this experience, the enemy learns and adapts to the play itself, but also begins to pick up on the Mantis’ antics. An all-in in StarCraft usually doesn’t work two times in a row. It will have its impact and its effects, for sure, but in order to keep up, the Mantis must keep drawing from the wide variety of gimmicks available, be it through planned and premeditated ones and ones that are improvised during a match.

This leads to a problem in prolonged use of unexpected Sentry spots. The unexpected will be expected. An analogy is when a Spy backstabs a group of individuals enough times that the enemies are paranoid of the Spy’s presence. A good play the Spy can carry out is to seek other unaffected targets until the paranoia dies down. While this is not a one-to-one, perfect parallel, the Engineer in this unorthodox style also runs into a similar scenario. He can whip up multiple kills and rack up damage with his ambushes, but after a while, the enemy will come to expect it. Targeting another area on the map or individuals or even reverting back to meta play can be the wiser decision when this occurs. Sometimes the best play is simply not to make one. After the dust has settled, the Engineer can go back to his ambush play.

The Mantis is a short and sweet method of unorthodoxy. It creates shock and almost immediate psychological effects that can disrupt enemy forces. However, it ages poorly in a game with continued, repeated use. To reach a high degree of performance in this method, an Engineer must have a good understanding of the game, mechanics, and self-control to not overuse. It is also to be noted that those who rely on this method must also be competent in the meta to make sure that the Engineer isn’t useless when the enemy catches onto his antics and needs to use the standard strategy to let the dust settle.

$50 Million. This is how much damage the mongoose does to the Hawaiian Islands annually and the cost was estimated by the Hawaiian government in 1999. With intelligence to avoid human traps, consuming turtle eggs, and pilfering native bird ground nests, these invasive rodents have become the most despised animal of the islands. They have no natural predators and even decades after their introduction, they still run rampant, driving some of Hawaii’s already endangered native species closer to extinction and being a pest to humans.

The Mongoose is a category of unorthodoxy in which its strength primarily lies in how alien it is to the rest of its environment. The fact that they are the minority by such an incredible degree that there is little to no counterattack or counter strategy. Little to no natural predators. Allow me to point at some case studies from other games: Tekken 7, Super Smash Bros. Melee (SSBM), and baseball.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429035100/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHz2vDQ2m8E

This documentary made by theScore esports talks about RangChu: a South Korean Tekken player who won a major tournament and defeated some of its greatest and oldest players thoroughly with Panda, one of the worst characters in the game and written off by the community as unviable. Panda is slow and lumbering compared to the other characters in a game where speed and agility are prized attributes. At first, it appeared that he would get crushed by household names like Devil-Jin and Xiaoyu. Yet this newcomer to the battlefield took first place in the Tekken World Tour Finals 2018 against titans like Knee and Qudans, both players who have a staggering number of titles and runner-ups.

Qudan's Record


Knee's Record


https://web.archive.org/web/20220429035330/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qxVDOc-oV8

In this video essay by Innuendo Studios, the author talks about how competitive Super Smash Bros. Melee is “a thing of beauty”. He details his love for the game and why Melee personally stands out. In a particular section, he narrates the story of aMSa, a Yoshi player, defeating Mew2King at Kings of Cali IV. In the Winners Quarterfinals match, aMSa controlling the lower tier Yoshi defeated Mew2King who was controlling Shiek and Fox, two strong staple characters in Melee. To supplement his narration, he brings up a specific pitch from baseball: The Knuckleball. The Knuckleball is a very unusual pitch. If thrown incorrectly, it is simply a worse curveball. If thrown properly, however, it drives major league batters insane no matter what their batting average might be thanks to the Knuckleball’s delirious flight pattern. Innuendo Studios says that “almost no major league pitchers throw them, but consequently, no major batters have practiced hitting them.”

This is the crux of the matter when it comes to The Mongoose. The “push-and-pull of the meta”, to quote Innuendo Studios. Because those who are within the status quo practice against what is common, standard, and expected, they lack experience and knowledge and thus are hamstrung when it comes to facing something alien and invasive. To make matters worse, the unorthodox players have a wealth of knowledge on the meta they could possibly want. Knee and Qudans never rehearsed, let alone competed against a Panda of RangChu’s level prior to the Tekken World Tour Finals 2018, but Rangchu knows Devil-Jin well. Mew2King never faced a Yoshi of aMSa’s caliber before Kings of Cali IV, but aMSa faced plenty of high level Fox mains. The legion of batters in the Major League never faced an R.A. Dickey or had a chance to practice for a Knuckleball. There was no textbook countermeasure implemented because such a thing didn’t even exist in the first place! The martial arts panda, the red dinosaur, and the Knuckleball throwing Blue Jay had little to fear from predators in their own time.

Speaking of time, I would like to discuss the transient nature of this category of unorthodoxy. While it is fine to marvel in the heat of the moment, what happens afterwards cannot be ignored.

What will happen first is what I call the Initial Shock. This when the unorthodox player, in a spike of performance and exploitation of the enemy’s ignorance, makes a major debut. This is the point where the alien unorthodox method grabs at least a noticeable amount of attention from the community and, consequently, the part that is the most talked about. It will be no surprise if the Initial Shock of a well thought out Mongoose results in a major victory or at least close to it as prior to this, the rest of the community and competition have little to no data and experience. In theScore esports documentary, Reepal “Rip” Parbhoo expressed concern for Qudans when Ranghu was going to meet Qudans in the finals, as Rip knew that Qudans did not practice nor prepare to fight a Panda for the finals. The sudden appearance of the strange leads to a shock.

The point after this is the Adaptation phase, where the victims learn and adjust from the defeat. When an ecosystem is struck by an invasive species, the natives must evolve, adapt, or have a predator come in. People like Knee, Qudans, Mew2King, and major league baseball batters aren’t players who simply roll over and die when they are bruised from something they do not understand. They have overcome steeper plateaus before in their climb to the top and will seek to dissect the unorthodox and punch back with newfound knowledge. The meta will throw the ball in The Mongoose’s court and the onus is now upon the unorthodox to adapt. This is compounded by the fact that this is happening in the fallout of the Initial Shock. The unorthodox is likely going to be the talk of the town, and thus there will be many who discuss countermeasures. With this, there are 3 locations the unorthodox strategy can go: Continued Damage, Standstill, and Falloff.

Continued Damage is when the unorthodox method is still successful and is able to continue enjoying great success. This is done through consistent practice, learning, and adaptation, while still exploiting its sheer rarity. An example that comes to mind is the Melee player HungryBox and his Jigglypuff. Jigglypuff has existed in at least the upper echelon since the October 2008 Tier list mostly due to Mango’s developments so the Initial Shock phase and the Adaptation phase is well behind us. Seeing HungryBox’s SSMBRank, he has always been at least 5th place since 2013 and 1st place since late-2017 to mid-2019. No other Jigglypuffs are close to his rank. This creates an awkward situation for his opponents. The sheer rarity of not only Jigglypuff mains but ones of HungryBox’s level is something to behold, as it makes preparing for him uniquely difficult compared to practicing for a match versus a Fox or a Marth. Word of mouth also says that HungryBox tends to avoid playing “friendlies” (practice matches during a tournament). If this is true, then it is likely a strategic decision, despite it being socially unsavory to some individuals, as it further throttles the available up-to-date information. These factors, combined with HungryBox’s diligence and perseverance throughout his career, points to him as a player who exploits the minority status of his methods and works to maintain it: an example of Continued Damage.

The next is a Standstill: where the unorthodox becomes part of the ecosystem after the meta adapts to it. While I do not have a concrete example of this, it comes to reason that this is a possibility under certain conditions. It needs to be effective enough to stay competitive, receptive enough for new interested players to learn, and does not overtly disrupt the meta and force a too radical shift in gameplay. This is contrary to Jigglypuff, where while she is still competitively viable, has a bizarre learning curve and slows down the game to a crawl in many occasions contrary to the usual rapid and dynamic nature of Melee.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429024526/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04EvLUkjcYQ

The Falloff is when the unorthodox experiences a drop in quality and competitiveness because the method is innately inferior to what already exists and thus is easily answerable, or the practitioners of the unorthodox strategy did not evolve themselves to reply to the meta when the ball was thrown back to their court, or both. If it is inferior, the only reason it was able to initially succeed was because it was unexpected. One example I can think of in the TF2 Engineer is the fabled Dave+ spot on Upward first defense. You need only the first minute of this video to get an idea of what the strategy is like. This was certainly the case for the TF2 Competitive world during Season 8. To put it briefly, the strength of this spot comes from its high ground, its radius of vision, and the viable angles of attack. The BLU Demoman will not only have a difficult time attacking the position, but will have to walk a considerable way to attack the Sentry. The Sentry is far enough that the BLU Heavy will experience great falloff damage. The height and the position allows the Engineer to cover much ground with the Wrangler. The opposing team, “brb.u”, had a difficult time assaulting Dave+’s position. However, after the Initial Shock, it was rarely seen again. This is for multiple reasons:

1. The meta has evolved in a way that is less centralized around the Engineer. Dave+’s team worked with him to execute his strategies.
2. The Sentry does not protect the Medic as well as the more standard spots.
3. There has been no serious work done on this strategy since Dave+ himself.
4. People have adapted to the strategy after the strategy’s debut, further diminishing its effectiveness.
5. Nerfs to the Wrangler such as decreased accuracy over long range, damage falloff outside normal Sentry range, and repair penalties weakened the advantage of its wide radius of vision, high ground, and range.

While you will find the rare practitioner in a Casual match and Engineer legends like Spamfest using the Dave+ spot years after its debut, it is certainly not a strategy that is keeping Platinum/Invite players up at night.

In the diagram, the 3 events after Adaptation point to one another. This is simply because any one of the 3 can mutate into another. A killer counter strategy can come to dethrone a Continued Damage unorthodoxy to turn it into a Standstill or even a Falloff. A Standstill can go either way, a discovery turning it into a dominant yet unique method or pummeling it into the abyss of obsolescence. Something can be in the shadows of a Falloff only to resurge into the Standstill or Continued Damage through work that leads to dramatic improvements.

The mistletoe isn’t as romantic as it is portrayed in popular culture. It is actually a parasite. Their roots embed themselves in the trunk, branches, and twigs of a tree, extracting water and nutrients. A severe enough infection can kill a tree, choking the very life out of it by covering enough of its surface. The Mistletoe is an unorthodox form that is parasitic to the meta and takes full advantage of cracks in the armor and mindset.

A major example of this is from competitive Pokemon. Se Jun Park won Pokemon VGC Masters Division in 2014 with… a Pachirisu? Surely this can’t be right! That electric squirrel is not even a passing thought in anyone wishes to have a ghost of a chance in a world tournament. Its attack and HP stats are laughably low. One Earthquake will surely dispatch it. It has passable defense stats but if you want a defensive Pokemon, there are much better options out there that can also disrupt the enemy team. Many powerhouses roam the battlefield like Mega-Charizard, Garchomp, Tyranitars, Rotoms, Zapdoses, Talonflames, Mega-Mawiles, and countless others. But little did the rest of the competition know that this little squirrel would be the most agitating adversary in this competition. Weathering Leaf Storms, crumbling Draco Meteors, and shaking off Earthquakes, Pachirisu served a sacrificial role while Se Jun’s heavy hitters like Garchomp, Gyrados, and Gardevoir freely wailed on the opposition.

Go to 4:41

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429035733/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrtfKpd_2xI

The reason for Se Jun’s extremely unusual pick was because he read and deconstructed the meta and came to the conclusion that Pachirisu was just the Pokemon he needed to fill the microscopic niche. Another Pokemon on his team was a Mega-Gyrados, a Pokemon weak to electric attacks. What Se Jun required was a redirector, but the meta Pokemon in this role was the grass mushroom Amoonguss. Amoonguss has good defensive typing, respectable defensive stats, Rage Powder to redirect dangerous enemy attacks from allies, and Spore to reliably put enemies to sleep. All of these make it an excellent supportive and defensive pick for a team and it will rarely be useless in the middle of a match. Every competitor was going to expect and prepare for it. Players started equipping the hold item Safety Goggles on team members, as it protected them from powder based moves like the aforementioned Rage Powder and Spore. When push came to shove, Se Jun settled on the cute electric squirrel. With Follow Me to redirect enemy attacks away from its allies, Pachirisu packed Nuzzle to cripple enemies, Protect for defensive and scouting play, and Super Fang to chip enemy’s health by dealing half of the target’s remaining health. Nuzzle and Super Fang also allowed Pachirisu to care little about Taunt, a move that forces the victim to use a damaging move, as even if it couldn’t get a Follow Me or a Protect, it would still paralyze or chunk the enemy health pool. What Se Jun did was exploit the tendencies of the meta and the crowd’s line of thinking.

This wasn’t just a one time show. Se Jun enjoyed success by outplaying and thinking one step ahead of the meta in the past. In 2013 VGC, the meta consisted of slow defensive Pokemon like Cressalia and Tryanitar. He took advantage of the glaciers’ lack of speed by using Pokemon like Breloom and Liepard that crippled them with the Sleep status and outsped the competition to win the 2013 Korean Nationals and the respect of the international VGC community. In the time period around the 2014 Korean Nationals, the community dismissed rain teams and considered them obsolete due to certain nerfs in the latest Pokemon game at the time. Se Jun’s team? He took advantage of this understandably negligent mindset and ran a rain team, picking Ludicolo not only to benefit from rainy weather but to counter common Pokemon roster picks. He added Zapdos and Garchomp to cover the biggest potential threats and counters to his strategy. With this, he grabbed the 2014 Korean Nationals championship, taking that title a second time in a row.



Notice what happened during his career. Every time Se Jun Park reared his head, those who practiced the meta noticeably struggled in a unique way. Whenever Se Jun was in full force, he always seemed to find a way to exploit key weaknesses and cracks in the armor. He saw what the crowd was doing and following and sought to undermine it by staying one step ahead of where the majority will tread. He is a parasite that feeds on the host, attaching himself to the meta and draining the very life out of it.

The issue with The Mistletoe is that it is somewhat difficult to execute. It is not like the Mantis in which your average player can place a silly Sentry that will get a cheap kill. Whoever wishes to pursue this type of unorthodoxy must have an excellent understanding of the game and the current meta. A parasite that cannot even attach itself to a host is a parasite that will shortly die. A strategy that is designed to counter the meta by exploiting its tendencies and weakness will never work if one does not understand the meta well enough.

Another problem with this style is that it will likely struggle against a diverse environment consisting of many sufficiently different and effective strategies. Se Jun’s Pacharisu fulfilled a microscopic niche and was designed against a very centralized meta. If the 2014 VGC Masters Division were much more diverse, then the niche would start to crack at the seams. The Pacharisu cannot account for a wider angle of Pokemon team compositions and strategies that the squirrel’s design is not meant to feed off of. The more centralized and limited the meta is, the stronger The Mistletoe will be. However, if the meta is sufficiently diverse, the strategy will lose its overall effectiveness. If there are nothing but trees in a plant filled area, mistletoes will eliminate most if not all of the fauna. The solution, in the perspective of the meta, is not to plant more trees but to diversify the plant life, particularly those that cannot be infected. More Garchomps would not have solved the problem of the electric squirrel. What would have solved Se Jun’s Pacharisu’s rampage overall would be a team composition and strategy that couldn't care less about its presence yet was effective enough to compete at the world stage and is common enough to be considered the meta.

The difficulty of The Mistletoe against diversity is in respect to workload and reaction. The more meta strategies that exist, it means that the unorthodox player simply has more work to create a parasitic strategy or at least account for each meta strategy. The unorthodox player will also need to be responsible for being proactive and reactive to a myriad of strategies under such conditions. There might even need to be multiple parasites, each for a different strategy. I once talked to Gamemaster, an unorthodox Highlander Engineer, and he mentioned that his antics and plans work better in a competitive Highlander game against people of at least middle skill level. He adds that he has a noticeably harder time in pubs and against lower level Highlander players. This makes sense in the context of the difficulty of diversity. Higher level competitive players have a tendency to play more centralized textbook strategies while lower level players and your average pub players will play how they see fit and will perform actions that can be completely illogical in the eyes of more experienced and skilled players, leading to a myriad of strategies, optimal or not. The latter poses a difficulty for The Mistletoe while the meta will do just fine even in the chaos of a pub match.

A massive difficulty with The Mistletoe comes due to the passage of time. It is common knowledge that in most multiplayer games the meta evolves. Once the meta evolves, it is likely that the parasitic strategy that once terrorized the landscape would in danger of extinction. The same thing can happen when the game changes through patches. Let us revisit Se Jun Park again. Notice that his team composition changed drastically between tournaments. The meta and the games changed and the unorthodox teams that he built to demolish them became obsolete when the meta mutated and when new Pokemon games were released.

When time marches on, the parasitic unorthodox style can go one of two ways:
1. The game changes and/or the meta changes to the point where the weaknesses and tendencies that the parasite exploits are no longer relevant and existent. When this happens, the strategy dies and falls into obsolescence. A new Mistletoe needs to be created.
2. The game changes and/or the meta changes but not to an extreme extent. The meta may adapt in an attempt to counter but not do so completely. If such is the case, the onus is now on the unorthodox player to further refine and adjust the strategy to exploit the cracks in the armor that the meta still has and/or increase its flexibility. After this, the meta would then adapt and then so on. It would be like a game of tennis where the ball bounces back and forth between the two sides of the court, the onus being on whatever player the ball happens to be heading towards the side of.

The Mistletoe can be devastating to those who are too stuck in the meta because it actively seeks to exploit its tendencies and glaring weaknesses. We see this in Se Jun Park's creative team building and how he used weaknesses of meta Pokemon and the mindset of the crowd to run circles around the competition for consecutive tournaments. Its shelf life can be rather unpredictable as it depends on the response from the meta and the changes to the game to see if it lives another day. If not, then it can continue to thrive and feed off the meta given that it continues to evolve alongside the meta and not fall to the wayside. One must have a good understanding of the game to not just create the strategy but to pull it off, but the damage can be critical.

As far as TF2 is concerned, there has been parasitic theories for the Engineer but, as far as I know, there has not been one that has worked relatively successfully in competitive history. There is one strategy on koth_lakeside. However, that method is outdated from nerfs to the Engineer and because the strategy has never fully been realized in game. I will cover this strategy in particular in the coming section “Formulating the Mistletoe”.

“You can’t emphasize enough how much you need to be a paradigm shifter” - Ma “Savior” Jae Yoon.

The last method of unorthodoxy I want to discuss is the most unusual, which is strange because unorthodoxies are by nature unusual. It is not a short and sweet suckerpunch, nor one that simply relies on its rarity, nor is it one that leeches to a victim until the blood runs dry. Rather, it is the most enigmatic, unprecedented, and extremely difficult to do out of them all. It is the greatest form of achievement in terms of unorthodoxy as it is catastrophic towards even the best players of an era. This is a paradigm shift. An overhaul of underlying principles. A recreation of the basics. Throwing and trapping the enemy into a completely new environment that it is not familiar with and causes it to struggle for even the slightest bit of clarity. It is like a beaver’s dam, changing the ecosystem’s very natural environment around it after its construction. The case studies I want to bring in is StarCraft: Brood War once again. I will be drawing your attention to two players: Savior (Zerg) and Bisu (Protoss) in that order.

Before I even talk about Savior, I need to say something very important about him. He is a criminal. Not metaphorically, but literally. His peak was during 2006-2007. After those glory days, he fell into a slump and was eventually found to be involved in matchfixing in 2010. He was found to be the middleman between the bribed players and illegal esports gambling sites. Due to this, he faced prison time and a life ban from playing in tournaments from every major Koran esports organization. I say all this because I do not want people reading this who are ignorant of Brood War history to give Savior more credit than he is due. Without further ado, let’s talk about Savior.

During Savior’s era of dominance, the trend was that top Zergs lost to top Terrans. The best players that the Zerg race had to offer did not compare to the accolades of the Terrans. For example, a top Terran iloveoov during that time had a staggering 37-0 score vs Zerg in the course of 13 months. Compare that to the Zerg Gorush who went 27-11 over the course of 5 months, inferior in both winrate and duration. Even the maps were not in Zerg’s favor. All other Zergs except Savior totalled up to a 25% winrate vs Terran on Longinus II and Reverse Temple. Savior commented that “the maps were so hard for Zerg. I practiced so much looking for answers.” Other top Terrans commented that Savior would inevitably lose on those maps if the game dragged on for too long. During 2004, some top Zergs were considering asking Blizzard for direct intervention to balance the matchup. Needless to say, Zerg needed a savior, and a Savior they received. But how did Savior perform on Longinus II and Reverse Temple? 87% winrate vs Terran. But how did he do it? I cannot do the details justice in the scope of this essay, but instead direct you to one of the greatest articles written about Brood War that goes much more in depth: God of the Battlefield Part 1 and Part 2. For the sake of this essay, I will be touching on the overarching points from them and how they relate to the topic at hand. I will also be drawing a lot from those articles as they point out much of what a paradigm shift in action looks like.

https://tl.net/forum/final-edits/226236-god-of-the-battlefield-part-1
https://tl.net/forum/final-edits/405029-god-of-the-battlefield-part-2

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429035913/https://tl.net/forum/final-edits/226236-god-of-the-battlefield-part-1
https://web.archive.org/web/20220429040002/https://tl.net/forum/final-edits/405029-god-of-the-battlefield-part-2

One thing that a paradigm shift does is that it tends to be a step forward in the meta. Before Savior, Zergs were playing StarCraft as “gather resources, make an army, and then attack and defend with that army.” This was met with extreme difficulty against Terran as their timing attacks were too sharp, their units too cost efficient, and their defenses too tight. Some Terrans were blessed with excellent mechanics that further exacerbated this issue. Zergs attempted to kill Terran with outright aggressive all-ins since Terran units were more efficient as the game progressed. While this did have some level of success, those holes in the Terran strategies began to close and so the aggressive strategies began to fail. Savior realized that something needed to change. That the whole system of Zerg needed to be torn down and reworked from the ground up for any chance of a future and to overcome obstacles his peers are struggling against.

The strategy that Savior popularized and refined during his era of dominance is 3 Hatch Mutalisk vs Terran. You need not know the nitty gritty details of this strategy. What you do need to understand is that the 3 Hatch Mutalisk is the groundwork of some of the standard Zerg builds even today. The attributes of current ZvT strategies can be traced back to Savior despite his dominance being over a decade ago. This strategy has multiple phases that involve faking threats, superior balancing of resources on economy vs army, boosting his economy every chance he gets, efficiently defending against the Terran, and upgrading his tech quickly so that he can go toe to toe with the Terran or even outright slaughter them. The overarching strategy was peppered with ambushes, flanks, intercepting enemy reinforcements, feigned retreats, and blocked enemy retreat paths to respond to any Terran muscle that dared to touch Savior’s base and to insure maximum body count. Every cog in Savior’s machine needed to work in tandem with each other to crush the enemy. No component is independent of the other. Usually an innovator’s tricks get solved or go out of style or replaced by something better but Savior’s inventions have continued to succeed.

Another aspect that the paradigm shift seems to have is that it punishes the correct answer. It understands the opponent and himself to such an extremity that it is capable of doing this. In God of the Battlefield Part 1, there is a section talking about Savior defeating a Terran player Casy through clever maneuvering and tactics to overcome Casy’s superior firepower and instead gain relative battle strength against Casy. Again, I don’t want to bog you down with details but instead show you a quote from God of the Battlefield Part I:

“Let's think about the scenario from Casy's point of view: Savior charged but backed off without fighting. 'Clearly he feels that he can't win in the open field and is trying to buy time for more units and defilers. Since my army is momentarily paused I should use that period to reinforce my army to keep up my relative superiority while advancing towards Savior's natural, and not give him the time he needs to get defilers. Because it will take a little time to wear down the defenses of his natural my reinforcements will arrive just before he must attack, thus giving me the maximum possible advantage.' All of this is completely logical and the correct choice. And exactly what Savior predicted.”

“Completely logical”. “Correct choice”. “Keeping up relative superiority”. “Giving maximum possible advantage”. The article even talks about how Casy has excellent mechanics. All of his correct decision making and mechanics point to a relatively easy victory for Casy, especially given the matchup but Savior had none of it. It was "exactly what Savior predicted." What is interesting is that Savior understands the Terran so well to the point that he knows what the Terran will do before the even thought of doing it crosses their minds.

Concepts and mindgames like this are also called “hard reads” by the Smash community. It is when the player predicts that the opponent will take a particularly specific option and thus prepares to optimally punish said option. However, if the player predicts incorrectly, it could easily lead to disaster. There are also “soft reads” where the player predicts and covers a wider array of options from the opponent, but the punishment is not as severe for both ends. It is a classic ‘risk vs reward’ scenario. By a series of grueling hard read punishments from Savior, he was able to upheave the Zerg vs Terran metagame and become a Bonjwa, one of the greatest titles a player can ever earn in StarCraft: Brood War. We must understand that Savior was able to do these hard reads in the first place because he understood Terran and its nuances so well.

The second player that I want to highlight briefly is the Protoss player Bisu. Here is Day9 talking briefly about Bisu’s impact on the game by using two units that Protoss usually never uses against Zerg (Corsair and Dark Templar) because the latter race has excellent countermeasures against them.

Watch From 7:56-9:57

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429041044/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EP9F-AZezCU

The gross irony of this story is that Bisu ended up revolutionizing the matchup by defeating Savior himself 3-0 in a major tournament final. In the Liquipedia article of the tournament, it says that Bisu’s build has become a staple in the matchup.

https://liquipedia.net/starcraft/2006_GOMTV_MSL_Season_1
https://web.archive.org/web/20220429041147/https://liquipedia.net/starcraft/2006-2007_GOMTV_MSL_Season_1



This next video focuses mainly on the Corsair, an air superiority fighter. Bisu's revolution in Protoss vs Zerg created an interesting dynamic between the two races. Originally, the matchup consisted of the slower Protoss ground army vs the faster Zerg ground army. After Bisu's revolution, it became very common to see both races rush to air units and playing this strange game of chicken in the skies while building a much smaller ground army. The strangest part about the dogfights is that air units initially used in the matchup can only attack other aerial targets! The Corsair can only attack other air units, but it attacked a critical, always present weakness of the Zerg: their Overlords. Overlords increase the Zerg's supply, allowing them to have more units. By specifically targeting this, Protoss is able to get ahead of the Zerg by forcing the Zerg to spend money rebuilding Overlords and building anti-air instead of investing the money to a standing army. It was a strange revolution indeed!

Go to 5:15

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429041315/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM3Z7FjuixU

While this isn’t a complete restructuring of the Protoss race, he did create and popularize strategies that are the standard build today and revolutionized a particular matchup. I remember learning how to play Protoss in 2018-mid 2019 and I could detect the works of Bisu in the strategies. Using Corsairs keeps Zerg players in the dark about what the Protoss is doing all the while gathering crucial intelligence and granting flexibility for the Protoss, something that is very important as Zerg has many ways to disrupt the Protoss that can be game ending if it isn’t scouted. This, after defeating one of the greatest Zerg players of all time, gave Protoss players favor in a matchup they have been struggling against for some time. Day9 mentioned that Protoss went from winning against Zerg 45% of the time to 55% of the time because of this revolution. Bisu did do a paradigm shift in the Protoss vs Zerg matchup, but this is an example of more minor degree. He has the nickname "The Revolutionist" for good reason.

As The Beaver innovates the current meta, it frequently has significantly more staying power than other types of unorthodoxy. Modern Zerg strategies against Terran can be traced back to Savior and Bisu’s revolution still rings in the ears of countless Protoss professionals. The meta advances a step forward because of it. This will mean, in some degree of irony, that the unorthodox will become a strong orthodox. Another possibility is that the developed paradigm shift method is difficult to the extent that only a handful of players can properly execute it and the meta hasn’t truly taken a step forward.

As for difficulties and weaknesses, it is extremely difficult to do and to formulate. In order to accomplish this, one must have an unprecedented knowledge of both the game and the opponent. Rumor has it that Savior’s Terran was on par or even superior to his Zerg. In God of the Battlefield Part 2, Savior said that he reached his peak as Zerg after he started playing Terran more often than his main race. No wonder Savior is able to punish even the best Terran players with such ease and finesse. In Gamemaster’s "Conundrums of Philosophy", he recommends the reader to purchase a primary strange weapon of a non-Engineer class and get it to Hale’s Own so that one may scratch the surface of how that class operates, thinks, and feels under countless circumstances. With this, the Engineer can better understand how to deal with the class. It comes to reason that an Engineer with a Hale’s Own Knife will get stabbed less often because the Spy’s stab timings and opportunities are so ingrained from playing him so much. There are not many weaknesses in The Beaver aside from the execution, creativity, and the amount of effort it takes to get the strategy to work in the first place.

https://steamproxy.net/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=450376990
See Knowing Thy Enemy (Mechanically)

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429030220/https://steamproxy.net/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=450376990

It is at this point where I would bring an example from the Team Fortress 2 Engineer that demonstrates this or at least shows that it exists but something that could be refined and evolved. So what do I think is a good example that fits this ticket? I have a short answer and a long answer for you.

The Short Answer: I. Don’t. Know.
The Long Answer: I don’t know because I have yet to see it and am ignorant of such a revolution that happened with the Team Fortress 2 Engineer both in theory and in practice. I do not know if such a thing even happened at the Savior-level. An entire paradigm shift? A complete rework of the class from the ground up with no intervention from Valve? A change of understanding to the class so drastic that it is a tremendous leap forward in the class’ evolution? Such a shift has not occurred in the Engineer’s competitive lifetime, and the class, its function, and methodology at its very core plays the same as they did during the first season of UGC Highlander. Yes, there are changes Valve implemented into the Engineer’s design such as changes to his weapons and attributes that have led to changes in the meta, but nothing so drastic as to fundamentally change how you play him not to mention that these are changes from the developers and not from the mind and hands of a great player. I had another large writing project that I published on Steam Guide called “Of Pioneers and Dimensions”. In it, I talked about 4 Highlander Engineers that helped grow the class and started a new way of thinking and improvements to playing him. But none of them seemed to qualify as a Savior, the highest degree of The Beaver. Dave+? Perhaps he is like Bisu with how dynamically Dave+ played with the meta spots to bolster his team and came up with interesting strategies but it didn’t throw the enemy into the abyss and created new staple strategies and weapon loadouts. I was thinking of perhaps Sigafoo due to his popularization of the “Sigafoo Save” but that is simply a technique and not a reconstruction of the class’ very framework. His popularization of DM is an argument but it is an added dimension to the class rather than a makeover. Gamemaster doesn’t qualify because as much as he was unorthodox and groundbreaking in his thinking and philosophy, he sought to exploit the meta and not to replace or supersede it and his strategies and philosophy show this. Spamfest showed that the best Engineer is the one who combines all of his strengths and attributes but I don’t recall Spamfest shaking the class at its very foundations for a new breed of Engineers to come out from the rubble.

The Beaver is enigmatic, powerful enough to topple giants, and is on a completely different field of existence by morphing the very environment. That said, the level of difficulty to attain this type of unorthodoxy to even an acceptable level let alone the highest degree is astronomical. One must have an esoteric understanding of the game and have near flawless execution of the plan. Doing this successfully will likely lead to another step forward for the meta if not something that is difficult but very dangerous to the victims.

Now that I have discussed the types of unorthodoxy, I want to talk about the common properties of it aside from the fact that they deviate from the meta. These are essences that are universally shared in unorthodoxy and is something to keep in mind whenever executing or dealing with it.

The first aspect to note is that unorthodoxy always places the onus in the enemies' hands and forces them to adjust and adapt to the alien strategy. Since unorthodoxy deviates from the meta strategy, it prevents the enemy from acting in a way they find optimal or usual in terms of a normal game. The moment an unorthodox strategy is out of the gate, the flow of the game changes and it is now the victims’ obligation to adjust, lest they face defeat if not a considerable amount of nuisance. The degree of this can vary, because, as we have seen, unorthodox strategies come in a myriad of forms and strengths. A quickly whipped up Mantis strategy will likely discombobulate enemies for a few minutes at most before being solved. On the other hand, a well thought out and crafted paradigm shift or a parasite can cause consistent trouble for months before seasoned players finally crack the code.

https://steamproxy.net/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=246980022
https://web.archive.org/web/20220429030117/https://steamproxy.net/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=246980022

This leads us to the next common property: forcing the enemy to engage in trial and error. When Gamemaster wrote his thoughts on unorthodox engineering, he mentioned a very important concept on how it disrupts even top players. For every textbook strategy, there is a textbook counter strategy. Teams scrim, refine, learn, and drill the meta because obviously that is the most effective strategy and also the most likely tool the opponents will use. To throw something at such individuals that is outside of what is considered textbook is to render a fraction of all that preparation useless if not diminish its effectiveness.

To quote "An Engineer's Guide to Engineering":
"A good Engineer will stall with a sentry until the enemy team has uber to take in on a conventional spot and take it out. A great Engineer will use a spot of his own creation and make the enemy team trial and error with multiple ubers until they figure out a method of approach."

There is another element to this and it is why in some level of theory unorthodoxy is more effective the better the opponent is. The more proficient one becomes at a certain thing, the less that individual has to “think” about executing it. High-level players can be predictable because they understand how the battlefield will react to their tested strategies under normal conditions. In breaking that, unorthodoxy gets its strengths. So to present what is not textbook to the enemy is to throw them out of their comfort zone and to engage in trial and error. There will be mistakes and suboptimal responses to the unorthodoxy for a certain period of time.

Another property mainly applies to players who formulate and execute unorthodox strategies often and well. That person will begin to build some sort of reputation for their successful use of unorthodox strategies. This stigma will reach players outside and inside the game. Recall that time I talked about ZeLoT and how BeSt expressed difficulty in preparing for such an opponent. Even before the game, a great player like BeSt was already uncomfortable. It is a psychological effect. Players, even competent ones, are susceptible to a state of discomfort, hesitation, and doubt when faced with a player that has a reputation of executing deviant strategies well. There is much potential for mindgames on the side of the maverick. A very simple case is an unorthodox player simply playing the meta well while the enemy wastes time, resources, and effort preparing for a bizarre strategy that was never coming in the first place.

Lastly, it increases the workload on the enemy in terms of attention and response types. This more specifically applies to the Engineer and TF2. Not only does the flow of the battle change, but the enemy must deal with an additional front in the war if unorthodoxy is in play. Note that the enemy is not simply dealing with just the Engineer doing non-textbook strategies. There are his teammates as well. No matter what his teammates are doing, they are an additional factor to worry about. If the Engineer was playing the meta, then only the textbook is required. But if the Engineer is playing in an unorthodox fashion, there is another point of strain on the enemies’ attention for not only must they pursue trial and error to adapt to the strange strategy, but also execute the meta well enough to overcome the rest of the team.

I’ve covered all the categories of unorthodoxy that I can and up to this point, I have been generally positive by pointing out the successes people have enjoyed with unorthodox strategies. Indirectly, a moderate celebration. However, I do not want to present this with my head in the clouds and with rose colored glasses. It is not sunshine and roses 24/7 but many difficulties and pitfalls along the road. With that established, I would like to go over difficulties with unorthodoxy.

Learning

There are a few obstacles to learning unorthodox strategies and becoming proficient at it. One such thing is the lack of instruction to get there. The journey is one with little to no friends, in a sense. Instead of treading a well-built asphalt road, you will be treading a barely noticeable dirt path that might easily get you lost. For instance, think about how many knuckleball coaches there are in existence. Particularly a coach that can make you pitch it like R.A. Dickey. Even then, will you make major league batter sweat on the plate? There is less material and guidance to work with because there are so few players who are skilled in unorthodoxy.

Choosing to go this way requires a healthy amount of deliberate experimentation and perhaps finding the right experienced teacher. For instruction, I cannot give you names. I do not know who is active and inactive and even if I did know, I do not want them to get unwanted attention. What I want you to consider is deliberate experimentation. That means that when you attempt an unorthodox strategy, you must be attentive of the results, keep them in your mind, and know what to refine or tinker with later. These will be covered in more details during the formulation sections. Regardless, designing and executing unorthodox strategies can be a challenge all on its own.

Team Based Gameplay

When I talked about the other case studies, there were no “allies”. In Brood War, the players have full control of their buildings and units. Se Jun Park has full power to select the Pokemon he wishes and what the Pokemon does at a certain time. In a fighting game, the players don't have an ally player determining when the character jumps or attacks. Even in the baseball pitching example, R.A. Dickey relies on only himself to make the pitch. In Team Fortress 2, no one player has such power on his or her team. Strategies that rely on other teammates in order to accomplish will be inconsistent, as its probability of success can depend on the allies' skill level. Enemies have their own patterns and habits that must be accounted for as well. There is not only one brain on the enemy team but several operating at the same time and relationship.

This can be mildly solved with social engineering. Gamemaster comments on this a few times in his Steam Guide "An Engineer's Guide to Engineering" about how the Engineer class and his buildings subtly influence allies and enemies alike. Social engineering. Certain classes like the Scout and Pyro will be repelled by the Sentry while others like Demoman and Spy will naturally be called in to destroy it. Dispensers will be a point of gathering for your allies. You can softly dictate ally traffic through the Teleporter. It’s possible to reduce the number of variables associated with team play partially, but not completely.

There is one last factor from the fact that TF2 is team based: consent and cooperation from teammates. Some strategies will not only require radically different play from the Engineer, but also his teammates. An example is Dave+’s Upward first spot discussed earlier. It not only worked due to Dave+’s mind, but also because his team was willing to bend slightly to fit it. Some players in TF2 are very resistant to change and understandably so. Strange strategies are not tested and are skeptical of their reliability. There is limited time to scrim and practice. They could perceive the investment as not worth it. There is a level of risk people do not want to take. There is a good chance that many unorthodox strategies and even unorthodox Engineering in general may never truly take off.

The Engineer’s Limits

At the end of the day, the Engineer is a support class. I think a lot of players of even the highest level of competition sometimes forget this. He is a multiplier and not an additive. He amplifies his allies rather than being a force on his own. An Engineer can add force through DM, but he is incapable of doing it consistently as a Scout, Soldier, Demoman and the like. It does not matter if you are Josh, Jordan, Ender, or Spamfest: Engineers who achieved a legendary reputation in the competitive sphere. These individuals are a force on their own with their brutal DM, of course, but it is unlikely that they can even carry a game if both their allies and enemies are of level skill to the four.

There are many things out of the Engineer's control. Do come up with unorthodox strategies and methods if you so wish, but don't neglect the class' raw limitations.

Social Stigma

This difficulty is a little strange because it doesn’t have anything to do with the game itself. It is how the TF2 community perceives and responds to unorthodox strategies and public reception can go to both extremes. Savior captured the hearts of thousands of fans during his peak and was given the title of Bonjwa, which I mentioned before one of the greatest titles a Brood War player could have. It is a title given to players who had a clear era of dominance and only 5 players in history ever received it in Brood War history. Se Jun Park was showered with praise and support after his 2014 VGC championship title. On the other side of the coin, Knuckleball pitchers are sometimes mocked and accused of "not playing baseball". Plenty of people loathe Melee Jigglypuff players and even more so Hungrybox and the more vocal individuals claim that the character will "kill Melee".

The difficulty obviously comes from the latter two examples. The big problems from being glorified from unorthodoxy are complacency, arrogance, and unwanted attention. It is opposition and mockery that is a greater barrier. As far as TF2 is concerned, I have witnessed both sides of the spectrum. Bizarre Engineer plays and thought have been met both with thunderous applause, scathing hatred, and everything in between. The bottom line is that if you choose to pursue and dedicate yourself to unorthodoxy, it is wise to prepare for and expect at least some amount of social backlash.

Available Time

I have already discussed certain issues that arise with the categories of unorthodoxy when time tick ticks away. Almost all TF2 players participate for entertainment and not to put food on the table and make a living. Competitive TF2 players play the game in their spare time and are not able to dedicate their lives to creating and finding unorthodox strategies that might not even work in practice. As a result, some unorthodox strategies will take a long time to develop.

Execution

The last difficulty is execution. One thing to note about any sort of unorthodoxy is that all the theory will not matter in the final analysis if it does not manifest properly on the battlefield. While it is fine to theorycraft with the mind of a maverick, it is not “complete” unless it is executed properly. I am confident that Dave+ had many ideas and theories in his mind. However, his Upward 1st spot will live on in particular infamy because it managed to come to fruition through not only his execution, but with the help of his team. He theorized, made conclusions, and carried through with his thoughts. But it is this very execution that is in of itself a difficulty.

Even seeing the execution can be difficult. Dave+’s work was also subtle. I discussed this in "Of Pioneers and Dimensions" the impact of this area of his work. To put it succinctly, he made very minute adjustments to his building placements to specifically trouble enemies and to better assist certain allies. Executing and seeing subtle changes can both be difficult.

This section will be dedicated to overall clarifications, as I have been talking on and on about different games and topics.

The first clarification I would like to make is that the categories are not exclusive to each other. That is, an unorthodox strategy isn't simply and solely a suckerpunch but can also have the qualities of a parasite. You can even make arguments that the examples that I provided as case studies contain multiple categories, but strongly demonstrated the type I was attempting to explain. An example I can think of that contains multiple categories is Ninjaneering, when the Engineer sneaks behind the enemy lines to create a base or at least a Teleporter. This is both a Mantis and a Mongoose because not only does Ninjaneering create many opportunities to create surprise Sentries, but it causes the enemy to face a potential sandwich, something that is quite uncommon to face.

Next, unorthodox strategies are not ones that require no mechanical skills. It might be the case for some. Savior has below average actions per minute (APM) and didn't quite have the blistering speed in comparison to his peers. But also consider the Melee player Axe who mains Pikachu, an uncommon sight in Melee, whose methods rely heavily on squeaky clean mechanical skill to compete and to maximize Pikachu’s moveset. He won Smash Summit 8 which had the likes of Leffen, Hungrybox, Mango, and Zain. Both players are on opposite sides of the spectrum when it comes to raw mechanical capabilities but both have shown to take uncommon methods to the gold medal. More close to home, near to full time Mini-Sentry usage on defense is unorthodox Engineering. However, it requires excellent mechanics and DM to create enough of a force to make up for the lack of a Level 3. Yes, the Mini-Sentry is not the greatest representation of unorthodoxy, but in this context, it is a deviation of the meta where many players would prefer a strong anchoring point that the Level 3 provides.

I want to point out that unorthodoxy does not "belong" to any of the 4 dimensions I discussed in my previous essay "Of Pioneers and Dimensions". Those are more along the lines of schools of thought and root mindset. However, the 3rd Dimension which I called the Inverted Meta, would have the most amount of unorthodox players and strategies residing in it because it actively seeks to subvert the meta and turn it on its head. Other Dimensions are capable of doing this too but their origin of thought is not from the desire to not conform. For instance, when Sigafoo ran Mini Sentries for offense on cp_steel when most Engineers ran normal Sentries, he wasn't doing it because of some sort of goal to exploit certain weaknesses in the meta but because he was confident and capable in his DM to make up for the lack of a leveled Sentry and believed that him running Gunslinger would lead to more consistent play and results.

A quick thing to clarify is that these categories and unorthodoxy in general are not exclusive to the Engineer either. I remember in Season 8 Platinum UGC, a Soldier named vahlin on the team The Syndicate ran Black Box and Concheror on Payload defense. He would rocket jump behind enemy lines to harass and threaten a dangerous flanking maneuver. Killing the Teleporter Entrance. Dealing moderate damage from afar. Being a constant backdoor threat to his enemies. All this made it difficult for the BLU team to quickly organize and would delay pushes. vahlin was more than able to sustain himself due to the properties of the two weapons mentioned.

Lastly, I want to clarify that, more toward competitive Highlander, unorthodoxy is not a shortcut or speed boost to the top. If you wish to quickly climb the ladder of competitive or simply even doing exceptionally well in pubs, then do not waste your time seeking and practicing unorthodoxy. In fact, go no further than the end of this paragraph if effective and rapid improvement is your goal. The fastest way to climb is to acquire excellent DM, learn the meta, execute the meta well, and meet the right people that will get you in upper teams. It is the best way to grab people's attention in a noncontroversial and consistent way. Unorthodoxy is undeveloped, experimental, and sometimes controversial. These factors will not help anyone attempting to rise in the ranks of a competitive atmosphere effectively.

At this point of the essay, I imagine that I have at least agitated if not angered two extremes. One is the “super-creative” philosophy that ignores the meta almost completely and puts creativity on too high a pedestal. They might be angry with me because I did not give unorthodoxy enough credit and did not enter a diatribe on the meta. The other side of the coin is the “ultra-meta” philosophy who believes that creativity, imagination, and unorthodoxy is a complete waste of time and is pointless. They might be angry with me because I am here arguing in favor of a nebulus, divergent mindset and strategies of a TF2 class far down on the competitive totem pole. I would like to take the time to address both extreme sides, as I have met and seen people who hold either one of these two ideals or have come close to. I understand that it is a fallacy to argue for a middle ground just because it is the middle ground. There wouldn’t be justice if there was a compromise between law abiding citizens and a gang of terrorists. However, the balance of unorthodoxy and meta play is significant for an Engineer player. I also want to say that from my experience, these two groups of people are a vast minority of the TF2 community.

I will address the super-creative first: the ideal that views the meta with some ire and as some mildly oppressive force that saps the soul of fun and polices those with differing perspectives in the game. I would like to point out that the meta has a good reason for existing and there is a certain level of danger to creativity and novelty in and of itself. This is self-explanatory, but the strategies, loadouts, and roles of the classes in the meta are the meta because they have passed the test of time and the highest levels of competition. Experienced, knowledgeable, and skilled players throughout history came to the conclusion that the meta is what is optimal. Certain laws exist in the game and in life that should always be considered, lest disaster strike. Do not be novel for the sake of novelty.

An example that comes to mind is the collapse of Terminal 2E at Charles de Gaulle airport. The interior design of the terminal was praised as “futuristic”, “beautiful”, and even “practical”. It was uniquely visually appealing and the lack in interior support pillars mitigated traffic in the terminal. The collapse was from both design flaws and improper execution. There was a failure in its construction and the lack of supports, proficient reinforcements of the structure, and resistance to the elements all lead to an overall weak terminal section. The futuristic, unorthodox design idea was noteworthy to be sure and it even served some practical effects. Despite all this, gravity and physics heavily disagreed with the architect’s non-conformist notions.

There are certainly cases in the course of human history where creativity and innovation lead to great practical effects. However, in the same vein, there are cases where the same ingredients lead to failure. It is important to consider the constraints and the reason for their existence. It would be tragic if one were to vault over a guardrail mistaking it for a fence. He won't find freedom. Only death.

On the other side of the coin is the ultra-meta that lambasts and derides anything that deviates from what is the meta and standard. I once met someone who said that “if a revolutionary or an unusual strategy or improvement really truly existed, then some-Platinum-or-Invite-caliber-player would have already figured it out” which is an example of the ultra-meta philosophy. I obviously take umbrage with this statement. It would be ridiculous to tell young Copernicus that if the Earth really did revolve around the Sun, then Ptolemy, his successors, or all the scientists before Copernicus would have discovered it already. Imagine telling James Dyson that if a bagless vacuum cleaner was truly possible, then a team of engineers in a Fortune 500 technology company would have designed it already. While the statement itself can be reduced to absurdity, I can see where it comes from. When it comes to development, it will usually be the cream of the crop who spearhead it. The greatest Brood War Terran player Flash was the main innovator for an era Terran and every other Terran progamer during that time simply followed suit. It comes to reason that developments will likely come from the hands of the elite. Another origin point I suspect is that it is inadvisable to chase unorthodoxy if one wishes to optimally improve. I have already addressed this in Clarifications. However, to outright discourage any attempts to break new ground will lead to stagnation in the class.

What I find ironic about the mindset and goal of enforcing the meta and evicting any sense of unorthodoxy is that achieving it is counterproductive. That is, to alienate the unorthodox is to strengthen it. Throughout this writing, I have constantly pointed out that unorthodoxy rises in power the more the player base as a whole is conditioned with the norm, the standard, and the expected. Therefore, to inculcate the masses with the meta with iron rigidity is to make them more vulnerable to well thought unorthodoxy when it comes. You are simply making the unexpected more unexpected. Making the unfamiliar more unfamiliar. It is giving what the dedicated maverick wants which is the masses greatly unaware of what he has up his sleeves. I urge you to remember aMSa’s red Yoshi and Se Jun Park’s Pacharisu and what made them so effective in their respective contexts.

Another point that could be expounded in order to support a rabid enforcement of the meta is that the meta inculcated is so refined and good that no amount of unorthodoxy can penetrate it and therefore foolish to try. While it can be reasonable to believe in such a game state, I think it is a state of hubris. First, it will be difficult to measure and test qualitatively and quantitatively the robustness of such a meta. There needs to be certain tests in order to gauge not only the effectiveness of the meta but its ability to defend itself from the alien. In short, how are you so sure? Secondly, it is one thing to have a robust strategy, but another thing to execute and properly follow through. Even if such a meta theoretically existed, a vast majority of the players must be able to execute it but it is a self evident thing that even the best players can falter let alone your everyday player. Thirdly, I do not think TF2 is in a state where it has such a refined meta. StarCraft is a game where there have been many generations of professional players, revolutions, sponsors, proper infrastructure, culture, and was so mainstream in the public that there was a period of time where there was a Korean TV channel dedicated to broadcasting StarCraft. These properties are a stark contrast to TF2 whose competitive community and development has been more underground and community driven. Yet, despite all that StarCraft has, its standard play is not bulletproof. Much development was done on the game already yet those who follow standard gameflow are still vulnerable. As I’ve stated, ZeLoT has qualified for an ASL tournament when the game was approximately 20 years old. In 2018, the Terran demigod Flash lost a best of 5 ASL final to a Zerg player Effort who struck Flash with aggressive, unorthodox builds.

The other issue that with the ultra-meta mindset is how it removes a major component of what makes the Engineer entertaining to play. I understand that arguing in favor of something due to its level of entertainment value is not always sufficient. There are heinous people who commit acts of cruelty or unwise folks who engage in self-destructive lifestyles in the name of pleasure but that is no justification for their actions. A noticeable segment of the TF2 Engineer that makes him entertaining to play is the room for innovation, creativity, and theorycrafting that comes from his ability to create supportive buildings that assist his teammates and debilitate enemies. It is that very unique ability that draws people to play the Engineer and to remain playing him over a considerable period of time. There is a joy to tinkering with what the class is capable of doing in this respect. To discourage and even eliminate this aspect of the Engineer will diminish the passion of the player. It could even limit player potential. Imagine how much less of an impact Sigafoo would have had if he was completely discouraged to implement his aggressive playstyle which was quite a novel thing during his rise. Again, this sounds like a strange argument, but it is important in the context of TF2. Unlike progamers, who play their respective games for a living, those who engage in TF2 in any sphere do so primarily because of their love for the game.

Passion is a thankless fuel that I think some people take for granted and to have the ultra-meta mindset would be like poking holes in the gas tank. In “A Thing of Beauty” from earlier, Innuendo Studios says that if Melee became nothing but a pack of Foxes, he would be heartbroken, as the game would lose the charm that brought him into the game in the first place. As mentioned, a Zerg player named Effort defeated Flash in a 2018 ASL finals match where the Zerg pulled off aggressive, non-standard play to topple the Terran titan and the crowd absolutely loved it. Thinking of these things reminds me why some people have an almost allergic reaction to the traditional competitive 6s format for most of its history because its detractors considered it stale. Hammock is an Engineer who has played Platinum for many consecutive seasons and has clocked over 10,000 hours in Team Fortress 2. He has been playing before the Engineer could even pick up his buildings. Yet he played Highlander in 2019 and tinkers with and wields the bizarre Eureka Effect with pride and while many do not consider him one of the greatest Engineer mains, he is certainly respected and experienced and his level of gamesense, knowledge, problem solving, and experience with the class is something that cannot be ignored. Passion is a considerable driving force in all these examples. Do I think that if the meta was overly centralized, it would lead to the game’s death? It is possible but very unlikely. What I am confident of is that it will cause good people who care to leave or at the very least decrease their longevity and staying power. For a game like Team Fortress 2 where the community has done most of the leg work to sustain the game out of love and passion, anything that diminishes these attributes, while not necessarily alarming at an apocalyptic level, is still something of concern.

This leaves us with the middle road and the conclusion that the balanced perspective on the matter is a healthy one to have. To understand and learn the meta, the laws, and what is familiar but at the same time have room for the strange and the unknown. Both the meta and the imaginative spirit coexisting without the person as a whole falling apart. The heart of the child and the mind of the adult inhabiting the same disease free body. To have a passion and a joy of playing all the while being mindful of the boundaries and laws.

It is good that the aspiring painter is learning about how the colors synergize and to hold a brush properly against the canvas, but she must also appreciate the beauty of good art. It is good that the pupil violinist is learning how to hold his bow properly and practicing his scales, but he must also listen to and love great music. It is good that the novice pilot is learning how to interpret the instrument readings and to use all the various equipment, but he must also yearn to fly free with the birds.

https://www.thoughtco.com/charles-de-gaulle-airport-terminal-collapse-3972251
https://www.dyson.com.au/community/about-james-dyson.aspx

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429041637/https://www.thoughtco.com/charles-de-gaulle-airport-terminal-collapse-3972251
https://web.archive.org/web/20220429041758/https://www.dyson.com.au/corporate-social-responsibility/our-dna

The next sections will discuss methods of formulating the different types of unorthodox strategies. During these sections, I will refrain as much as possible from giving out specific strategies and builds themselves. The examples I give are already covered in case studies, general, obsolete, or a strategy that exists more in the realm of theory than in reality. Coming up with unorthodoxy, especially to a higher degree, requires creativity, problem-solving, and imagination. Simply giving out an unusual method to copy and paste defeats the purpose of equipping those interested in pursuing unorthodoxy with the proper skills. It also defeats the definition of unorthodoxy itself, as this is a public paper and the more eyes that see it, the more known it will be and potentially the less effective the strategies presented will become. I do not claim to have the best formulations possible for being an unorthodox Engineer, but I will attempt to give the best of my understanding.

I will also be talking about grading unorthodox strategies, the current state of unorthodoxy, and the future of it before concluding.

There are some general points I would like to point out before the rubber hits the road. Foremost, keep in mind the said difficulties I mentioned in a previous section. There are restrictions and guardrails you must respect whenever formulating any sort of unorthodox strategy or method. I will say again that TF2 is a team based game and that the Engineer himself has limitations that nothing except a radical Valve update can lift. The meta is the meta for very good reasons and that is something that must be respected no matter what your opinion on it is.

Next, all forms of unorthodoxy require experimentation and observation in order to improve them or at least get a good grasp of what works and what does not. When employing something new, take good note of the effects. Note how a Sentry or a Dispenser placed in a certain new location affects allies and enemies alike. As far as enemy players are concerned, pay attention to the classes and the players’ caliber. All these factors pool into your knowledge of how players of all different kinds are affected by the current unorthodox strategy you are attempting to refine. As for the maps, take note of the flow of battle and how the general atmosphere and movement of the enemies and allies are affected.

The other point is to know who the “audience” or “playing field” is. I say this because there are individuals who love to play Engineer in competitive formats and those who play it in Casual. Different formats in TF2 operate differently. There can be instances where a strategy works well in competitive but not in more casual matches and vice versa. This actually doesn’t pertain just to unorthodox strategies but to the meta. Knowing what format you wish to use unorthodoxy will also impact its creation.

When it comes to development, I do not think it is wise to develop unorthodox strategies as a large group or have a single, central, leader directing everything. It should be decentralized, work being done by individuals or a small group. It will lead to less exposure and will lead to fewer people using the strategy when it begins to gain traction, leading to a shortage of data. For something new to appear, there must be individuals who must break the mold and "go against" the grain and the group. I do not think it is a coincidence that people like Se Jun Park, aMSa, and Savior were one of a kind and not part of some collective. Take a few minutes to think about grand individuals who have made progress in science, philosophy and music, or created a revolutionary company, product, or idea. Even think about games you really enjoy, find unique, or stand out. It tends to be individuals or a small group of individuals and their vision and not a collective organization that creates things like these.

It is also worth noting that one should not completely disregard and dismiss ideas that might not first seem effective but instead entertain and experiment with them. What may originally seem silly or ineffective can end up being extraordinarily practical. The first steam turbine was created by a Greek inventory named Hero of Alexandria in the first century A.D.: the aeolipile. It was originally seen as a novel party trick and there was not much vision for its practicality. However, it wasn't until the 17th-18th century when the practical use of steam engines was fully realized with trains that can carry massive weights across a nation.

Lastly, sometimes the best thing to do to an idea is to scrap it. Not all ideas can take physical manifestation. There can be cases where a strategy, loadout, or method simply does not work at all and so abandonment or at least shelving it is in order. When you are on the wrong road, the fastest way to progress is to turn around, go to where you went the wrong direction, and attempt to take the right path from there. There won’t be much benefit to stubbornly trying to get a fish to climb a tree.

Coming up with the Mantis can actually be quite simple: find a Sentry Gun location that is rarely used, particularly in a relatively hidden location as this is the formulation of an ambush, after all. That is all well and good, but it is insufficient for optimal play. I believe that there are 5 elements to a good Mantis strategy:

1. Location
2. Direction
3. Intention
4. Reaction
5. Implementation



Location is partially what I described in the first sentence of this section: finding a Sentry Gun placement that is rarely used that is also in a more hidden location, and location is really the crux of the matter. The need for this is self explanatory. The enemies will expect meta Sentry spots so putting it in an unexpected location will provide the element of surprise. But there is more to what makes a good location, which is where the other 3 points come in.

Direction is the flow of enemies and the location of their attention. Knowing where the enemy will path from A to B in situation C. Knowing that the enemy will stare in X direction when engaged with situation Y. The most common pathing and sightline that needs to be considered is under the condition that the game state is “normal”. That is, the Mantis has not initiated its plan yet. Such is the reason why a hidden, predatory Sentry spot can pose such a sudden and immediate danger. One of the quotes about the Engineer that I remember is that he requires more map knowledge than most of the other classes. The fact that decent Engineers already have to dedicate more time to map knowledge than most classes to optimize metal usage and getting buildings in position further reinforces this. But from my experience, “map knowledge” usually refers to the raw geography of the map. There is one step above this, which is knowing what the raw geography does to allies and enemies alike under various situations. With this extra knowledge, one can come up with much more unexpected locations. When people think they are safe in TF2, their movements tend to enter a state of autopilot. “My team has captured the second point on Badwater Basin. With this, I know that the likelihood of RED players appearing until that point is extraordinarily low. I will proceed knowing that I have little to worry about.” Under this condition, they will move and look in a certain direction and this information can be exploited.

Intention is knowing what you and your opponents want and need at a given moment and/or the phase of the game. Consider the current state of objectives and how your opponent will seek to achieve it. This doesn’t strictly mean the game’s objective (e.g. cart, point, flag). Players can have goals that don’t rigidly adhere to the game’s objectives. Their mindset can be resources like health and ammunition, securing advantageous geography, or retreating to safe havens. Knowing what your allies’ desires are also crucial to better ambushes or better support for the team. It is worth mentioning again that the Engineer is in a better position to exploit the map because of the level of map knowledge the class requires.

Reaction is what happens in the time frame immediately after the enemy engages with the presence of the Mantis. This plays into the Direction and Intention. Does the location of the ambushing Sentry allow for little options where the opponents can go? Does it distract from the objective and the Engineer’s teammates? Does it create great delays? How badly does it disrupt the flow of enemies? More immediately, what measure and method will the enemy take in order to destroy your Sentry and compromise your location? The last question in the list is critical to answer to further extend the effects of the ambush strategy. This is because one can use this information to relocate to another location that exploits whatever reaction the opponent is having. If the opponents react to the first ambush Sentry A in a way that makes your ambush Sentry B more effective 30 seconds later, Sentry B will further discombobulate your opponents. Knowing the reaction of your opponents will lead to this sort of exploitation and extension. Also do the diligence to consider how your teammates will react to it as well. It can lead to synergy and sustenance.

The last, and probably the most important point is implementation. Can you actually deploy the ambush? Do you have the mechanics to pull it off? Are you able to get to the right place at the right time? With all your formulation, is it viable? The only way I can see to find this out is testing and practice.

Let’s take another look at the breakdown of Sigafoo’s surprise Level 2 and see how the 5 points are implemented. It’s location is in the tunnels, which is unorthodox indeed (Location). But the sentry caught the Engineer and Scout that were set on pushing the cart (Direction and Intention). After the first sentry, the Engineer and Scout expected the Sentry to be closer to the mouth of the tunnel yet was caught by the moved Level 2 on the platform (Reaction and Implementation). The enemy combo was out of the picture because they were focused on securing the hill (Direction and Intention).

Formulating the Mongoose can be simple to start but hard to establish. It begins with starting with a method, strategy, and/or loadout that deviates from the meta that has some grounds to function. But that is insufficient for a good Mongoose strategy. It must also disrupt the normal flow of gameplay and/or force enemies to deviate from the meta in order to deal with it. With this, the opponent not only has to deal with the rarity of the method, but must also adjust to the new on the field that does not involve normal play.



The graphic above is the basic flow of Mongoose formulation and I will be using this as a guideline. Theorization is the first component which makes sense. But the theorization has extra emphasis on what is uncommon so that its rarity can be exploited. There is not only what is rare but what the internal functions of the Mongoose strategy will provide. As I have mentioned in the Two Extremes, making something novel just for the sake of novelty is unwise. There needs to be some functionality and practicality to what you are making. Note that the Mongoose in respect to the Engineer can be something specific like a new Sentry position, moderate like a novel loadout, or something macroscopic like a new style of play.

After Theorization is Planning. The theorization of the unorthodox strategy is pointless in the final analysis if there is no execution. But in order to properly execute, one must plan. For this, consider what conditions, positions, and skills are needed for optimal effectiveness from the theory. Knowing when the strategy can fail is also crucial. Remember that there is no harm in reverting to meta play when the conditions are not set.

The next three components are in a cycle. Execution is the next step in the line and this is when one attempts the strategy in a game. The overall purpose of this is to practice and test. Chances are, methods that deviate from the meta will require self-reflection all on its own, as it is a different environment than normal. Therefore, practice is in order. Another component of Execution is testing how well the idea works. Speaking of, after this comes the Observation phase. This is considering the results during Execution and and taking in the data. How did it impact the enemy and allies? Is this something that can be viable or should I move onto something else? The last component of the cycle is Refinement which is where the data from Observation is taken to improve what already exists. This can be revamps in major components or minor tweaks, depending. As for improvement, in the early parts of developing an unorthodox strategy, it likely needs larger improvements. As time passes and the method becomes more refined, more minor adjustments are in order. After Refinement, the improved idea is tested in the battlefield again in the Execution phase.

Scrap phase is where the Mongoose ends. This is where, after Observation, one comes to the conclusion that the strategy is not or no longer viable and bins the idea. There is no shame in this, as failure is to be expected when experimenting.

A broad example I can think of is Stock Sentries on offense payload. Mini-Sentries are the meta of offense and combat because it is cheap, fast, disposable, provides the Engineer with more health, and its lockdown and damage power can be greatly amplified with the Wrangler to surprising levels. Defending RED players expect BLU offense Engineers to deploy Mini-Sentries. Inversely, is an uncommon sight to see a BLU Stock Sentry on offense but it also disrupts some of the flow on the RED team. They cannot easily retake territory if BLU numbers begin to dwindle. If the Engineer decides to move the BLU Sentry during an Uber push to secure a key location on the map, the enemy must divide their attention to not only the Medic and his Ubered patient, but also the deploying Level 3. Level 3s also provide better safety and coverage for BLU players whether they are sieging a point on the map or retreating to safety to health and ammo packs or your Dispenser. If the RED team wishes to expend their Uber to push the BLU team away, the Level 3 can serve as a good scapegoat while your teammates either retreat or use the extra time to hopefully turn the fight in their favor. These are all benefits the Level 3 can provide more effectively than a Mini-Sentry. With this example, we see that the BLU Stock Sentry on payload offense provides benefits that not only disrupts the enemy and mitigates certain options, but forces them to take a different approach than when they are faced with the normally utilized Mini-Sentry. The enemy team is now forced to adjust to you. We have the Theorization in place.

With the concept and theory in place, the next step would be ironing out the details. This component would be the Planning phase. What loadout should I run for it? How do I even want to execute building a Stock Sentry and what loadout and strategy best helps implement it? A Level 3 takes a long time to set up and the risk is high! Where is the best place to establish my base in the way that both allows me to deploy but at the same assist the team? When do I move the Sentry forward? In what situation should I swap back to Mini-Sentries?

A way to answer these questions is to go forth and play with these strategies in a game which would be the Execution phase. Make careful observations and notes for the Observation phase. Adjust the strategy in the Refinement phase. With a good idea, experimentation, and refinement, you can be a crafty animal to catch.

The Mistletoe can be much more difficult to formulate as it not only requires map knowledge, but in depth understanding of the meta and other classes. Remember that the Mistletoe is a parasitic category of unorthodoxy that exploits the tendencies of a class or even a team. There are two types of parasites: individual classes and team play on maps. Regardless of which one you decide to create, there is still a considerable amount of homework to do.

In order to be a thorn on the sides of other classes, you must understand how they function and how they work. What they like and dislike. What their tendencies are. When they are at their weakest point. What their roles are at a deeper level on a given map. I want to point again to Gamemaster’s advice on getting a Hale’s Own on a weapon of a different class, particularly one that is giving you much trouble. That way, you have at least a surface level understanding of the class. There is only so much progress you can make by only playing Engineer and neglecting to play other classes and getting into their minds. Even consider picking up another main. I have seen Platinum/Invite players be able to play multiple classes at the highest level of competition and do well.

As for team play on maps, you must go on a study of the meta but do not be satisfied with just knowing what the meta is. You must also carefully see why the meta is the meta. It will be foolish to deviate from the meta if you have no idea what its inner workings are and why it is as it is. How can you attempt to dismantle a machine if you haven’t even the slightest inkling how it is put together and why it is put together as such? This also feeds into the previous pointer of playing other classes. You will be interacting with maps and other classes in ways you have not before, granting you another perspective and understanding of the battlefield. With this in hand, you can see how to cause the enemy to stumble.

I want to now talk about a strategy that Gamemaster created for koth_lakeside because it encompasses a lot of the concepts of formulating the Mistletoe. Although I said that I would refrain from using specific examples, I am using this example for two reasons. First of all, this strategy is obsolete. A key component of this strategy uses the Rescue Ranger when it did not cost any metal to repair. The second reason is because this strategy exists more in the realm of theory than in practice. While I do not think that this is a parasitic unorthodox strategy in its fullest and most successful form in TF2, it is a hint that such things are possible. I still believe that it is a good case study for formulation.

The strategy of Lakeside was running Rescue Ranger in combination with the Mini Sentry at the bathhouse. The secondary slot can be the Wrangler or the Pistol, preferably the Pistol to compensate for the lack of raw damage. I would also like to mention that this strategy was formulated during a time when the Wrangler’s shield did not reduce the repair rate. The overarching idea of this strategy is saving metal, pressuring the bathhouse with the flank, and prioritizing long term investment and mobility of the Dispenser. A Highlander strategy on Lakeside is to send the flank (Scout, Soldier, and Engineer) to fight for control of the bathhouse while the combo (Demoman, Heavy, Medic, sometimes Pyro) fights for the Point. As far as the bathhouse flank composition is concerned, Soldier is a critical class. The chokes leading into the bathhouse and the enclosed space lets the Soldier reign with his splash damage. The Engineer builds the Mini Sentry at his side entrance of the bathhouse and keep it alive with the Rescue Ranger from enemy rocket spam. The Mini Sentry potentially has a total of 340 HP without costing a single piece of metal and without reloading the Rescue Ranger when you add the four 60 HP bolts in a full clip and the Mini-Sentry’s 100 HP. This is enough to waste all 4 of the enemy Soldier’s rockets while zoning out the enemy Engineer and Scout. This leaves the Engineer’s allied Soldier to have a significant advantage because not only has the enemy Soldier wasted more rockets on the Mini Sentry than he would have liked, but the enemy Engineer and Scout will lack presence in the bathhouse. With the choke point and the confined geography of the bathhouse, the allied Soldier has free reign. Soldiers sometimes run Gunboats on Lakeside, which means that the enemy Soldier, lacking rockets, will either need to waste time reloading or resort to his melee weapon for any damage at all. Both options are poor for retaliating.

The remaining 100 Metal can be invested into a Dispenser that will give the Engineer metal supply on the metal poor KOTH map while sustaining his flank down the line, further bolstering his flank’s advantage and presence in the bathhouse in the coming future. The now likely upgraded Dispenser has a strange sense of mobility thanks to the Rescue Ranger, allowing the Engineer to transition between putting his Dispenser next to the bathhouse entrance to support the flank and behind the obelisk to support the combo with relative ease.

Let’s break down how this strategy is parasitic to Lakeside’s meta. A meta strategy is to send the combo classes directly to the point while sending the flank classes to the bathhouse. The weakness of the strategy overall is how sparse the flank is and how much it relies on the Soldier to take control of the bathhouse. The Soldier’s weakness is the limit on his rocket launcher and maybe lack of reliable backup damage if he chooses to run Gunboats. Another weakness is that the Scout and Engineer are vulnerable to the Engineer’s Mini Sentry. A problem on KOTH maps tend to be a lack of metal, especially on Lakeside. Keeping the Mini Sentry alive with the metal free Rescue Ranger bolts wastes the damage potential of the Soldier, keeps the Engineer and Scout at bay, and allows for metal investment that will let the Engineer better support his team in the near future with his other buildings and a better stream of Mini Sentries. All is well and good except that sending only the Soldier, Scout, and Engineer to the flank is not the only meta strategy on Lakeside.

Another meta strategy is to send the combo to spearhead the takeover the bathhouse. A Demoman or Heavy will roll over this strategy by simply sneezing loud enough. The Engineer will then be left with nothing but the Rescue Ranger and the Pistol to fight with. The enemy Sniper can bring his attention to the bathhouse instead of the Point to dispatch the Mini Sentry with little effort. The enemy Spy can also do the same. Diversity is problematic to the strategy but that is not all. The strategy is now completely neutered due to the nerfs on the Rescue Ranger. Now the Rescue Ranger repairs 4 HP per 1 metal, crippling the strategy as it relied on the unlockable shotgun giving free heals from a range. The game and the meta changed and the parasite became extinct.

Let’s recap what we observed in this strategy:

• It seeks to exploit a weakness of the classes that the Engineer comes to contact with for a certain meta strategy.
  
• Pointed out how the strategy struggles against shifts in meta strategies.
  
• Pointed out how the strategy was brought to irrelevance and obsolescence, falling victim to the passage of time.

I do not have too much to say on how to formulate the Beaver or the paradigm shifter. The big aspect with unorthodoxy is that it is largely uncharted territory. There are not many practitioners let alone those who experiment and attempt to break new ground in this field. If the other areas are like travelling to new lands, this particular category is like the depths of the ocean. There is little to no light for vision and the pressure can kill. We cannot see nor go there until we have the means to do so.

The Beaver is not as simple as just “another cheese” or a “cheeky and cute strategy”. It is much grander and fundamental than that. A much bigger picture. There needs to be a reinterpretation and expansion of the view of the Engineer’s buildings and their functions, metal management, loadouts, and weapons. A deeper insight to his relationship with his team and his enemy. Min-maxing for all stages and permutations of a game and situations. Excellent mechanics and use of said mechanics. Sharp and crisp timings for certain goals and actions.

The best pointers I have are akin to formulating the Mistletoe but with even more emphasis. Master the understanding of the meta and the other classes. Perhaps even make it as good or even better than the Engineer. I want to point out again that the Zerg player Savior practiced as Terran more than Zerg when preparing for his matches and rumor had it that his Terran was even superior to his Zerg. It comes to reason as such as he revolutionized the Zerg vs Terran match and his efforts impact strategies a decade after his peak.

Now that we have covered the ways to formulate different types of unorthodoxy, it is now appropriate to discuss factors that determine the quality of an unorthodox strategy.

Potency

Potency is exactly what it sounds: the level of the strategy’s strength. It should come as obvious that this category is a criterion. However, this is still quite a broad brush. Within potency are aspects that impact gameplay that you would normally see. A measurement of how well it can support the team. How well it can secure the objective as well as capture it. How easily it can be deployed and executed. All of these variables factor into how any strategy will be.

However, because the topic is unorthodoxy, the other critical thing to consider is how much it disrupts the enemy, and exploits holes in the meta and meta tendencies. The unique strength of unorthodoxy hitches on those variables. Keep in mind that the other generic factors listed previously must also be taken into consideration. Do not sacrifice practicality for the sake of being different.

Adaptability

As emphasized in previous sections, those on the receiving end of unorthodoxy will figure out a way to counter it. The capability of an unorthodox strategy to survive after gaining a significant amount of attention depends on its adaptability. There are two levels to consider: microscale and the macroscale. The microscale is how well it can adapt and adjust to local variables such as the course of a round. This comes from the opponents attempting to resolve the unorthodox strategy through improvisation or experimenting with a counter strategy. The macroscale is how well it can evolve and adapt over the course of days and weeks, or even months and years.

Both components need consideration. If the microscale is ignored, then the unorthodox strategy will not work in certain parts and areas of a game where it could have. It could have had the potential to sow additional chaos and disrupt the enemy team even more but did not. If the strategy has the ability to mutate and adjust in the middle of a game, then it can extend its in-game lifespan and do further damage. If the macroscale is ignored, then the strategy will die over the course of a longer period of time. A way to see this is the war between medicine and disease. Once a disease arrives, people rush to find a cure. Once the cure is found, the onus is on the disease, so to say, to mutate to become immune and the cycle continues. The unorthodox strategy must keep evolving lest it be eradicated.

Complexity

Complexity is a criterion that does not necessarily make something better the more you have of it. The more complex it is, the more difficult it is to execute. The more likely something can go wrong. The more difficult it will be to break down what is wrong. That last point can serve as a double edged sword. Something complicated, while a struggle to execute, will also be a struggle for outsiders to fully solve. I mentioned in Adaptability the disease vs medicine analogy. How unorthodoxy must keep evolving so that the ‘cure’ does not eradicate it. Increased complexity can result in increased difficulty in the time it takes to come up with the next ‘cure’.

Do not mistake increased complexity being proportional with increased potency or adaptability. A Rube Goldberg machine and your everyday car are both considered complicated machines, but the former goes through many mechanisms to complete a quite simple task while the latter is very practical.

I do believe that Complexity and Adaptability have some sort of proportional relationship, although not absolutely. Think of your immune system and how it can account for a myriad of different situations, ways of protecting your body, and ridding it of any sort of unwanted guests. It is incredibly adaptable and fearful, but there seems to be no end to its complexity. It is hard to completely figure out.

Independence

Independence is the degree in which the strategy does not rely on active and deliberate cooperation from teammates to accomplish. Out of all of the criteria that is around for unorthodoxy, I consider this one the most critical. The one to strive for the highest degree. As I mentioned in Difficulties, one of the main hurdles for unorthodox Engineering is the fact that TF2 is a team based game. Another variable I mentioned is that your teammates are unlikely to comply with whatever alien strategy that is suddenly introduced. With that, a deviant strategy will be more consistent, repeatable, and easier to practice the less it relies on your team’s direct acknowledgement, intervention, and participation. An optimal unorthodox strategy would be “marching to the beat of your own drum, while keeping in tempo with your allies, while throwing your enemies off rhythm”.

Level 3 at cp_process Mid: 2:17
Level 3 at Enemy cp_process Second: 12:42

https://web.archive.org/web/20220429025959/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJj_ifz6OsI

Take Gamemaster’s Level 3 Sentry spots on cp_process. The Level 3 at mid is more independent than the Level 3 at the enemy second. When his team was holding mid, his teammates were able to carry on with their normal functions and how they practiced. Furthermore, Gamemaster’s team is playing defensively, which means that a Level 3 in its passive position will not disrupt how his team plays. There could have been minor adjustments due to Gamemaster’s Level 3, but nothing too demanding.

The Level 3 at the enemy second involves the team more. He mentions that because he needs to equip the Rescue Ranger, the Wrangler, and the Wrench and needs to look after his Sentry, the flank is weaker. In a normal situation, the Engineer would be running a combat oriented loadout (e.g. Shotgun and Gunslinger) and would reinforce the flank through direct combat as the team prepares to assail the enemy’s final point. To make up for the lack of firepower, Gamemaster’s Spy needed to fill the gap by directly fighting with the Revolver in the flank. This way, enough damage can be dealt to the enemy team to lead to a better push. In order for the Sentry to function to its full potential, his Spy needed to make considerable sacrifices and adjustments. During the time the Spy was fighting, he could have gone for a backstab on the Medic, coordinated a sap on the Enemy Level 3, or cloaked and gathered intelligence on the enemy. Luckily for Gamemaster, his Spy not only complied, but was more than happy to play gun Spy.

Longevity

It would be strange of me to not discuss the element of time, since it has been a focal point when I wrote about unorthodoxy’s categories. The shelf life and staying power of an unorthodox strategy is important to gauging its quality. This depends on a variety of primary factors listed before. The longevity of the strategy heavily relies on its Complexity and Adaptability. The more complex it is, the more time and effort it will take to “solve”. The more adaptable it is, the better it can respond to rebuttals.

This variable is in respect to both in and out of game. As discussed, opponents can attempt to resolve a strange strategy in game, through improvising and whatever experience and skill with the game they have. If the strategy is complex and adaptable enough, enemies are less likely to leave a reasonable dent. Outside of the game is another matter. It is one thing to have the strategy last in a single game, but how long can it last over a wider period of time? Will it be snuffed out or will it continue to succeed?

I will talk about the state of unorthodoxy at the time of writing this. There are the types of unorthodoxy present on the Team Fortress 2 Engineer, its skill ceiling, and the state of the practitioners. One disclaimer I want to state is that these are purely from my observations. An individual who can see more of the picture than I can come to a different conclusion but I will give some reasons behind my claims when I can.

There are the following criteria for each category: frequency and skill ceiling attained. Frequency of use will be how often individuals see them in respect to unorthodoxy in general. Obviously due to its nature, these methods won’t be seen frequently overall. The skill ceiling attained is the highest mastery, execution, and formulation that I understand to exist in the TF2 Engineer based on the categories of unorthodoxies I have explained throughout this essay. I will provide explanations for my verdicts. There are, from lowest to highest quality, None, Low, Mild, Medium, High, Very High, and Peak.


The Mantis is in a reasonable position. It is frequent but moderate in its skill ceiling of use. I set the frequency to High because of how prevalent the idea of a mischievous Engineer placing nonsensical Sentries is. Dying to an expected Sentry is a relatable experience to anyone who has played TF2 for a considerable amount of time. It's almost expected to fall victim to it at some point in the near future. But I have yet to see someone performing it to a higher caliber. Someone who overwhelms others through sheer quantity of suckerpunches, planning out timings, and taking advantage of particular windows. Actively inducing paranoia and taking advantage and working around it like a Spy would. That is why I set it to Medium.

The Mongoose sits at a bizarre position where there is a Medium amount of practitioners but a High skill ceiling obtained. I have seen a considerable number of Engineers both casual and competitive that attempt to run uncommon strategies like Stock Sentry offense or Mini-Sentry Defense. I am sure others who play TF2 considerably can tell you that they do see Stock Sentry play when Mini-Sentries are expected and vice-versa. The reason why I give the High skill ceiling is because of Dave+’s spot on Upward First. That spot was well thought out and had many facets and worked well with his team to execute it. The reason why I believe that it can be taken further is that there has yet to be Mongoose that does Continued Damage.

The Mistletoe has both a Low number of practitioners and Low skill ceiling likely to no one’s surprise. The only main individual I am aware of who sought to do this was Gamemaster and that particular Lakeside strategy exists more in the realm of theory than in practice. Obviously there is significantly more work needed in this area.

The Beaver is nonexistent as I've discussed in its respective section. No Engineer, from what I have seen in the game's history and community, has ever truly met the qualifications let alone the highest skill ceiling. I also mentioned that no paradigm shift for the Engineer has been devised up to this point.

All of this may sound like there is no work being done on unorthodox strategies at all, I have witnessed some fragments. During 2019 in Engineer.tf, a competitive Engineer community, I have seen Advanced and Invite Engineer players toss around new Sentry spots and strategies with some healthy discussion about them. A friend of mine, Rh0mbus, is theorycrafting and developing playing Engineer with only Stock weapons. There is work being done.

i think the climate for development might be favorable or will be favorable in the future too. In the mission statement in RGL, the largest NA competitive TF2 league, there are some paragraphs about the meta in the mission statement:



https://rgl.gg/Public/About/About.aspx?r=24
https://web.archive.org/web/20220429042149/https://rgl.gg/Public/About/About.aspx?r=24

Perhaps I am being naive and optimistic about this statement, but it personally gives me some hope that the social stigma around unorthodox development and play might not be so maligned in the present and the future if an organization like RGL is willing to accept the new.

Regardless, unorthodox engineering, at least from what I can see, is going to have lumbering progression. There will be some progress made in the Mantis and the Mongoose but little to no major breakthroughs in the Mistletoe and the Beaver. This is an understandable yet bleak position. I say understandable because many people are well aware of the first two categories and not the latter two. The first two are also easier to accomplish and build. It is also understandable as there is little work being done on unorthodoxy in general and the playerbase in TF2, although dedicated, is not numerous and prominent for people go forth and invest in something that has the potential to have no payoff. Another factor is the level of competency required for developing the Mistletoe and the Beaver in particular. These, as I have stated in this paper, are much more complex and difficult to formulate and execute, especially for a support class like the Engineer. I am not sure how many individuals are capable of this. All of this is not even taking into account the difficulties that I dedicated a section to. I do have hope that there will be progress between the Mantis and the Mongoose. I see little progress for the Mistletoe and nothing at all for the Beaver.

Despite my pessimism toward anyone making a parasitic unorthodox style work, I personally do think that it is quite possible because of how classes have strengths and weaknesses that one can exploit. Another thing about classes is that they have certain desires and goals when it comes to a phase in the game or a map. There is also another factor in which individual players have certain tendencies and temperaments that can eventually lead to parasitic play. None of these conditions can evaporate and go away permanently. It is something that is built both in the game itself and human beings. It comes to a reason that an observant player who understands and can carry out the ideas is able to make a Mistletoe come to life.

Paradigm shifts, on the other hand, is an upheaval of the meta in its foundations. Not only must the shifter be unprecedented in understanding and execution, but the meta itself needs to be open to the point where a paradigm shift is possible. TF2 is a game that has existed for countless competitive seasons and years of play. Although it does not have the level of meta refinement and infrastructure a more prominent esports games like League of Legends or StarCraft might have, it still has a history and progression of development nonetheless. Because of this, the chances of a paradigm shift happening is low, especially for a class that is considered on the weaker end like the Engineer. Even though change always happens to the meta of a game, it is not always possible for an incredible and fundamental change to happen. That opening gets smaller and smaller the more a game evolves. I have stated that I do not believe that the TF2 meta is or will be so refined that the unorthodoxy becomes a fool’s errand. However I do believe that the TF2 meta is or will be so refined and evolved that creating a paradigm shift for the Engineer is impossible if not incredibly difficult.

The TF2 Engineer has many aspects to him, but one area largely untapped is the realm of unorthodoxy. In this, we first discussed the categories of unorthodoxy in these uncharted lands:

• The Mantis that assaults its enemies with all-ins, surprises, and suckerpunches.
  
• The Mongoose that enjoys its lack of natural counters due to its alien nature and novelty.
  
• The Mistletoe that leeches off the meta’s tendencies and mindsets.
  
• The Beaver that is a complete shift of the meta and ecosystem itself and the next step forward.

We also discussed topics of clarifications of the idea of unorthodoxy, difficulties in achieving it in TF2 and the Engineer, and addressed devil’s advocates on two polar extreme views of unorthodoxy. With the categories of unorthodoxies, there are certain ways to formulate such strategies and methods. As stated, if you wish to pursue unorthodox engineering, do beware of its difficulties, misconceptions, and limitations.

My hope is that I presented a reasonable case for unorthodoxy and mapped out its uncharted territory even just a tiny bit. Thank you for your time in reading this work and staying the whole way through.

Editing and Revision: The Grandmaster
Guide branding image and wildlife profile pictures: Dr.Cogenheïmer
SFM Posters in "General Formulation Guidelines" and "Categories of Unorthodoxy": Jeagle_g

https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/hisc/info/invasive-species-profiles/mongoose/
https://www.airtohawaii.com/rat-control-plan-hawaii-goes-awry/
https://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/11/an-invader-advances-in-hawaii/
https://liquipedia.net/smash/SSBMRank
https://www.trainertower.com/sejun-park-the-innovator/
https://homeguides.sfgate.com/mistletoe-kill-oak-trees-76201.html
https://www.arborilogical.com/articles/all-articles/article-repository/2010/november/mistletoe/
https://www.cnn.com/2012/07/07/us/dickey-knuckleball/index.html
https://www.livescience.com/44186-who-invented-the-steam-engine.html

Regardless of this treatise’s reception, I do plan on writing more about the Engineer. I enjoy writing long winded, detailed, and hopefully intriguing essays and guides on the class like this one:

https://steamproxy.net/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1301053770

I plan the next two to be about taking a deeper look at the Damage Meta and Dynamic Meta mentioned in my Pioneer essay. I think these serve as a good vehicle for further talking points, discussion, and areas to dig and research.

Damage Meta is playing Engineer with the mindset of damage and raw numbers as its main argument and source of effectiveness. While this greatly encompasses the Combat Engineer, there are areas where it is the exception.

Dynamic Meta is doing the meta but with optimization to the situation, allies, and enemies and adaptability. It can also involve heavy mobility and constant motion.

Damage Meta and Dynamic Meta will hopefully be more grounded in the world of practice as there is more evidence to use than in the world of unorthodoxy. I don't know which one I would want to start on first... I have things to say about both...

Another task I wish to take on down the line is a dissection of legendary Engineers like Spamfest, Ender, Jordan, and Josh. What made them so great? What made them a cut above the rest of the competitive Platinum and Invite Engineers that existed throughout TF2 's history? I think this will be the most difficult task out of the 3. Information will be heavily limited and these players come from an era long gone. Data will be lost in the sands of time and it is also very possible I will not be capable of comprehending their level of understanding and detail.

Edits recorded here.

4/28/2022: Archived most links.