Respawn Camping Revisited

Some topics never get old, and some issues will never be resolved [1]. One of those topics is the ever-popular disgrace known as “respawn camping”. I’ve already discussed this in one of in my “Honor, Sportsmanship and Teamplay”-articles, but since I had to witness again people justifying respawn camping just a few days ago on a server of a clan I usually have much respect for I think it deserves once more some more detailed commentary.

DISCLAIMER: I’m talking about PUB GAMES here! The usual casual pub game with the common intent to be played for fun. I am NOT talking about clan matches, NOT even talking about more competitive oriented pick-up-games.
This discusses the majority of games you’ll find when you open your in-game server browser and join one of the servers listed there.
Got that?

To be on the same page on this discussion let’s agree on a basic definition of respawn camping:
Respawn camping is an action executed by one or more players which has those players staying in front or nearby an enemy respawn (or comparable respawn area) for an extended period of time with the intent to engage every opposing player leaving that respawn.
The operative words which will be the basis of this discussion (and help to separate respawn camping from legitimate actions) are “staying”, “extended time” and “intent”.

Let’s look at the line of argument of those defending the use of respawn camping:

The main argument is:
TF2 is a competitive game which goal in the majority of cases (read: maps) is for each side to win the match by overcoming the enemy within the rules of the game. Since TF2 lacks a clear set of rules it is reasonable to imply that this constitutes in using no cheats or exploits within an even playing field (for the most part equal team sizes).
So every tactic within those parameters which is helping the team to accomplish its goal and contribute to its success or progress is valid.

There’s a secondary argument which usually remains unspoken or indicated at best and only pops out into the open later in discussions. That argument is:
If a team allows itself to be locked down in a respawn or is majorly obstructed by enemy players outside the respawn it deserves no better.

On the surface it’s very hard to object against those arguments. It is of course true that a player camping the enemy respawn will obstruct their return to the battlefield and force them to spend resources (time/health) into killing him (or chasing him away). That will make it easier for the rest of the team to proceed on their objective, either to push the cart, cap the next CP or grab the enemy intel.

And as a temporary tactic I would not even argue against doing that. There is nothing wrong with guarding a respawn for a moment while some teammates are in a critical phase. There’s a major HOWEVER attached to that, which I will get to a little later.

In any kind of real competitive oriented match (e.g. clan matches) I would tolerate the use of such tactics. Not only is the skill level usually high enough that respawn camping will not last long, but also the greater amount of teamwork and communication will help enormously to deal with such opposition.
I think we will all agree that this is by far NOT the case in your usual pub game. Skill levels are varying drastically, teamwork is sparse and communication is often very, well, let’s say rudimentary
That means that the use of respawn camping often has an inappropriately greater effect than it should have, and would have under optimal circumstances.

Having said that it’s only fair to add that respawn camping can be overcome. Unless the player outside the respawn is God or it’s a greater numbers of enemy players a team should be able to deal with campers. It might take a few attempts, or combined actions. A respawn camper might be flanked by using an alternative exit (if available [2]). One could go spy and try to take him by surprise. If everything else fails a medic could build a uber to help remove the camper. And the camped team almost always have the advantage of the nearby resupply cabinet, while the camper outside has to depend on ammo/healthpacks in the area.
But the camper has the advantage of a natural chokepoint, the sound of the door opening will alert him and of course in the beginning he has the element of surprise on his side [3]. Longer respawn timer gives him a chance to get health and ammo. Those are advantages not to be underestimated. It’s not quite an unfair advantage, but it gets close.
These advantages combined with the lower level of teamwork and communication in many cases will make respawn camping more effective than it should be, it takes longer to deal with, and consequently will help the enemy team in an inappropriate amount.

And this leads us to one of the main problems with respawn camping.
Losing on the battlefield against an opponent is something any reasonable and halfway mature player will accept. But to be robbed that chance by being locked inside a respawn by an opposing player often leads to anger and frustration [4].
In other words: Respawn camping impairs the fun of the game, the fun of playing
 [5]. A respawn camper takes away from the excitement and challenge provided by the initial goal of the game, be it to cap points, push or obstruct a cart, steal or defend the intel; all that completely regardless of victory and defeat. Instead a different kind of game is forced upon the camped team.

For quite a number of people the outcome of a game is important enough that they are willing to see the game spoiled for the other players. For them the fun of the game is tightly knotted to them winning their matches.
However, allow me to question this philosophy in regards of respawn camping.

I can basically understand that it is important for a person that his team wins a round, but on the other hands we have to ask ourselves why a victory should have more than rudimentary significance?
After all, it’s a pub game. Often with people one has never met before and might never play with again. The victory of this random compilation of players will not be recorded, and it will probably not be remembered after a few days.
So why should such a fleeting success be more important than the fun people are having, including the opposing team? The more since those people might be playing alongside you on the next map!
I pity people thinking that way because they have a really screwed up sense of reality [6] and a twisted set of priorities. It’s a position I cannot respect.

For other people victory is a byproduct of their performance, and in the end it’s more important how they are doing in a game than the actual outcome. For them a win is the icing of the cake and if their skill contributed to that win it’s something they can be proud of. And that’s perfectly fine!

However, if those people resort to respawn camping I question their motives. As said, respawn camping gives a player an advantage, even if it’s just a minor one.
Fragging a hapless person leaving a respawn unsuspectingly is no show of skill. And even while doing so for an extended period of time might take more skill it still lame because the camper is always trying to rely on the various advantages.
He’s not looking for a fair fight on even ground where skill and experience decide the outcome. And often enough “successful” respawn camping is a sign of an imbalance between the teams, so that “success” might be more the result of lack of skill on the camped players than the eliteness of the camper.
So in the end respawn camping is ultimately cheap. It’s far too often no proof of skill and nothing to be proud of.

Consequently every victory which was helped by respawn camping is basically cheapened and tainted by that tactic. Even more, it did not only rob the camped team the opportunity to properly play the game, it also robbed the winner the feeling to have properly earned that victory.

So even people who will not respawn camp themselves, but tolerate respawn camping should question the legitimacy of that tactic.

I would think players who are looking for affirmation of their skill, who are trying to improve their game or, hell, even if they want to impress people, would be actually looking for a challenge, for the most even battleground to test and prove their skill.
And in that mindset wouldn’t it be the bigger challenge and a better proof of skill to win a match without respawn camping?

Which brings us to a nasty truth!
What if those people inclined to respawn camping actually don’t care about the rest of their team and is only remotely interested in the outcome of the game?
What if the main motivation of those people is to get a high kill score by preying on unsuspecting targets, the more since they have a slight advantage at their side?
And what if even that isn’t their biggest motivation? What if they don’t only take the anger and frustration of the camped players into account, but they take satisfaction from that fact.

In fact I’m quite confident that a high number of respawn campers are griefers in disguise!

They will never admit it and will always hide behind the argument that they were helping the team. [7] When confronted they will offer the same rhetoric I have been arguing against above. Admittedly sometimes it’s a grey area to decide if a player is respawn camping with the honest (though misplaced) intention to help his team or just to get off by collecting easy kills or draw pleasure from pissing other people off (or both).

So in light of all that I see really no reason whatsoever to execute respawn camping on a pub server [8], to promote it or to defend it as a “valid tactic” when it really achieves nothing productive and positive, but only angers and annoys people on one side and cheapens the efforts on the other.
It is by far not the gravest infliction on a pub server, and certainly not the worst kind of griefing one can encounter, but it is simply not needed to have a good game and every good match can certainly do without. So I fail to understand why people insist on defending it over and over again.

Consequently I respect every server admin of a pub server who discourages respawn camping and I applaud him reprimanding (and ultimately kicking) players who insist in doing so anyway, especially those who are clearly acting more on their own twisted sense of amusement.
A griefer by any other name should be kicked just the same

---

At first glance there appears to be one major exception to the rule, and that would be A/D maps, most prominently Payload-maps. That is partially true. After all, it is common and accepted that RED will mount up outside the BLUE base and the beginning of the match is indeed one big respawn camping by RED which the attackers will have to break through. However, I hope we agree that this is explicitly designed that way and part of this particular mod. The blue base is usually designed very much to support it (often larger areas and safe zones, gates, forecourts as buffer areas).

If however blue team was able to start respawn camping on the red team respawn I feel the same rules would apply as on any other map (which would be: Don’t do it!). And since people love to nitpick let me clarify: I don’t say "stay away" from the red respawn as if it was radioactive. I have no problem with an attacker running past it and engaging enemy players as long as he moves on afterward. I hope this is clear enough!