Poll Update!

[Thortok2000]

F13ND wrote..

The thing that you fail to understand is that that player is cal m because he is good. He is not good because of his team. His teams is good because of him and the other skilled players on the team. Like i have said before, you have never been in any leagues throtok, you barely have experience in scrims... theres no way you can know what you are talking about.

The team is good because it's a lot of good players working as a team. In a pub, that doesn't happen.

WHO CARES HOW IT LOOKS?! cs is not real. Its a game. Made for fun. The end....

And I don't find stupid, ridiculous looking stuff to be fun. Most others don't either. To me, it breaks the intensity of the game if people start acting absurd.

You obviously totally missed the point... You are more LIKELY to win because there is less skill involved in shooting a free throw than playing actual basketball. Basketball itself is made up of things like "jumping" "catching" "dribbling" "shooting" and others. By only having to shoot the ball and make it to win, you have more of a chance and less room for errors which would cause you to lose.

You obviously totally missed the point. YOU WOULD STILL LOSE. Who cares how 'likely' you are to win? You're 100% guaranteed to lose, freethrow or not, against someone of that skill.

The point isnt whether the team would lose or not... its how many of the better team (in this case 3d or Sk) would die.... another thing you neglect to understand. And maybe if you had read one of my other posts in the other thread, you would have seen that this can and did happen with me and ur prime example, 3D. And that should not happen.

No, the point is whether the team would lose or not. Because it's a team game, and with the objectives, killing or not dying is 2nd priority to winning. A strong 2nd priority of course, but still 2nd priority.



You completely fail to realize that competitive CS is not and has never been about how many people you can kill, or how skilled you are at killing alone. Yes, you can win the round by killing all of the enemy CT's, wherever they may camp, but you will win the round by planting the bomb and preventing it from being defused.



It sure is hard to avoid fire when you're getting shot. So let's make 'pro mode' easier by removing the stutter jump so we can jump around.



It sure is hard to aim sometimes, when my random recoil isn't shooting where I want it to, so let's make 'pro mode' easier by making the bullets go where I shoot.



It sure is hard to get my pistol out in time when I need it, and didn't predict the need quickly enough. So let's make 'pro mode' easier by making weapon switch faster.



Do the pros really need to play an easier game?



You can argue that jumping makes people harder to hit. Reducing recoil makes it harder to survive when someone aims at you. Quickswitch makes it harder to kill someone.



So either way, if you look at it one way, it's easier, and if you look at it from the other person's point of view, it's harder.



So what do these changes benefit? Who gets it easier, and who gets it harder? Lets look.



(Before we begin, I define 'intelligence' as knowing /what/ to do, 'skill' as being able to do it, and 'experience' as a blend of the two that you get over time. Assuming equal experience, intelligence should win over skill. See the other comment thread on 'pro mode' for more on this.)



Increase Jumping. People who are getting shot at get it easier, people who are aiming get it harder.



Considering that people can occasionally get shot at and completely deserve to die (such as stepping right into a camper's crosshairs, or running around making lots of noise, not checking corners and such), this makes the game EASIER for people who ARE NOT USING TACTICS. So, bad choice.



Reduce Recoil. (Let's just ignore the 'randomness' of it for a moment.) People who are aiming at someone get it easier, people who are getting shot at get it harder. This is especially the case of people who are shooting while moving get it easier, while people who are getting shot at but NOT moving get it harder. So who does this benefit? People who are offensive, running and gunning without a care of stealth in the world. Campers who are defending a position, or are silently walking and moving more slowly get it harder. Someone comes blasting around a corner and starts shooting gets it easier, while someone who is quiet and still, heard them coming, and is waiting for them gets it harder.



Considering it doesn't take much intelligence to run around and shoot any enemies you see, whereas it takes a bit of intelligence to find a good spot to camp (especially considering good players will check most, if not all spots), this makes it EASIER for people who are NOT USING TACTICS, and are just running around killing at random.



(Now as far as 'randomness' and 'luck shots'...again I say, interp and hitboxes should be adjusted first, then we'd see how many of those 'luck shots' now actually miss when they're supposed to.)



And finally, increasing quickswitch. Who does this benefit? People who want to pull out a pistol faster, usually because they have either run out of bullets, or have a primary gun inappropriate to the need (sniping with a shotgun or CQB with a sniper rifle). Who does this harm? People who DO have a primary gun what CORRECTLY fits the need, and also people who have NOT run out of bullets.



Considering that it doesn't take much intelligence to know when a pistol is needed, this makes it EASIER for people who are NOT USING TACTICS and forgot to bring out their pistol in time.



To me, these three changes in particular, while increasing 'skill', reduce teamplay and tactics. And you'd be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.

[F13ND]

Maybe you didnt notice thor but everyone shoots in cs and everyone is shot at so...



People who are aiming at someone get it easier, people who are getting shot at get it harder. This is especially the case of people who are shooting while moving get it easier, while people who are getting shot at but NOT moving get it harder. So who does this benefit?

everyone



And finally, increasing quickswitch. Who does this benefit?

Everyone



Everyone plays and everyone would benefit some way.



Thor you are a product of what Stillman said. You are a new player to the game who is used to the dumbing down of the game. You lack the skill to survive if anyone were to make these changes. Because your camping, which you seem to be proud of? You seem to think campers are smart? why? because they hide incase someone decides to come walking along? In competitive cs ts cant camp out the round anymore. Not that you would ever have heard of that being so new to scrimming and all. You are in your own mind a "Strategic Possitioning Specialist"...



You have no concept of competitive cs. You seem to think that because there will be more skill required that people will just run around like madmen shooting there guns at whatever moves... maybe in pubs? but not in competitive cs where this would actually be used.



You do not understand the connection between skill, intelligence, and experience. Experience leads to the other two. You can think that you are as intelligent as you want but until you have the experience to really say... thats all you are... what you think. The same goes with skill.



Thortok2000 wrote...

"You obviously totally missed the point. YOU WOULD STILL LOSE. Who cares how 'likely' you are to win? You're 100% guaranteed to lose, freethrow or not, against someone of that skill."



#1 i wasnt talking about the moot point you were trying to make. I was talking about the person who originally said this.

#2 it doesnt matter how likely you are not to win you still have MORE of a chance to win. Didnt ur mommy ever tell you anything is possible?

#3 That it what the person who originally made this point was trying to say. People who have played longer and have the skill should be able to win especially "against someone of that skill." ty.



And last but not least #4



Thortok2000 wrote..

A lot of stupid stuff

You show no basic understanding of the following arguments.



ROFL

[Thortok2000]

Edited by [user="152360"] @ [time="1081748940"]

F13ND wrote..

Maybe you didnt notice thor but everyone shoots in cs and everyone is shot at so...



People who are aiming at someone get it easier, people who are getting shot at get it harder. This is especially the case of people who are shooting while moving get it easier, while people who are getting shot at but NOT moving get it harder. So who does this benefit?

everyone



And finally, increasing quickswitch. Who does this benefit?

Everyone



Everyone plays and everyone would benefit some way.

Yeah, everyone would benefit by becoming more stupid. People would stop playing intelligently and just run and gun, since that's type of player that's being encouraged with your suggested changes.



I guess it's true. Stupid people want the game to be stupider so they can play it easier.



Grow up. As I pointed out with logical arguements (that you completely ignored and apparently failed to understand), the changes you suggest "dumben" or "dumbify" (am I speaking your language now?) CS.

Thor you are a product of what Stillman said. You are a new player to the game who is used to the dumbing down of the game. You lack the skill to survive if anyone were to make these changes. Because your camping, which you seem to be proud of? You seem to think campers are smart? why? because they hide incase someone decides to come walking along? In competitive cs ts cant camp out the round anymore. Not that you would ever have heard of that being so new to scrimming and all. You are in your own mind a "Strategic Possitioning Specialist"...

I probably do lack the skill to survive if these changes were made, because I haven't been playing the last year in those conditions, and my habits are tuned to the current, better, system. So? I'd adapt, certainly, as would the community, and be about as equal skilled as I am now, eventually.



But shut your mouth for a moment and think. I'm a CT walking down backalley's basement hallway and I hear a T coming down the stairway. I duck into one of the T-spawn rooms (which are rarely ever checked for CT's by the T's), and he goes running by. I step out, silently, and shoot at him. I'd normally line up a headshot, but lately the hitboxes make it nearly impossible to hit the head from behind. He jumps, turns around, and shoots at me. If he has an AK or something, he usually instantly headshots me before he dies, especially if I'm crouching.



I did everything right. I positioned myself correctly, lined up the shot, and he was completely ignorant of my presence until I started shooting. He should die. This is an example of intelligence and stuff.



Jumping, turning around, and popping a headshot is an example of how a 'skilled' person would win while being completely stupid. Such things shouldn't be in the game.

You have no concept of competitive cs. You seem to think that because there will be more skill required that people will just run around like madmen shooting there guns at whatever moves... maybe in pubs? but not in competitive cs where this would actually be used.

Try to say something logical instead of saying this five times per post. Just because I haven't scrimmed CAL-i or whatever doesn't mean I'm not allowed to speak, especially when I do so more intelligently than you.



And I don't know how many times I have to tell you that unless they made 'pro mode' LAN-only at tournaments and didn't release it to the public, then everyone else would be playing it for pubs and scrims (and probably even CAL-o matches) and the current system would be called 'newbie mode'.

You do not understand the connection between skill, intelligence, and experience. Experience leads to the other two. You can think that you are as intelligent as you want but until you have the experience to really say... thats all you are... what you think. The same goes with skill.

I'm sorry, but experience does not lead to intelligence. It can lead to knowledge, certainly, but not intelligence. Do I need to whip out a dictionary?



And also, you may want to rephrase whatever the heck you said in the latter part of that paragraph so it resembles a correct sentence.

#2 it doesnt matter how likely you are not to win you still have MORE of a chance to win. Didnt ur mommy ever tell you anything is possible?

0% chance to win normal basketball...0% chance to win freethrow contest...being 0% 'more' chance to win. To me, zero is not more. Go back to kindergarten and learn math.



To me, the 'lower skill difference' means it's HARDER to be THAT good at it, that you ALWAYS win. Meaning that a pro is even more of a pro if he remains a pro in spite of the alleged 'lower skill difference'. I think it makes the game harder if a 3D person has to watch out for the lucky headshot from a newbie while still being able to kill him even when the randomness doesn't go his way. The fact that he still continues to consistently win in these conditions means that he really is a pro.



Trust me, when newbie cal-o teams start beating cal-i teams, then you can whine about how it's a newbie's game and anyone can win. Until then, I strongly recommend you be quiet about things you don't understand: namely, anything intelligent.

appended @ [time="1081750811"]

I was skimming through this again and I saw this...

Amnesiac wrote..

However, a CAL-M player can't go into a random pub and just be ridiculously good. Reason being, the game has far too many random elements and his individual skill has been hampered by the fact that he can't quick switch, and that he can't jump around. The more options you give the players the more skilled they can be. The fact that people aren't able to jump or quick switch leans the advantage towards people who weren't proficient with those abilities in the first place.

"The more options you give the players the more skilled they can be."



Wrong. The more options you give him, the easier it is for him to specialize and capitalize on the easiest 'options' to do that give the biggest gain returned.



Look at the guns. There's 20 or so. About a third of which are used in scrims and matches, and if you don't include default guns such as glock and usp, less than a fourth. People are 'skilled' because they use an mp5, instead of using a mac10 or tmp. Options does not equal more skill, it means just the opposite. Everyone will be doing the same, easiest thing.



The fact that people can't jump or quickswitch leans the game away from people who were ONLY proficient at those skills, both of which weren't really in the theme of CS. So even that point that you made was wrong.



Anyway, I won't skim through anything he said again. It seems that logical arguements that disagree with his opinions are to be ignored.



It basically boils down to this:



You either want skill, or you want intelligence. Intelligence allows people of equal intelligence to beat each other as determined by skill. Skill allows people of equal skill to beat each other as determined by intelligence.



An intelligence-based game would require you to be smart to even stand a chance, and then, assuming that, the most-skilled man wins. Someone who even makes one slip-up, intelligence wise, (such as accidentally giving away their position, or looking the wrong way when the enemy's behind them, or not throwing a flash first into a camped room, etc.) stands a good chance of losing, and probably won't be able to correct their mistake.



A skill-based game would require you to point and click and press buttons like a fragging maniac, to even stand a chance, and then, assuming that, the smartest man wins. Someone who even makes one slip-up, 'skill' wise, (such as aiming a couple pixels off, not jumping at exactly the right moment to dodge, not having a fast enough reaction time to the sudden appearance of an enemy) stands a good chance of losing, and probably won't be able to correct their mistake.



Apparently, only those who are stupid would want the skill-based game, where those who are already intelligent can see that the intelligence-based game one is the better option.



Besides which, CS is meant to be an intelligence-based game, not a skill-based one. If you make a skill-based mod, it's not CS anymore. And if you don't think CS is meant to be an intelligence-based game, then take a good look at the changes from 1.3 on and see what the game designers are doing.



At the moment, however, there are factors of both in the game, which is probably even better, but if emphasis should go anywhere, it should go to intelligence, NOT to skill.

[T|2i|34L]

HEY LOOK! MY INTELECTUAL DICK IS BIGGER THAN YOURS. SHUT THE FUCK UP - IT'S A GAME.

[fatboy2mc]

I HAVE GOT THE SOLUTION FOR THE AZTEC SOUND

Do what me and every other Pub Nub out there does and bind stopsound to a key that is easily accessible. Then when the thunder claps, stop it. Simple as that. Maybe this is not allowed in a league, I am not sure, but that command has been in my config, and most other players configs for a long while. try it.

[SpookyStillman]

ok, this is waht things come down to, either you-



a) Are an active participant of the professional community of CS, or

b) simple pubber who takes the game for what it is worth, gets teh updates, and plays to have fun.



As far as both of those types of people go, its seems to me that most of the B people have no idea what the game really is about. Thor, from what I see, and what i think, you are not apart of the a catagory, so your views on CS are somewhat scattered. You dont know that quickswitching is VITAL for one on one situations, thats why the pistol exists, thats why you can hold two weapons, thats why grenades are there, so that when a random situation pops up, you are ready. Dont even tell me that having your pistol ready two seconds faster on a one on one, or even a two on one situation wouldn't help you out. Ive had my share of Ogl, PG, CAL and other league experiences, and that two seconds and 12-20 bullets helps you out. If you want to run for cover, thats fine for me, but while you are reloading your colt/ak, im going to usp you in teh face. No questions asked.



The strategic elements of CS to include, quickswitching, jumping and shooting, strafing and camping all make the game very unique. While some people are better at different things, if you are well rounded at all of these (which was made possible in CS versions 1.3 and before) you were considered a part of the "elite." Everyone had their days where they used to stand still and shoot, hoping to get that kill. but now, if you have any common sense, you will strafe and shoot. Why? because a moving target is obviously harder to hit. If you bash someone for jumping and shooting, and bitch and complain about how unrealistic that is, you are playing the wrong game. The game, while having some major realism to it, has its very unrealistic features. The game had been, and always will be about teamwork, but, without individual skill, you will not progress. Simple. No clan is going to pick you up, if you cant hold your own.



Which brings me to another point, you play a game because its fun, and because you want to be good at it, right? So, if you get really good at certain things, and use different techniques to have an advantage, wouldn't you be really upset if all of a sudden, they took it out of the game? Granted, you are still playing the same game, with the same people, but now, all of your advantages are gone. end of story. THATS how most of us feel about CS. Most of our techniques are gone, jumping and shooting cripples us now. all anyone has left is either to crotch and be more accurate when we shoot, or strafe and try to evade the bullets. The game is now accomadated for people who never picked up the essentials, and its making us (experienced players) suffer.



Will I still play CS, yes of course. Will I DL pro mode and see wtf its all about, sure, I think that most people will and adopt it for a CS substitute. But is that right? thats the main question, not if its going to replace CS, because its not. People are still going to play CS 1.6 or whichever versions they still play.



Even with all the hackers, CS is still thriving. You can bitch and complain about them all you want. but its either you or them. Would you give up the game youve been playing for so long because of a couple of unskilled retardes? No. So whats teh soloution? Play the game professionally. Or at least try to. Thats what i did, and its been the most fun ive had for 5 years. Try it out if you havnt, get in a cal o clan and battle your way up. But realize that most people ahead of you have been playing this for a long time, and have seen the game go to shit over newbs who simply cant adjust to people having a slight advantage. Not everyone is looking for a reason to bash CS, but chopping the game so that most people have to re-adjust gives US the right.

[F13ND]

Thortok2000 wrote...

"Yeah, everyone would benefit by becoming more stupid. People would stop playing intelligently and just run and gun, since that's type of player that's being encouraged with your suggested changes."



Again who says that just because more skill involved players will become stupid? And for the fourth time go dl a 1.3-1.4 demo and you will see that just because there is more skill involved doesnt, by any means at all, mean that the players are any less intelligent.



Thortok2000 wrote...

"As I pointed out with logical arguements (that you completely ignored and apparently failed to understand), the changes you suggest "dumben" or "dumbify" (am I speaking your language now?) CS."



#1 What arguments where these i must have missed a post?

#2 How does these changes "dumbify cs"

and #3 Most of your arguments are not logical to anyone who has played cs for at least 1 or more years.



Thortok2000 wrote...

"I'm a CT walking down backalley's basement hallway and I hear a T coming down the stairway. I duck into one of the T-spawn rooms (which are rarely ever checked for CT's by the T's), and he goes running by."



Ill just ignore that you said that because CS_backalley is not played in any of the leagues that these changes would affect. Which proves another point of mine... You dont know what your talking about.



Thortok200 wrote...

"Jumping, turning around, and popping a headshot is an example of how a 'skilled' person would win while being completely stupid. Such things shouldn't be in the game."



Since when is being skilled being stupid? Why should he not be able to turn around and kill you if you are not skilled enough to shoot him in the head? You, in that case, would be the stupid one for NOT being able to kill him.



Thortok2000 wrote...

"Wrong. The more options you give him, the easier it is for him to specialize and capitalize on the easiest 'options' to do that give the biggest gain returned."



Hence... skill.. ROfl. isnt "specializing and capitalizing" anything be seen as skill?



Thortok2000 wrote...

"Options does not equal more skill, it means just the opposite. Everyone will be doing the same, easiest thing."



Which would be skill again? Look at basketball again. You could shoot every shot over the back of your head. But WTF would be the point of that when its easier just to shoot it the right way? More options doesnt mean more skill but being able to choose the right options does.



Thortok2000 wrote

"I'm sorry, but experience does not lead to intelligence. It can lead to knowledge, certainly, but not intelligence. Do I need to whip out a dictionary?"



GO for it. Lets picture this. Youve never played a cartain map before. Are you following me? You dont know where to do your favorite thing, in this case camp, because you have never played the map. After playing the map for 15 minutes you now know where you can and cant hide. Is this not an example of experience leading to intelligence? How are you going to know what to do when youve never done it before?



Thortok2000 wrote...

"It seems that logical arguements that disagree with his opinions are to be ignored."



Yah because you have no coherent sense of what this mod would actually be used for and are not the target of this mod.



"Thor, from what I see, and what i think, you are not apart of the a catagory, so your views on CS are somewhat scattered."



"Thortok2000 wrote..

A lot of stupid stuff

You show no basic understanding of the following arguments."



Im not the only one who sees this.



Thortok2000 wrote...

"You either want skill, or you want intelligence."



Why are you thinking that a choice has to be made between the two? Can there NOT be both? BTW skill is based on



Thortok2000 wrote...

"Someone who even makes one slip-up, 'skill' wise, (such as aiming a couple pixels off, not jumping at exactly the right moment to dodge, not having a fast enough reaction time to the sudden appearance of an enemy) stands a good chance of losing, and probably won't be able to correct their mistake."



Why should it not be like that? It is their fault they died. Work on it... get better.



Thortok2000 wrote...

"Apparently, only those who are stupid would want the skill-based game, where those who are already intelligent can see that the intelligence-based game one is the better option."



So only stupid people want this kind of cs. ROFL. thats all i have to say. That is one of the worst stereotypes i have ever seen and i just have to laugh at you for actually believing this. And what about those that are intelligent and skilled but still want this done? What are they? rofl...



Thortok2000 wrote...

"Besides which, CS is meant to be an intelligence-based game, not a skill-based one. If you make a skill-based mod, it's not CS anymore. And if you don't think CS is meant to be an intelligence-based game, then take a good look at the changes from 1.3 on and see what the game designers are doing."



Wow... just wow. This shows that you have no concept of the past of cs before 1.6... This has all been talked about before... the game has been dumbed down to cater to whiney "noobies." Just because they have made it that way doesnt mean that cs is meant to be that way. Cs hasnt been made for more intelligence it has just been slowed down. If you made it a skill based mod it would still be cs because cs is about skills and smarts. Not just smarts... Not just skills which you seem to think.

[SpookyStillman]

F13ND wrote....

"You are in your own mind a "Strategic Possitioning Specialist"...



ROFL, I cant believe I missed that before.

[F13ND]

lol

[Thortok2000]

SpookyStillman wrote..

a) Are an active participant of the professional community of CS, or

b) simple pubber who takes the game for what it is worth, gets teh updates, and plays to have fun.



As far as both of those types of people go, its seems to me that most of the B people have no idea what the game really is about.

I think 'most' of both A and B have no idea what the game really is about. Generically, A knows more than B does, but you've still got clueless people in the A category and intelligent, thoughtful ones in the B category.



Again, these two categories don't really represent how logical someone's arguement is. You don't assign how 'right' a person's arguement is by what they've done or what they haven't done.



I've presented logical points that show that your changes help people who make stupid mistakes get out of sticky situations easier (assuming, of course, that they're able to). These logical points have been ignored, while everyone continues to focus on the (incorrect) idea that the amount of time you've played CS determines how logical, thoughtful, and observant you are at deciding what the game should be.



Now, if 'pro mode' actually did exist, and there was a schism between A and B, where they were not actually playing the same game, then you'd have a point. But competitive CS is playing the same game, just better, with better teamwork, and with a certain set of rules (CAL.cfg and cal's rules). I've played under those rules and they're basically 'default CS'.

Thor, from what I see, and what i think, you are not apart of the a catagory, so your views on CS are somewhat scattered. You dont know that quickswitching is VITAL for one on one situations, thats why the pistol exists, thats why you can hold two weapons, thats why grenades are there, so that when a random situation pops up, you are ready. Dont even tell me that having your pistol ready two seconds faster on a one on one, or even a two on one situation wouldn't help you out. Ive had my share of Ogl, PG, CAL and other league experiences, and that two seconds and 12-20 bullets helps you out. If you want to run for cover, thats fine for me, but while you are reloading your colt/ak, im going to usp you in teh face. No questions asked.

Or you can shoot me with the last 10 bullets of your M4 that you saved for when I was reloading.



Don't miss. Shoot less. This helps both your recoil and the amount of times you have to reload.



Also, reloading is meant to be a vulnerability. Your teammates cover you; you reload at 'safe' moments; you watch your bullet count and don't go into a gunfight with half a clip. You also don't reload after a kill if it only took 3 bullets.



As far as I can see, quick switching to pistol is "oops I messed up but I'm gonna shoot you anyway". How hard is it to press Q and then keep shooting, adjusting your aim slightly for the different gun's recoil and such? I mean really. You act as if it takes a lot of skill when all it really is is just hitting a button and continuing the firefight.



I've already made my point about quickswitch:

I said:

And finally, increasing quickswitch. Who does this benefit? People who want to pull out a pistol faster, usually because they have either run out of bullets, or have a primary gun inappropriate to the need (sniping with a shotgun or CQB with a sniper rifle). Who does this harm? People who DO have a primary gun what CORRECTLY fits the need, and also people who have NOT run out of bullets.



Considering that it doesn't take much intelligence to know when a pistol is needed, this makes it EASIER for people who are NOT USING TACTICS and forgot to bring out their pistol in time.

The strategic elements of CS to include, quickswitching, jumping and shooting, strafing and camping all make the game very unique.

None of those 'elements' are overly strategic. You forgot money management. You forgot formations. You forgot teamwork. You forgot who gets what kind of gun and goes where, and when. You forgot 'delay rushes'. When to do the objective, when to camp so you can keep your gun. You didn't even mention crouching or walking, or making sure you don't accidentally shoot your teammates. You didn't mention nades, the three kinds, how they're used, and when. When to buy them, when to throw them. How to throw them around a corner. Blinding the enemy is easy but doing so while not blinding yourself or your teammates (who may run towards the flashbang after you throw it) is harder.



No, the only strategy elements you listed are various methods of really only 2 strategic elements: Killing and avoiding being killed. Which is the most 'default' strategy, requiring the littlest amount of intelligence to comprehend.

While some people are better at different things, if you are well rounded at all of these (which was made possible in CS versions 1.3 and before) you were considered a part of the "elite." Everyone had their days where they used to stand still and shoot, hoping to get that kill. but now, if you have any common sense, you will strafe and shoot. Why? because a moving target is obviously harder to hit. If you bash someone for jumping and shooting, and bitch and complain about how unrealistic that is, you are playing the wrong game. The game, while having some major realism to it, has its very unrealistic features. The game had been, and always will be about teamwork, but, without individual skill, you will not progress. Simple. No clan is going to pick you up, if you cant hold your own.

The game has lots of unrealistic features, a ton of which revolve around getting shot and still being 100% effective until you're 100% dead.



The idea of people jumping around while shooting isn't necessarily 'unrealistic' so much as 'completely stupid, ludicrous, ridiculous, and unnecessary'. 'Unrealistic' just happens to also be adequate at describing it. Yes, this is an opinion, but hey, the CS designers and most others who aren't 1.3 addicts agree with me.

Which brings me to another point, you play a game because its fun, and because you want to be good at it, right? So, if you get really good at certain things, and use different techniques to have an advantage, wouldn't you be really upset if all of a sudden, they took it out of the game? Granted, you are still playing the same game, with the same people, but now, all of your advantages are gone. end of story.

In gaming terms, it's called 'nerfing the cheese'. People who win purely on cheese alone scream bloody murder when their cheese tactics get nerfed. The cheese is only 'fun' because it's fun to win and cheese guarantees that against people who aren't cheesing.



In Warcraft III, it was common to see every player who played Human making the exact same caster armies and playing the exact same way and winning every time, until they came up against another caster army and then it boiled down to who was the better player (or who made the better caster army). This screwed over the entire 'variety' and 'tactics' and 'counters' that Blizzard was going for. So they nerfed the cheese.



In CS 1.3, it was common to see every player jumping around as soon as they got shot. They'd continue to jump and win every time, until they came up against another person who jumped and then it boiled down to who was the better player (or jumped and shot the best). This screwed over the entire 'sanity' and 'tactics' and 'realism feel' that the CS designers were going for. So they nerfed the cheese.



(Now, the stutter jump is a mechanism to prevent jumping 'too much'. You still see people jump when they get shot, or to dodge bullets, and it still works for this purpose. But jumping repeatedly is what they nerfed, because it goes against what they wanted.)



Yes, cheese is always tasty and fun to the people who prefer to just find some cheese and win on that way alone. But they nerfed it, so grow up and stop asking for it back.



A game is good if you can win in more than one way. There shouldn't be one 'THE correct way' that if you don't do it, you automatically lose. As it is now, it's too close to that already, where if you buy a pistol besides a usp or deagle, you suck. If you use a shotgun or submachine gun other than an MP5, you suck. If you bought a scout or a para, you wasted your money.



I'm just glad you're not a video game designer.

Will I still play CS, yes of course. Will I DL pro mode and see wtf its all about, sure, I think that most people will and adopt it for a CS substitute. But is that right? thats the main question, not if its going to replace CS, because its not. People are still going to play CS 1.6 or whichever versions they still play.

I doubt it. Pro mode will be adopted by the newbies because they would rather spend years pubbing at pro mode before scrimming as opposed to spending years pubbing at 'newbie mode' before having to learn all over again to scrim in 'pro mode'.



Basically, if pro mode was introduced, the real 'new' mode would be 'newbie mode', which would be the way it was before pro mode. The majority of players on pubs would 'go pro'.

Even with all the hackers, CS is still thriving. You can bitch and complain about them all you want. but its either you or them. Would you give up the game youve been playing for so long because of a couple of unskilled retardes? No. So whats teh soloution? Play the game professionally. Or at least try to. Thats what i did, and its been the most fun ive had for 5 years. Try it out if you havnt, get in a cal o clan and battle your way up. But realize that most people ahead of you have been playing this for a long time, and have seen the game go to shit over newbs who simply cant adjust to people having a slight advantage. Not everyone is looking for a reason to bash CS, but chopping the game so that most people have to re-adjust gives US the right.

I've been looking into joining a clan, but it's hard to find an organized one that is also friendly and intelligent. I'd also prefer one without profanity, and even better if they were in my city, or at least my state.



I've been scrimming with a Canadian clan called MtK, and was planning on joining them for next CAL season, but they're splitting into two clans, and I haven't heard from any of them in a couple weeks. Ah well. They weren't exactly what I was looking for anyway.

appended @ [time="1081838350"]

F13ND wrote..

Again who says that just because more skill involved players will become stupid? And for the fourth time go dl a 1.3-1.4 demo and you will see that just because there is more skill involved doesnt, by any means at all, mean that the players are any less intelligent.

You're not getting it. You're simply not getting it.



Jumping allows people who are stupid enough to put themselves in someone's crosshairs allow themselves to survive.



Lower recoil allows people who are stupid enough to be running around without any stealth kill people who are being quiet and calm and cool-headed.



And faster weapon switching allows people who are stupid enough to run out of bullets (or have the wrong gun, like when an awper gets flanked and doesn't realize it until he gets shot at) when someone's shooting at them can still have a fighting chance of surviving.



In all three of these examples, people are doing stupid stuff, stuff that requires no forethought, no planning, no intelligence, and it doesn't even matter if something unexpected happens.



In all three of these examples, your suggested changes would allow these stupid people to win in spite of their mistakes.



THESE CHANGES DUMB DOWN CS. Yes, they increase 'skill', they increase the amount of mouse-pushing and button-clicking you have to do. But they lower the amount that you have to think, plan, invent, and improvise.



They benefit 'everyone'...because everyone can click buttons and push their mice. But just because everyone can stare at a computer screen and fiddle with input devices doesn't mean that they should be able to kill someone who outwits them.



You call campers as 'strategic positioning specialists.'



I call bunnyhoppers as 'strategic space-bar specialists.' Quickswitchers as 'strategic Q specialists.' And people who need recoil-less guns to aim with as 'strategic Mouse1 specialists'.

#1 What arguments where these i must have missed a post?

#2 How does these changes "dumbify cs"

and #3 Most of your arguments are not logical to anyone who has played cs for at least 1 or more years.

See the above. See any of my posts. Read. And shut up.

Ill just ignore that you said that because...You ... know what your talking about.

(Note: Edited to be more accurate.)

Since when is being skilled being stupid? Why should he not be able to turn around and kill you if you are not skilled enough to shoot him in the head? You, in that case, would be the stupid one for NOT being able to kill him.

In this case, a STUPID person uses what SKILL he has to make up for his STUPID mistake.

Hence... skill.. ROfl. isnt "specializing and capitalizing" anything be seen as skill?

No, it's called the idiots who get told what the cheese is (or MAYBE figure it out themselves, but most likely told) and do the cheese, and get 'good' at the cheese.

Which would be skill again? Look at basketball again. You could shoot every shot over the back of your head. But WTF would be the point of that when its easier just to shoot it the right way? More options doesnt mean more skill but being able to choose the right options does.

There's more 'right ways' to basketball than just shooting, no matter how you shoot. You may be past the three point line. You could shoot now and get 3 points if you make it, but you might miss. You could go closer and try for a 2 pointer. You might go to the side to bounce it off the backboard to put it in. Or you might try for a slam dunk.



To put changes such as the cheese you're suggesting means that 3 pointers are now 50 pointers. As in, sure, you could do the other options, but it's not worth it. This makes one and ONLY one way the 'right' way. Then it's all about landing those 50 pointers and the people most 'skilled' at that will win. Slam dunks and any 2 pointers get forgotten. This makes it cheese.



If there's only one way to win, that by default removes any intelligence. You simply do it that way or you lose. You don't have to make choices or base decisions on factors or anything intellectual. Do it the 'right' way or lose.



And that simply doesn't make for a good video game, especially if figuring out the 'right' way takes little, if any, thought.

GO for it. Lets picture this. Youve never played a cartain map before. Are you following me? You dont know where to do your favorite thing, in this case camp, because you have never played the map. After playing the map for 15 minutes you now know where you can and cant hide. Is this not an example of experience leading to intelligence? How are you going to know what to do when youve never done it before?

That's leading to knowledge. As I said, experience can lead to knowledge, but not intelligence. In this case, intelligence is the simple ability to find those places. Observing is seeing them. Intelligence is recognizing them. Knowledge is knowing them. For instance, someone could tell you where the spots are, and that's not being intelligent, but you still know.



A stupid person in this case would never find the right camping spots and would be shot while staring at corners trying to figure out if someone can see him from there or not.



Skill:

2 a : the ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance b : dexterity or coordination especially in the execution of learned physical tasks

Knowledge:

2 a (1) : the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association

Experience:

2 a : practical knowledge, skill, or practice derived from direct observation of or participation in events or in a particular activity

Observe:

5 : to come to realize or know especially through consideration of noted facts

Intelligence:

1 a (1) : the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : REASON; also : the skilled use of reason (2) : the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests)

Yah because you have no coherent sense of what this mod would actually be used for and are not the target of this mod.

This mod would be used to make the game easier for people who do not think. This mod will not be used by CAL or anyone who actually DOES think.



And as for the target, the mod aims at all of CS. It's like a headshot, if you aim at the best, you get the rest.

Im not the only one who sees this.

It doesn't take much to say "You're not understanding me." It's because you continue to make invalid points and are completely inable to prove them.



They actually have stuff to say. They make a valid point from time to time. Not on the main subjects, though. You, however, rarely make a valid point at all.

Why are you thinking that a choice has to be made between the two? Can there NOT be both? BTW skill is based on

on....? Finish your sentences. English class, remember?

Why should it not be like that? It is their fault they died. Work on it... get better.

The game should not be that strict. It should (and does) encompass elements of this without being BASED on this. Read that last sentence seventy times and maybe you'll begin to understand it.



The key words in the tiny bit of out-of-context stuff you quoted are that 'ONE slip-up' and 'will not be able to correct the mistake'. For instance, if you aim your crosshairs slightly off, you should be able to correct it after 1-2 bullets and shoot again.



If you make several skill slip-ups, then you should die. But a single, solitairy skill slip-up? Nobody's perfect. You shouldn't have to be perfect just to have a fighting chance.

So only stupid people want this kind of cs. ROFL. thats all i have to say. That is one of the worst stereotypes i have ever seen and i just have to laugh at you for actually believing this. And what about those that are intelligent and skilled but still want this done? What are they? rofl...

Where are they? Have them debate instead of you. Because 'intelligent' simply does not apply to you.

Wow... just wow. This shows that you have no concept of the past of cs before 1.6... This has all been talked about before... the game has been dumbed down to cater to whiney "noobies." Just because they have made it that way doesnt mean that cs is meant to be that way. Cs hasnt been made for more intelligence it has just been slowed down. If you made it a skill based mod it would still be cs because cs is about skills and smarts. Not just smarts... Not just skills which you seem to think.

Find me a quote, any quote, from anyone who works on designing CS, that says they're catering to newbies. They cater to pubs, sure, but pubs aren't necessarily newbies. Find me a quote that says they want to make CS easier, so that people that aren't as good can kill people that are.



No, you make up junk like that because everyone else says it. It reminds me of the quote from the bible..."Ashes to ashes, dust to dust." The thing is, that quote isn't in the Bible. You can read the Bible cover to cover and you'll never find the quote. But everyone says it, so it must be true, right?



Wrong. CS is not 'being dumbed down for newbies'.



The game as it is now has skill and smarts. You can still dodge an awp bullet by jumping. You can, you know. I've done it myself. In 1.6. You can still aim at a person's head and actually hit it (give or take the really screwed up interp and hitboxes). Recoil doesn't mean you can't hit someone.



Your suggested changes, however, would remove the need for 'smarts' in three categories.



Category #1: Quickswitching...removes the need for prior planning of whether to have a pistol or not. Removes any need for intelligent decisions of when and where to reload. If you're out of ammo, simply switch and be done. You don't have to think.



Category #2: Jumping repeatedly...removes the need for choosing exactly when to use your one or two jumps. You can simply jump as much as you want and not worry about anything limiting you. It's a factor you don't have to deal with. You don't have to think.



Category #3: Lesser recoil...removes the need for smaller bursts, better timing, and better placement of shots. You don't have to worry about your bullets missing if you spray too much. It's a factor of the game you don't have to deal with. You don't have to think.



In all three of these categories, it increases the amount of button pushing and mouse clicking you do while decreasing the amount of decisions of when and where it would be best to do said button pushing and mouse clicking. With your suggested changes, a player can do it anytime he wants to instead of ONLY when he NEEDS to.



As it is now, if you jump (or don't jump) at the wrong time, you're screwed. If you switch (or don't switch) at the wrong time, you're screwed. If you shoot too fast (or aim too slowly), you're screwed.



The game already has the level of skill you're suggesting. It just requires intelligence to know when and where to apply these skills. You're suggesting that they remove the intelligence.

[MikeJ]

Yes and No



!

[I2o[G]uE TacT-X]

wow puffy, this is super late.

[Bokuho]

I don't watch demo's to try and get better at CS because I think the only way to get better is to just play the game over and over. However, sometimes I'll inadvertently get better tactically by watching CPL demos or whatever - I'll pick up on new places to hide, good sniper spots, etc etc.



In short, I don't watch demos just to get better, but I watch them anyway for fun and sometimes on the odd occasion I'll pick up on something new tactically.

[David Johnston]

Further proof that there is a conspiracy to wipe out any 'comedy 3rd option' from online polls.

[Cool Mo D]

PRO HO MODE !!