| Forum Index > General Games |
|
saddaromma
1129 Posts
Introducing R8 is the right direction to go. It solves one of major problem in competitive cs go, CT side being able to camp their way to victory when they get ahead. Its very common since all pro teams know how to use map, T might take round or two, but CT already have huge bank and can camp same spots over and over again. R8 forces defensive side to be more creative at positioning, which leads to more dynamic games and risk taking. I agree its OP. But general idea seems right. | ||
|
Yrr
Germany803 Posts
https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/3w1azc/in_depth_analysis_of_december_8_2015_weapon/ | ||
|
Luolis
Finland7103 Posts
On December 09 2015 19:45 saddaromma wrote: If we stop panicing and think seriously a bit. Introducing R8 is the right direction to go. It solves one of major problem in competitive cs go, CT side being able to camp their way to victory when they get ahead. Its very common since all pro teams know how to use map, T might take round or two, but CT already have huge bank and can camp same spots over and over again. R8 forces defensive side to be more creative at positioning, which leads to more dynamic games and risk taking. I agree its OP. But general idea seems right. Thats just retarded. Rather than adding a mini-awp for 850$ and switching up round/bombtimers for majors (i cannot comprehend how dumb this is), rather make smokes last less, for more possibilities for terrorists. Honestly it just feels like an april fools prank or something. | ||
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
switching up round/bombtimers for majors (i cannot comprehend how dumb this is), rather make smokes last less When you think about it, your latter suggestion is actually somewhat equivalent to the former. Longer round -> reduces the effectiveness of smokes / molotovs (when used as time buffers). So well... | ||
|
Luolis
Finland7103 Posts
On December 09 2015 20:34 Ragnarork wrote: When you think about it, your latter suggestion is actually somewhat equivalent to the former. Longer round -> reduces the effectiveness of smokes / molotovs (when used as time buffers). So well... Yea sure its somewhat equivalent, i just dont see any reason to switch game mechanics that have been there for 10 years or so. I dont think making the game slower than what it is now is the right choice, nor switching up fundamental core stuff. Rather do a smaller change with smokes lasting less, and keep the mechanics the same. (Not to mention that making retakes easier is, in my opinion, a really bad idea, as theres much less risk in trying a retake and itll also reduce the importance of defuse kits in competitive play.) | ||
|
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
i just dont see any reason to switch game mechanics that have been there for 10 years or so That's not an argument per se. It's not because it's been there for a long time that it shouldn't be changed. It's a random and dumb "traditionalist" argument. There are reasons some things are the way they are. Not looking at these reasons and thinking about the whys and if it should be set in stone is completely dumb. That doesn't mean the changes have to be completely random or poorly thought either. About the retakes, I find it more interesting that you have more opportunity to do it. That's debatable, but that means more such scenarios, and I like it. Defuse kits are a good point to mention though, that may need some further tweaking. | ||
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
Everyone is shooting this down before even having seen it. In Dota they changed the very map, laning mechanics and such as well, turned out it was for the better and encouraged more fast paced gameplay and less 4-1 stratting which was deemed ''boring''. I think that the way they did it without asking input from others is probably a bad idea to go about it but since these players have been doing it for years they would just say no most likely. Icefrog's influence stretches past its Dota realm. ''Because its tradition or because its been this way for 10 years'' is not neccesarily an argument in itself. There are loads of traditions that are/were changed because its for the better. | ||
|
Luolis
Finland7103 Posts
On December 09 2015 20:47 Ragnarork wrote: That's not an argument per se. It's not because it's been there for a long time that it shouldn't be changed. It's a random and dumb "traditionalist" argument. There are reasons some things are the way they are. Not looking at these reasons and thinking about the whys and if it should be set in stone is completely dumb. That doesn't mean the changes have to be completely random or poorly thought either. About the retakes, I find it more interesting that you have more opportunity to do it. That's debatable, but that means more such scenarios, and I like it. Defuse kits are a good point to mention though, that may need some further tweaking. We clearly know the old times work. I do not see a point in switching something that works. By the same logic of "making things more interesting", should we increase the size of football goals, or make the field smaller so theres more opportunities to score goals, since its "interesting". I dont understand why people would want to change something that quite obviously works on a fundamental level. | ||
|
Clonester
Germany2808 Posts
Its completly op, the spray mode is so accurate while still kills, its like wtf, all pistols got nerved but this gun is made for rush and gun. In Force or Eco you just rush down a path and you allways get 2 kills, way out of hand. The "scoping" is compeltly off, you scope, move around the corner, shoot, kill, back off... no reaction possible from enemy. Its not even funny how op this is. | ||
|
iXphobos
Germany1464 Posts
Even without that the R8 is completely ridiculous. Oh and there's a nice bug now. You can ALT TAB infront of a smoke and when you reenter the game the smoke is gone. xD | ||
|
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
On December 09 2015 21:04 Luolis wrote: We clearly know the old times work. I do not see a point in switching something that works. By the same logic of "making things more interesting", should we increase the size of football goals, or make the field smaller so theres more opportunities to score goals, since its "interesting". I dont understand why people would want to change something that quite obviously works on a fundamental level. Uhm yeah, they change rules in sports too, the reason why you don't change things in traditional sports too is because its bounded by physical stuff and the worldwide availability makes it super hard to actually change stuff. IIRC they changed something about Ice hockey not too long ago. In CSGO you can change code that translates into changing everything so its significantly easier to implement. The accurate comparison is with other video games, and they sure as hell change fundemental stuff in Dota, League and other video games. Just because its good doesn't mean it can't work better. | ||
|
Roggay
Switzerland6320 Posts
On December 09 2015 20:47 Ragnarork wrote: That's not an argument per se. It's not because it's been there for a long time that it shouldn't be changed. It's a random and dumb "traditionalist" argument. There are reasons some things are the way they are. Not looking at these reasons and thinking about the whys and if it should be set in stone is completely dumb. That doesn't mean the changes have to be completely random or poorly thought either. About the retakes, I find it more interesting that you have more opportunity to do it. That's debatable, but that means more such scenarios, and I like it. Defuse kits are a good point to mention though, that may need some further tweaking. To me it is an argument in itself. It's not the only one obviously and changes can be good, BUT there is a merit to having a stable core of principles to the game. Sure you have to look at the reasons, but feeling that the game is good in its current state is also a good reason to begin with. Considering the timers, I always did and will always have the principle that the game should be balanced around the highest level of play. I don't care at all that casual don't have enough time to retake a site, if the pros feel like 35sec is enough and plays well with how rotate times work on most map then it should not be changed. And as a personnal preference, I think 35sec is absolutely fine as it forces you to make good decisions fast and rewards those that can make those decisions / coordinate them. I also like the fact that it rewards T for correctly faking a site and planting at the other. | ||
|
Luolis
Finland7103 Posts
On December 09 2015 21:19 Kipsate wrote: Uhm yeah, they change rules in sports too, the reason why you don't change things in traditional sports too is because its bounded by physical stuff and the worldwide availability makes it super hard to actually change stuff. IIRC they changed something about Ice hockey not too long ago. In CSGO you can change code that translates into changing everything so its significantly easier to implement. The accurate comparison is with other video games, and they sure as hell change fundemental stuff in Dota, League and other video games. Just because its good doesn't mean it can't work better. Yes they have changed things, but not huge fundamental things. I understand small balance/design tweaks like what you could explore with smokes and all sorts of stuff like that. Im simply not in favor of switching something that obviously is good to something that might, or might not be good. (guess why i stopped playing starcraft after lotv came out) edit: i also agree 100% on what rogg wrote above this | ||
|
Yrr
Germany803 Posts
On December 09 2015 21:08 iXphobos wrote: Oh and there's a nice bug now. You can ALT TAB infront of a smoke and when you reenter the game the smoke is gone. xD lol, this explains quite something. edit: Yeah it works. you dont see the smoke anymore as long as you dont enter it. | ||
|
Roggay
Switzerland6320 Posts
On December 09 2015 21:25 Yrr wrote: lol, this explains quite something. edit: Yeah it works. you dont see the smoke anymore as long as you dont enter it. This is something that would be discovered incredibly quickly with a beta client and fixed. It is mind boggling that they still don't have that. | ||
|
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
| ||
Nixer
2774 Posts
| ||
|
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
The patch can be bad decision-wise, that's something that may happen (even if in this case it's mindboggling how you can end up with that shit). There's no excuse for it to be technically bad. It just shows the developer doesn't care, or has a deadline from its editor (we always say Valve, but Hidden Path Entertainment actually develop the game, and has other production to maintain/carry on....) that actually makes no sense, and force to release too early to carry proper testing etc. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On December 09 2015 19:45 saddaromma wrote: If we stop panicing and think seriously a bit. Introducing R8 is the right direction to go. It solves one of major problem in competitive cs go, CT side being able to camp their way to victory when they get ahead. Its very common since all pro teams know how to use map, T might take round or two, but CT already have huge bank and can camp same spots over and over again. R8 forces defensive side to be more creative at positioning, which leads to more dynamic games and risk taking. I agree its OP. But general idea seems right. It's absolutely the wrong thing to do. There is no problem with camping, in fact, as far as I can tell, camping is less of a problem in CSGO than it's ever been, with a serious offensive advantage. Maps are balanced, people know the popflashes to move players away from their "camping" positions (camping is not even a commonly used word in competitive play at any decent level). This gun is both OP and will be fixed I'm sure, but it's also conceptually wrong because it reinforces the T side in a game that came to be balanced without it. Right now CS is broken and I stand by my last post. Hopefully they make it CS again sooner rather than later. | ||
|
Yrr
Germany803 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
|
EPT
