My view on PCS and "rushers".

Yer Mom · 04-13-2005, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yer Mom

I see more relevance of this post in de_cbble than I do on Italy.

On cbble, I see a very delicate contraversy. At B, there is the hallway. CT's get there sooner than T's, so they could move forward into the hallway. This would change a LOT about the game. With proper communication, B will be held on both sides. Actually, regardless of proper communication, B is held on both sides, as the only other way to B is through A. Why go to B if you're already at A?

I can understand how this IS PCS. In fact, I get extremely angry when an admin calls me out for doing this. It's the best way to defend B, concidering the crowded choke point it gives CT's. When T's hit B, they spread and dominate. It always proves to work. If CT's take that hallway, it's going to take some SERIOUS teamwork, dare I say PCS work, from the T's to retake the hallway and be able to plant at B. If the T's mess up, they lose too many people to plant in the hallway and they can't defend B as well.

Do you see my logic here?

Taking this hallway has to be the MOST PCS oriented thing I've ever heard of, yet we still claim it as rushing.

I agree with the admin. A rusher can be defined as someone who is past certain, NOT SET, boundaries that would be concidered too far away from their objective to be able to defend, and almost definately LOSE, it. Stop calling it out every time someone goes to B when the rest of their team is at A. Distraction FTW. Besides, if I'm on T's and I take my leader role, as I try to do often, I play against the "hunters" and "rushers", using them as distraction while me and the "team" go to a different site and wait for them to die/kill some of our enemies.

Rushing is not something to claim not doable. If anything, it's a VERY good addition to the PCS ruleset. We all know how much a rusher throws the ENTIRE CT team off. Why not plan the rush, instead of throw down and argue with the "idiots"?

-Mom

I think I've struck on something gold here. As long as the "rushers/hunters" are on the offensive team, give them a role. If they like to go off and try to kill the entire enemy team, let them, but make sure it's team oriented. Don't be a jackass to them imediately. Add them into the team if you see them rushing.

"Joe_Bob, you weren't with the team last round, but that's okay. We're going to B, you go to A and kill as many as possible. You can be our distraction."

Make sense to anyone else but me?

As far as the PCS goes, that's just my views on how it should work.

-Mom

Uchiha Obito · 04-13-2005, 01:26 PM

LOL, that actually makes alot of sense. Now we just have to persuade them to be on the offensive team every round.

Yer Mom · 04-13-2005, 01:28 PM

Be on the T's, you will. Yesss...

-Mom

**Wyzcrak** · 04-13-2005, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yer Mom

If they like to go off and try to kill the entire enemy team, let them, but make sure it's team oriented. Don't be a jackass to them imediately. Add them into the team if you see them rushing.

"Joe_Bob, you weren't with the team last round, but that's okay. We're going to B, you go to A and kill as many as possible. You can be our distraction."

Make sense to anyone else but me?

Yes, that makes sense, but it's not a golden ticket.

It's been said before that you can't authorize something only because "the team was on board with it." I don't think that's what your proposing. That having been said....

PCS doesn't happen just because the team is working together and applying their talents in the most effective way, but PCS, when it IS happening, happens BEST when the team is working together TO apply their talents most effectively.

Yes, if you have someone on your team who is a crack-shot, deploy them alone as a distraction. Multiple teams did this against Darwin in the tournament (we didn't do it, as our only crack shot is a Sniper, who you don't deploy alone on most maps).

**Tempus** · 04-13-2005, 02:02 PM

Offensive rushing, or lone distractors, have never been questioned here. But half of your post is about CTs rushing forward through the B hallway because "its the best chokepoint". That's where things get questionable.

Yer Mom · 04-13-2005, 02:06 PM

Not rushing, defending. Think about it.

The CT's have two bombsites. There is only two ways to get to B. One is the hallways, and the other is CT spawn. If the T's hit A, the CT team would mostly move to A leaving atleast 1 person at B.

The hallways at B, meaning the one headed to B, not the one that goes to courtyard, should not be concidered rushing. The room with all the boxes makes for SUPERB B cover. You can see the bombsite from this room, plus you can defend the site from any movement towards it. Sure, it makes for a nade target, but what doesn't? Put two or 3 CT's in the room with boxes, and you have B, if played right.

I'm simply stating that our "boundaries" aren't exactly what would seem too PCS oriented on some sites.

-Mom

**Tempus** · 04-13-2005, 02:10 PM

CTs have always been able to enter the hallways at B. It's going THROUGH the hallways that is not allowed.

**Wyzcrak** · 04-13-2005, 04:24 PM

I'll assume, from Mom's post, that he's been told at least once, in so many words, and probably by one of us admins, that being in the hallway itself is inappropriate. Otherwise, he would have no argument to make in the first place.

Mom, play where and how you want to play. You want to play PCS... so play it. Don't worry about the admins... they'll let you know if you're out of bounds. Otherwise, applying everything you know about PCS, assume the map is your objective's playground.

It's just not as fun to play this game if you're holding yourself back because you think you're on a leash.... unless you're the one holding the leash, in which case it's all good. Yes, the admins have to put public players on leashes, but we shouldn't have to put regulars on leashes. I mean.... I guess it depends on the regular, but you sound like you have your head screwed on straight, as do most of the regulars... at least the ones that make it to the forums.

If an admin slaps you on the wrist, all you can do is say "OK" and bring it to the forums later, for discussion, if you really want to talk about it.

Short of an admin intervening (see last paragraph), consider objectives, not admins, when you choose where you go. The "b" word is a regretable side effect of PCS in the public world. You're not "public" anymore, so lose the boundaries and play PCS. I'm trying to lead by example in this regard when I play. Play the team. Play the objective. But, for goodness sake, use the map to do it.

We have regulars among us who are afraid to move past an invisible line in the sand, and we're stable enough now to start shedding some -- not all -- of this gameplay limitation.

04-13-2005, 01:26 PM	#2 (permalink)
Uchiha Obito Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Texas Age: 25 Posts: 345	Re: My view on PCS and "rushers". LOL, that actually makes alot of sense. Now we just have to persuade them to be on the offensive team every round.

04-13-2005, 01:28 PM	#3 (permalink)
Yer Mom Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: TN Age: 22 Posts: 789	Re: My view on PCS and "rushers". Be on the T's, you will. Yesss... -Mom __________________ Yer Mom /O> To all but me is the look given but never received. My heart sinks faster and faster every time I look into them, yet I do not understand their controling power on my soul. - W11114m W45h1n670n

04-13-2005, 02:02 PM	#5 (permalink)
Tempus Join Date: May 2003 Location: Miami, FL Age: 38 Posts: 8,163	Re: My view on PCS and "rushers". Offensive rushing, or lone distractors, have never been questioned here. But half of your post is about CTs rushing forward through the B hallway because "its the best chokepoint". That's where things get questionable.

04-13-2005, 02:06 PM	#6 (permalink)
Yer Mom Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: TN Age: 22 Posts: 789	Re: My view on PCS and "rushers". Not rushing, defending. Think about it. The CT's have two bombsites. There is only two ways to get to B. One is the hallways, and the other is CT spawn. If the T's hit A, the CT team would mostly move to A leaving atleast 1 person at B. The hallways at B, meaning the one headed to B, not the one that goes to courtyard, should not be concidered rushing. The room with all the boxes makes for SUPERB B cover. You can see the bombsite from this room, plus you can defend the site from any movement towards it. Sure, it makes for a nade target, but what doesn't? Put two or 3 CT's in the room with boxes, and you have B, if played right. I'm simply stating that our "boundaries" aren't exactly what would seem too PCS oriented on some sites. -Mom __________________ Yer Mom /O> To all but me is the look given but never received. My heart sinks faster and faster every time I look into them, yet I do not understand their controling power on my soul. - W11114m W45h1n670n

04-13-2005, 02:10 PM	#7 (permalink)
Tempus Join Date: May 2003 Location: Miami, FL Age: 38 Posts: 8,163	Re: My view on PCS and "rushers". CTs have always been able to enter the hallways at B. It's going THROUGH the hallways that is not allowed.

04-13-2005, 04:24 PM	#8 (permalink)
Wyzcrak Join Date: May 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 14,139	Re: My view on PCS and "rushers". I'll assume, from Mom's post, that he's been told at least once, in so many words, and probably by one of us admins, that being in the hallway itself is inappropriate. Otherwise, he would have no argument to make in the first place. Mom, play where and how you want to play. You want to play PCS... so play it. Don't worry about the admins... they'll let you know if you're out of bounds. Otherwise, applying everything you know about PCS, assume the map is your objective's playground. It's just not as fun to play this game if you're holding yourself back because you think you're on a leash.... unless you're the one holding the leash, in which case it's all good. Yes, the admins have to put public players on leashes, but we shouldn't have to put regulars on leashes. I mean.... I guess it depends on the regular, but you sound like you have your head screwed on straight, as do most of the regulars... at least the ones that make it to the forums. If an admin slaps you on the wrist, all you can do is say "OK" and bring it to the forums later, for discussion, if you really want to talk about it. Short of an admin intervening (see last paragraph), consider objectives, not admins, when you choose where you go. The "b" word is a regretable side effect of PCS in the public world. You're not "public" anymore, so lose the boundaries and play PCS. I'm trying to lead by example in this regard when I play. Play the team. Play the objective. But, for goodness sake, use the map to do it. We have regulars among us who are afraid to move past an invisible line in the sand, and we're stable enough now to start shedding some -- not all -- of this gameplay limitation. __________________ Steam Community? Add me. \| Join #tacticalgamer \| Search Results Legend \| New Posts Forum Filter \| Postbox Toggle \| Live Thread Review \| One Line Results \| Free Remote, Encrypted Backup Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links