Zephyr

Okay can we clarify via the use of examples in game? I have one and it concerns a somewhat detested map (Aztec).

According to the information I've picked up in this thread, if the T's decide to rush through the double doors and this information is reported to the remainder of the team, it is completely valid for CT's at the long bridge to traverse it and, given that they are not detected, may fire off a few rounds at the backs of the T's who have blatently failed to cover their backside. Should they be detected by the T's, they have no business with a standoff, they need to get their asses out of there.

I agree that boundaries were specifically designed with the intent of teaching us about playing defensively and never had the intention of excluding anyone physically from an area, only morally in the interest of winning for the team.
-Zephyr

__________________
You were once like the newbie who needed a hand from above and TacticalGamer gave you it.

You owe the newbie who comes after you that same outstretched hand from above on your honor as a Tactical Gamer.

Tactics at TG come from trust and friendship, not meticulous detail and rigid discipline.

Everyone should be assumed mature until proven otherwise.

We are no clan.
We are not a single game.
We are mature, intelligent, and cooperative individuals.
We are TacticalGamer, a community above and beyond its name.

Root

You're not entirely incorrect Zephyr, however you need to take into account things like how many CT's are dead, and would it keep more CT's alive if the guys at bridge exit the bridge room and snipe across the water to B.

Root

__________________

CingularDuality

It's not a rush/DM/whatever, it's just not good defense. What are you going to do if the entire rest of your team dies and you're all the way over by that car? There's no possible way that you can help defend the hostages from that location. Even if you start making your way back towards the hostages once you see teammates start to die/call for backup, what happens if you're cut off before you can go back up the middle? It's just not a very good defensive position, not to mention the fact that you can't get there before the CTs do... Remember, your objective is NOT to defend chokepoints. Your objective is to defend hostages. Defending chokepoints is great, but you have to make sure that you're not abandoning your objective in your zeal to keep the CTs from taking a particular route.

Let me clarify your scenario. The entire T team pushes hard through the double doors. The CTs defending the bridge decide to cross the bridge and follow the Ts through the double doors. You're asking if the CTs need to retreat once they are spotted coming through the double doors? Absolutely not. They have to prevent the bomb from being planted.
If you mean the CTs crossed the bridge before the entire T team and bomb pushed through the double doors, then you're right, the CTs should not even push across the bridge unless the bomb has positively been identified as going through the double doors. If a mistake is made, the CTs should retreat to an appropriate defensive position.

Common courtesy is not so common on our servers, lately. If you find yourself accidentally violating a rule, take immediate action to correct yourself, even if it means putting yourself in danger. If you fall off a ledge or through a hole or had the situation miscommunicated, don't penalize the other team for your mistake. Get back to where you belong as quickly as possible. Hopefully you won't be spotted, if you are, take your lumps for messing up and learn from your mistake. We all make 'em...

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

Pokerface

If I never see that argument again, it will be too soon. If the entire rest of your team dies, and you're right next to the hostages, you're just as boned.

The argument could be made that NOT being at the hostages with the rest of your team dead is a greater tactical advantage, as the CTs would need to be watching every corner on their way to the rescue points.

__________________

NS Game Officer. TF2 Admin. BF2 Admin / Scripter. PM with issues.
Tempus: Pokerface is nailing it right on the head. Everyone who is arguing against him is simply arguing against reality.
<anmuzi> it is not permitted to have privacy or anonymity
<LazyEye> yeah when I play on TG the server digs though my trash
Arm yourself with knowledge: TG NS TF2 BF2

RandomGuy

Give me a break, pokerface. If your entire team dies defending the hostages and you weren't in a position to help sway the outcome of that battle then you are not helping your team as much as possible.

Basic strategy tells us that if the attackers have two players and they encounter one enemy on the way to the hostages and one on the way back they are far more likely to succeed than if they encounter two enemies at the same time. It's not a stretch to extrapolate that to more players.

Now, this is ignoring all the details of whatever defensive position you are in, but you can't convince me that being at the car is so advantageous as to put your team at such a disadvantage.

Pokerface

I'll call BS on that.

There are myriad good reasons why you would be at one place while your team got slaughtered nearby and you couldn't get there in time. If you're camping above the apartments, and the enemy team rushes long hall, five bodies could hit the ground before you round that corner back to the house.

You make plans as a team, even though you execute alone. If your team's plan says go forth and be fruitful, and they end up getting slaughtered as you camp the OTHER choke point, then life sucks. Similarly, if the plan is for you to shoot every shot through a hostage's legs, and your team ends up getting slaughtered outside the hostage area, then life STILL sucks.

__________________

NS Game Officer. TF2 Admin. BF2 Admin / Scripter. PM with issues.
Tempus: Pokerface is nailing it right on the head. Everyone who is arguing against him is simply arguing against reality.
<anmuzi> it is not permitted to have privacy or anonymity
<LazyEye> yeah when I play on TG the server digs though my trash
Arm yourself with knowledge: TG NS TF2 BF2

Root

Huh?

When your team starts losing people, you must fall back to the objective. Thats non-negotiable. WInning isn't as important as playing PCS. Yes its nice, but PCS > winning.. If CT's tag the hostages, you've failed. You might then stop them from getting to the rescue point, but you still haven't guarded them properly.

Root

__________________

Karkianman101

Okay, this issue needs some readdressing after tonight.

You can leave any boundaries (YES! THEY EXIST FFS!*sigh*) for RECON. RECON. Say it again: RECON.

You may leave the objective if you have the spare manpower to GATHER INTELLIGENCE. However, if you see enemies, DO NOT ENGAGE. DO NOT KILL HUNT. Fall back if you are seen, do not try and kill them in the direct sense of the word. If you see them, one of WASD should be firmly held down, in the direction of the objective.

Restatement: Do not leave the boundaries that do exist in the aims of confrontation. If those aims should fail, relay intel and get the kfuc out of there, back to the objective, ASAP.

RandomGuy

Then you are saying being on top of the apartments is worth the cost of your team being a man down. I would disagree in general but rational minds can disagree. I don't think anyone can say the same thing about being down by the car.

Karkianman101

Lets put it this way: you should not put yourself in a position where you can and will likely be cut off from the objective. It is UNlikely that the hall will be rushed and the rest of your team will immediately die. It IS likely that if you are running around CT spawn and the CT's rush long hall, the entirety of your team may be taken out before you arrive. As an example, me and ninja were at apts, and there was a hall rush. Within 5 seconds, me and ninja turned and fired on long hall, and the rest of our team died while the CT's were like 4 strong. In that case, we ran back to CT spawn to intercept. Yeah, we failed part 1, but that was an UNlikely scenario, so it had merit.

SephirothValentine

This thread is still alive... wow.

__________________


- "Children in the back seat cause accidents, accidents in the back seat cause children."
- "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

~ SephVal <--> TG-303rd Master Sergeant (MSG) <--> Distinguished Sniper - Class I


~ COD4 Sniper <--> Owner of the Golden Dragunov

SephirothValentine

People don't know there PCS

__________________


- "Children in the back seat cause accidents, accidents in the back seat cause children."
- "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

~ SephVal <--> TG-303rd Master Sergeant (MSG) <--> Distinguished Sniper - Class I


~ COD4 Sniper <--> Owner of the Golden Dragunov

Mateo

Or THEIR grammar! LOLOL.

SephirothValentine

Bah... Internet = Most don't care for grammer.

I do usually but not when I'm tired :P

__________________


- "Children in the back seat cause accidents, accidents in the back seat cause children."
- "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

~ SephVal <--> TG-303rd Master Sergeant (MSG) <--> Distinguished Sniper - Class I


~ COD4 Sniper <--> Owner of the Golden Dragunov

SephirothValentine

Actually when I first typed that I used it correctly then edited the wrong way

__________________


- "Children in the back seat cause accidents, accidents in the back seat cause children."
- "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

~ SephVal <--> TG-303rd Master Sergeant (MSG) <--> Distinguished Sniper - Class I


~ COD4 Sniper <--> Owner of the Golden Dragunov