Server 2: Are there boundaries? - Page 4

**Wyzcrak** · 05-27-2005, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

rational minds can disagree

* applause *

Random, you continue to have a head level enough to build a bookshelf by.

**Xen** · 05-27-2005, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karkianman101

It is UNlikely that the hall will be rushed and the rest of your team will immediately die.

First off the whole point of the start I brought up is to force the CT's up long hall. Control your enemy, so you can fight under your terms not thiers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karkianman101

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.

No where in my example is the recon/chokepoint person going to CT spawn, nor is that the unspoken intent. If they encounter heavy resistance they are to move up the middle hall, which takes exactly the same ammount of time as running from the roof, I timed it. So this arguement that the roof is ok and the other is not can not be based on response time. Plus your about to get closer to the hostages under cover.

Root and I discussed this strat on server two lastnight, and came to a consenus. Putting two people down there would be too much but one with a scope or whatever would be viable. Not something for the pub server mind you, this is an advanced strat. But no where is it in violation for pcs, aslong as there is full communication (which is lacking now adays), trust in your teammates (seems to be non exsistant), and your playing your objectives. This whole thing about objective is not a chokepoint or anything like that is not fully valid. You have to stop the offensive team at some point, which becomes a "chokepoint".

All I did was bring up one that pushes the Noob boundries because I saw an oppertunity for clarification of PCS, and to see if as the name of this thread intends are there really boundries. And from what I've gathered with all the bitterness and anger the issue is far from resolved. No where have I said this is what I did or this is what that person did. This strat was a thought exeriment so we, as a community, could hash out the above question. I thought I was helping everyone but it appears as soon as you push the comfort zone around here, people, instead of talking it through, just lash out. There are certain people I would have in mind when using this strat, Batman with scout, sniper. Ninja, Swoop. These people are good at what they do, and putting one down there could fesiblely shut that area down unless it's completely rushed, even then the CT's wouldn't get away unscathed.

**asch** · 05-27-2005, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xen

All I did was bring up one that pushes the Noob boundries because I saw an oppertunity for clarification of PCS, and to see if as the name of this thread intends are there really boundries. And from what I've gathered with all the bitterness and anger the issue is far from resolved. No where have I said this is what I did or this is what that person did. This strat was a thought exeriment so we, as a community, could hash out the above question. I thought I was helping everyone but it appears as soon as you push the comfort zone around here, people, instead of talking it through, just lash out.

Raising questions like you have brought up is great for the community. It provides a means for us to educate the populace about PCS. Having scenarios that are theoretical or actualy provides for some great examples and the more we have the better chance that people will begin to understand.

There will always be people to disagree with the strategy used in any scenario and we just need to work around that. There are always "but what if..." responses and those can be broken down further. But in the end I hope the point about objectives, teamwork, communication, game/map limitations and the like are made. We should learn by both talking about these situations and trying them out in-game. There is nothing wrong about making a mistake in-game or having the wrong idea about PCS. The problem is when we don't learn from those mistakes and try to correct ourselves.

**CingularDuality** · 05-27-2005, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xen

Not something for the pub server mind you, this is an advanced strat. But no where is it in violation for pcs, aslong as there is full communication (which is lacking now adays), trust in your teammates (seems to be non exsistant), and your playing your objectives. This whole thing about objective is not a chokepoint or anything like that is not fully valid. You have to stop the offensive team at some point, which becomes a "chokepoint".

You're wrong here. The objective for the Ts on Italy is to defend the hostages. Period. It's never your team's objective to "prevent the CTs from going through the wine cellar". That may be a tactic that you attempt to use in order to accomplish your objective, but let's be very clear that that is NOT your objective.

So, whether or not sending a T down to that ol' car is a decision that compromises a solid defense. Unlike guarding the apartments, you're more than just a few feet away from having a line of sight on the hostage house.

So, again, I think it's a bad tactic. I would never have someone on my team doing it. I do not think that having someone there is un-PCS. I absolutely think that the reasons that you tried to use, Xen, are not PCS.

If defending chokepoints were the objective, it would be simple to keep the offensive team bottled up in their spawn on certain maps. That would certainly keep them from their objective, right? That's not how we play here, though. Defensive team DEFENDS, and the offensive team ATTACKS. Not the other way around...

**CingularDuality** · 05-27-2005, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asch

Raising questions like you have brought up is great for the community. It provides a means for us to educate the populace about PCS. Having scenarios that are theoretical or actualy provides for some great examples and the more we have the better chance that people will begin to understand.

There will always be people to disagree with the strategy used in any scenario and we just need to work around that. There are always "but what if..." responses and those can be broken down further. But in the end I hope the point about objectives, teamwork, communication, game/map limitations and the like are made. We should learn by both talking about these situations and trying them out in-game. There is nothing wrong about making a mistake in-game or having the wrong idea about PCS. The problem is when we don't learn from those mistakes and try to correct ourselves.

Absolutely. I hope it doesn't seem like I'm angry or anything when I disagree with you, Xen. I just want people to understand PCS better and situations that involve subtleties are sometimes very good ways to explain it.

Root · 05-27-2005, 01:09 PM

Here's a thought.....

You're playing a normal game on server 2 and you're a CT. Your team just flew out of spawn heading to choke points and bomb sites.. Various people then go moving forwards, they might even communicate this to their team. After its too late, someone on your team notices that with all the moving forwards, and the lack of co-ordination, that one or both bomb sites don't have enough protection. It's too late because the T's have made their move, and taken down a lone CT that was looking for kills but justifying their position as recon. Because the communication is so poor, and the CT had no backup, he didn't get a warning out to his team. The T's storm past the corpse, pick a couple of CT's that are between them and their target site, and plant.

These T's aren't necessarilty PCS players, but they're all over the bomb site your team is meant to be guarding. You and your team mates drop what you're doing, rush to the bomb site and die, because those T's that are all over the place have you completely outgunned, and they've had the time it took you to realise the bomb was planted, reaslise where it was planted, and travel the distance to said bombsite just to take cover.

Lets try that again.....

You're playing a normal game on server 2 and you're a CT. So what if it's not a captains game or tourny match? You've all agreed a team commander who has at least some talent for planning and organising. During the freezetime, they've issued orders to each member of the team. The freeze time ends and your team flies out of spawn to the positions they were assigned, and the bomb sites are locked down. As soon as you're in position, you report this, and freeze. All you do is watch your field of fire, and keep an ear out for updated orders. After the 5 minute mark comes and goes, the team commander details one person (by name) to move out and recon a specific area. Additional orders are to disengage if fired upon. This player moves forwards slowly and quietly. Everyone maintains comm silence so that if the fertilizer hits the ventilation, someone stands a chance of getting vital intel out to the team.

Recon guy makes visual contact on the T's, gets a count because the T's are too busy wondering why my first scenario isn't happening. Recon guy calls in the fact that the bomb is definitely with the group he's seen, and the group is heading in a certain direction. Team commander details 2 units from one site to move quickly via a route where they won't be seen, and pulls recon guy back to the now unlikely target site.

One of the T's gets impatient and decides to go hunting for kills, so they announce to their team they're going to do some recon. One dead T later, CT's have a numbers advantage, and the T's have no intel. The clocks ticking all the time. The objective is to get that bomb planted, and sit on it until it detonates. Not knowing whats going on, and in true deathmatch style, the T's try pressing forwards with an assault instead of genuine recon. A couple more dead T's later and they back off. Now the pressures on. When the time runs out, the T's lose. The CT's have a 2-1 numbers advantage now. They've used the best cover and concealment available to them at the sites, and then they send another recon guy out. Did I mention the clocks ticking? Sooner or later either the T's realise this, and rush a site (and probably die), or they spend so long trying to figure out how to overcome the odds that the timer runs out on them.

You'll notice I managed all of that without reference to any particular map or using the word boundaries. If you think about it, the T's and CT's roles in the above can be switched if its a hostage map and the result is still the same. Yes there are other valid tactics than camping right on the objective. However, if you make the target appear extremely difficult by sheer numbers, *and* use all the things we require of PCS such as communication and team work, those numbers have a greater effect.

Moving forwards to engage the offensive team pretty much equates to fighting on their battleground. Staying back, having clear and concise communication, working as a team to carry out a substantial plan, carrying out *genuine* recon, making the offense come to you, and playing for the round timer to get to zero is more likely to mean a win for your team that you don't have to die for.

Root

**SephirothValentine** · 05-27-2005, 04:22 PM

And it goes on...... My oh my.... Let the debate continue. Or whatever you may call it!

**Xen** · 05-27-2005, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Root

Lets try that again.....

You're playing a normal game on server 2 and you're a CT. So what if it's not a captains game or tourny match? You've all agreed a team commander who has at least some talent for planning and organising. During the freezetime, they've issued orders to each member of the team. The freeze time ends and your team flies out of spawn to the positions they were assigned, and the bomb sites are locked down. As soon as you're in position, you report this, and freeze. All you do is watch your field of fire, and keep an ear out for updated orders. After the 5 minute mark comes and goes, the team commander details one person (by name) to move out and recon a specific area. Additional orders are to disengage if fired upon. This player moves forwards slowly and quietly. Everyone maintains comm silence so that if the fertilizer hits the ventilation, someone stands a chance of getting vital intel out to the team.

Recon guy makes visual contact on the T's, gets a count because the T's are too busy wondering why my first scenario isn't happening. Recon guy calls in the fact that the bomb is definitely with the group he's seen, and the group is heading in a certain direction. Team commander details 2 units from one site to move quickly via a route where they won't be seen, and pulls recon guy back to the now unlikely target site.

One of the T's gets impatient and decides to go hunting for kills, so they announce to their team they're going to do some recon. One dead T later, CT's have a numbers advantage, and the T's have no intel. The clocks ticking all the time. The objective is to get that bomb planted, and sit on it until it detonates. Not knowing whats going on, and in true deathmatch style, the T's try pressing forwards with an assault instead of genuine recon. A couple more dead T's later and they back off. Now the pressures on. When the time runs out, the T's lose. The CT's have a 2-1 numbers advantage now. They've used the best cover and concealment available to them at the sites, and then they send another recon guy out. Did I mention the clocks ticking? Sooner or later either the T's realise this, and rush a site (and probably die), or they spend so long trying to figure out how to overcome the odds that the timer runs out on them.

You'll notice I managed all of that without reference to any particular map or using the word boundaries. If you think about it, the T's and CT's roles in the above can be switched if its a hostage map and the result is still the same. Yes there are other valid tactics than camping right on the objective. However, if you make the target appear extremely difficult by sheer numbers, *and* use all the things we require of PCS such as communication and team work, those numbers have a greater effect.

Moving forwards to engage the offensive team pretty much equates to fighting on their battleground. Staying back, having clear and concise communication, working as a team to carry out a substantial plan, carrying out *genuine* recon, making the offense come to you, and playing for the round timer to get to zero is more likely to mean a win for your team that you don't have to die for.

Root

Thank you Root for this discription, The recon guy in the second example is what I was trying to bring up in my examples. The fact that if someone if found in an advanced postition, he might be there for very good reasons. And to assume just because he's there, he needs to banned, kicked or whatever get's people into trouble. As a supporting member, I have to make descussions where there are these "grey" areas. This is only when there are no admins on and people are asking for action. But, I still have a duty to perform and will do it. I even enjoy it..... I've said too much.....

-Root I do have one thing that I disagree with about your example being used for bomb map. It would be nice to have recon on bomb maps, but you are already spread thin having two sites to cover. On hostage maps, all the T's are "in one spot" which is where recon and such would be of more use and more valid. IMO.....

-Cing I'm not angry or anything, I love a good solid debate, I may have read some hostility into some prior posts and maybe there is.... To that I say this...... IT"S A GAME..... it's ment to have fun and be entertaining..... If it's not fun step away from the keyboard go for a walk and do something/anything that makes you happy.

lastly anyone that cares to claim that I try and play anything other than PCS, is crazy. Sure some of my examples push the rules but I have never tried any of them before hand. When I discussed the above example with Root on server 2 there was no one in it at the time I was looking it over. And it was well after I even posted it to this thread. Yes, I'm a rookie to PCS, but I hardly ever get talked to by anyone that I've broken PCS in any way.

Root · 05-27-2005, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xen

-Root I do have one thing that I disagree with about your example being used for bomb map. It would be nice to have recon on bomb maps, but you are already spread thin having two sites to cover. On hostage maps, all the T's are "in one spot" which is where recon and such would be of more use and more valid. IMO.....

Have another read, and a rethink that. If both sites are clear for a substantial amount of time, recon is a logical move from a tactical point of view. 3 guys can secure a bomb site against a team of 7 at least long enough for backup to arrive. Everyone has read the SOP forum, so they all know backup is to arrive from the fastest route.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xen

lastly anyone that cares to claim that I try and play anything other than PCS, is crazy. Yes, I'm a rookie to PCS, but I hardly ever get talked to by anyone that I've broken PCS in any way.

You correctly state that you are new to PCS, so how can you be so certain that you only play PCS? Shouldn't that be a judgement made by people like CIng, Wyz and Apophis, who are long time PCS players? You probably don't get spoken to about rule breaking, but have you considered that your general attitude and playstyle might not be PCS, but *are* appropriate enough that no-one pays much attention to you when they are looking for frag monkeys and such like?

Root

**Xen** · 05-27-2005, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Root

So how can you be so certain that you only play PCS? Shouldn't that be a judgement made by people like CIng, Wyz and Apophis, who are long time PCS players? You probably don't get spoken to about rule breaking, but have you considered that your general attitude and playstyle might not be PCS, but *are* appropriate enough that no-one pays much attention to you when they are looking for frag monkeys and such like?

Root

Sorry my grammer is bad, what I ment was I try to play PCS. And if there is a problem with my playing style at any time I want people to say something, even if it's minor. It's a matter of correcting misunderstandings that is needed more. Please don't assume I'm hunting for kills if I screw up.

**CingularDuality** · 05-27-2005, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xen

Sorry my grammer is bad, what I ment was I try to play PCS. And if there is a problem with my playing style at any time I want people to say something, even if it's minor. It's a matter of correcting misunderstandings that is needed more. Please don't assume I'm hunting for kills if I screw up.

Glad you brought this up! This isn't aimed at you, but rather is intended for everyone.

Depending on the mistake, I sometimes slay players and then explain why. Don't take this personally. I didn't do it because I didn't like you. I did it because you were messing up. Learn from it and become a better PCS player. That's what I'm trying to do every time I take admin action: make that player a better PCS player.

We all make mistakes. Yes, all of us. Keep that in mind. We all have things to learn about how to play PCS better.

**Wyzcrak** · 05-28-2005, 01:01 AM

I don't make mistaks.

Zephyr · 05-28-2005, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyzcrak

I don't make mistaks.

me eiter.
-Zephyr

Root · 05-28-2005, 10:55 AM

The standard of humour in the CSS forum has definitely gone south.

Root

05-27-2005, 01:09 PM	#51 (permalink)
Root Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: South east england Posts: 8,839	Re: Server 2: Are there boundaries? Here's a thought..... You're playing a normal game on server 2 and you're a CT. Your team just flew out of spawn heading to choke points and bomb sites.. Various people then go moving forwards, they might even communicate this to their team. After its too late, someone on your team notices that with all the moving forwards, and the lack of co-ordination, that one or both bomb sites don't have enough protection. It's too late because the T's have made their move, and taken down a lone CT that was looking for kills but justifying their position as recon. Because the communication is so poor, and the CT had no backup, he didn't get a warning out to his team. The T's storm past the corpse, pick a couple of CT's that are between them and their target site, and plant. These T's aren't necessarilty PCS players, but they're all over the bomb site your team is meant to be guarding. You and your team mates drop what you're doing, rush to the bomb site and die, because those T's that are all over the place have you completely outgunned, and they've had the time it took you to realise the bomb was planted, reaslise where it was planted, and travel the distance to said bombsite just to take cover. Lets try that again..... You're playing a normal game on server 2 and you're a CT. So what if it's not a captains game or tourny match? You've all agreed a team commander who has at least some talent for planning and organising. During the freezetime, they've issued orders to each member of the team. The freeze time ends and your team flies out of spawn to the positions they were assigned, and the bomb sites are locked down. As soon as you're in position, you report this, and freeze. All you do is watch your field of fire, and keep an ear out for updated orders. After the 5 minute mark comes and goes, the team commander details one person (by name) to move out and recon a specific area. Additional orders are to disengage if fired upon. This player moves forwards slowly and quietly. Everyone maintains comm silence so that if the fertilizer hits the ventilation, someone stands a chance of getting vital intel out to the team. Recon guy makes visual contact on the T's, gets a count because the T's are too busy wondering why my first scenario isn't happening. Recon guy calls in the fact that the bomb is definitely with the group he's seen, and the group is heading in a certain direction. Team commander details 2 units from one site to move quickly via a route where they won't be seen, and pulls recon guy back to the now unlikely target site. One of the T's gets impatient and decides to go hunting for kills, so they announce to their team they're going to do some recon. One dead T later, CT's have a numbers advantage, and the T's have no intel. The clocks ticking all the time. The objective is to get that bomb planted, and sit on it until it detonates. Not knowing whats going on, and in true deathmatch style, the T's try pressing forwards with an assault instead of genuine recon. A couple more dead T's later and they back off. Now the pressures on. When the time runs out, the T's lose. The CT's have a 2-1 numbers advantage now. They've used the best cover and concealment available to them at the sites, and then they send another recon guy out. Did I mention the clocks ticking? Sooner or later either the T's realise this, and rush a site (and probably die), or they spend so long trying to figure out how to overcome the odds that the timer runs out on them. You'll notice I managed all of that without reference to any particular map or using the word boundaries. If you think about it, the T's and CT's roles in the above can be switched if its a hostage map and the result is still the same. Yes there are other valid tactics than camping right on the objective. However, if you make the target appear extremely difficult by sheer numbers, and use all the things we require of PCS such as communication and team work, those numbers have a greater effect. Moving forwards to engage the offensive team pretty much equates to fighting on their battleground. Staying back, having clear and concise communication, working as a team to carry out a substantial plan, carrying out genuine recon, making the offense come to you, and playing for the round timer to get to zero is more likely to mean a win for your team that you don't have to die for. Root __________________ BFCL TF2 league admin

05-27-2005, 04:22 PM	#52 (permalink)
SephirothValentine Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: VA Age: 21 Posts: 313	Re: Server 2: Are there boundaries? And it goes on...... My oh my.... Let the debate continue. Or whatever you may call it! __________________ - "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

05-28-2005, 01:01 AM	#57 (permalink)
Wyzcrak Join Date: May 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 14,139	Re: Server 2: Are there boundaries? I don't make mistaks. __________________ 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.

05-28-2005, 10:55 AM	#59 (permalink)
Root Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: South east england Posts: 8,839	Re: Server 2: Are there boundaries? The standard of humour in the CSS forum has definitely gone south. Root __________________ BFCL TF2 league admin

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

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links