Map Boundaries??? - Page 4

Addict · 02-11-2005, 06:36 PM

Wow. Sam, don't hold back, tell me how you really feel. Maybe just a wee bit over the top, I still liked this section(*slightly* edited)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samurai

Because then those players in an "intercept" position are:

1 - NOT in a position to back up their team and help keep them alive.

2 - NOT in an ideal position to help stop the CTs from ever getting to the hostages in the first place<snip>

3 - NOT in a position where the rest of the team can easily back them up if they need it.

4 - NOT in a position where the rest of the team can back them up without leaving the hostages unguarded<snip>

We're going to have rather conservative interpretations on boundaries/tactics for a while, until the comunity matures.

**Wyzcrak** · 02-11-2005, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceCold

I think he meant "All I can say here is that you've made an idiotic statement."

Well then he'd be well advised to say what he means and avoid personal insults, as would we all.

**Samurai** · 02-12-2005, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyzcrak

Well then he'd be well advised to say what he means and avoid personal insults, as would we all.

Now I understand why so many people left to go play elsewhere.

It's crap like this that drained the soul out of this place the last time.

If I had openly just flamed the hell of this kid, that would be one thing. My entire post consisted of solid arguments and counterpoints to his points. Then he says one thing that is so idiotic that there is simply no reasoning with it, and I call it like I see it.

Don't make it sound like my entire post consisted of "OMG U N00B TARD UR TEH STUPAD HATE U K LOLZ!"

**RandomGuy** · 02-12-2005, 04:13 PM

Relax, kimosabe. You made a personal insult and that's not helpful so it's appropriate to discourage that. Nobody edited your post, which was a very effective and helpful one. Nobody characterised the rest of your post as unhelpful.

**Samurai** · 02-13-2005, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Relax, kimosabe. You made a personal insult and that's not helpful so it's appropriate to discourage that. Nobody edited your post, which was a very effective and helpful one. Nobody characterised the rest of your post as unhelpful.

I understand that, and now that I'm calm I'll apologize for the insult, and I'll avoid repeating that mistake in the future.

Although I may have broken the letter of the rules I still stand behind my opinion that there is a time and a place for everything, and I feel that what I said was deserved, considering the context.

**CingularDuality** · 02-13-2005, 02:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samurai

Although I may have broken the letter of the rules I still stand behind my opinion that there is a time and a place for everything, and I feel that what I said was deserved, considering the context.

If I had wanted to express myself in that manner, I would have called his statement idiotic. Attack his idea, not him...

**Samurai** · 02-13-2005, 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CingularDuality

If I had wanted to express myself in that manner, I would have called his statement idiotic. Attack his idea, not him...

I said what I said because I honestly do not believe that only his ideas are idiotic. If I thought that, I would've said that.

But like I said, I'm sorry for the insult and in the future I will follow the rules.

FOX9 · 02-13-2005, 01:16 PM

......LOL I remember before when I said Thanks to all of you for posting, its making the community a better place. Not so sure now.......

J/K!!!

Although some people......
(Won't name names, I am sure it is obvious to anyone)

**Wolfie** · 02-17-2005, 11:48 PM

Correct me if I am wrong....

but isn't the priorities of the CS server Team, Objective, Kill (in that order)?

How would setting up an ambush in a position far from your team that you can not provide backup holding to the ideals of the server?

**Pokerface** · 02-18-2005, 12:48 AM

I'd have gone "Objective" first, given the discussions as of late.

**section-8** · 02-18-2005, 01:07 AM

Seeing as how "Map boundaries' is the title of this thread, Ive decided to pos(t/e) a question for you guys.

Today we were playing some Inferno on the TG server. Now ive regularly seen CT players go all the way up the middle. As long as they are transitting between bomb sites(it is the quickest way) the admins seem to be ok with it. One such instance happened today. I was all the way on the left side of the map and my teammate radioed that they were all the way over on the right(i forget which one is A and B). So I make a mad dash for the right side of the map, going up the middle to the hallway, turning right at the little sniper post and catching them all with their back turned. I have just flanked them. I proceed to shoot and kill. Blah blah blah we win the round. Upon which someone complains about my rushing. Now, I was simply transitting between bombsites. The bomb was not yet planted, i was simply answering a call for help. So, my question is: In the above situation, what would you TGers consider too far? SHould I have gone around the backside?

My personal opinion is that the middle hall is just fine for CTs any time in the map. You are far from rushing their spawn. As long as you have the bombsites in mind, that is.

**Wyzcrak** · 02-18-2005, 01:28 AM

Objective, Team, Kills.

Team, Objective, Kills.

Pick whichever you like. It seems to me you were playing PCS.

**CingularDuality** · 02-18-2005, 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by section-8

Seeing as how "Map boundaries' is the title of this thread, Ive decided to pos(t/e) a question for you guys.

Today we were playing some Inferno on the TG server. Now ive regularly seen CT players go all the way up the middle. As long as they are transitting between bomb sites(it is the quickest way) the admins seem to be ok with it. One such instance happened today. I was all the way on the left side of the map and my teammate radioed that they were all the way over on the right(i forget which one is A and B). So I make a mad dash for the right side of the map, going up the middle to the hallway, turning right at the little sniper post and catching them all with their back turned. I have just flanked them. I proceed to shoot and kill. Blah blah blah we win the round. Upon which someone complains about my rushing. Now, I was simply transitting between bombsites. The bomb was not yet planted, i was simply answering a call for help. So, my question is: In the above situation, what would you TGers consider too far? SHould I have gone around the backside?

My personal opinion is that the middle hall is just fine for CTs any time in the map. You are far from rushing their spawn. As long as you have the bombsites in mind, that is.

I don't have a problem with this, as long as it's not abused. I don't think the CTs should set their defense up in that middle alley, nor should they patrol it. If they're responding to their teammates being under attack (like you did), I think it's just fine...

**Vulcan** · 02-18-2005, 11:26 AM

Section 8 brings up an interesting point here. One thing i consider a problem with boundaries is players get to comfortable not watching their backs. This is bad imo. The team that's playing offense seems to get in a frame of mind that they only have to watch in front of them to the bombsite. This is not true, and is not tactical either. once you cross into a "neutral zone" you better have your flanks watched. When you start playing maps where boundaries are no longer an issue this is vital.

**Tempus** · 02-18-2005, 11:45 AM

The point is valid, but we must remember that one team's role is offensive, and the other's is defensive. If we were to allow unlimited flanking, particularly on bomb maps, this will reverse the roles, as once the Terrorist team is located, it will likely be pinned down on two sides. If this becomes typical, then the Ts will have to resort to rushing more often, as taking time to assault a position will be only inviting an attack from the rear.

02-12-2005, 04:13 PM	#49 (permalink)
RandomGuy Join Date: May 2003 Location: K-W, Ont. Age: 27 Posts: 1,737	Re: Map Boundaries??? Relax, kimosabe. You made a personal insult and that's not helpful so it's appropriate to discourage that. Nobody edited your post, which was a very effective and helpful one. Nobody characterised the rest of your post as unhelpful.

02-13-2005, 01:16 PM	#53 (permalink)
FOX9 Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: South Florida Age: 23 Posts: 112	Re: Map Boundaries??? ......LOL I remember before when I said Thanks to all of you for posting, its making the community a better place. Not so sure now....... J/K!!! Although some people...... (Won't name names, I am sure it is obvious to anyone) __________________ We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of the dream. Wandering by lone sea breakers, and sitting by desolate streams. World losers and world forsakers, for whom the pale moon gleams. Yet we are movers and the shakers of the world forever it seems.

02-17-2005, 11:48 PM	#54 (permalink)
Wolfie Join Date: May 2003 Location: Michigan Age: 33 Posts: 1,405	Re: Map Boundaries??? Correct me if I am wrong.... but isn't the priorities of the CS server Team, Objective, Kill (in that order)? How would setting up an ambush in a position far from your team that you can not provide backup holding to the ideals of the server?

02-18-2005, 12:48 AM	#55 (permalink)
Pokerface Join Date: May 2003 Location: MD, USA Age: 30 Posts: 5,771	Re: Map Boundaries??? I'd have gone "Objective" first, given the discussions as of late. __________________ 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

02-18-2005, 01:07 AM	#56 (permalink)
section-8 Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Okinawa Age: 25 Posts: 1,311	Re: Map Boundaries??? Seeing as how "Map boundaries' is the title of this thread, Ive decided to pos(t/e) a question for you guys. Today we were playing some Inferno on the TG server. Now ive regularly seen CT players go all the way up the middle. As long as they are transitting between bomb sites(it is the quickest way) the admins seem to be ok with it. One such instance happened today. I was all the way on the left side of the map and my teammate radioed that they were all the way over on the right(i forget which one is A and B). So I make a mad dash for the right side of the map, going up the middle to the hallway, turning right at the little sniper post and catching them all with their back turned. I have just flanked them. I proceed to shoot and kill. Blah blah blah we win the round. Upon which someone complains about my rushing. Now, I was simply transitting between bombsites. The bomb was not yet planted, i was simply answering a call for help. So, my question is: In the above situation, what would you TGers consider too far? SHould I have gone around the backside? My personal opinion is that the middle hall is just fine for CTs any time in the map. You are far from rushing their spawn. As long as you have the bombsites in mind, that is.

02-18-2005, 01:28 AM	#57 (permalink)
Wyzcrak Join Date: May 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 14,148	Re: Map Boundaries??? Objective, Team, Kills. Team, Objective, Kills. Pick whichever you like. It seems to me you were playing PCS. __________________ 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.

02-18-2005, 11:26 AM	#59 (permalink)
Vulcan Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Montreal Age: 30 Posts: 7,560	Re: Map Boundaries??? Section 8 brings up an interesting point here. One thing i consider a problem with boundaries is players get to comfortable not watching their backs. This is bad imo. The team that's playing offense seems to get in a frame of mind that they only have to watch in front of them to the bombsite. This is not true, and is not tactical either. once you cross into a "neutral zone" you better have your flanks watched. When you start playing maps where boundaries are no longer an issue this is vital.

02-18-2005, 11:45 AM	#60 (permalink)
Tempus Join Date: May 2003 Location: Miami, FL Age: 38 Posts: 8,234	Re: Map Boundaries??? The point is valid, but we must remember that one team's role is offensive, and the other's is defensive. If we were to allow unlimited flanking, particularly on bomb maps, this will reverse the roles, as once the Terrorist team is located, it will likely be pinned down on two sides. If this becomes typical, then the Ts will have to resort to rushing more often, as taking time to assault a position will be only inviting an attack from the rear.

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

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
No Boundaries? Tell me More!	lucky15234	Counter-Strike - General Discussion	78	11-09-2005 11:59 PM
Admins, T-Admins, and Boundaries.	poe	Counter-Strike - General Discussion	10	08-18-2005 12:26 PM
Server 2: Are there boundaries?	SephirothValentine	Counter-Strike - General Discussion	58	05-28-2005 11:55 AM

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links