+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 22
Discussion: Counter-Strike Source / Counter-Strike - Tactics Discussion - A discusion about Office - I'm curious about something in office. The back office where CT's go through the glass.
-
04-02-2005, 06:38 AM #1
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- Loveland, CO
- Age
- 38
- Posts
- 1,033
A discusion about Office
I'm curious about something in office. The back office where CT's go through the glass. To what tactical purpose does the T's have being in there? I know the rule states that T's can be anywhere inside and that is what I want to discuss. I feel that the T's push it by camping in there. If a CT got to the hostages a T, in the back office, would be hard pressed to know and come defend the hostages. That area is easily covered by the back hallway and the front hallway. Infact a T in the back hallway could notify anyone crossing in front of the bathrooms or rounding the corner from the back office. I guess it's like the apartments in Italy, and the fact T's can't go in there to defend the hostages. I see them as the same type of thing.
Just my two cents. Curious what others have to say.Last edited by Xen; 04-02-2005 at 08:04 AM.
-
04-02-2005, 09:55 AM #2
- Join Date
- Jul 2003
- Location
- UK
- Age
- 27
- Posts
- 1,166
Re: A discusion about Office
Playing devils advocate:
At the start of the round one T could be in there to prevent entry to the building. If team mates started dying on the other side of the map (i.e. back entrance via the garage) the T could retreat to cover the hozzies.Wintermute
Play EVE online. It's like being an accounting addict in space.
www.MakePovertyHistory.com
-
04-02-2005, 10:05 AM #3
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- MD, USA
- Age
- 33
- Posts
- 5,914
Re: A discusion about Office
It's a chokepoint, pure and simple; one of three places a CT has access to the building. Not covering it in some fashion would be foolish. Being IN there may not be the most tactically sound idea ever, but just because it's not the best option doesn't mean it's not a viable one.
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
-
04-02-2005, 10:14 AM #4
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Location
- Manhattan, New York, United States
- Age
- 33
- Posts
- 10,036
Re: A discusion about Office
Covering does not necessarily mean being in there. You can hear the glass break from the long hall. Anytime i've ever seen people back there against a good ct team, it never worked out well. It is good for scouting but making yourself a target doesn't work to well.
-
04-02-2005, 10:49 AM #5
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Posts
- 433
Re: A discusion about Office
The hostages are being kept in a building. It is well within the realm of good tactics to guard the building. It is cts job to enter the building then rescue the hostages, to give the cts the building or say that it is bad practice for ts to be in the office is a big stretch. I think the proper question should be how should cts attack the back office, not should ts even be there? How many swat teams go running with their head cut off shooting out windows and climbing into a building the way the cts do at the beginning of every round assuming that any t guarding the office is not playing properly. If I were guarding a building I would want to keep the attackers out and if that fails then fall back to a more entrenched position.
If the cts have an effective response to a t in the office, then the ts would be forced to change tactics.
-
04-02-2005, 11:17 AM #6
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- Miami, FL
- Age
- 41
- Posts
- 8,684
Re: A discusion about Office
^^^ Excellent points! ^^^
-
04-02-2005, 02:17 PM #7
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- K-W, Ont.
- Age
- 30
- Posts
- 1,842
Re: A discusion about Office
I think its quite pointless to go out into the back office. There are three windows that the CTs can enter that back office through from three different directions. It's a waste of manpower to defend all of those, plus you don't prevent CTs from coming up the front or back stairs and getting behind you or getting to the hostages. The chokepoint is not inside the back office, it is the exit from that back office by the filing cabinets or around that corner by the filing cabinets to the long hall. I estimate that one T guarding the long hall or the front hall that runs parallel is twice as effective as a T inside that back office area.
It might be worth sending one guy in there as an ambush once in a while but in general I don't like seeing my teammates go in there because it doesn't help the team.
-
04-02-2005, 02:22 PM #8
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- Dallas/Ft. Worth area of Texas, USA
- Age
- 37
- Posts
- 18,761
Re: A discusion about Office
I really think that the more important question here is: "Why is Xen using my avatar?"
I sometimes notice on my radar that some terrorists rush to those back offices right away every round. There's nothing to defend in those back rooms. The long hallway is the most effective chokepoint, along with the area near the elevators. If I die near the elevators and I spectate to find T's still over in those back offices guarding nothing, I'll slay every one of them. If you're going to push your defense out to guard chokepoints, you have to be prepared to collapse back in on the objective if/when your defense is penetrated.Become a supporting member!
Buy a Tactical Duck!
Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:
-
04-02-2005, 03:40 PM #9
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- K-W, Ont.
- Age
- 30
- Posts
- 1,842
Re: A discusion about Office
I think Apo people's old forum avatars and added them to the standard avatars in the new forums.
Originally Posted by CingularDuality
btw, this is a good thread to help make smarter tactical decisions. Does anyone know how to get the map overlays from CS source?
-
04-02-2005, 03:55 PM #10
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- Miami, FL
- Age
- 41
- Posts
- 8,684
Re: A discusion about Office
LOL. Cing, the first time I read the post, I thought it was by you. Only after coming back to it did I notice it wasn't you.. Originally Posted by CingularDuality
I really think that the more important question here is: "Why is Xen using my avatar?"
-
04-02-2005, 03:58 PM #11
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- Loveland, CO
- Age
- 38
- Posts
- 1,033
Re: A discusion about Office
CingularDuality, the avatar was able to be selected so I did. Sorry for any offense.
The back hallway is probablely the best chokepoint for covering the back office and the middle stairs. You can see them if they cross infront of the elevators in the front hall and give those covering the front entrance warning. Or, you can stop a push from the back office or hall with 3 guys. Maybe and this is a stretch IMO, have 3 gaurding front entrance 3 in back and one roamer. The roamers job is to support either the front or the back depending on where the action is.
Just another two cents.
-
04-02-2005, 04:11 PM #12
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Location
- Manhattan, New York, United States
- Age
- 33
- Posts
- 10,036
Re: A discusion about Office
i dunno how you can get the overlays random but i know you can view them with the control menu or use to, may be broken now.
-
04-02-2005, 06:27 PM #13
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Age
- 29
- Posts
- 4,799
Re: A discusion about Office
Some CTs enter the backoffice expecting no resistance. A properly hidden T can relay info about CT movement to his team, then pull a murderous flank (with or without team support) for added damage because shooting three guys in the back is not only a good kill ratio, but always gives me a warm fuzzy.
It's a high risk situation in that if the CTs are doing their job, they'll find you ASAP. But if they just run up into the main area of the backoffice, it's like shooting fish in a bucket.
It's not always tactically viable, but I have done it with some limited success in the past. It should only be done once maybe every 4-5 rounds as, unless the CTs have a learning disability, they'll just know to expect it.
Surprise can go a long way. Example: Ts were trying to rush bombsite B from the waterways underneath (I'm bad with map names, but you should all know that map with the well at B). Anyways, once I heard communication from the middle that they were diverting to A, I listened till all were past me: then jumped down the well and killed three before being TKed by Abunai's grenade (no problem, I did a poor job annoucing I was going down there, because I knew I had to act fast).
You could argue that it wasn't the best place for me to be, but I find that siezing an advantage (while still leaving 2 teammates at the bombsite) to inflict serious damage on the opposing team is well within the spirit of TG CS.
-
04-02-2005, 07:09 PM #14
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- Dallas/Ft. Worth area of Texas, USA
- Age
- 37
- Posts
- 18,761
Re: A discusion about Office
No, no offense, although I would prefer that you not use it... I was trying to be funny while pointing out that you're using my avatar... Originally Posted by Xen
Yep, I think this is a good, standard defense for Office. Originally Posted by Xen
Ah, the occasional unexpected ambush is a great tactic. But I don't think that's what we're discussing here. I tire of seeing terrorists run off over there round after round after round. People are still hung up on boundaries and I've been hoping that people's play would evolve more than it has... I'll say it again: It's not about where you are on the map, it's about why you are there... There's a difference between running around hunting for kills within some boundaries and using novel tactics to defend your objective. I see people on the server telling pubbies that the Ts have to stay inside the building. Well, that's a quick way to get them to somewhat conform to our playstyle, but that's not what we're about. It's appropriate in some situations for the defensive team to be outside the building, and there are situations where places inside the building are inappropriate for terrorists to be there... Originally Posted by TheFenix
Become a supporting member!Buy a Tactical Duck!
Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:
-
04-02-2005, 07:43 PM #15
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- I am lost, if you know where I am then please feel free to tell me.
- Age
- 32
- Posts
- 2,053
Re: A discusion about Office
IMHO office is a special kinda map that doesnt really follow along with the regular PCS rules.
As per PCS rules state, you should be defending the objective (in this case, the hostages). However, office is a special map, so it needs to be the exception to the rule. I feel, me personally, feel, that you arent really defending the hostages so much as trying to prevent the CTs from entering the building, therefore, any place *inside* the office should be free game for the Ts (within reason). If you see that your team mates in the back area are getting taken out, then you shouldnt just sit up front playing with your wacker. You should be following back to another choke point to cut them off (being in a sense, a second wave of defense).
Think of it in a real world setting. Terrorist take over an office building they're not going to sit right next to the hostages, or in the next room, or anything. They'll have two guards for the hostages to make sure they dont escape, and the rest will be patrolling the building blocking off possible entry points.
This is just my opinion, so..
Reply With QuoteThread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Bookmarks