Xen

All I can say is, not much has changed since I left. This whole thread sounds to me as a way to justify rushing. Tactical Advance, or whatever you want to call it, still does the same thing as normal plain old rushing, which I was always arguing about in the past. If the T's rush a bombsite, then the CT's are in disarray. This is how it's always been in CCS. If you can get them to think your rushing one bombsite and stealthly hit the other, now that's a tactic that's beyond any Pub Server. Just my two on it.

__________________
Curiosity is going to kill this Cat.

Root

Excellent post. Welcome back, Xen.

__________________

Vulcan

Good post xen and good to play with you again!

__________________

Black_V!per

I was always against rushing, but xen is right, faking a rush with a 2 man stealth attack to a different bomb site sounds like a great idea. I'll have to keep that in mind with a full server.

__________________

Root

There are 2 key components to a fake rush, that I see consistantly ignored on our server.

1. The team carrying out the fake rush are NOT required to kill CT's, merely to create panic. The panic should be sufficient that the CT's scream for backup, thus leaving the real target site nearly or completely undefended.

2. The team carrying out the fake rush are NOT expected to die. Their mission is to be ready to exfiltrate WITHOUT going through the remaining OpFor, as soon as the bomber has planted. The bomber should be given terse updates, with a plant warning just the same as if he were warning is team that he was going to put a nade out.

The fake team should be using proper tactics to withdraw from the decoy site. All routes are valid for the CT's at that point, so withdrawing by leapfrog is the perfect solution.

__________________

What Is Schwa?

I feel this point is merely brushing the tip of the iceburg.

The "Fake Rush" or "Distracton" is designed to falesly present yourself as a greater force. In my oppinion, one person can do this just fine. Armed with full grens a single person can give the impression of up to three players, and hopefully draw more defenders to that bombsite.

Designating half your team to the "fake rush" is a poor tactic.

-Aaron

Root

I disagree. I'm not the only player here, who counts the type and quantity of nades that go off. If you hear 6 or 7 smokes go off, then it follows that 6 or 7 players MUST be present. That's far more incentive for the other team to come running, than just a couple of flashes, a smoke and an HE.

__________________

What Is Schwa?

Sure, but you can always run back to the buyzone and buy grens, and 90 seconds is a very, very long time. On d2 I could throw 20 smokes in that time. This would especially confuse someone like you who associates 1 smoke = 1 person.

-Aaron

Gogeta

You are correct sir.... I would also easily pick up on a spammer, as the nades would be obviously too spread out to actually think its more then one person.. and everyone is waiting 10 seconds to throw something lol

__________________
|TG-4th| Gogeta

What Is Schwa?

<sigh> Well, that's why I count on you guys either being on my team, or nowhere near my distraction.

I've played on this server long enough and heard enough "ThEY aRe ALL riGHt HeRE!! BAckUp NOWwwW!!!11one1" to know it doesn't take much to fool the rest of yas.

I just count on one person relaying bad info.

-Aaron

Root

roflmao. Thanks for appreciating the tactical minds that you game with.

__________________

KingTubby.561

You guys talk about rushing being bad. As in not tactical... What is the the real diff between a "tactical assault" and a "rush" on the TG server? I have seen while playing with the regulars on TG that there is no rush that wasnt planed out. 45 secs to plan calls for a well planed rush... As long as you have people that know what there doing that is.

Distractions are a normal thing for me, smoke and flash one way then go another, or even send the whole team one way then just take the bomber and one other person to an alternate route, like you guys have been saying. All this i found to be effective on the TG server.

Also, i found if you keep all the same players on a map, the basic game of css turns into a tactical mind game between teams. esp if you know all the regulars on the other side. Therfore, i found if you tried all of the above, a full out planed "rush" would blow the minds of the opposing team and would not see that coming. I.E. sure win.

Maybe this is considered cheap? Or not tactical? but when a game turns into predicting what the other team is gonna do, I'm going to try and fool you.

Root

Correct. Rushing = bad. I'll leave you to make use of the forum search facility, in order to find previous discussion on this.

__________________

QuantumDelta

It's impossible to create a credible diversion against a knowledgeable and reasoned opponent in a game like this, the game follows certain rules and restrictions for single players, so at the very minimum to create a credible fake rush you need two, to three members of a squad to be present throwing nades/placing a few decent shots.

However counterstrike is not Rainbow six, delicate planning can completely go to waste because of one skilled CS player (read; tactically and strategically minded, as well as situationally aware and level headed, some good old fashion FPS twitch gaming comes in handy to boot). If you are playing at a high skill level then knowing all of the firepoints and covered arcs, as well as the rush points on a map is more or less all there is to the map from that point on the map itself is self-explanatory, no matter what your opponents do.

For example if you find yourself alone on a map vs a full team of opponents because your original team got caught in a cross fire due to a bad call, it is still (remotely) possible to get a plant in, or get away with the hossies (much harder) should the defence be confined by their objectives, simply because (especially in DE and VIP maps where one T can pick off a VIP as easily as 10, or) a thinly spread defence force to cover both objectives and all approaches quickly leads to isolation and death if they're just waiting at the strategic points in the map for their 'prey' - who will know exactly, where those points are.

Root

That's not always the case. A lot of us know each others styles well enough that if, for example, I'm identified as leading an offenisve team, you can pretty much rule out a rush at all. I don't like them - the most likely outcome of a rush is deathmatch. We start playing mind games when we know (assume) who's running the other team. When I call down the rush of the almighty, there's a good chance the OpFor won't be prepared for it, because it's not a plan you expect from me.

Last night on havana, Ben proposed a plan and when we switched teams, some evil git (dirtboy?) suggested we use Bens plan against him. It totally blew goats, but it could have worked, and the T's certainly weren't expecting it.

Knowing all the approaches isn't always enough. Sometimes, killing the guy who's calling the plan can turn the tide (granted that's luck given the absence of a neon sign above the commanders head).

Nice post though. +rep for you.

__________________