Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Limilts on Dust 2 ?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Limilts on Dust 2 ?

    I have a question that seems to be in major dispute:

    Dust 2 map boundries for CT?

    For a year moths of playing dust and dust 2, I thought the Ct boundries were the DD long A and middle, and the tunnel at B. But when I played a game about 2 months ago, I was seeing well known players and admins on CT (while I was on T) running up middle to the tree and thru DD middle up stairs to B from the back. I had a big discussion / argument with them and they all said that the boundries were up to the tree in middle and that going to B from the middle up the stairs is legit. I was really dumbfounded but I soon adopted those boundries to my own playing style.
    I was playing with those boundries tonite and several TG players were giving me a hard time about my boundries. I decided, upon their request, to hold off on my boundry limits since they seemed unaware and unpracticed to the limits that I was following.
    Basically, my question is what are the real boundries for server 1 dust 2?
    Thanks,
    Ben




    All I ask for is communication

  • #2
    Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

    Haha this is the best question ever! I don't even know.

    Every admin I've been around with (which is 9v, Mateo an Fenix) have all said that the boundaries you stated (The tree, the dd and the T side of the tunnel) are the true boundaries. I can't wait to find out the truth.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

      I'm very interested to know aswell. I thought, and it would seem logical, that the B tunnel was offlimits to CT's, and that the CT's couldn't go past DD in mid. Is this not the case?

      ... Also....

      On a similar note, I'd like to know the official boundaries for Office. I always believed that the Back Office was off limits, and you could only go down first flight of stairs on the side garage tunnel. Is this true?

      Oh, and is there an Official TG Map Boundaries post of some kind? If not, could one be compiled?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

        For Dust2 I've always heard and played like the limit was DD long A, T-Side B tunnel, and for middle just not too close to T spawn. For Office, I've always believed it was everything that has a carpet. This means yes back Office, no to any stairs, and no jumping on window sills.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

          There are no boundaries on our servers. You are there to support your team in completing it's objective. If you're doing that with a high standard of communication, you can't go wrong.

          To the best of my knowledge, I've played dust2 with everyone who's posted in this thread so far, so I'm confused as to why this has come up.

          Get the boundaries out of your heads, because they just don't come into this map. Both sites can be secured before the T's get there, so immediately the only thing CT's should be doing is heading via the fastest route. The tree in the middle and the tunnel at B don't feature anywhere in doing this. Once the sites are secure, do you have any reason to move? I'm not telling you the answer is cast in stone, but isn't your job to remain at the site and wait for the lambs to come to the slaughter?

          Of course there are reasons for not sitting right on the bomb sites, and even better reasons for not doing so every single round. Anyone who reads this knows who the real PCS players are - watch, listen, learn. Then question those players as to why they took those actions.

          Root
          BFCL TF2 league admin

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

            Originally posted by Lazarus
            Oh, and is there an Official TG Map Boundaries post of some kind? If not, could one be compiled?
            Not going to happen. The reason is that PCS requires some flexibility.

            For example, normally, we tell players to stay on the carpet in cs_off, which would barr being up on the windowsill....however, if the T's are getting repeatedly abused by a sniper on those positions, then it would make good tactical sense to cover that weakness. If we made that a hard rule, then T's wouldn't be able to do that.

            The same with dust2.

            I don't agree with the tree as the boundary off A, It seems to me that CT's can cover a quite sufficiently from long A, short A, and middle. Going past the doors on long A smacks of kill-hunting, since it leaves the two other approaches open.

            The tunnel off B, however, is ok. CTs can go through the double doors, to the crate, and bang the right into the tunnels. CT's can also jump the crate, and proceed left to A via short A as a flanking maneuver.

            Further than that, and you are off objective.

            Once the CTs are in the tunnel, they cannot go left towards T spawn, they can only use the tunnel to achive the objective: either to guard the bombsite, or defuse the bomb.

            You could set up a defense in the tunnel, but it's not manageable. You turn a defense of three positions (tunnel, doors, rocks) to four (door to T spawn, doors, rocks, stairs).

            It's safer from a complete the objective standpoint to defend the bombsite directly, since the coverage distance is reduced. 3 CTs a B bombsite with grenades can adequately defend the site.

            Hope that answers the dust2 question.

            Generally, Root is correct: under PCS, there are no boundaries. We tend to enforce some loose boundaries on server 1 to make it easier to explain to newcomers how we play. Just think "what makes sense as a fair way to achieve the objective?" and you will be ok.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

              Just to recap on this, your objective is guarding the bombsites, not going to the nearest chokepoint the T's hit. Those middle routes are usually used to move from one side to another quickly and aren't a major point for CT's to focus without the proper knowledge that T's are concetrated there. Otherwise your leaving yourself open to all kinds of beat down.

              If you notice that your team is playing very un-PCS like, take the high road and have your team try to understand that guarding the bombsite first then expanding as needed helps people stick together and learn more.


              - -

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

                I will always use the middle DD right to the B tunnel whwn i know that the T's are coming to B from their spawn, as this is a very good and logical "sandwich" flanking position to take. As long as this has been cleared up, which it has, then I am going to use it when necessary. But, if people start complaining that I am doing it then i want it forever cast in the holy electronic word that i have asked, received various answers along a similar theme and am in the clear to proceed when the tactic calls for it. this is how I play the game always.
                Thanks




                All I ask for is communication

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

                  The biggest problem when the only entrance to A is through CT spawn: what happens when the Ts are securing the site? If they came from Short A, you are just walking to your death with no way of winning- they are watching from the top and killing you as you come around.

                  If you go from Short A at least you still have a chance.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

                    Originally posted by AzzMan
                    The biggest problem when the only entrance to A is through CT spawn: what happens when the Ts are securing the site? If they came from Short A, you are just walking to your death with no way of winning- they are watching from the top and killing you as you come around.

                    If you go from Short A at least you still have a chance.
                    I almost ALWAYS go Short A, when heading from B to a planted bomb at A. I cannot stand that small hill, where they can be above/behind/beside/below you. I feel I can handle situations much better when going from Short to A, instead of attacking the gauntlet. Plus that's just asking for a flank.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

                      About there being no boundaries: yeah. I kinda realize that. However, there are areas where it is extremely unlikely during normal play that a CT should be, and some areas where it may not be directly guarding the bombsite, but it is indirectly, because it is securing yet another flank where the people at the bombsites wont have to worry about.

                      Its just easier to call "limits of objective based intent during normal gameplay" boundaries. When I say boundaries, I mean whats in the quotes.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

                        I think we still need some writeup on boundaries, since it will be much esier to resolve disputes and point newcomers to right direction .. all the conflicts that I've ever seen recently - almost all of them had "boundaries interpretation" in it is core..
                        Boundaries are not for us - they are for the admins to rule out some tricky situations ..

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

                          I don't like the idea of writing up boundries, but I see it as the only way for the server to function. Even though technically there are no boundries and it's all about working tactically and communicating with your team, as soon as some t-admin or admin gets killed on the opposite team, they'll throw a fit and start kicking (at least from what I've seen that's usually what happens). Since there are so many t-admins, there are alot of different interpretations of the rules. As long as there are so many different interpretations, not having written up boundries is going to continue to cause alot of controversy.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

                            Originally posted by cyber$haman
                            I think we still need some writeup on boundaries, since it will be much esier to resolve disputes and point newcomers to right direction .. all the conflicts that I've ever seen recently - almost all of them had "boundaries interpretation" in it is core..
                            Boundaries are not for us - they are for the admins to rule out some tricky situations ..
                            Can I just refer you (and Bruce) to post #5 in this thread. It should answer both your posts.

                            Root
                            BFCL TF2 league admin

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Limilts on Dust 2 ?

                              Originally posted by Karkianman101
                              Its just easier to call "limits of objective based intent during normal gameplay" boundaries. When I say boundaries, I mean whats in the quotes.
                              That's easier? :icon12: :icon19: :icon25:

                              Ok, maybe this will help you guys, maybe it won't.

                              While there are no boundaries, you can picture the defensive team being attached to the objective via some weak force. It can be "the force", bungee, whatever makes it easier for you to visualize.

                              At the objective, there is no tension on this weak force.

                              The further away from the objective you get, the more force is required to keep you there, until you get to the point where in terms of covering the objective, the tension is at maximum.

                              That's about as far as you can reasonably go and still cover the objectives.

                              Every map and situation is different, but the idea is that a PCS player can sense how far they are from the objective, and have an reasonable tactic for being there, or will retreat to the point where their position relative to the objective creates an acceptable tradeoff between the tension of providing an adequate defense and the weak attraction of covering the objective.

                              Notice, if you follow that last line through to it's conclusion, the fewer member of your team remains, the more the tradeoff is weighted towards the objective, and not defense.

                              Let's look at how this works in practice:

                              We all know cs_italy quite well.

                              So relative to the objective the weak bounds are....the door or roof of apartments, the end of long hall, and the crate at the bottom of center stairs.

                              On the roof of apartments, it may seem out of bounds. It's not, for the reason that 3 key entries to the hostage area can be covered from that position.

                              Going inside the winecellar, however is off objective. It's harder to get back up the stairs to cover the center patio area, and there is a high probability of being flanked while you are in there. The same coverage can be provided from the stairs, without creating unnecessary "tension" relative to the objective. Think someone is down there? Drop some frags and call for backup.

                              Similarly, the further down long hall you get, the less able you are to cover the objective, and the more force required to keep you there.

                              At the end of long hall, the PCS player knows that without some valid tactical reason for being there, the same coverage could be provided from the doorway, the window, or the tree in the middle with a greater chance of successfully achieving the objective with less risk to the player and the team.

                              Like you say, Kark, there are some areas where a defender cannot be and still be covering the objective. PCS players can sense this tension between the objective, and their position relative to it, and compensate for it as necessary.

                              I hope that helps, although it may generate more questions than answers.

                              Just let the objective be your guide, and you can't go wrong.

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X