Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

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

  • Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

    Recently on cs_parkhouse I've noticed the Terrorists often times rush across the covered bridge on the right side of the map. I realize that they are using this to flank the CT's on the Boat House, but I see this as killhunting for a couple of reasons. They are extremely far away from the hostages and they do not need to flank the CT's on the Boat House. There are plenty of spots on their side of the map and in the house that the CT's on the Boat House can't see. With that said, a tactic that I like to use when I play as a T on this map is to get across the bridge and cover that corner while a teammate sits on the bridge and covers the entrance to the Boat House. I would like all of your opinions on this. Thanks.
    The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord, when I lay my vengeance upon thee. -Ezekiel 25:17

  • #2
    Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

    Originally posted by Lt.Waters555 View Post
    Recently on cs_parkhouse I've noticed the Terrorists often times rush across the covered bridge on the right side of the map. I realize that they are using this to flank the CT's on the Boat House, but I see this as killhunting for a couple of reasons. They are extremely far away from the hostages and they do not need to flank the CT's on the Boat House. There are plenty of spots on their side of the map and in the house that the CT's on the Boat House can't see. With that said, a tactic that I like to use when I play as a T on this map is to get across the bridge and cover that corner while a teammate sits on the bridge and covers the entrance to the Boat House. I would like all of your opinions on this. Thanks.
    I agree Waters. I dont see an issue with them initially pushing up to the edge to assess numbers heading that direction and then pulling back. It is not very smart...but sometimes it catches the CTs off guard.

    Couple of issues. When you are up that far, you have NO CHANCE of backing up your team if the hostages are tagged. They can walk them right out the back door, and there is nothing you can really do about it.

    The main issue I have seen is a T setting up on the ladder on the CT side of the bridge. I understand the position if the Ts have a vast majority over the CTs (most have died or something) other than that...its a no go. Because again, if the CTs tag the hostages and move them out the back door, there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

    The only justifiable tactical reason for the Ts to be on the CT side of the map is if hostages have been tagged, their extraction neutralized, and they are stationary on that side.
    If it isn't PCS, whats the point?
    with any questions or concerns.
    |


    Aggressive Defense (an oxymoron): A naturally occurring situational event where a defender is caught in a role reversal anomaly. Usually associated with lack of practice, discipline or map awareness in a team based conflict.



    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

      I disagree. Though I do not particularly enjoy being on the receiving end of this tactic, the T's are not very far at all from hosties. In fact, they gain a great vantage point to the entrance that leads to the lower hosties as well as a vantage point against CT's sniping from the roof area of the boathouse.

      I've found that this position is key to either side. The team who posesses it has a great advantage over the other team. I think it would be silly for either side to ignore it.

      EDIT: I also think there needs to be made a distinction between what rushing/killhunting is and what moving in to secure a defensive/offensive position is. I think the term 'killhunting' is thrown around too loosely when someone is frustrated with what the opfor is doing.
      | | |

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

        Originally posted by Atomic Dog View Post
        I disagree. Though I do not particularly enjoy being on the receiving end of this tactic, the T's are not very far at all from hosties. In fact, they gain a great vantage point to the entrance that leads to the lower hosties as well as a vantage point against CT's sniping from the roof area of the boathouse.

        I've found that this position is key to either side. The team who posesses it has a great advantage over the other team. I think it would be silly for either side to ignore it.

        EDIT: I also think there needs to be made a distinction between what rushing/killhunting is and what moving in to secure a defensive/offensive position is. I think the term 'killhunting' is thrown around too loosely when someone is frustrated with what the opfor is doing.

        You make good points, but it all falls back to "Can I, as a terrorist, pull back in time to intercept a hostage extraction?" And the answer is probably not. Yes, you can see the hostages, but you are not near the hostages. It would take you quite a bit of time to get to the hostages if needed from that position. The only chance you have is 1 or 2 shots to take out whomever is attempting the extaction..and if you miss your initial shot, you just lost the round for your team.

        Yes, the team that controls that point has an advantage, but is attempting to secure that advantage worth losing 1 or 2 players on an 8 man team? When you factor in rock cover in the T spawn area, they can easily neutralize any CT target that attempts to cross the covered bridge or use the snipe spot.

        And lastly, why is the defensive team attempting to move into an offensive role?
        Last edited by ouija; 05-26-2007, 03:06 AM. Reason: Changed format of the initial paragraph
        If it isn't PCS, whats the point?
        with any questions or concerns.
        |


        Aggressive Defense (an oxymoron): A naturally occurring situational event where a defender is caught in a role reversal anomaly. Usually associated with lack of practice, discipline or map awareness in a team based conflict.



        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

          The answer to whether or not it's worth it to send one or two guys out to secure that position is, yes. I've seen one CT sniper on a rooftop take out 3-4 guys...half a team...by himself. Just the opportunity to neutralize that threat makes it worth it. Also, from that position you have a great opportunity to intercept CT's taking hosties through boathouse to the spawn rescue point. So long as there are teammates to secure the back rescue zone then I feel comfortable having someone cover that area. I would never sit there if I were the last man on my team or one of two or three left. When the numbers get thin, you definitely fall back. Until then it's a very strategical location to hold.

          EDIT: To answer why a defensive team would move into an offensive role, that's just the Art of War. If the opportunity presents itself, you should force the offensive back onto the defensive role. This means you've completely disrupted their strategy and now they need to regroup and refor which can buy you some very crucial moments to secure your position a bit more. You're not putting the whole team on the Offense. Just one or two at most.
          | | |

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

            Originally posted by Atomic Dog View Post
            The answer to whether or not it's worth it to send one or two guys out to secure that position is, yes. I've seen one CT sniper on a rooftop take out 3-4 guys...half a team...by himself. Just the opportunity to neutralize that threat makes it worth it. Also, from that position you have a great opportunity to intercept CT's taking hosties through boathouse to the spawn rescue point. So long as there are teammates to secure the back rescue zone then I feel comfortable having someone cover that area. I would never sit there if I were the last man on my team or one of two or three left. When the numbers get thin, you definitely fall back. Until then it's a very strategical location to hold.
            But why do some feel it necessary to try and move the defensive team into this offensive role? There are tons of spots that the Ts can get in to neutralize that position without being at said location, and still have a much better position on the map to prevent hostage extraction.
            If it isn't PCS, whats the point?
            with any questions or concerns.
            |


            Aggressive Defense (an oxymoron): A naturally occurring situational event where a defender is caught in a role reversal anomaly. Usually associated with lack of practice, discipline or map awareness in a team based conflict.



            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

              I think it comes down to several reasons, off the top...neutralizing the boathouse is critical. In my mind that's the least likely place the guy on the boathouse looks, which is why I go there. Second, you have a great vantage on any rescue attempt. Thirdly, variety. It's just another option in the playbook to keep your team from being predictable (at the moment). Eventually CT's will wiseup and watch that spot better...I know I do as it is.

              EDIT: I also use that location to get onto of the covered bridge itself, meaning I walk across the wall back onto the bridge but camp on the roof instead of under it. Gives me a better line of sight on not only any rescue attempt on the lower hosties, but also a direct LOS on the upper level hosties themselves.
              | | |

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

                Originally posted by Atomic Dog View Post
                Thirdly, variety. It's just another option in the playbook to keep your team from being predictable (at the moment). Eventually CT's will wiseup and watch that spot better...I know I do as it is.

                I would agree with you, if I didnt witness at least 2 people sprinting for that location at the start of every round (almost without exception) on this map.

                As stated, I understand securing a chokepoint...but I also understand the desire of people wanting to push the limits. On lockdown nights, I have no issue with this tactic...during normal gameplay, I have a lot of issues with it.
                If it isn't PCS, whats the point?
                with any questions or concerns.
                |


                Aggressive Defense (an oxymoron): A naturally occurring situational event where a defender is caught in a role reversal anomaly. Usually associated with lack of practice, discipline or map awareness in a team based conflict.



                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

                  I agree with you there to a degree. I see the maneuver as a PCS move. I don't appreciate people rushing the location, with the exception of PCS players. Myself, I have gone there straight away...but more often than not I wait for communication from the teammates that there is indeed a sniper on the roof of the boathouse before I move in. Most of the time I hang back and move in slowly. But that's me...and I do see where you're coming from. Most of the guys who rush the location are doing so because they see a PCS member doing the same so they think they should be hitting that spot every time for the reason of attaining kills. That I definitely don't agree with.
                  | | |

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

                    I think covered bridge is fair, but -- at the risk of breathing a limit -- no further than the rope-ladder that gets atop the stone ridge, unless they need to get someplace further to stop a rescuing CT. The covered bridge sees one of the hostage rooms, the side of the house they can't well-defend elsewhere but from that one lone stone out front, and it prevents the Ts from being completely surrounded.

                    Besides that, covered bridge is not a vital path for CT. They can come in from any direction they like. CT control of the bridge is desired for the same reason T would want it. It gives you the ability to cover (CT) or pin-down (T) the primary advancement routes along the water. CT attacking from that side is rather exposed and troublesome, at least in my view.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

                      The spot can be a huge lifesaver for both sides. Personally, I think T's should strike that spot every round. They don't have to necessarily hang around it, but they should make sure that the CT's aren't there right from the start. Besides, it gives a good view onto the boat house. Last night, me and a sniper dominated the front of the house. we could get the first hosties with barely any opposition. If the T's had rushed the bridge and rock, we would have been screwed. Though moving past the ladder in most cases is way too far.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

                        Parkhouse is an interesting map because of those things, The T's can see the hostages from that area and keep long range shooters from taking your team out in the house. This applies to the cliff area and the bridge. We have to restrain ourselves though because the map is very small.


                        - -

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

                          I firmly believe that the Area I have highlighted is open to T's due to the extreme importance of that position to the Ct. As Atomic Dog stated many a time has a sniper on that ridge or on the bridge for that matter, been able to descimate a team. It is also quite easy to fall back from to catch the hostages coming out the back door. (that being the case if CT were in the house we shouldnt be up there any longer).

                          It comes down to a matter of "intent" If your intent is to go kill hunting, you wont stop at the highlighted areas. If your intent is an aggressive defense, then you will hold that position to keep the CT from taking it

                          I.R. Hogan |TG|


                          Discipline is the soul of an army.
                          It makes small numbers formidable
                          procures success to the weak
                          and esteem to all.

                          ,,


                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

                            As a CT, I really don't mind T's pushing up to that position. I enjoy killing them with frags, reducing their numbers, and making it that much easier to get the hostages out. As a CT you should be on guard for this situation and take advantage of it.

                            As a T having a couple men successfully take this position prevents the CTs from setting up a wide range coverage of the house. At least limits their sniping ability to one side of the map rather than 2 sides + middle. And on a map like this, CT coverage of the house is crucial. Limit that, and you severely cripple the CTs.

                            Yes, this area of contention may result in some shoot outs. If the CTs are organized enough and prepared for it, they can take advantage of it, if they are not, then they may lose some people before they deal with it. So be it.

                            CTs be prepared, be cautious, work with buddies, communicate T positions, utilize coverage, use frags and flashes, and take them down if they are there. CTs can take advantage of this and hurt the Ts if it's done properly. If CTs are disorganized, not looking, and not communicating, yeah, guess what, they are gonna get blind sided.
                            .



                            [Game rules, announcements, and SOPs ][ ][ ][ ]
                            "The success of what we do depends upon people valuing the team over themselves."
                            - Wulfyn

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Terrorists Rushing on Parkhouse

                              Originally posted by SloppyJoe View Post
                              As a CT, I really don't mind T's pushing up to that position. I enjoy killing them with frags, reducing their numbers, and making it that much easier to get the hostages out. As a CT you should be on guard for this situation and take advantage of it.

                              As a T having a couple men successfully take this position prevents the CTs from setting up a wide range coverage of the house. At least limits their sniping ability to one side of the map rather than 2 sides + middle. And on a map like this, CT coverage of the house is crucial. Limit that, and you severely cripple the CTs.

                              Yes, this area of contention may result in some shoot outs. If the CTs are organized enough and prepared for it, they can take advantage of it, if they are not, then they may lose some people before they deal with it. So be it.

                              CTs be prepared, be cautious, work with buddies, communicate T positions, utilize coverage, use frags and flashes, and take them down if they are there. CTs can take advantage of this and hurt the Ts if it's done properly. If CTs are disorganized, not looking, and not communicating, yeah, guess what, they are gonna get blind sided.
                              I believe Vulcan hit the nail on the head. The map is small...and this area is just too aggressive for the beginning of the game.
                              If it isn't PCS, whats the point?
                              with any questions or concerns.
                              |


                              Aggressive Defense (an oxymoron): A naturally occurring situational event where a defender is caught in a role reversal anomaly. Usually associated with lack of practice, discipline or map awareness in a team based conflict.



                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X