Welcome to Tactical Gamer

User Tag List

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 56
  1. #1

    Zek's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Age
    29
    Posts
    609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    I am noticing a very consistant pattern when I play on this server. Whenever there are admins on the server, they have to constantly spam their rule bind every couple of minutes because the defending team keeps rushing, with little to no effect. Most new players to the server express curiousity as to how far they're allowed to go, and without fail the admins refuse to answer them except with oversimplified comments like "Don't rush."

    In order for players new to this server to follow the rules, they have to understand what the rules are. We have to establish clear boundaries for each map that the defending team is not allowed to cross. In cs_office we've already done that; Ts can't leave the building, end of story. That is so much easier to enforce and so much easier for people to understand, because there is absolutely no room for interpretation. Either you're in the building or you're not. Everyone can understand that rule. On the other maps, however, people are simply confused about where they can camp that's considered valid defense, and how far out is too far. On de_cbble, it was established that camping the window spot outside marine spawn is bomb site defense, but stepping foot past the door is rushing. This was only made clear after about 15 minutes of prodding, by the way; definitely not immediately evident to a new player. People who went past the door weren't told at which point they went too far, just to stop rushing. I talked with Overlag about this at some length in the game, but he insisted that any ignoramus can understand exactly what he means when he says defend the bombsites. That didn't so much prove to be the case, judging by how many players were kicked or banned that game.

    Somebody just needs to establish what is and isn't rushing on each of the maps. For example, in cs_italy CTs aren't allowed to go beyond the double doors or the bridge. In de_dust, no going past the tunnel or through the underpass. If all the admins understood these boundaries and were willing to tell them to players, you wouldn't have to spend so much time discussing it with people. You can continue to tell people to defend objectives, just like now. The only difference is that when people ask what not to do, you answer them. Simple.

  2.  
  3. #2


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NE Outer London, UK
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,428
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    sigh

    the point of the server is to defend objectives... the whole line "how far can we go" just proves that they still want a deathmatch style server, of which theres 10's of thousands of servers out there....soon to be millions i guess.

    Clear boundaries will ONLY work if the person visits the website first to found out, and boundaries is not really what PCS is about. Being in the middle of the map meeting the Attackers in a "counter attack" is NOT defending the objective, its deathmatch.

    if people dont know the "lines" they should do exactly what the admin says, and thats DEFEND THE BOMBSITE/HOSTAGES.

    there are plenty of players out there on pubs that do this, these guys "suck" because they do there job, they "camp" etc and have a crappy score.... id say 1 in 20 can play our style and about 5 in 20 could play it if they tried.

    And to be perfectly honest you KEPT on bugging on and on after we said drop it, we explained many times what was going on and you just kept posting the same question in a different way, trying to get a different answer. Admins are here to play the game too you know, on cbble i died almost EVERY round typing the shame reply to you and its REALLY annoying, since the rushers infact stopped the 2nd time we asked them. yet you kept going on an on about it.

    If it wasnt for TG in your name you would have been close to seeing the kicked sign im sorry to say.
    From Adam Webb

  4.  
  5. #3

    Zek's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Age
    29
    Posts
    609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Overlag
    the point of the server is to defend objectives... the whole line "how far can we go" just proves that they still want a deathmatch style server, of which theres 10's of thousands of servers out there....soon to be millions i guess.
    Huh? It just proves that they don't want to break the rules. The distinction between deathmatch and defense is entirely up for debate when the player is camping one spot either way. You are asking people not to cross the line without telling them where it is.

    Clear boundaries will ONLY work if the person visits the website first to found out, and boundaries is not really what PCS is about. Being in the middle of the map meeting the Attackers in a "counter attack" is NOT defending the objective, its deathmatch.
    Who said anything about the website? They don't have to visit the website to find out about boundaries any more than they do to find out about the rule. You guys already do this for cs_office, remember? The only difference in most of the other maps is that you have to list one or two other criteria. There aren't that many maps in CS:S, it wouldn't take much time or effort to set up binds.

    if people dont know the "lines" they should do exactly what the admin says, and thats DEFEND THE BOMBSITE/HOSTAGES.
    At what point are you no longer defending the bomb site and instead rushing? There has to be a cutoff point. You must have boundaries in your mind that you already use to decide when people need to be warned; why can't you tell them to anyone else?

    there are plenty of players out there on pubs that do this, these guys "suck" because they do there job, they "camp" etc and have a crappy score.... id say 1 in 20 can play our style and about 5 in 20 could play it if they tried.
    And a lot of players want to try, but they are frustrated by the lack of information. They're simply looked down on for their inability to understand what isn't explained to them. You're right, most players won't just get it right off the bat. If you want this server to attract more players as regulars, then you need to teach them.

  6.  

  7. #4


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NE Outer London, UK
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,428
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    we was the only regs in was me and ranger yet quiet a few played AS WE played, no questions asked...why? because to some people the BASICS of this game is what PCS is really about, defence, and team work. They stick with there team, they stick to the objectives, they come to help if people call for backup etc etc

    The problem is once a few rushers come on, they will start to follow those, since they are A: Still doing teamwork B: fed up on others getting all the kills.

    you only need one or 2 rushers and the whole think falls down flat on its face. hence the rushers are delt with swiftly. to make sure the other tactical players dont get annoyed and leave, or turn into rushers themselfs

    1: Some leave on there own accord if they notice that we are "slow", "camping" etc
    2: Some will whine how lame we are and how we are playing the game "wrong"
    3: Some will tell us to **** off when we tell them what this server is about (and then turn to returning to the server with speed hacks.....)
    4: Some will try and play our way but often still cross the line.

    number 4 is really the only one we can fix....hell even i "cross the line" because as i said, PCS isnt about lines on maps........
    From Adam Webb

  8.  
  9. #5

    CingularDuality's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dallas/Ft. Worth area of Texas, USA
    Age
    41
    Posts
    16,861
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    We did the "lines on a map" thing and it didn't work. People would then just run to those boundaries and set up camp. That's not what it's about. There are times when "crossing the line" is appropriate and there are times when being out at some predetermined boundary would be inappropriate.

    If someone doesn't understand how to help his team defend an objective, then there's a problem and I'm not sure if that person is mature enough to play here. Sure there are going to be gray areas during gameplay. Some players are going to defend by being more aggressive than others, but if they press an attack real quick and then keep going, that's a problem. If a defender is setting up an ambush near a likely path of attack and they see/hear that their teammates are getting lit up, then they need to abandon their little ambush and go help their team. If someone's whole team gets wiped out, it's time to play a little bit closer to the defensive objective. The "lines on a map" will move depending on the situation. And sometimes unconventional tactics are appropriate. But rushing up to a line just to be the first to get to shoot at the other team is NOT what PCS is all about...

    I don't know how else to say it. I think either you get it or you don't. Seriously. It seems like the players that come to our server seem to understand without having to be told what the "boundaries" are, and the players that don't get it can have things explained hundreds of times to no avail...

  10.  
  11. #6

    DeRanger's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Age
    52
    Posts
    593
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    Quote Originally Posted by CingularDuality
    We did the "lines on a map" thing and it didn't work. People would then just run to those boundaries and set up camp. That's not what it's about. There are times when "crossing the line" is appropriate and there are times when being out at some predetermined boundary would be inappropriate.

    If someone doesn't understand how to help his team defend an objective, then there's a problem and I'm not sure if that person is mature enough to play here. Sure there are going to be gray areas during gameplay. Some players are going to defend by being more aggressive than others, but if they press an attack real quick and then keep going, that's a problem. If a defender is setting up an ambush near a likely path of attack and they see/hear that their teammates are getting lit up, then they need to abandon their little ambush and go help their team. If someone's whole team gets wiped out, it's time to play a little bit closer to the defensive objective. The "lines on a map" will move depending on the situation. And sometimes unconventional tactics are appropriate. But rushing up to a line just to be the first to get to shoot at the other team is NOT what PCS is all about...

    I don't know how else to say it. I think either you get it or you don't. Seriously. It seems like the players that come to our server seem to understand without having to be told what the "boundaries" are, and the players that don't get it can have things explained hundreds of times to no avail...
    Exactly! Thanks for weighing-in Cingular!

  12.  

  13. #7

    Wyzcrak's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    17,535
    Mentioned
    93 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    I've seen intelligent people pick up on PCS without any explanation whatsoever.

    I've also seen very intelligent players -- the very players TG would be more than happy to retain as regulars -- ask for clarification about where they can go and where they can't.
    THERE ARE NO BOUNDARIES if you follow it to the book
    That's terribly confusing and leaves a lot of room for misinterpretation.

    There ARE boundaries, but they're DYNAMIC. Telling players that there "are no boundaries" if you "follow it to the book" doesn't help people understand.

    As admins, be it for CS or any other game, we shouldn't put our own need to play the game above our responsibility to help a willing, genuinely interested, and simply ignorant player understand how (and why) the rules work. We should abandon our concern for "this game" and instead imagine the server six months from now as you react to players who show even a shred of intelligence. What may interrupt your gameplay for five minutes may create the beginnings of a regular that plays here for the next two years.

    Consider the following response, which takes more effort but offers more to understand:
    There ARE boundaries, but they're based on a WHAT and WHY, not a WHERE. Your goal is to [X defensive]. The moment you stop being defensive, you're "out of bounds." Likewise, the moment we stop being offensive, we too are "out of bounds." Short of Rule #2 (MOTD/No rushing offensive spawn), the map is otherwise your playground.
    SOMETHING like that is a better start. If the recipient of that message is a tard, it will quickly become apparent to those who are not. If the recipient of that message is intelligent but otherwise confused, that's likely to either resolve their confusion or effectively begin a dialog that will.

    "Either you get it or you don't" may (or, admittedly, may not) be part of the reason why PCS died once. I don't want it to die again. Plenty of players are going to want clarification -- not because they're being difficult, but because they're eager to participate without concern for doing it "wrong." The better prepared we are to provide that clarification, the greater our chances of retaining regulars on the server.

    Don't confine your responses to one liners. Explain the idea to people in full. Those worth keeping (which can and will include those who don't "get it" at first) will appreciate it.
    Steam Community? Add me. | 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. Zephyr: Apophis is clearly a highly sophisticated self-aware AI construct that runs on a highly modified toaster oven in Wyzcrak's basement.

  14.  
  15. #8

    CingularDuality's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dallas/Ft. Worth area of Texas, USA
    Age
    41
    Posts
    16,861
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    Well said, Wyz.

  16.  
  17. #9


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NE Outer London, UK
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,428
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    bah, it was 6am
    From Adam Webb

  18.  

  19. #10

    Apophis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Northeast, USA
    Age
    43
    Posts
    8,338
    Blog Entries
    12
    Mentioned
    113 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    I guess I don't need to say anything, it's all been taken care of.. But I will anyway..

    Zek,

    There are multiple types of players we see in CS. There are some that want to play deathmatch, they have no care or concern for the rules and just want to go kill the opposing team as quickly as possible.

    There are some that read the rules and want to know exactly how far is too far, and to what pixel on the map they may move to without it being considered "rushing". They don't really understand the rules or the objectives at TG, but they choose to attempt to follow the rules by pushing them to their extreme limits.

    There are some that read the rules and UNDERSTAND the rules. They realize that when we say "Defensive team MUST PLAY DEFENSE" that means the defensive team should be focusing on its objectives and providing proper defense of those objectives. Understanding that rule doesn't require questions like "how far is too far" as it should all be answered by basic common sense. These are the ideal players we seek.

    I have also come to accept that only 1 in 100 players reads, understands, and enjoys the rules that were set up for our Professional Counter-Strike server, but I also understand that only 1 in 100 players will want to stay on our server. This is acceptable. We are not defining the rules based on what the public player base wants to see, we are defining the rules based on the type of gameplay we desire and then finding the appropriate like-minded players who wish to play in this manner.

    In the years past when we first launched our PCS server(s) we had two of them online. On a regular basis we had BOTH servers full with people waiting in line to get in and play. We used these same rules and they worked beautifully. Once the tools become available, the server may very well be locked down the way it was in the earlier PCS days to promote the type of gameplay we enjoy.

    Diplomacy is the art of saying "good doggie" while looking for a bigger stick.

    43452045524748454146204742204754202d204642424121

  20.  
  21. #11

    Apophis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Northeast, USA
    Age
    43
    Posts
    8,338
    Blog Entries
    12
    Mentioned
    113 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyzcrak
    "Either you get it or you don't" may (or, admittedly, may not) be part of the reason why PCS died once. I don't want it to die again. Plenty of players are going to want clarification -- not because they're being difficult, but because they're eager to participate without concern for doing it "wrong." The better prepared we are to provide that clarification, the greater our chances of retaining regulars on the server.
    PCS died when the game started getting old. Many of the long time players moved over to other games. The rules began to get too complex because we tried to bring in a broader player base and had to keep explaining every little nuance and making rules for every step a player took. Essentially, if they didn't "get it" we had to make rules for it. Admins quickly because overburdened when they tried to play because they had to spend most of their time trying to explain the rules rather than be able to play, and most of the time they were virtually spat in the face for their efforts.

    There ARE a lot of players that understand and appreciate this style of play, but there are 100x more that don't appreciate it. We do have basic rules up in the MOTD and it's fairly apparently that hardly ANYONE actually reads them.

    Diplomacy is the art of saying "good doggie" while looking for a bigger stick.

    43452045524748454146204742204754202d204642424121

  22.  
  23. #12


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NE Outer London, UK
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,428
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Apophis
    PCS died when the game started getting old. Many of the long time players moved over to other games. The rules began to get too complex because we tried to bring in a broader player base and had to keep explaining every little nuance and making rules for every step a player took. Essentially, if they didn't "get it" we had to make rules for it. Admins quickly because overburdened when they tried to play because they had to spend most of their time trying to explain the rules rather than be able to play, and most of the time they were virtually spat in the face for their efforts.

    There ARE a lot of players that understand and appreciate this style of play, but there are 100x more that don't appreciate it. We do have basic rules up in the MOTD and it's fairly apparently that hardly ANYONE actually reads them.
    i tried to explain that last night...we had been playing PCS constantly for 2-3years some of us...it got BORING just like any game would.

    Right now i have time for CS:S and trying to fix/train new players. After 2-3 years of CS i (and many others) didnt have time for anyone so we didnt keep any new players.
    From Adam Webb

  24.  

  25. #13

    Zek's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Age
    29
    Posts
    609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Apophis
    There are multiple types of players we see in CS. There are some that want to play deathmatch, they have no care or concern for the rules and just want to go kill the opposing team as quickly as possible.

    There are some that read the rules and want to know exactly how far is too far, and to what pixel on the map they may move to without it being considered "rushing". They don't really understand the rules or the objectives at TG, but they choose to attempt to follow the rules by pushing them to their extreme limits.

    There are some that read the rules and UNDERSTAND the rules. They realize that when we say "Defensive team MUST PLAY DEFENSE" that means the defensive team should be focusing on its objectives and providing proper defense of those objectives. Understanding that rule doesn't require questions like "how far is too far" as it should all be answered by basic common sense. These are the ideal players we seek.
    What you have to understand is that not everyone in the first 2 categories is irredeemable. Our goal is to attract more regulars who adhere to our playstyle, right? In order to do that we're going to need more than 1/100 of the people who stumble upon us. The first type of player may simply not know the rules; it's probably true that they didn't read the MotD, but that doesn't mean they won't be receptive if they know what the rules are. The second type obviously wants to follow the PCS playstyle, but they don't understand your completely implied set of rules. The only reason I brought it up last night is that so many people were asking about the rules and were not satisfied with the answer given.

    I know it seems like common sense when you run the server, but to the vast majority of people "Defend the objectives!" does not equate to "You can go out a room or two and camp, but not three rooms, and sometimes not two rooms either if it's too close to the Ts." The majority of maps have really simple points of conflict that the defending team almost never has to cross. If you named them specifically, people would know what was expected of them and not be as frustrated by the indecisive ruleset. Think about de_aztec, for example. Defining the bridge and the doors as the CT eliminates rushing because both of those positions are obviously in defense of their respective bombsite. I don't see why it matters whether the person going there is thinking "Gotta rush to the line!" or "Gotta guard the bomb!" when they are both doing exactly the same thing for exactly the same reason. If people go past there you can remove them, probably with less warnings necessary since they won't have to break the rules just to find out what they are.

    I just don't think it's realistic to expect anyone to already "know" what you're talking about. It's NOT obvious. The only reason it's obvious to you guys is that you already know the boundaries. As someone who's only played on this server a handful of times, you can take my word for it when I tell you that these limitations are not simply understood when somebody sees the words "Defend the objective." Sure it's a pain to explain any more to people, but it's also a pain to give so many warnings to people who have no choice but to push the limits to find out what they are. People don't like being warned when they're honestly trying not to break a rule, and that's why you get people quitting out of frustration rather than think about the rule anymore.

  26.  
  27. #14

    CingularDuality's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dallas/Ft. Worth area of Texas, USA
    Age
    41
    Posts
    16,861
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Zek
    I don't see why it matters whether the person going there is thinking "Gotta rush to the line!" or "Gotta guard the bomb!" when they are both doing exactly the same thing for exactly the same reason.
    Well, a few of us have already explained this, and it's starting to look to me like you just don't get it.

    Don't think of lines on a map. There are no lines. Boundaries? Yeah, but like Wyz said so eloquently, they're dynamic. For instance, look at Aztec. Normally, there would be no reason for a defender to cross the bridge. But what if he finds out that the bomb has been planted at the other bombsite? It would THEN be entirely appropriate for the defender to cross the bridge to approach the other bombsite through the double doors.

    The statement of yours that I quote here sums up the exact opposite of what we want here. Instead of thinking about that line on the map, think in terms of WHY you are where you are on the map. If you're still defending, then you're OK. In other words, whether you are thinking "gotta rush to the line" or "gotta defend the bomb" IS what matters on our server.

  28.  
  29. #15

    DeRanger's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Age
    52
    Posts
    593
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Clarifying the "No Rushing" Rule

    Quote Originally Posted by CingularDuality
    Well, a few of us have already explained this, and it's starting to look to me like you just don't get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by DeRanger
    Exactly! Thanks for weighing-in Cingular!
    <certain closes> <lights dim>


  30.  
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Back to top