Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Quote from blackdog

On 7/19/2017 at 11:46 PM, blackdog said: What the fuck :-| this game actually costed me money

External Content www.youtube.com

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display content once Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

They had them at 13-12 on an super eco and managed to lose the match.

CS delivers close games just like my beloved basketball, where great plays can turn a game in 30 seconds.

Incredible that Faze went from being finalists to last place... in the space of three weeks! BTW for the few games I've seen I haven't seen anything impressive coming out of Niko, which makes me question him being currently considered the #1/#2 player

Haven't BIG seriously abused the crouch jump bug in that particular game to make their comeback on the CT side?

I think was there game before this, the commentators said something about it. I think was used a couple times.

I think they won fair and square, SK wasn't playing as good as I've seen them playing. they lost both pistol rounds!

Guess maybe they weren't 100% cos it's not playoffs, and I was silly to bet just because I missed out on betting on who's gonna win the tournament

Makes me think of crouch running in goldsrc. Just ban it, what's the problem?

Well is a CS bug, I think is a Valve problem. Yes a tournament could ban it I imagine, but not when the tournament is underway. From the video below seems is covered in the rules (allowed).

Personally I think it doesn't need to be completely fixed, I mean it can be another feature that people that train to pull it off can do it. If Valve wants to keep the silent jump as a feature, they have to address the perspective problem that allows unfair peeking.

Quote from blackdog

4 minutes ago, blackdog said: Well is a CS bug, I think is a Valve problem. Yes a tournament could ban it I imagine, but not when the tournament is underway. From the video below seems is covered in the rules (allowed).

Personally I think it doesn't need to be completely fixed, I mean it can be another feature that people that train to pull it off can do it. If Valve wants to keep the silent jump as a feature, they have to address the perspective problem that allows unfair peeking.

Agree to that one. Keeping the silent jump as a skill feature would be cool. The POV problem is breaking the game tiny bit too much though. Valve's move fix it. Not the player's fault to discover and use it imo.

Edit: I realized my post came off condescending, that wasn't my intention. What I'm saying is that while Valve ought to fix it, organizers have some responsibility in maintaining fair play, and the bug is game breaking, being able to peek unseen. That is huge. Instead of gentlemans agreements, just ban the use of it. I don't see it as any different than the overpass pixelwalk.

Quote from grapen

8 hours ago, grapen said: Edit: I realized my post came off condescending, that wasn't my intention. What I'm saying is that while Valve ought to fix it, organizers have some responsibility in maintaining fair play, and the bug is game breaking, being able to peek unseen. That is huge. Instead of gentlemans agreements, just ban the use of it. I don't see it as any different than the overpass pixelwalk.

It is a bit different: pixel walk or looking through textures in inaccessible areas can only be performed to abuse the game, while jump is basic movement and you can use it for simply landing silently (which I don't see as a problem) or to peek.

I'm not sure what kind of referee system is in place, but I think to penalize these behaviors, CS scoring should be changed radically, made more abstract and not just internal to the game (eg, rounds won/lost are important and referee can remove rounds for penalty or remove some money from a team).

Quote from blackdog

19 minutes ago, blackdog said: It is a bit different: pixel walk or looking through textures in inaccessible areas can only be performed to abuse the game, while jump is basic movement and you can use it for simply landing silently (which I don't see as a problem) or to peek.

I'm not sure what kind of referee system is in place, but I think to penalize these behaviors, CS scoring should be changed radically, made more abstract and not just internal to the game (eg, rounds won/lost are important and referee can remove rounds for penalty or remove some money from a team).

But you're peeking fully knowing the opponent won't be able to see you, the pros are well aware of the difference between a regular jump and a bugged crouch jump. The outcome is the same as standing behind a one-way nodraw, you know it's not fair play or the intended design.

Quote from grapen

On 21/07/2017 at 11:13 PM, grapen said: But you're peeking fully knowing the opponent won't be able to see you, the pros are well aware of the difference between a regular jump and a bugged crouch jump. The outcome is the same as standing behind a one-way nodraw, you know it's not fair play or the intended design.

Not really, say I know the T are sneaking into Inferno B and I want to climb up the crates, to reposition... not necessarily I need/want to peek but just don't want them to hear me.

Quote from blackdog

2 hours ago, blackdog said: Not really, say I know the T are sneaking into Inferno B and I want to climb up the crates, to reposition... not necessarily I need/want to peek but just don't want them to hear me.

You're talking about two different things here: 1) not being able to be seen 2) not being able to be heard. Related to the same bug, but that's about it.

Quote from Squad

47 minutes ago, Squad said: You're talking about two different things here: 1) not being able to be seen 2) not being able to be heard. Related to the same bug, but that's about it.

Sorry, I don't see how I am doing that, I've only talked about the sound aspect. I've said from the first post that it's up to Valve to decide what needs to be kept of this player interaction.

And I've said that personally the sound aspect should stay, while the perspective (see/be seen) needs to be fixed.

What I'm trying to explain is that a player can use this interaction without gaining an advantage, that is if you are not considering as bugged both implications of crouching and jumping (view and sound). For a better explanation watch 3dklikphilip video, when he mentions the possibility of which hunt.

This was the tournament of the upsets!

First Faze doesn't even make the playoffs, SK gets kicked out by the most underdog team, Astralis also eliminated by the underdog team… haven't been able to watch much, but from what I've seen some teams had really stepped up their game. Astralis in semi-final were so dominant you wouldn't imagine would be shut down equally well the following game.

Anyway, GG; here's the re-run of the final

I don't like the opposing booth, not with all the glass insulating the teams. What's the point for people to be there to support.

Quote from blackdog

10 hours ago, blackdog said: I don't like the opposing booth, not with all the glass insulating the teams. What's the point for people to be there to support.

They're soundproof booths. It's to prevent the players and coaches from hearing the commentators and getting any info on the other team. I didn't like them facing either though, its nice when they're side by side so you can see the reactions of both teams I guess.

I was sad VP didn't make it to the final. The crowd went mental anytime VP did anything and that was great. Happy for Gambit though. They really worked hard for it and they deserve it.

they say they can't hear but still feel the vibrations from the cheering, so I guess they felt this

https://clips.twitch.tv/CogentObliqueMuleChocolateRain

Yeah I know it's about sound proofing, they enforced "the hat rule" as well for the purpose, but I still think is quite stupid.

I don't think a player, who is considering all the variables he's normally considering, can also pay attention to commentators and act on that. The coach is a bit different, but they can't give tactical advice until a break from what I understand so…

I've updated the previous post with the whole final re-run.

Anyway great matches, is not making me think to much about the money I lost betting on SK, I was planning on paying for my flights to Canada

Quote from blackdog

1 hour ago, blackdog said: I don't think a player, who is considering all the variables he's normally considering, can also pay attention to commentators and act on that.

I think you'd be suprised about the amount and kind of information they could derive from this. Depending on how both teams are facing each other, they can determine if a FB was effective (as in, seeing a white reflection on one's face) or not and act upon that

Had a fun clutch today.

[Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/gXBIgCh.jpg]

viv seriously do you play in silver or something?

I make it look easy

* shades on *

Quote from Squad

On 25/07/2017 at 2:06 PM, Squad said: I think you'd be suprised about the amount and kind of information they could derive from this. Depending on how both teams are facing each other, they can determine if a FB was effective (as in, seeing a white reflection on one's face) or not and act upon that

I still don't think that's something they rely on, in the games I've watched I haven't seen people looking up until the round was over, and anyway the only I've seen looking at the other team was that chav of Kng from Immortals, trash talking the adversaries. Potentially yes what you say could work, maybe a dead player can do that, but an active player, in such a time-sensitive game… can't align a flash, look up and then rush a site.

~

Anyway, lol