Personally, I have to frankly doubt the idea of placing the rescue zone in the opposing direction from the CT spawn. IMO, there is no sensible reason for that - the map would be unnecessarily big and hard for players to learn. Many of you give as a reason for doing so that "Players would not have to backtrack and retake already taken areas" - I don't understand you, I thought that we agreed on hostage maps being too T sided and now we want to take from CTs that advantage? As somebody has already mentioned, CTs would be so weakened due to attacking one of the "Hostagesites" that they would not have enough resources to progress further through the level. If the rescue zone was at CT spawn (not necessarily there, but in the direction of it), CTs would have the possibility to place lurker(s) behind them to keep their way back secured.
All of you definitely realize how hard is it for Ts to take over a bomb site, even though there are two of them on a map so the defense is split. There are two hostages on a map - we can easily infer from that, taking a hostage is as difficult as taking a bomb site. In most scenarios it is even harder because on vast majority of maps hostages are closer to each other than bomsites regularly are. And now think about this - Ts do not even have to retake it, they just can back off to escape routes. I don't know, why are you suggesting such a changes to layout build-up if it does not solve the essential issue - that the maps are so ridiculously Ts sided if played properly.
Now to my own suggestions - add a third hostage to a map. The hostages would not have to be far away from each other to allow Ts relatively quick rotation, but would force Ts to seek intelligence. As well as that, CTs would not deplete all their resources on taking the hostage, due to defense being even more split, allowing them to send lurkers to actually defend the way back (Nowadays, I can barely see anyone doing that). Why is the second part of hostage-scenario round so random and uncompetitive? Because no team has enough players left to hold on some actual map control and so, it is just a bunch of survivors trying to win the round with few resources they have left. This needs to be unconditionally changed.
Viability of Hostage Rescue Scenario in CS:GO
in Development
Posted · Edited by Adam108CZ
typos
Hi guys, really nice discussion over here!
Personally, I have to frankly doubt the idea of placing the rescue zone in the opposing direction from the CT spawn. IMO, there is no sensible reason for that - the map would be unnecessarily big and hard for players to learn. Many of you give as a reason for doing so that "Players would not have to backtrack and retake already taken areas" - I don't understand you, I thought that we agreed on hostage maps being too T sided and now we want to take from CTs that advantage? As somebody has already mentioned, CTs would be so weakened due to attacking one of the "Hostagesites" that they would not have enough resources to progress further through the level. If the rescue zone was at CT spawn (not necessarily there, but in the direction of it), CTs would have the possibility to place lurker(s) behind them to keep their way back secured.
All of you definitely realize how hard is it for Ts to take over a bomb site, even though there are two of them on a map so the defense is split. There are two hostages on a map - we can easily infer from that, taking a hostage is as difficult as taking a bomb site. In most scenarios it is even harder because on vast majority of maps hostages are closer to each other than bomsites regularly are. And now think about this - Ts do not even have to retake it, they just can back off to escape routes. I don't know, why are you suggesting such a changes to layout build-up if it does not solve the essential issue - that the maps are so ridiculously Ts sided if played properly.
Now to my own suggestions - add a third hostage to a map. The hostages would not have to be far away from each other to allow Ts relatively quick rotation, but would force Ts to seek intelligence. As well as that, CTs would not deplete all their resources on taking the hostage, due to defense being even more split, allowing them to send lurkers to actually defend the way back (Nowadays, I can barely see anyone doing that). Why is the second part of hostage-scenario round so random and uncompetitive? Because no team has enough players left to hold on some actual map control and so, it is just a bunch of survivors trying to win the round with few resources they have left. This needs to be unconditionally changed.