Nethergoat

I do this too, whenever I run across one.

It's fun when I'm on one of my marketeers and can afford to lay a multiple of the 'real' contest reward on them.

=)

A goat in slacks would be far more offputting, trust me.

I'm with No Pants on this one- I love incidental touches like that.

BUT.....I wonder how many dev hours went into it, and postulate they'd have been better off assigning those resources to creating more content.

I'd love to see weather added to this game, but there are a lot of other things I'd rather they spend the energy on.

I'm against any proposal that props up the ridiculous pretense that inf is anything other than cold hard cash.

My pen and paper Champions campaign was a seething hotbed of min-maxing and shameless Disadvantage abuse. The storyline was also mostly driven by very high quality role playing from my players.

What's an example of a well balanced multiplayer game with an 'open' system of power advancement?

I haven't played everything, but in the games I have played people rapidly figure out the 'good' stuff and the junk and plan their advancement accordingly. Absent structural limitations like ATs, of course.

It may be that it's possible, but simply too resource hungry. If an AT system is substantially easier to balance than an open system, that alone makes it incredibly appealing to dev teams with limited man hours.

Also, and this is total conjecture, but I think the majority of players like having a pre-defined role to play. If its easier to balance and appealing to your audience, no wonder devs love the AT system.

I urge everyone to check the stats of the top players on any fairly busy server, or competition stats for any 'big' organization.
CS players declare the "best" weapons over and over in every case.

My dismissive attitude is born of playing for hours every night for several years and pouring over the server logs and stats at the end of every week. Claiming that CS players hadn't settled on "the best" guns is complete and utter nonsense.

The weapons weren't balanced at all. There were a couple of really good ones, a couple of okay ones and a bunch of crummy ones nobody ever used except as a joke.

An analogy from this game for the G3/AWP comparison would be saying that an an emp/dark defender solos just as well as a bs/regen scrapper.

They can both solo, but one is light years faster than the other and the answer is obvious to anyone who's played for a while.

You're spouting nonsense, so my interest in continued communication is limited.

no, I have fact and you have unsupported opinion.
Anyone who cares to can hit Google, find some CS server stats and check out the top players on ANY of them. You'll see the same weapons over and over- AWP, M4, AK47. MP5 would be the #1 smg, deagle will be the #1 pistol.

It isn't something someone you can have a rational discussion about, because there's only one correct interpretation of the data. Which is publicly available- pick a random server, check out the top players. The vast majority of their kills will be with one of the Big Three.


I could mow fools with my Mac 10 too- it was so inaccurate that once I got to close range I could hop like a maniac, hold down the trigger and it was a pretty much guaranteed head shot.
That didn't make it a good gun.

You could rack up kills with anything- we had a clan that only use the TMP. There was a weekly contest to see who could get the most kills with the pump shotty. We would occasionally fire up Adminmod and have a Scout only round.

But there were "best" guns.
Everybody knew which ones they were, and most players used them exclusively most of the time.

Only idiots & the AFK get killed by knives in CS.

People with bad aim generally get killed by people with good aim, so what guns they use is largely irrelevant.
Again, check server stats- the information is out there.
"Crappy players use some other guns so the AK isn't really the best" is an amusing but fundamentally flawed argument.

So what? An AWP in the hands of a clown won't do them any good.
I've charged a crummy sniper with an AWP down the long tunnel on Dust from the bomb site to the sniper balcony and killed him with a knife- he fired at me three times and missed them all.
By your logic that means the knife is better than the AWP?

The G3 is a fun gun, but a piece of junk compared to the AWP.
How many G3 kills were tallied in the last CPL tourney, assuming they still do things like that?
Good players use the 'best' guns.


No they don't.
Server stats don't lie.
AK, M4, AWP were ALWAYS the top 3 killers.
Every week for several years.

the "path of least resistance" means THEY'RE BETTER.
They're more efficient, they're deadlier, that's why everyone uses them.

If CS weapons were "balanced" in the way you claim they are it wouldn't matter what people used, so they'd use whatever.

Instead, they used the colt, the AK and the AWP in overwhelming numbers.

Gosh, I wonder why?

Haven't played CO and probably never will.
I've been commenting on your attitudes about 'open' balance systems and your claims that CS weapons were balanced.
Which they absolutely are not.

edit:
Finally found some competition stats.
Clicked some random guys and everyone gets their kills with the Big Three, with a smattering of other guns. If you find ANYONE who got a kill with a G3, let me know.

I've always found it amusing that people run the same missions over and over to get past content they've played over and over.

Not knocking it- I PL too when the mood strikes me.
But the cure for repetitive gameplay being more repetitive gameplay is funny.



Between the exp changes and the various extremely handy vet rewards and the temp travel powers, they have added a 'fast track'.
Faster travel & more attacks = more efficient leveling.

The low level hero game stinks on hot ice and could certainly do with a complete re-vamp.
Red side is fine, but there needs to be more of it.

With the SSK changes, players can team for any level range and still earn xp. That eliminates one of the longstanding barriers to extending the low level game- players don't spend much time there, so why pour in a bunch of resources? Now that all content is 'level appropriate' content for one is content for all.

As someone who ran a CS server for several years and examined the server logs weekly, that is incorrect.

The AWP was the best sniper by far, the AK was the best terrorist gun by far, the Colt was the best CT gun by far. The MP5 was next 'best', mainly because it was the cheapest gun that didn't suck and the default choice when people were poor in the early rounds or when their team hit a losing streak. The Deagle was the best pistol by far.

As to your hilarious anecdote about the G3...LAWL.
No AWP sniper with a pulse could ever be out-dualed by anyone sporting a G3. The SCOUT was better than the G3 if you could aim worth a damn.
It makes me wonder if you've ever actually played the game, or if you just glanced over the Wiki for some names.
I liked the G3, but for the same reason I liked the Mac 10- it was so inaccurate you could get headshots without being able to aim.

My personal experience with the game is years out of date, but LITERALLY looking at the first set of server stats that came up on Google and checking out the details for their #1 player, guess what weapons top his chart?

CS's buy system periodically forces players to use 'weak' guns, which artificially increased diversity. But given their druthers all the 'good' players always picked the same guns.

As a longtime player, I realize that they were choosing the most effective options available to them.
How do you explain their behavior?

Gamers will always gravitate to "the best" powers.
An AT system is good for a game because it enforces diversity. This AT is good at this, this other one is good at that. In any system where anyone can take anything, players will all flock to the "best", whatever that is.

I don't think it's possible to make everything equally viable. They can't even do it in the much more limited world of FPS games, where there is always a "best" gun that "everyone" uses- the evolution of FPS games toward the class system deployed by MMOs amply demonstrates their solution to that particular problem.

I agree, but that isn't going to stop them. =P

It sounds like a population that's decided you're much too thick & annoying to bother replying to.

And who can blame them?

This was my first laugh of the day.

=D

I don't even look at my drops until I fill up.

I find it best to view individual runs as bricks in the wall, not the wall itself.
What looks sad and wan after one run could well be a mighty bastion after ten runs.

My work here is done!