DarkPassage1ArchAngels2EventMaps / statscobblestone (6:16)cache (22:19)mirage (7:16)OtherNo demo - MatchpageLGR2Delete0MiTH0B.O.O.T2m0nster1TheMongolz2EventMaps / statsmirage (7:16)dust2 (16:13)cobblestone (17:19)OtherDemo - MatchpageAVANT GARDE2InFamous0EventMaps / statsmirage (16:2)cache (16:5)OtherNo demo - MatchpageX0Epsilon3EventMaps / statstrain (6:16)dust2 (10:16)cobblestone (14:16)OtherDemo - Matchpage
The pistols in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive have been imbalanced since January updates, and AK47 continues to dominate the Colt M4A4. Why?
There was a massive outcry in January after Valve's update to CS:GO made the Glock far too powerful. Some of the complaints have disappeared after two updates and time passing though, despite next to nothing being changed in the big picture of things.
It's true the update on February 21st nerfed especially the burst mode of Glock quite a bit, but it still isn't enough. Terrorists still win two out of three pistols on average on all the maps. Check out some interesting stats below.
AK47 also still continues to dominate the Colt M4A4 as a weapon of choice among professional players, although Valve has continuously argued that a silencer would give the Colt, or rather the defenders, too big of an advantage.
We have now decided to look at our statistics database to see if we can find answers to the current gun balance in CS:GO, and maybe point Valve in the right direction for their future updates.
Glock, P2000 and P250
Prior to the initial update on January 23rd taking place, P250 was clearly the pistol of choice among top players in CS:GO, with some people sticking to P2000 and being Glock the third in popularity.
Just over half of all pistol round frags prior to the January 23rd update were scored with a P250, with an additional 22% coming from the P2000 and just 16% from the Glock.
For counter-terrorists, over 91% of all pistol round frags were scored with either a P250 (50%) or a P2000 (40%), while 86% of terrorist pistol round kills came from the gun barrels of P250 (53%) and Glock (33%).
To put that into perspective, it means that over the course of a map, less than two pistol round kills were scored with a weapon other than those three, with a fairly even split among them.
For comparison's sake, in years 2011-2012 of Counter-Strike 1.6 where the balance was widely considered good, 68% of all pistol round frags were scored with a USP, and Glock came in second with 27%.
Split among teams, over 59% of all terrorist side kills came from a Glock, with an additional 36% from a USP, whereas counter-terrorists over 94% of all kills were scored with a USP, with a majority of the rest coming through HE grenades.
Since the update P250 has seen a drop of 74%, down over half to about one tenth of all kills. Glock has soared from 16% to 52%, an increase of 223%, or roughly from two-to-three kills a map to a whopping ten kills a map, and that's only in pistol rounds.
P2000 usage has risen by just roughly two kills per map, which goes to show the imbalance of the pistols - counter-terrorists simply no longer score nearly as many kills as they did prior to the patch in January.
Pistol round momentum shifts
Prior to the January 23rd update pistol rounds in CS:GO were very well balanced; counter-terrorists had a very slight average after over roughly a thousand pistol rounds, having won 51,2%.
Counter-terrorists held the biggest advantage on de_train_se, where they were victorious roughly 60% of the time. On de_mirage_ce the advantage was 54%, while others had terrorist advantages of less than one percent.
In the update terrorists gained a sizable advantage, seeing a 32% increase, now winning 64% of all pistol rounds. That means terrorists went from winning slightly less than half to two-out-of-three of all pistol rounds overnight.
Broken down by map the biggest change has taken place on de_train_se, where terrorists now win two-out-of-three pistol rounds; a complete reversal of roles in comparison to the past, as seen in the GIF below.
The defenders now have the hardest time on de_dust2_se, where on average they win less than one third of all pistol rounds. No map is much easier though, as terrorists win at least over 61% of pistol rounds on every single map.
To put this into perspective, we can once again compare these numbers to what we saw over the last two years of competitive Counter-Strike, starting in January 2011 and ending in August 2012.
In Counter-Strike 1.6 counter-terrorists were actually favored on each of the most popular five maps, ranging from 62% on de_tuscan to just 51% on de_dust2; a fairly even, yet slightly defender favored split.
Overall in the older Counter-Strike terrorists won 43% of pistol rounds, while the number in CS:GO has been in the region of 64%; up from an even split prior to Valve's update.
Little change in the balance of sides
This absurd change in pistol round wins has not made a huge difference in how entire halves play out though, which could be caused by a number of factors not visible in statistics.
Prior to the massive update of January 23rd, terrorists had won 46% of all played rounds. The update only made the number jump to 47%; a mere change of 1%, or one round in five halves played.
Multiple things varying from the game generally being counter-terrorist sided to teams learning how to play angles to their advantage, control the spray or even focusing on defending in practice as a result of terrorist side being easier could play their part in this.
On the map where pistol rounds took the biggest turn, de_train_se, terrorists have won under 2% more rounds since the update, translating to less one round per two halves, although there's been a jump of 56% in pistol rounds won by terrorists.
That is true despite a won pistol round leading to a 2-0 lead more than 93% of the time, and a 3-0 lead 65% of the time as counter-terrorists. The number for a 3-0 lead is 78% for terrorists, more importantly.
By far the hardest map to win a second round buy is de_nuke_se. Counter-terrorists go up 2-0 an incredible 97% of the time; terrorists have only won that round nine times in our database of 324 such instances.
It's easier to win the first three rounds as terrorists on all maps but de_inferno_se and de_nuke_se, where teams often opt to buy early. Best odds to go up 3-0 are on de_dust2_se, 82% following a pistol round win.
To sum it up, teams must have gotten a whole lot better as counter-terrorists, especially de_train_se, to lose less than a round on average compared to before, despite starting the defensive side down 0-3 as much as 17% more often than in the past.
AK47 versus Colt M4A4
Perhaps the most requested change out of anything that has been brought up for GO has been the missing silencer for Colt M4A4. According to stats, adding it could certainly even things up in the rifle department.
As it stands now, the AK47 is a significantly more popular weapon of choice than its counterpart. A total of 39% of all kills in the game are scored with an AK47, versus a much lower 28% of the Colt.
In Counter-Strike those numbers were 38% for AK and 30% for M4A1; not a big difference on paper, but when you look at the breakdown for counter-terrorists it begins to paint a picture.
In CS:GO under 2% of all terrorist side kills are scored with an M4A4, compared to 13% of counter-terrorist kills starting from an AK47 barrel. That means a total of 15% of all kills are scored with the other team's rifle, and that on the opposing team an AK is picked up much more than an M4A4.
To once again compare it to the older CS title of 1.6, the number was just under 10%, with almost the entire jump coming from players choosing to use an AK47 as the defenders much more often in the new game.
Adding a silencer for the Colt M4A4 would make the weapon more popular without giving anyone an unfair advantage. We've seen literally thousands of people asking for it, and the time really has come for it to be included.
We know Valve's rational that the counter-terrorists would gain an advantage, but I don't think it's such a big difference. Sure, the quieter sound helps its case, but the silencer should also hinder the weapon in some way, as it did with recoil in 1.6.
It also wouldn't give the same advantage in spamming walls as it did in 1.6 on maps like de_nuke and de_dust2 because you can hardly spam anything, and because you can't really hear yourself hitting people through walls as effectively.
Everyone from the public players to competitors and professionals wants it back, and there's even a chance csgo_dev's tweet suggested it is en route back, so hopefully that is the case.
If not, the good guys will be stuck with a weaker weapon that costs $400 more than the AK47, on a side where you have to buy more equipment in general. Something must change.
Better off without changes?
Would Counter-Strike: Global Offensive be better balanced had Valve not attempted to fix the weapons based on what is likely for the most part, since there are more casual than competitive gamers, data from matchmaking and lower levels of play?
You can't be certain they aren't doing the right thing, but I can't imagine it hurting if they were to put a little more emphasis on how the maps are playing out in the professional circuit.
One thing to consider as well is that not every map should be intended to have a 50-50 split in rounds; some of the best maps in CS 1.6, namely de_train and de_nuke, used to be very counter-terrorist sided.
Half scores have lost a lot of their meaning in CS:GO where more often than not teams switch sides with a 9-6 lead at most, which means they often don't even get put in situations where they'd need to mount massive comebacks.
The game will keep evolving regardless of Valve's future plans, but I do believe making some adjustments and adding the silencer for the Colt M4A4 would improve the game in its current state.
Most importantly, something needs to be done about the pistols, as soon as possible. Regardless of the affect they are or aren't having on half scores, they simply aren't balanced as it stands.
Either the Glock should be nerfed, or the P2000 would have to be improved in comparison to its counterpart. As of right now, as the data proves, the Glock is simply out of this world as a pistol round weapon.
What would you like to see changed next in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive? Where should Valve's developer team next focus their efforts? Leave a comment below.
As for the lack of comeback situations, I think that's more upto the particular match than weapons or maps themselves.
Post edited 2013-08-01 21:42:08
However it IS interesting that pistol rounds should have so much of an effect maybe something should be done about that (I dunno, a pistol round loss gives you 2400$ instead of the usual 1900, allowing for a 3rd round buy).
2. faster updates
3. cs:go f2p
4. micro transactions
5. cs:go championship series like LCS in league of legends
= cs:go top1 competitive fps game
ofc i could be wrong but this seems kinda logical to me...
These are just my basic ideas how to make csgo f2p but I think it could work.
in other words, csgo will only live if valve seriously starts giving a shit. which i dont see happpening.
3. valve must listen to professionel players and follow them
4. 128 tickrate in Matchmaking and ban russians too many cheat
= csgo best game :)
and the list is way too fucking long!
anyway, good job lurppis
Post edited 2013-08-01 21:56:01
Add tuscan, new cache, mirage_ce, season and the 2 new maps I mentioned to the map poll of matchmaking and finally the 128 tick servers, with less servers but more scatered around Europe, USA, whatever, to make less ping possible for players from countries far from the actual server locations (equality of conditions).
Little buff to deagle and maybe some other weapons. I think those are the main. If this list is completed, then CSGO will be a top game and can equal LoL numbers or get close to them. Free to play... Well it's an interesting question. If they decide to put it free to play, then add to the list improved anti-cheat and do not ban the account, but the IP. Of course you can change it but 10 year old kid's (main cheater source) probably won't know how to change it. Add some microtransactions to help cs:go, whatever, skins, operation payback and things like that. These are my thoughts about cs:go.
Post edited 2013-08-01 22:26:29
"I have NEVER heard a single word from any of our sponsors about graphics. In fact, for our event in Shanghai two seasons ago it was Intel that asked us to run a local Chinese DotA tournament. We all know DotA is a game made on a 2002 engine."
Thats like me making my first computer system with the name Microsoft.
Would it sell better with the name Microsoft or the name B4C0N_SOFT.
The name sells, so don't give to much credit to cs:go about how good the game is for sponsors. Because they "stole" a very well known brand, so ofc cs:go is gonna have a better start that 1.6 did. Because cs:go takes the name counter-strike and counter-strike already proved to people to be a good game, so when people see a "counter-strike 2" ofc it sells more the first months than 1.6 did.
Post edited 2013-08-02 13:05:40
And 1.6 had its playerbase high even through HoN, LoL, Dota2 etc etc came out.
But anyways, the point is that cs:go is "fast growing" because of the name. Nothing more, if cs:go didn't have CS in it, i doubt many would play it.
When HoN, LoL and Dota 2 came out, CS player base was already stablished.
Not to mention CS was a new exciting thing, and CSGO has the burden of being better than its predecessors.
Yet it had many players because the game was awesome.
And Starcraft, dota and wow was/is pretty big.
Gaming was also less popular
So ofc there wasn't as many as today, i know that. But people still had the chance to try thoose MOBA games you talk about.
But i think you misunderstand me, im not hating on cs:go. But people are trying to make cs:go look better than 1.6 because the events was there from start. Well its pretty easy to have events at a new game that is just an "updatet" version of an old game that had a competetiv scene thay moved along with the new game.
Post edited 2013-08-02 16:45:21
p2000 need buff 100% agree
Post edited 2013-08-01 22:07:47
As far as pistol balance is concerned, I think giving the P2K a more USP-based sound effect would make it at least twice as effective, haha. But seriously though, I like the fact that the glock is not a mere water pistol anymore, so buffing the P2K seems to be the way to go. The glock's damage output on range should be decreased, the P2K's increased. That's it pretty much. Maybe there could be a silencer for the P2K aswell, decreasing the damage output on long ranges and increasing it on short ranges, like it did in 1.6 (for the M4A4 also, of course).
Post edited 2013-08-01 22:07:20
The nerf of the p250, i never understod. The glock got boosted and thats fine, when the p250 was an alternative, but now the p250 is more or less shit compared to the alternative which is p2000 and armor/nades. Give us a better p250 again, and keep the glock as it is now (make the eco rounds slighty more cool) and do something about the Deagle...:D
Post edited 2013-08-01 23:18:04
They could also clean the awp scope :/
Post edited 2013-08-01 22:30:08
About this question:
Either the Glock should be nerfed, or the P2000 would have to be improved in comparison so its counterpart.
- buff P2000 rate of fire (CycleTime: 0.17 -> 0.165) and give us a try
- nerf Glock slightly
About deagle, they should tweak in example: http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.p..
Post edited 2013-08-01 22:34:41
About deagle, take a look on damage it's low with that deagle we can kill 2 guys one by one like in CS 1.6, right not it's nearly impossible, 1 guy is 100% aim but second will be the total random, to kill the second guy with aim you need to wait steady about 3/4 seconds and in that time you will be dead.
So what is the point to buy the gun foo $800 and kill only 1 opponent?
Most people wants "beta deagle" so this is it, tweaked beta deagle.
i think to bring some fresh blood to the game valve should improve the demoviewing section, where you could watch the demos round by round, where you could stream ingame without twitch (or implement twitch � but i'd enjoy a stream more where i could go back a few seconds just to watch a highlight).
to make the game f2p with some skins you can buy is obviously a good start, but the gameplay still needs to be improved so the new players and the old would want to play with it for a long time.
the guys before me have already said the most important things a lot, rebalancing guns, improving dynamics and maps, make the game a bit less random, more strategic etc etc.
i hope that valve starts to listen, but i doubt it. im playing the game, enjoying the game, but if there was a big competitive scene who plays a game like 1.6 i'd have max 20 hrs overall in this game.
Post edited 2013-08-01 22:43:47
glock should be nerfed
Post edited 2013-08-01 23:01:14
Am I missing something or they are just not that important for CTs?
Valve should realize that whats fun about a game isn't just scorelines but how you get the kills, expecting all the players to just stand and aim rather than play sneaky and creative is wronk.
Just attaching the silencer to my m4 takes my enjoyment up a notch. Because I'm now in a new mode of play.
As game designers they couldn't be more wrong about their audience. I just hope they realize their mistake and not try to blame an expanded shooting game market or bad PR.
Post edited 2013-08-01 23:12:14
Unless I misread, it says that the glock has 52% of all gun rounds kills.
It then says that the usp had 68% in 1.6.
I don't know for you guys, but 52% seems a lot more balanced to me...
1. Glock needs to be under-powered, its a TOO outworld gun.
2. M4 needs some of this things: +damage or silencer or be cheaper.
3. AWP fast scopes are Awful and completely random, they need to improve that, and you cant shot and fastly change to the pistol like 1.6.
4. Deagle is bad, now you dont see that amazing rounds in a DE-eco, because it cost $800 and just the 1st bullet hit.
5. P2000 is annoying bad, they should include a p250 as default gun for ct-side + low damage to glock. This should works fine.
6. The Money sistem: a knife kill gives you $500+, and an awp kill gives you $100, not balanced for the awpers.
7. Movement Commands and settings
8. Mayor Events and tournaments, like the Dota2 community. $2M in prizes - $200k for the highest pot in CS:GO.
9. 128 tickrate in community matchmaking, and stop giving a BOT when somebody leaves the match, another person should join the server.
10. use the ESEA maps as official, the fog on some maps is terrible.
inevitably the growing will be=
CS:GO 200.000+ players due to the / CS 1.6 + CS:S + New Players will migrate at the same game.
I hope you read this, and sorry for any grammar mistake!
Post edited 2013-08-01 23:39:14
p90, bizon increase recoil while run & shoot!
Post edited 2013-08-02 00:08:37
1) One shot to the head to kill
2) Muzzle rise that is similar to 1.6
3) Slower rate of fire
Reasons not to choose M4:
1) Neck shot doesn't count for head shot
2) Requires two shots to the head to kill
3) Muzzle rise is not similar to 1.6
4) High rate of fire
5) No suppressor
Post edited 2013-08-02 00:10:26
1.Hitboxes don't change with the weapon. If you hit the head you hit the head. If you don't, you don't.
2. The m4 always had two shots in the head to kill. It's necessarily made less powerful because of the better recoil and high rate of fire. Making it a 1 shot HS would make the ak useless.
3. If you're talking about the recoil pattern, there is nothing wrong about having something different. Just a matter of practice.
4. A high rate of fire is what makes the m4 useful in defense, slowing it down would make it even weaker.
5. Let's hope it's added soon.
Exactly. The M4 has always been weaker but it had benefits over the AK in certain scenarios. Currently there isn't a prevailing reason to use it...
The muzzle rise on the GO AK is very similar to CS. Whereas the muzzle rise on the GO M4 is different from CS. So 1.6 players will find the AK familiar to use in GO. Also the AK's rate of fire makes GO recoil easier to control. Lastly, the AK can make recoil control irrelevant because you only need to click once or burst twice.
In GO a high rate of fire makes it difficult to spray. The current recoil behavior locks the crosshair more closely to the bullet trajectory. This means when you fire your crosshair moves off the target. You are required to make fine adjustments to place your bullets back on target or wait until the cool down time has passed. In CS this behavior was forgiving -- humans can actually react effectively.
Post edited 2013-08-02 04:59:52
What will change however is off course the damage they will make, but you already know that.
The m4 still has benefits over the ak in certain scenarios. Not as many as in CS 1.6, because of the silencer missing, but still. The fact that you don't see a prevailing reason to use it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
If you're trying to say that the ak is more comfortable for 1.6ers, yes I agree.
A high rate of fire was always resulting in a difficulty to control the spray... It's not specific to CS:GO...
I don't think controlling a spray in GO is harder to do than in 1.6 honestly.
The benefits of the m4 over the ak are a better spray control and a higher rate of fire (both of these were already in 1.6). I already know you don't seem to agree, but it doesn't make much difference.
AK is slower than in CS 1.6.
CS:GO = 3s (full clip)
CS 1.6 = 2.8s
About 4) on M4:
M4A4 is slower than in CS 1.6.
CS:GO = 2.6s
CS 1.6 = 2.5s
About 1) on M4:
It's better than before, so for me you're wrong in this point.
So when you aim for the neck (while face to face) in 1.6 you are technically aiming at the chin. When you aim for the same area in GO you are aiming right below the head hit-box. The bullet spread then determines whether you get a head shot or a body shot in GO.
Post edited 2013-08-03 05:50:34
The game shouldn't be balanced. Why ? "1.6 wasn't", classic.
Maybe they could let CTs buy the glock, but then it would most probably be glock+kevlar vs glock.
But the maps don't have to be, cause that brings actual variety opposed to forcing variety by making guns imbalanced. It proved to work well in 1.6 for over 10 years with the imbalanced nuke and train maps, so based on experience it's a solid concept.
Valve made something ugly, low cost, with CS : they tweaked weapons and money system (+peeker advantage ?) to favor T because it cost less than working on heavily CT sided maps.
Obviously "balance" has not the same meaning for everyone, to me it means that you must be able to get pretty much the same number of rounds playing ct or t (with teams at the same level). If it occurs on most of the maps (and it does on CSGO) then it's fine.
The colt should have a silencer, seeing as that it costs $400 more than the ak and is less powerful.
Defuse kits should go back down to $200--I'm also confused as to why this hasn't been fixed yet.
Post edited 2013-08-02 00:47:41
Sometimes the glock feels indeed OP, sure, but I don't know exactly how much it should be nerfed.
2.fix some narrow passage in the train/inf ..Remove some decoration,let the map becomes more concise.
do something valve!!!!!!!
- Weapon balance and recoil were adjusted with pro community input ( Thanks to J3Di, NiP, VeryGames, ESC, 4NOT, mTw, and FM TOXiC )
Post edited 2013-08-02 04:31:57
Bring back the good things the old CS had and throw it into a newer engine, it's simple.
2. AK 47 make a little more powerful
3. Fix AWP fast zoom every shoot missing accuracy.
4. clean the scope awp.
5.the clock is fine in real life you can shoot and run in the same time
6. CHANGE THE P2000 with colt 45 acp. - low magazin but well be good for eco round, with p2000 you can win eco round.
7. turn off the smoke-dust on the maps i cant see the enemys from long distance.
8. fix glock burst mode. it suck.
sorry for my bad englesh
2. AK is fine as a weapon
4. with certain graphics options it is clean
5. cs in not a real life simulator and i don't see anyone talking about the run and shoot part, every pistol is like that
8. it's fine
*Were taken from /scripts folder, file "weapon_m4a1.txt".
// before string means description for this string or use to make program do not execute this string without removing it from code.*
// "SilencerModel" "models/weapons/w_rif_m4a1_silencer.mdl"
// "special1" "Weapon_M4A1.Silenced"
// "special2" "Weapon_M4A1.Silencer_Off"
// "special3" "Weapon_M4A1.Silencer_On"
// accuracy model parameters
That means they have already coded silencer in game(copy-pasted from cs:s actually but who cares). They just have to make 3d model of silencer and attach it to 3d model of m4.
Ton of kids from gamebanana.com can do this.
Post edited 2013-08-02 10:06:46
I like the fact that we need to adapt to a new way of playing in competitive, pistol rounds are now so important (to not loose as T and to win as CT^^)...
But true, I'd like to get back the fucking silencer xD
So you will increase the community and there for get more payed players that also want to go to the beter MM section.
And of course the silencer, so we can finally stop a rush with 4-5 kills in a single spray.
So if the weapon should be balanced,then the maps should be balanced too.
Otherwise the knife round will probably decide which one will win.
In my opnion,who plays the advantaged side first who has more winning pecentage of the match,and the more unbalanced the map is,the more obvious it is.
So if the map is extremely unbalanced that lead ur opponents get 14or 15 points in CT side for example,it's harder for u to comeback when u are under heavy stress because ur opponents are so close to or have got the matchpoint.And I think that's why everyteam almost chooses the advantaged side everytime after winning the knife round and that's why the knife round exists.
But I haven't analysed the statistic such as comparing the winning percentage for each team when they start on t side with one when they start on ct side to get this conclusion ,so may be I am wrong.:)
And I would like to ask u a question:As an IGL,which side u would prefer to choose on de_dust2_se which is a third map of a main tournament's final Bo3 after winning the knife round .
I completely don't understand what you wanted to say.
He's right and it looks like you are totally good with scores like 14:1 and 0:15 etc.
I agree with whole article, but something more needs to be done or scores will be just like that.
Silencer, Nerf glock/better p2000 etc. Looks like most of potential changes benefit CTs ;)
Post edited 2013-08-02 18:40:09
P2000 and Glock = $200 + tweak P2000
Other pistols = $300 or $400 + balance
Deagle = $800 + tweaks
Then people will use pistol what they like.
P250 = better on medium distance + smth special
FiveSeven = better on long distance + smth special
Tec9 = better on long distance + smth special
Elite = better on short distance + smth special
The same they could do with AUG and SIG:
AUG - slightly worse than M4A4 in dmg and parameters, current rate of fire and scope, the same price as M4A4 ($3100)
SIG - slightly worse than AK47 in dmg and parameters, current rate of fire and scope, current scope, the same price as AK47 ($2700)
So players will pick gun in this way:
1. Gun for short distance and spray - they will buy M4A4
2. Gun for long distance and tap - they will buy AUG
1. Gun for short distance and spray - they will buy AK47
2. Gun for long distance and tap - they will buy SIG
Currently they often buy M4/AK and very rare AUG/SIG.
It's only the suggestion how they can change smth about pistols balance.
"smth special" could be armor penetration, damage, range, inaccuracy parameteres, recovery, recoil parameters etc.
It's not soo hard to do.
1. Do the same parameteres for these pistols.
2. Tweak them to be different but still without changing the price.
People don't buy other pistols because they're too expensive and they prefer to buy defuser/grenades because they're more important on pistol rounds.
So why not to make these pistol cheap so they can buy pistol what they like (pistol for choosed role/position) and they will still have the money for defuser/grenades but not for vest.
Post edited 2013-08-02 13:57:49
Did you even read the news?
Deagle in example should be picked after losing first round aka deco round ofc ourse when some team is confident about that move.
Statistics aren't always a indicative of balance. See the silencer for example, adding it probably will raise the use of M4, but this doesn't necessarily means that the M4 will be stronger.
Even with my changes people would still stick with default weapons and buy defuser/grenades/vest but on the other hand it's highly possible that other pistols would be used more often.
When deagle will be better people will use it more for "deco" round which was really nice move in CS 1.6 and maybe CS:S.
Post edited 2013-08-02 14:31:24
Even in CS 1.6 people didn't use other pistols.
So thinking that "price" is the solution is a stupid idea.
They don't think price is the best parameter, its just one more parameter, one that affects the planning side of the game.
Think about it, seriously: what would happen if every weapon had the same price?
Only "other pistols": P250, FiveSeven, Tec9 and Elite.
Please read more carefully next time.
Then I'll shut up and admit your right.
Here's the deal: when you create a new weapon, you want that weapon to feel unique. It must be used differently than the weapons that already exist, otherwise there's no point on creating it. Every weapon is just a representation of a different playstyle. The problem is, some playstyles are inherently better than others, thats where the price comes in, you get what you pay for.
Creating an entirely new playstyle isn't as easy as just changing a few parameters, you have to know what you're aiming for, and remember it must feel different. Due to the nature of the game, how the maps were made and how the game flows, there's only a few possible different pistol playstyles. Right now, whats the difference between p2000, p250 and Five-Seven? Do playing with each one of them really feels different? You may think that a change in effectiveness from medium to long range justifies the existence of a new pistol, but in reality two players each one with one of these will face overall the same situations on a map, and one of them will be more effective most of the time (because maps don't favor all playstyles equally). And there's still the problem that pistols must cohexist with other weapons like rifles, so they must be different than other pistols, and different than other weapons too.
So, why is cost there? Because this way you give players a reason to use weaker weapons, you add a new parameter to be considered. If you want to save money for a defuse kit, don't buy a better pistol. If you aren't such a good aimer anyway this would be a wise decision. This is the reason smgs and shotguns are cheaper than rifles (and this is also the reason why they reward the player with more money per kill). You say almost everyone buys grenades instead of pistols, but this is because almost everyone favors tactical play instead of raw killing power, and you're taking into consideration only pistol rounds.
For example, lets say I'm playing CT. On eco rounds, I always buy a p250 and maybe an HE (depending on how much money I'm planning to save), because I'm good enough to kill unaware, unlucky, or just plain bad rifle players with it, but thats a risky choice (p250 is so cheap though that the risk is almost always worth taking). Now see how this works, with the same amount of money, I could buy armor, or a stronger pistol (Five-Seven), or a defusal kit. With the HE + p250 I could try to surprise them with a crazy rush and maybe kill one player and do so damage to the other ones. With the defusal kit option, I could try to play carefully and take advantage of any errors the TR's make to try to eliminate them at the last second and defuse the bomb. Alternatively, I could just be cautious, don't buy anything this round and make a safe full buy on the next round.
In CS 1.6 we have deagle and nothing more.
Pistol round - often default pistol with equipment, sometimes stronger pistol without equipment
Eco round - often full eco, sometimes strong pistol
Or maybe you have some idea how to change the "usage" of other pistols?
For me P2000 should has slightly faster rate of fire to balance it with strong glock.
And the deagle need to be tweaked so we can kill 2 guys one by one in a situation.
I don't think deagle should be buffed. It's actually pretty good right now, a 800 weapon that can kill anyone anytime with a single HS. You just gotta have good aim. If you buff it, all the other pistols will be less useful in the same proportion, and I believe we don't want that. The things is, there is no such a thing as the old deagle playstyle anymore because thats was too unbalanced. Do you think its really fair for a player to be able to take out 2 armed enemies with a $650 weapon and two consecutive and very fast shots? It sure wasn't easy, but it wasn't that hard too, anybody could pull it off with some pratice, what the hell people used to even get aces against fully armed teams.
Glock: yes it needs a little nerf, range or innacuracy.
P2000: need to be slighlty faster
Deagle: is shit, you can only hs people every 4 seconds, right now you need to aim ideal shot and run away to get next position for clear shot.
We should be able to kill although 2 guys in a row.
About "unbalanced" it was like that in CS 1.6 and no one complained, we 1.6 players love deagle actions.
They need to do smth with it and with other pistols too.
- good only in low range and in narrow alleys
- high armor penetration
- high recovery time
- good only in low/medium range
- normal armor penetration
- medium recovery time
- should be for $800 not $650
- similar to beta deagle
It could work only for casual players.
Untlil AK is the only one rifle with one-shot-one kill ability it will always be weapon of choice by pros.
Untlil AK is the only one rifle with one-shot-one kill ability it will always be weapon of choice by pros.
Wrong! SIG can 1s1k with helmet even from long range (1024 units).
Please test next time when you write smth like this.
And the funniest thing. What's the point of
"SIG - slightly worse than AK47 in dmg and parameters"
if you still want to remain it with 1s1k.
"SIG - slightly worse than AK47 in dmg and parameters"
if you still want to remain it with 1s1k.
Because than SIG would be 2nd AK47 but with scope, and we don't want that.
So why not to make weaker AK47 but with scope, then people will use it more often for long range, and AK for short/medium range.
They nerfing too much and buffing too much :)
If you do only those changes it will end up with 15:0 for CT. Yeah glocks are frustrating for cts, but on full rounds with well used nades Ts have nothing to say ;/
Post edited 2013-08-02 14:24:24
WHOAH, did not see that coming. What, with Valve's track record with CS sequels and everything.
inferno, mirage, train - you wouldn't even know where you were shot from with so many colors and details on the map.
With people not knowing when to buy and how to use grenades T side would be very hard. Same pain in the ass as it was on nuke and train in 1.6.
Making p2k more accurate, nerfing glock and p90 are good ideas. Other than that please leave matchmaking alone.
P2000 has really good accurate, but it's slower than USP so for me they could only change "CycleTime from 0.170 to 0.165 or even 0.160".
Post edited 2013-08-02 15:08:30
And they won't learn because Valve gives points and MVPs to wrong people. And if you play responsible, support role, you will always play with those who started playing last week.
To me, this move has been a great element in cs. It helps us when we are about to go peek a corner, or surprise attack an area. It also gives a different sensation (a good one too!) when moving around the map. So when I first tried cs:go, the first thing I did when I started moving was tap the duck button, apparently, cs:go models get tired faster than those of cs 1.6. I noticed this when I pressed the duck button continuously, and the pace starts to slow down. It's kinda sad to me that we can't do the duck-jump anymore, it was great to have it.
2. Another thing I noticed about the jumping mechanism, is the movement mid-air. The way we jump in cs:go is a bit awkward. I feel that it would be better to improve the strafe-jump in cs:go. It might just be me though.
3. Also, it would be great if we can peek from behind boxes with the duck button, just like 1.6.
4. I must raise my voice on the awp quick-scoping as well. I've been trying to pull off this move ever since I started picking up the awp in cs:go, but out of 10 tries, maybe only 2 or 3 are successful. This might be a problem with the movement, or the bullet registry, and some of you might think I'm just a noob who can't do that awesome move, believe me though, I could swear it should've hit. Anyway, it would be great if the quick-scope is buffed a little bit.
I may sound like a 1.6 freak, but I think these moves are worthy enough to be applied in cs:go.
5. Please change the penalty you get when abandoning a competitive match. I just got my third ban (24 hours) simply because of a power outage. In my country it's quite common, and it's quite random too. It might happen anytime throughout the day. So there's no way for me to set a gaming schedule for this. It's kinda annoying that you get these matchmaking cooldowns when it's not even your fault.
Other than that, I pretty much agree with the balancing of the weapons. Either make it available for both sides, or balance out each side's respective weapons.
Sorry if I made mistakes, I'm just trying to give my opinion for this game to get better. I love it, just needs some tweaks to get to its optimal state.
- shotguns should be nerfed, some wallbangs should be added
- the sound system should be reworked because it's not very accurate sometimes
- the recoil of the deagle should be reworked as well
- and for god's sake, fix this fps leak issue.
- complete end to adadadad
- larger maps to 1.6 scale
- more consistent spam spots
- increased nmber of total boosters
- old weapon reload and selection animations
- classic player skins
everytime i see "33% more" on bottles i think... 33% more than a bottle i didn't pay attention months ago?
223% does look impressive in text though. nonetheless, you're writing is getting better. keep it up
Post edited 2013-08-04 11:35:57
Should be 7.5% of all kills.
Great read otherwise, +1!
1. you need 1 month to put silencer ???
2. you say de_tuscan well be done in the end of july???
3. valve asking the gamers what they want to be change - many comments
we say :
-fix awp fast zoom
-clean the scope
-silencer on m4...................................... and you dont change nothing
(VALVE What would you like to see changed next in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive? Where should Valve's developer team next focus their efforts? Leave a comment below). DONT ASK ME AGAIN "liars"
SORRY FOR MY BAD ENGLISH.
GL HF PLAYERS and dont answer on valve issues they made us
Post edited 2013-08-07 09:44:56
Valve have to please both 1.6 and Source scene, so there must be some balance. And it takes some time.
You're f*cking retarded if you refuse playing CS:GO just because of silencer.
ask your self why counter strike GO is not on WCG . and never be on the level on history 1.6
Put the famous weapons like colt45 , walter ,SW , .....
If i shoot 1 bulett in the helmet with m4 your head well be on pieces.
Learn more about weapons and back to speak with me fool
GIVE ME ANSWER ON THIS QUESTION http://www.hltv.org/news/10813-no-counter-strike-a.. MORRRRRON
THIS IS REAL GAME LIKE REAL LIFE!!!
BUT CS GO NEVER BE...