Why coaching is the future of CS

After explaining why a coach likely will not benefit Titan much last week, this time we look at all the benefits recruiting one could bring for a team.

With last Friday's "A brief look at Titan and coaching" article giving a measly outlook on the team's decision to hire a coach, we look at the other side of the coin this week.

Make no mistake, coaching is valuable and will be a huge asset to the right teams using the advantages it gives in the right way. I simply do not believe Titan are the right team for it, or hired the right coach.

For those interested in the subject, we also talked about it in-depth in [POD]Cast episode #17 together with Duncan "Thorin" Shields and fnatic's Patrik "cArn" Sättermon.

Below are just some of the ways I believe introducing coaches to today's Counter-Strike teams could benefit everyone involved, and are the reason I think coaching is the future of CS.


Could teams other than Titan gain more from coaching? 

 

Improved in-game calling

As outlined in the Titan coaching piece, I strongly believe having a coach on the voice communication software with the entire team and able to see everyone's monitors during a match will make teams better. It's so much easier to make the right calls when you see everything that happens - no team communicates nearly enough to make up for the difference.

You can pick up patterns in the other team's play a lot easier when you can see all the grenades being thrown. You can quickly notice if one of your players is overextending, or is not aggressive enough in trading a kill. It's also going to be a whole lot easier to adjust to the other team, when you have a better understanding of how they play in the first place.

From my experience as a coach at World Cyber Games events, while only allowed to speak during freezetime, it felt as if calling the right plays was almost as easy as when watching games with the whole map visible on GOTV. It's hard to overstate how much useful information goes uncommunicated in a given match, which proves how right Dave "moto" Geffon was when he said it's impossible to communicate too much.

Furthermore, you will get to focus entirely on calling. No more worrying about your movement, aiming or where to look when you're attacking a site. All you have to do, as a coach, is figure out what the best tactic for any given round is, or what the best overall strategy to beat a certain team is. That opens up so much brain power to pure thinking on a strategic level.

It also allows you to spend time thinking about the upcoming rounds mid-round. Normally you have to formulate your thoughts subconsciously, or during a few free seconds between the rounds. All of a sudden the coach would have up to a minute to go through different options in his head, consider all the information available and to make the best decision. Don't undervalue this part, it will improve calling.

On the other hand, it will also make whoever was the in-game leader before a better player. No longer will that person have to focus on his teammates, spend excess energy on reading the other team or make sure everyone is doing everything correctly mid-round. You get to look at your crosshair, be aware of what is going on and try to click some heads. It's a lot more fun.


Even a CS genius like ave could have improved with help

 

Allows for better players

Most modern teams, save for the mid 2013 version of fnatic and the 2014 LGB eSports, have a roster spot for a designated in-game leader. That's probably the thinnest spot on the roster in terms of available talent - there are very few good in-game leaders, and thus it's less likely the good ones are skilled individually - and therefore there's plenty of room for improvement.

In practice that would mean substituting an individually weak in-game leader, who is still good at his main job, into the coaching position. That would allow the team to recruit a more skilled player in his place, improving the overall skill level of the team, as well as leadership, as explained above. Good examples for teams who could benefit from this are Titan and dignitas, whose leaders struggle in fragging.

That's not to say players such as Richard "shox" Papillon, who are able to make good mid-round calls themselves, wouldn't help a team. They could bring in valuable thoughts, but they wouldn't have to relied on them. In other words, they could chime in when they wanted to, as opposed to being forced to do it every single round. Imagine a good mid-round caller, and allow him to only call when he wants to. That's going to improve the overall level of his calls.

Some will argue in-game leading will not affect a player's performance, and for some it may be right - it all depends on the individual. But once teams start employing five players recruited based on their team work, chemistry, communication and individual skills - with no focus on leadership - those teams will inevitably become more like the 2012 fnatic squad, which included five legitimate fraggers, and therefore more pure firepower.

As mentioned in the paragraph above, there are much more good fraggers than good in-game leaders. If we don't need a player who happens to be good at both, we can get a better in-game leader as a coach - regardless of his skill level individually - and a better fragger - who can't read the other team, or make equally good calls - but will provide more firepower. That's a win-win situation, and one that any team should strive for.


fnatic 2012 basically had no real in-game leader 

 

Mistakes can be fixed faster

Lost a few key rounds in a match and you're about to start your next series in fifteen minutes? No problem, the coach probably saw what went wrong and will be able to point it out before it starts. A traditional team won't stand a chance in comparison, unless you're Danilo "Zeus" Teslenko and willing to spend breaks watching demos. And even then there's very limited time.

What's better, you won't even have to wait until the next game. It's normal for teams, even the very best in the world, to have small arguments after lost rounds. Sometimes they extend to multiple rounds, and generally don't lead to cohesive decisions without the in-game leader making, sometimes unpopular, executive decisions and overruling others.

If you have a coach, who possesses more authority than all the five players on the server, the whole game changes. All of a sudden instead of having five players looking at each other to find out whose fault something was, you have a coach who can simply tell a player to try something differently next round. It can reduce tension, while improving the team's play.

This applies to practice, too. Sometimes for a leader it can be hard to tell in practice whether a new tactic is flawed completely, a minor tweak could fix it, or if the loss was simply caused by a big mistake by one of the players, or a huge performance by an opponent. Player egos play to this part too, as refusing to acknowledge a mistake may lead the entire team wrong.

Having a coach overlooking the entire process changes everything. No more will you have to rely on players' own opinions, you can make the decision yourself, as a coach. These are only a few examples - in reality there are almost no limits to this. Coaching will change the game entirely when it comes to adjusting, just like it surely did in today's mainstream sports back in the day.


Zeus could use some help with demos
 

 

Better scouting

Although in an ideal world players would spend hours upon hours watching demos of their opposing teams playing before events, in reality that's hardly the case - most people prefer actually playing themselves, and focusing on their own game as opposed to their opponents'. However, a coach could easily put in multiple hours watching other teams, as he wouldn't have to worry about his own individual play, simply decisions he'd make.

If a coach had all this time to focus on preparation, he could also easily hire a few trusted friends to go over some demos and analyze them for him in a way that would be easy to do but still give him valuable information. Go over NiP's all pistol round tactics on de_dust2 and de_inferno from the past month? Done. Write down everything Patrik "f0rest" Lindberg does on de_nuke so we can try to stop him? Easily done.

Already in the past have some people, including myself, used this. During tournaments when you might have a twenty minute window between matches, you could text your friend and ask him to watch fnatic's two most recent de_mirage demos to find out their pistol rounds before a lower bracket match at e-Stars 2011, because you couldn't do it yourself at the event. Don't think it doesn't help.

This isn't new either. As far back as in 2005, one of the most successful North American teams of all time, Team 3D, hired a coach. That was Chris "bootman" Boutte, best known for his playbooks on GotFrag. According to him, he also served as the in-game leader for 3D at ESWC 2005, but for the most part he worked as an assistant, going through demos for the team and helping them prepare for matches, for the six months he stayed on.

A team could also go one step further, and hire an assistant coach. They exist in real sports for a reason, and if Counter-Strike were to become big enough, they would appear here too, though potentially under a different title. If The International had a $10,000,000 prize purse in 2015, there's no way some top teams wouldn't hire more assistants to help with analyzing demos, opponents' playing styles, and more.

You may argue you can already do all of this without a coach, but here's the difference - as a player, and an in-game leader, your time is already limited. Why put even more burden on you than necessary? As a coach, you don't have to play, which saves an immense amount of time for you. All of a sudden you can, and should spend extra energy on all these seemingly minor details, and when you add them all up, I guarantee they will make a difference.


Thorin would be my best coaching candidate without a player background

 

Less arguing among the players

This seems counter intuitive, because surely the coach needs to be on the same page with his players, but if the players are able to put some of the blame on the coach as well, it may reduce tension among the team. Arguments will still come up, but their role, depending on how the authority among the team is split, will be vastly different. Can we see teams swapping coaches in the future? You bet we can.

Will changing your coach be more of a hassle than changing a player? That depends how your team is built. An experienced coach who fits the team he partners up with can easily be taught their existing playing style, which he can then modify as he sees fit. That would allow for the team stay together for longer, which most likely would improve a team's results.

Still, ideally it wouldn't even come down to changing a coach, or a player. In an ideal world the coach would be able to cool down the arguing players before the issues ever became that large. Having an authority figure above you will make people respond differently, but it's then up to the coach to understand how to deal with your specific players and to get them on the same page without arguments.

This especially helps teams with young players. Next paragraph, dealing with pressure, will show how young many top teams are. Those players will likely cause more arguments, and a coach overlooking them should be able to reinforce good habits, while slowly chucking away at the bad ones. A good coach will also help with player development, which is a key factor to consider.

Sometimes very talented players don't blossom because they're put in wrong situations. Consider Christopher "GeT_RiGhT" Alesund in SK Gaming and NiP, or Timi "aslak" Verkkoperä in teams prior to WinFakt. A good coach can do what players don't necessarily have the motivation for; gel with new players, and help them adapt to their new situation as a professional player.

Don't rule out a future with various different coach types either, equivalents to, for example, shooting coaches in the NBA. Many teams, including my EG rosters, needed people to act as the glue in the team. In the future that glue might not have to be a starter, it could be a coach. There is little doubt Ediz "goodfornothing" Basol - who would have been a great coach as well - could have worked his magic from the sidelines as well.


Devastating losses have often caused tension within teams 

 

Handling pressure

For young teams handling the pressure of major events can be a grueling task, and if you take a look at our age chart for DreamHack Summer, you see that even many of the top teams in the world are still fairly young. An experienced coach who has been through all of it before as a player can certainly help with the mental aspects of the game, thus reducing the pressure players feel in-game.

fnatic said Sättermon didn't call strategies during their triumph at DreamHack Winter, but they stated Sättermon did help with the team staying calm and keeping their composure in their first major Counter-Strike event final. Especially when bringing on younger players and the in-game leader already has his hands full with other stuff, a coach can really help here.

When this part evolves, all of a sudden it may become more trendy to give younger players a shot, too. Maybe coaches will be able to help whom many now consider online players adjust to tournament play, which will then deepen the talent pool available for teams to recruit. If Sättermon helped fnatic win a major, don't think others couldn't benefit from similar type of coaching.

Even for teams not made of young players, some of them tend to get into arguments during close games - the 2008-2010 mousesports team is a good example - and part of it probably caused by the players' bad habits of dealing with the building pressure in those matches. Having a coach there can surely help, as explained in more detail above, and it may help teams develop killer instinct; that magical X factor some have, while others do not.


If cArn helped fnatic, coaches could help other teams, too

 

How to implement it in-game

Obviously a vast majority of hours all the professional players play Counter-Strike is not at tournaments, where coaching can be easily implemented. Most of it takes place at home, with players logging onto Steam and communicating over a voice communication software. Luckily a coaching mode already happens to exist in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive.

Older competitive players may remember certain Counter-Strike 1.6 teams, for example mousesports, often having their manager in-game watching them practice. He would join the team without picking a skin, enabling him to spectate everyone on his team only. In CS:GO you can do the same by typing "coach t/ct" in console. It will allow you to spectate your team, see their money, health bars, and everything else as you'd expect.

Valve could go a few steps further and make it more interesting. They could allow for a coach demo, which would be the equivalent of a GOTV demo, but would only allow its viewer to spectate anyone on his team. The developers could also add a notepad for the coach to write down important notes while watching, and he could use a screenshot function to send snapshots to his players to better explain what he wants them to do, à la whiteboards in sports.

This is simply to say coaching online wouldn't be an issue, and with some extra effort put in, Valve could really make the the coach's role in-game cool with a bunch of new useful features. Organizers could also bring back the timeout rule, which would be a lot more useful now. This is only the beginning, and brainstorming for a few more minutes would likely bring out a lot more useful ideas. Once we get down this route, expect more big changes to come.


The drawing map could be a key feature for coaches in-game 


Why not?

This part should be fairly short, because all the good reasons as to why not hire a coach for a Counter-Strike team are related to finances. Basically all real sports use coaches, for a reason. They can bring a lot to the table, and improve the performance of the players. Counter-Strike without coaches could be compared to the early days of the NBA when players such as Bill Russell acted as player-coaches. Those days are nearly fifty years gone, and they are not coming back, because it makes sense.

Others will argue against it for historical reasons, but those are the ones who struggle with change and adapting. Unlike changes to the games themselves, this realistically is only a change for the very best teams, and the players in the team. An average fan may not even be able to tell the difference, and that's why it won't be met with too much arguing, even by the people who wish to hold onto status quo.

Perhaps the biggest obstacle to coaching as I've explained it here are authority issues. There currently aren't enough retired in-game leaders for even all the top teams, and most of the ones out there (e.g. Alexander "ave" Holdt and Fatik "gob b" Dayik, and Björn "threat" Pers) have moved onto other things, and likely wouldn't want to come back to coaching for average money. It comes down to organizations having to work these coaches in slowly, and it's a long way to go.

Then again, as time passes by, players will slowly be forced to let go of their egos on this front and understand, like players in major sports have, that you do not have to be a professional player to understand a game better than one. Most coaches in professional sports did not play the game professionally, and even fewer were actually top players. The two qualities aren't exclusive, naturally, but you don't have to be a superstar to be a good coach. If the job opened up, there would be a lot more candidates, and some of them would turn out to be very good at it.

Flying one extra player around the world is not cheap, and hiring someone to effectively work full-time on a Counter-Strike team may cost even more. Still, if we are to believe our game will one day have millions in prizes, it's only a matter of time before someone would jump at the opportunity to get all these perks, hoping to get ahead of the curve. Let's imagine Valve's The International has CS:GO next year. Who wouldn't spend a few extra thousand dollars to try to win a few more million?


It wouldn't be easy to lure gob b back into CS
 

 

With ESL taking the first stance in allowing coaches to talk mid-round to their players in Katowice, it may only be a matter of time before a sixth man becomes standard in every team's corner.

Hopefully other tournament organizers will follow suit soon, and we can make coaching a reality in terms of it being allowed. Then it will only be up to the teams to implement it.

Follow HLTV.org's @lurppis_ on Twitter.

no its not the future
2014-07-10 20:25
15 replies
reason: because
2014-07-10 21:16
if you're going to outright dismiss the idea of coaches, at least explain why you fucking cretin.
2014-07-11 02:44
Agree. This game is 5v5 not 6v6 where is one guy behind who isn't playing but talks what to do. This is bad for competitive CSGO, the role of Team Leader get disappear. It is just a trend here to left Devilwalk and pay for Jerome.... I don't know but I think it is stupid.
2014-07-11 08:37
10 replies
#144
 | 
United States lurppis
i already pointed out in the article that some people will be against change - though i am not - but that doesn't mean a team with a good coach wouldn't have a massive advantage over another one without a good coach.
2014-07-11 08:53
6 replies
what about smaller teams not being able to afford a coach?
2014-07-11 10:39
5 replies
#157
 | 
United States lurppis
i assume the in-game leaders who aren't good enough individually will go to those teams, thus helping them move up on the scene. a team with a coach can lose to another without one - it's simply an advantage, not a guaranteed win.
2014-07-11 10:43
4 replies
Would you be open to coaching a team?
2014-07-11 10:53
3 replies
#162
 | 
United States lurppis
the problem is i quit playing cs because it was too time consuming, so i don't see myself being able to put in similar hours in a coaching role either - if i did, i'd simply play myself.
2014-07-11 11:00
2 replies
Do you play cs in any form anymore?
2014-07-16 09:36
1 reply
#219
 | 
United States lurppis
nah, i don't very much enjoy doing something so rarely, i have to be somewhat all-in in everything i do
2014-07-16 11:19
Basketball is 5v5 with substitute, NOT 6v6 but all teams even amateur does have coach. Just like fnatic 2012, there's no REAL IGL so why are you scared if the IGL role will disappear? One goal if this game is to kill the enemies so 5 player killing enemies is better than 4 players with 1 IGL that frag less.
2014-07-11 12:52
2 replies
Yes, but they have one HUGE difference: stadium not maps. They faced with their enemies. In this way Valve should erase all weapons and walls and left just 1 with 2 baskets and decoy made.
2014-07-11 19:39
1 reply
"They faced with their enemies.". CSGO also faced their enemy in game and literally, right? The coach is watching on the stadium while the 5 players is playing. A coach can also watch the 5 players in CSGO while playing. Is that a HUGE difference for you? How much more will be a HUGE for you? haha.
2014-07-11 19:47
Like in every other sport,the team has a coach. Why not have it in E-sport as well?
2014-07-11 11:32
Already the future in moba games like dota and LoL. I can't see why it shouldn't be in CSGO.
2014-07-12 17:32
"Thorin would be my best coaching candidate without a player background" :-DD
2014-07-10 20:24
2 replies
#47
 | 
Liechtenstein Chamele0n
GeT_DrunK best coach
2014-07-10 21:15
Lurppis would make a great coach too if he wanted to.
2014-07-10 21:34
no coaches were in 1.6 needed
2014-07-10 20:27
29 replies
The game was also less "strategic" in terms of "Chess-style" play, less smoke based strat, also the lead used to be less complicated, it was mostly outreading/smarting your opponents, teams tended to do less redirections stuff like that. Also, it's not 1.6 anymore, teams are evolving, so do their strategies, you cannot rely only on your skill and great mind-reading anymore.
2014-07-10 21:08
28 replies
-1
2014-07-10 23:07
cs 1.6 was far more tatical than csgo are, deal with it
2014-07-10 23:28
20 replies
No, it wasn't. Get over it.
2014-07-10 23:42
19 replies
it wasnt just because u probably played just pubs online... the pro scene of cs 1.6 was way way far more tatical than the csgo pro scene are atm, theres nothing to say about it
2014-07-11 03:01
18 replies
No, it wasn't. It was all about aim.
2014-07-11 03:03
17 replies
CSGO is all about aim, look at the old demos from onepointsix, the movements, circus jumps, wallbangs, nade spots, EVERYTHING better than in csgo
2014-07-11 03:06
#125
 | 
United States lurppis
CS:GO is much more skill-heavy than CS 1.6. I don't see how anyone can argue that CS 1.6 was NOT more strategy based.
2014-07-11 06:40
11 replies
lol
2014-07-11 09:36
shots fired
2014-07-13 18:09
On the contrary. The possibilities created by the dense smoke grenades, decoys and more rapid rotations in almost all maps makes CS: GO a game with much larger strategic possibilities, i can`t beleave in what i just read, but ultimately you're the profisional ... Good article tho.
2014-07-15 12:33
8 replies
#202
 | 
United States lurppis
we're not talking about possibilities though, we're talking about reality - and the reality is that there are hardly any strategic elements in top level cs:go.
2014-07-15 13:06
7 replies
How can you say that in top level CS:GO teams there is not a high level plan to achieve one or more goals under conditions of uncertainty. "Strategy is important because the resources available to achieve these goals are usually limited.Strategy generally involves setting goals, determining actions to achieve the goals, and mobilizing resources to execute the actions. A strategy describes how the ends (goals) will be achieved by the means (resources)." Taking this into account it can be stated that CS: GO is a strategically more evolved than the 1.6 game (more skiled based),since there are more resources available (pistols, molotovs, decoys, the fisics enveolving the granades, a wider range of weapons at your disposal, etc...) and yes, chances are also greater. Yet they are just opinions.
2014-07-15 18:08
6 replies
#204
 | 
United States lurppis
doesn't make the game more tactical if teams don't employ any of the possible tactics.
2014-07-15 18:16
5 replies
thing that the coaching could do?! Ok, now i understand...
2014-07-15 18:24
4 replies
#206
 | 
United States lurppis
a coach, or a good in-game leader. so far the only in-game leader i've seen lead a team what i'd describe the proper way was gla1ve in ww.
2014-07-15 18:33
3 replies
and about, Fiff, ex6tence? are not they at that level?
2014-07-15 18:55
1 reply
#208
 | 
United States lurppis
not based on what they've done, no.
2014-07-15 22:02
#215
 | 
United Kingdom jMz86
I thought VP done a good job with strategies when they won EMS One Katowice but I agree teams have a lot of work to do if they want to exploit the full range of strategic possibilities in CS:GO. I think CS:GO play style so far has been played as simple map control and pick play rather than fully structured rounds(There are some general default rounds but other than that it's simple plays that win rounds). Although decoy banana and rush B pistol round > all :P
2014-07-16 10:21
No, CS:GO is all about aim. This is why every map in the game is basically a series of aim_map's. CS 1.6 was much more about strategy due to wall banging and smoother movement. The only way GO exceeds 1.6 in strategy is smokes and flashes, and its basically come down to "smoke where they're gonna be, and throw a fuckton of flashes/pop flashes"
2014-07-11 06:45
1 reply
I agree. I can't believe he said that... It's common knowledge that this is the case... Apparently he just worded his post really poorly and actually meant to say "current pro teams play CSGO in a pure skill manner rather than using technical strategy".
2014-07-31 14:28
hahaha
2014-07-11 08:48
I'm sorry dude, but you're wrong. CS:GO is way more technical, but 1.6 was more strategic.
2014-07-11 12:25
+1
2014-07-10 23:36
1.6 was more strategical than cs go... one and only reason is that it has been played for so long that no maps gave any surprise in terms of angles... in 1.6 every map was way to well known to every pro player... so plays like youtube.com/watch?v=oTh5v5Km-_c this were needed... I play cs go and it is a great game , but don't talk about things you dont uderstand...
2014-07-11 00:06
4 replies
You are talking strategic from ONE player perspective. You are also saying that clutching were needed because from your any many other POV that there were more skill =/= pros knew the game in-and-out. CSGO is more teambased in a way. It offers a variety of possibilites which didn't xizt (see wut I did thur?) in 1.6. Doesn't make it more skillfull perhaps nor what it will look like later on. Maybe it will become more strategic or perhaps it will turn out like 1.6.
2014-07-11 01:14
2 replies
hes right at this point, no need to try to say otherwise because its the only truth, 1.6 was and will be ever more tatical than csgo, go doesnt require so much in-game knowledge like 1.6 required
2014-07-11 03:04
1 reply
#216
 | 
United Kingdom jMz86
Well, to be fair there is potential for CS:GO to be tactical but at the moment the picks/trade game style is working. I am pretty sure there was a stage when 1.6 teams didn't use many tactics, actually I remember from playing back in the 2000/2001 era tactical play was pretty much; pick a site, choose rush or slow and commit. That being said, it is obvious that tactics played a much bigger role in 1.6 compared to CS:GO but we are comparing well over a decade of gaming to two years.
2014-07-16 10:31
whats up with this retarded video being shown in every single journal on this site? :DD "amazing movement" laughing my ass off :D whats so amazing about it? ROFL
2014-08-13 12:08
I don't like it that coaches can call in-game, players should be able to read the other team's moves and react accordingly. if this happens we'll see a 5 v 5 of only Scream's that can't fucking throw a flash or a smoke.
2014-07-10 20:27
8 replies
thats why you have captains and coaches on other sports
2014-07-10 20:39
6 replies
I dont see a football coach with an earplug in communicating to the players the whole time. They can take care of a game plan. Not make dicissiona mid game unless they are for example changing a player or yell it on the field.
2014-07-11 15:07
5 replies
+1 Exactly what I was going to say. Saves me a few words.
2014-07-13 06:50
But i see F1 doing that thing. And even though it's esports and everyone is like blah blah it needs to be like other sports its a new thing and it has to be tried out. In the end couches will be the new norm on top play.
2014-07-16 08:42
#217
 | 
United Kingdom jMz86
I played football at a very high level when I was younger before I ruined my ankles and I can say that coaches/managers play a MASSIVE role during a game. If you have a good coach, even things like motivation can play a big role. In terms of "tactical" decisions during the game, of course they play a big part and most of the options are pre-discussed. For example a corner during a game, the coaches/manager has all ready decided who should go where, attack which position, who should take the corner, who should stay back and defend. However a manager can also at any point tell the back four to sit higher or deeper depending on how aggressive the other team are playing, they regularly take players to the side and give them information for themselves or to pass on to a player on the other side of the pitch. Normally a captain and the manager will have a lot of go between in a game, you just don't see it as much on the TV as they concentrate on the ball. Formation changes happen ALL the time during a game and that is decided by the manager, going from a 4-4-2 to a 4-5-1. I am not entirely sure of your point here as football is a great example of a tactical game being controlled by a manager.
2014-07-16 10:41
2 replies
Didn't read
2014-07-18 20:13
1 reply
#226
 | 
United Kingdom jMz86
Me neither.
2014-07-18 22:23
Omh, maybe in same way Valve should show other players on Radar or legit wallhacks? Everyone will be able to see movement. Man you says trash.
2014-07-11 08:39
Lurppis you should focus more about: "Why overpass and cobblestone is not a future of CSGO"
2014-07-10 20:31
3 replies
+1
2014-07-10 20:33
you should focus why people in nowadays are more open mind. (but yeah they suck)
2014-07-10 20:37
+1
2014-07-10 21:04
Good read, but you should have written something about the negative side of coaching. It might fuck up some teams balance, a coach might get too involved ingame. "dont go to aggressive"
2014-07-10 20:32
3 replies
#142
 | 
United States lurppis
an in-game leader can do all the same stuff wrong; i'm focusing on what a good coach would do, and how it could improve a team - not how a bad coach could hurt the team (in exactly the same way as an in-game leader).
2014-07-11 08:51
2 replies
True, but there is a different effect: Ingame leaders can't watch over anything, coaches can. coaches are behind the players and can overstep their boundaries physically. (It annoys some, like how jason lake hugs players from behind after a clutch, Iknow he is not a coach)
2014-07-11 15:21
1 reply
#183
 | 
United States lurppis
i know plenty of in-game leaders who have done the same.
2014-07-11 17:26
Gotfrag looked pretty cool :).
2014-07-10 20:34
Very nice article. Interesting points called and it was a nice read overall. I would read again 10/10
2014-07-10 20:35
You'd have to split the prize money with another person... :/
2014-07-10 20:35
4 replies
That may be true, but what if the coach has his own contract and salary? He also gets a bonus for each major tourny win and so on.
2014-07-11 02:07
#141
 | 
United States lurppis
i'd rather take a smaller slice of a bigger pie than vice versa, but that's just me.
2014-07-11 08:50
#170
 | 
Denmark Danny D3
I would guess (most) coaches would have a contract, and not earn by winnings/earned income (can't remember the english word for that). -Since the organizations earn money from sponsors just by being active and attending LAN tournaments, while promoting their products.
2014-07-11 12:21
More money will be heading towards eSports, so the slice of the pie will eventually get bigger.
2014-07-12 11:21
"Let's imagine Valve's The International has CS:GO next year." THIS!!!
2014-07-10 20:36
ave <3
2014-07-10 20:37
3 replies
+1 My fav player
2014-07-10 20:43
#151
 | 
United States mainz
+1 miss that team so much
2014-07-11 09:45
#171
 | 
Denmark Danny D3
<3
2014-07-11 12:23
It's impossible for lurppis to write a short and shitty article, it seems.
2014-07-10 20:42
1 reply
Lmao
2014-07-10 20:42
TL:DRYETALL but... Valve could go a few steps further and make it more interesting. They could allow for a coach demo, which would be the equivalent of a GOTV demo, but would only allow its viewer to spectate anyone on his team. The developers could also add a notepad for the coach to write down important notes while watching, and he could use a screenshot function to send snapshots to his players to better explain what he wants them to do, à la whiteboards in sports. This was suggested many times even on reddit reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/1r.. but Valve's priority is too still suck $ for their cases, keys, skins etc. media.steampowered.com/apps/valve/2014/g.. I ask where the hell are the important competetive gameplay changes?
2014-07-10 20:42
2 replies
#140
 | 
United States lurppis
that's also a good idea, though it's for demos - my idea was meant real-time when playing matches, but both SHOULD be implemented separately.
2014-07-11 08:50
1 reply
Ahh in real-time. So now as a coach you can see all povs from your team, map and you can commmunicate via game voip and that's all yes? You think about something like that? - Coach can show for all players (grenades, positions, problems, tactics, boosts etc.) on map and in 3rd person in real-time. When match is ongoing he can still communicate with his mates and send them snapshot a la whiteboards with his insights etc. That would be great and really helpful for teams and I think it should be like that from release of the coach mode.
2014-07-11 11:29
Lovely to see some people with true passion here. Thank you for your effort lurppis, good read!
2014-07-10 20:44
i dont like it at all
2014-07-10 20:49
Why coaching is the future of CS AKA Why your team should hire lurppis to coach.
2014-07-10 20:52
4 replies
lol'd
2014-07-10 21:04
#51
 | 
Hong Kong SHiFT^up
n1
2014-07-10 21:17
+1
2014-07-11 02:14
#126
 | 
United States lurppis
i actually would not want to coach, it's equally time consuming as playing, which is the reason i quit. however, i do think there are people who would want to do it and be capable of doing a good job.
2014-07-11 06:43
great read and yes i do agree adding a coach to relieve pressure off ur in-game leader will help some teams to preform much better in the end and with prizepools continuously growing its only a matter of time before this does become reality
2014-07-10 20:52
Good read, once again. GJ Lurppis
2014-07-10 20:59
Happy Birthday gobbeloN! <3
2014-07-10 21:00
n36
2014-07-10 21:03
I like the idea, me being someone who has 10+ years of CS exp but not the best reactions/aim could get involved with higher level teams with this.
2014-07-10 21:03
No coaching is not future of CS permanently
2014-07-10 21:06
good read You're right about players' egos mashing with coaches, especially if the coach doesn't have a solid professional background. I can't imagine someone who never played top level CS trying to tell GTR how to handle a 1vX clutch situation in the middle of the round.
2014-07-10 21:06
4 replies
thats not what he is talking about. theres nobody in the world that should tell GTR how to try and clutch, but what a coach can do is look at tendencies and give gtr a "heads up" on where they may be at the end of the day the coaches are looking at big picture rather than clutch situations when it comes to the clutch players go off instincts rather than information
2014-07-10 21:14
2 replies
Oh, so more like the phil jackson type, chilling out most the game because you have the Michael Jordans and Kobe Bryants of CSGO on your team. =D
2014-07-10 21:25
1 reply
Nah like the bill bellichick type, calm demeanor, draws up winning plays, steal defensive signs all that good stuff. Really though you need or can benefit from someone watching all the screens that can see where the timing might be off or where the push should start initially.
2014-07-10 22:12
#139
 | 
United States lurppis
i don't see why any coach would try to tell someone like gtr how to clutch a round. what he could do, though, is tell nip how to attack the bombsite in the first place, and be a lot more effective at that than anyone in-game playing for nip can be.
2014-07-11 08:49
Seems like a nice idea. Players should focus on playing, not thinking (more or less ;p).
2014-07-10 21:07
Some cs go players need from fitnes coach to improve the body. Good mind in strong body is better. :D Maybe I wrong, but after gym I play better in MM. Looked Pasha....
2014-07-10 21:12
Counter-Strike is not that type of the game where teams are looking for a coach. In Counter-Strike, there is only one coach, in-game leader and his team as a helpers for him. Captain has to understand everything, not like coach is coming and saying like 'they like to attack A with split'. And about that mindset part - manager is for that + usually managers are with good counter-strike background and they can help them as well. Chess players are not playing with coaches, right ?XD
2014-07-10 21:16
3 replies
#128
 | 
United States lurppis
chess is 1v1, and requires no mechanical skills, only thinking - terrible comparison.
2014-07-11 06:44
I am playing chess not at pro level but i know they got a strategies who going against who and stuff. I think coach will improve the cs:go teams by far its will be lovely to see that happen.
2014-07-14 23:52
#218
 | 
United Kingdom jMz86
"Counter-Strike is not that type of the game where teams are looking for a coach". Teams are looking for coaches, destroyed. NEXT!
2014-07-16 11:17
sorry hltv, but i remember the same discussion about coaching WAYYY back in 1.x times, and it wasn't the future then why should it be now
2014-07-10 21:16
2 replies
Evolution
2014-07-10 22:14
Lurppis sufficiently answered this question in the article.
2014-07-10 22:29
#50
 | 
Latvia Ke]R[4u
Why coaching is not the future of cs:go; Bigger money expenses for orgas
2014-07-10 21:17
cArn done that in DreamHack 2013 and lead his team to the 1st place. Dunno why people reacts like they found gunpowder
2014-07-10 21:33
5 replies
exactly...
2014-07-10 21:55
#137
 | 
United States lurppis
he didn't call anything, he simply sat behind the team and tried to motivate them. completely different from what i suggested.
2014-07-11 08:48
3 replies
you can say whatever you whant and for sure you have more informations about what happened at that game rather then me. but i don't believe he didn't called anything i trully believe that was one of the reasons why fnatic won DreamHack. Or cArn made the rolle of a coach or he simply ghosted the opponent team. I saw the game and i saw how much he talked to them in the end and at the middle of rounds and i dont believe he was saying "good work fellas". Sorry but i dont believe that :D
2014-07-11 12:51
2 replies
From what I heard and understood with my veeery limited Swedish, he basically only said stuff he noticed was missing in communication. As in "CT spawn clear boys" and small stuff like that. It was just a little bit of what lurppis has in mind. He didn't call specific strategies or anything like that, only helped with communication and morale.
2014-07-11 17:42
1 reply
I understand what you're saying but ofc a coach will not be so intrusive WHILE their playing because what you ear while you playing is very important "steps, grenades blowing". But i think cArn helped them a lot while they practice for DH20013 and i say that because cArn is very professional and he have a big passion for counter strike and as all we know he was one of the best IGL of the ALMIGHTY 1.6. I would love to ear what cArn have to say about that but i think we'll keep speculating about that. :D btw this is only my opinion
2014-07-11 18:04
cs go doesnt need coaches
2014-07-10 21:47
never gonna happen
2014-07-10 21:49
#59
 | 
Brazil LIPE1
ave cyx <3
2014-07-10 21:52
Agreed Lurppis, I would like to see more improvements within the game as well. For example: During buy time (and when you are dead) you should be able to place an icon on the overview map to denote how you're setting up for the coming round. On a map like nuke there are many ways to cover outside some passive some aggressive and having a clear picture of your team intentions (more useful in gathers) can help you assess how and when to rotate.
2014-07-10 21:58
4 replies
#136
 | 
United States lurppis
that would actually be a good addition for matchmaking.
2014-07-11 08:47
3 replies
lurppis... can i please see you make a smiley face cuz i only se you write straigth forward with a dot in the end! plz just a normal smiley face :D
2014-07-16 02:49
2 replies
#210
 | 
United States lurppis
^o)
2014-07-16 06:16
1 reply
+1
2014-07-16 13:20
wut is coach in cs? explain me with max 5 words pls
2014-07-10 22:02
8 replies
He can buy for you some burgers, chocolate to eat when u play :D btw really somebody explain, the cs go team has captains, who's knows everything for the game. Maybe coach is good for motivation ?
2014-07-10 22:06
4 replies
devilwalk was the worst in fnatic. now he is coach...how will he improve everything? :D
2014-07-10 22:27
3 replies
So because devilwalk couldnt hit heads like get_right, he cant have good understanding of the game? Seeing him commentate matches, i feel he has alot to offer when it comes to tactics and so on
2014-07-10 23:28
2 replies
gtr cant hit heads too ;D devilwalk is more about heads than gtr :D
2014-07-11 09:17
1 reply
Gj, keep it up.
2014-07-11 09:20
1backs 2up 3in 4game 5leader
2014-07-10 22:15
Stop laziness read fucking article.
2014-07-10 22:17
1 reply
no way
2014-07-10 22:26
heatoN is like the manager of NIP or he also helps in game with some calls standing behind them? just asking. And It is difficult to imagine weaker teams having coaches. You need to pay the dude salary. Some organisations do not even pay salaries to the players..
2014-07-10 22:05
1 reply
#135
 | 
United States lurppis
he yells loudly to motivate his team, like jason lake did for col. he doesn't call anything.
2014-07-11 08:46
i think proper communication and understanding what happens around every player should be left upto the player and IGL, thats part of CS , where a superior brain or better prediction etc wins A coach would take that away to a certain point , but lurppis made amazing points
2014-07-10 22:06
2 replies
That's how every sport ever started, but then people realized that a coach can see the big picture much better than those playing, and a coach can make better decisions during the game because he doesn't have to worry about anything else. And thus the quality of play in every sport has increased over time.
2014-07-10 22:16
1 reply
/THREAD COACHING IS DA FUTURE.
2014-07-10 23:57
You would need some basics from a coach, and too handle pressure and so fort. Buts thats it. The coach, can not "feel" the game like the players can. If you play too much towards a surden tactic instead of going with the flow, and have fun with the game, it will make the players focussing too much on the mistakes and deviations from the tactic, instead of just playing the game as it comes. - The team needs to stay together for a long time, like a year or twö, before they chance members, and a coach will work in there favor. imo.
2014-07-10 22:15
1 reply
What if the "feeling" is wrong? You need to have to make decisions based on "facts" not on feelings. Regards
2014-07-10 22:19
then remove IGL have coach call it out. Then you won't need to give under performer "because he's igl" bs
2014-07-10 22:33
1 reply
#134
 | 
United States lurppis
that's exactly what the article says.
2014-07-11 08:45
l to the o to the L
2014-07-10 22:38
dumb blog is dumb
2014-07-10 22:39
on a slightly related note... i would love to see freeze time extended from 15 to 25 seconds. the extra 10 seconds each round would add a max of 5 minutes to the game, but would allow commentators and casters to make more use of all the tools available: overhead map drawing, graphs, replays etc.
2014-07-10 22:47
2 replies
#133
 | 
United States lurppis
it'd be good for teams, but boring for spectators - and delay games by up to five minutes, which also isn't something anyone wants.
2014-07-11 08:45
1 reply
it would only be boring for spectators if the commentators didn't use it properly. professional level studios are trying to incorporate replays, listening in on team comms etc. currently drawing on strategies etc. on the overhead map is barely used
2014-07-11 20:31
Couldn't agree more. Indeed Tomi, you could be an excellent coach, I barely watch any streams now, but i remember your calls while casting 1.6 with Joe Miller back in.. '10-'11? Fnatic could use cArn's great IGL talent (if he's still good at it) and the same goes for many other teams
2014-07-10 22:55
how can couch be a future if u sit on it?
2014-07-10 23:01
1 reply
+1
2014-07-11 05:20
cArn is key that they won the Dreamhack winter.
2014-07-10 23:08
Great read, and i totally aggree. It would make cs alot more proffesional. Surprised to see so many negative comments on this subject, then again, the arguments are basicly "its a bad idea becauz it iz" "i dont like it cause i dont like it"
2014-07-10 23:22
#94
 | 
Denmark qwedsa
To use a coach as a in-game caller is to misplace his role in the team. While a coach will have an overview of the exact moment, he will not be able to pick up patterns from each single enemy. He should though all the time make sure that all info gets to the players and sometimes give them on the behalf of a player, so that the player can focus on combating opponents. Also, he should be the one observing if everyone is holding his position etc. just like a football coach. If everyone is following the tactic he let the players play their game. If he believe some adjustmens are needed then he tells them during freezetime or so (a cs coach). A coach should NOT act as IGL.
2014-07-10 23:55
10 replies
Why not? Lurppis gave multiple arguements why it would work perfectly. We should definitely consider it and let the game evolve by itself.
2014-07-10 23:59
2 replies
#102
 | 
Denmark qwedsa
I think You misunderstood. I support the idea of having a coach in the team, but his role should not be IGL every round. He don't see how every single opponent behave, but the players dO. Instead, he should be giving info what's going on(flashes, smokes etc.), tell the positions, holding angles etc. and let the players decide based on the information they get.
2014-07-11 00:18
1 reply
Actually I understood perfectly. Lurp gave an idea of coach being a switch from an igl and even more. This way teams would consist of 5 players, who didn't have to worry about thinking what to do THAT MUCH, not like coach told them everything, they could make some mid round calls, decision making etc, but let's be honest, everyone is playing better when he doesn't have to worry about all the tactical aspects of the game, instead they'd have a voice telling them all that during the game.
2014-07-11 00:28
#132
 | 
United States lurppis
a coach can actually pick up patterns a lot easier when in the coach-spectating mode with sounds. you say a coach shouldn't act as an in-game leader, yet you provide zero arguments as to why it wouldn't work better.
2014-07-11 08:44
6 replies
#154
 | 
Denmark qwedsa
Both yes and no. While I agree that strategies could be easier to read, it's far from enough, in my opinion, to put someone in the position to make the calls. Monitoring 5 screens at the same time divides the quality you can provide and will not allow you to observe and get the feel of your opponents individual movement - which is as important as reading the strat. A coach will set up a formation at the beginning of the round, but how fast and qualified can he analyze what happens in a given round? Sometimes a round comes down to 25 second and it's over. In a fast round you need short and fast communication between the players, because in that moment there's no time to analyze, your instincts and reflexes takes over. This is what makes coaching in CS different than other sports. In other sports you play continously and a coach can make changes during playtime, but it ain't the same in CS, where a round is 1:45min. I've played football at high level and sometimes the players need to make a quick change on their own during the game to adapt to the other team because of sudden changes and first later on get new instructions from the coach. Furthermore, a coach will have to learn and understand the behavior of each single player, ensuring you will not bring a player out of his comfort-zone with your calls as a coach. This may be more tricky than if you actually play together with him when you're in the same position. I do like the idea of having a coach, but his role should be "forward-minded". Let the players deal with the current round and have a coach analyze strategies so he can set up formations for the upcoming rounds. Of course he should also provide sensible information during a round that may have been missed.
2014-07-11 10:05
5 replies
#155
 | 
United States lurppis
I can only speak from experience and from coaching EG at WCG events I can tell you it's MUCH easier to make the right calls when watching everyone's monitors than when actually playing in-game.
2014-07-11 10:30
4 replies
#158
 | 
Denmark qwedsa
I do believe you. Just being a bit sceptical whether everyone will benefit from having a coach acting as IGL. But let's wait and see how it'll turn out for Titan and evaluate afterwards.
2014-07-11 10:44
3 replies
#160
 | 
United States lurppis
i've already explained at hltv.org/news/12746-a-brief-look-at-tita.. why i believe titan are the wrong team to implement this in, why they hired the wrong coach, and why i don't think they will gain anything from it. tl;dr: bad example to evaluate coaching as a whole, especially seeing as he won't coach in the sense that i explained i assume.
2014-07-11 10:45
2 replies
#164
 | 
Denmark qwedsa
I know, read that last week and have no objections in that matter, but as you mentioned, we don't know yet what his role will be. To me, the key-point to evaluate on will most definitely be the communication between them. How does this set of extra eyes influence on the team's managing during a round.
2014-07-11 11:05
1 reply
#168
 | 
United States lurppis
i feel it's impossible to evaluate without knowing the extent of his role and understanding french while being able to watch them play.
2014-07-11 11:37
n1
2014-07-11 00:02
+1
2014-07-11 00:03
izi 4 cArn
2014-07-11 00:09
VALVE should set a Coach slot in-game, like a dead dummy player..
2014-07-11 00:13
4 replies
Like they have in dota2 :).
2014-07-11 00:28
1 reply
didnt know they had in dota2. Then we can believe it will happen :)
2014-07-11 00:31
plz no its 5v5 not 5v5 + coaches
2014-07-11 02:52
1 reply
5v5 + coach just like in dota2 ;)
2014-07-16 08:55
I think having an IGL make this right or wrong calls, is a key aspect of Counter-Strike. Adding in a coach, and taking away from the IGL (sure making it easier on him and the team) isn't something should be implemented. Also if that works, and helps teams by the amount proposed here... How are new/uprising/semi-pro teams (without a coach) meant to beat the pro teams who all have a Coach. Not everybody will get a high quality coach, and if it works it will kinda make the game "unfair". I want my 5 players, to beat your 5 players on equal conditions. I think instead, teams should be allowed one 5 minute tactical pause (like it was in 1.6 eswc) per half, where they can discuss stuff with the coach. So the coach can still exist, but only during half-time break, tactical pauses and in-between maps.
2014-07-11 00:36
3 replies
This makes little to no sense. 1. How are they meant to beat pro teams with a bad IGL? 2. How does it make something unfair if a team has the better coach? That's like saying playing against Team X is unfair, because they have Player X 3. Team A vs. Team B ... doesn't mean it can't be 6 people Some other stuff i don't wanna get into....
2014-07-11 01:15
2 replies
1. They could have a good IGL, and the perfect strategy to beat their 'pro' opponent. But they won't have the extra 6th man telling them exactly how to adapt etc etc. So their good IGL, their good well prepared strategy... all wasted. AKA their opponent will always adapt better due to the coach (otherwise they might be surprised and unable to recover during the game). 2. Okay I guess you're right and it is similar. But still " I want my 5 players, to beat your 5 players on equal conditions." Not everybody will have the luxury of a 6th is the point. Like I said, I think a Coach can exist, but only if tactical pauses are implemented again.
2014-07-11 01:24
1 reply
well, f.e. i'm not a very good player myself in terms of ...i lack consistency n shit. But i'm fairly brained and a good caller. While i don't see myself wasting time playing ....i could see myself helping younger players/teams by coaching. And IGL can tell you the same stuff as a coach ....it's just harder to have the "overview". So ...dunno...
2014-07-11 15:52
Good read and good points, good job lurppis.
2014-07-11 00:47
#108
 | 
Denmark Danny D3
Even a CS genius like ave could have improved with help Martin 'guddo' Cording?
2014-07-11 00:56
2 replies
#129
 | 
United States lurppis
I like guddo, but all he did was book flights.
2014-07-11 06:53
1 reply
#169
 | 
Denmark Danny D3
haha!:D well he did mental support the team in every LAN match they had, so not completely worthless at least;)
2014-07-11 12:08
Great post lurppis! I agree with you on all points, coaches can only help improve a team's game play. As an esports example outside of CSGO (I'm probably getting hate mail for this), the CLG League of Legends team has vastly improved with the addition of a coach. Their coach lives on the other side of the world, shoutcasts Korean LoL, and (AFAIK) his main role is analyzing their in-game communication. As others have pointed out, cArn was a huge part of fnatic's DH2013 win and mainstream sports have gone from coach-less to coached. I'd say it is only a matter of time before we see more coaches and leagues/tournaments should definitely make sure they have clearly defined rules for that day.
2014-07-11 01:31
Until most top teams consist of people like JW/Pimp/Pita/Shox and the likes of these types of players no coach can do anything. CS:GO has a very bad and scene there several players who are in a teams i can count on my hand that can improve with a coach everything else well lets be honest they are not mature enough to be able to change their diapers then what goes for taking advice from a coach. I am sorry but the scene at the moment is a joke. Yes 1.6 had kids in it but goddammit they were crushed by the other players and not let flourish and damage the scene. Hell even GTR had a very rough start until he realized that the way he was going wasn't the right way. Point is kids cannot be couched they are not mature enough just look at the goddam danish scene do you think there is 1 guy in that scene that can actually control the moans of Pimp? or the lashes of Niile or what ever the fuck that guys name is.?! Trow those people out of the scene rebuild it from the ground and then you can maybe think for actual coaches. Titan with a coach are you for real? These guys have no clue how to work among them self's and you think a coach will help them? They don't have respect for each others 1st what goes for a guy who has to be the driving force behind the team? Deluded people.............
2014-07-11 03:00
1 reply
The 6th there can be a changing thing. The players after that can see each other's as equals and not arguing over single matters.
2014-07-16 09:01
#122
 | 
United Kingdom tomtmh
If any team needs me to help coach your team I'm free , I make very good penis drawings on the ingame map
2014-07-11 04:52
1 reply
penis drawing its the first and the most important requirement to work as a coach, i think you should ask nip
2014-07-11 05:02
Been thinking about this for years.
2014-07-11 09:27
Coaches are oke, but imo it's a bit to much if a coach can connect to teamspeak/whatever and have a headset and call the whole match, that's playinv 6v5 if the other team doesn't have it. You dont see coaches in other sports wearing bluetooth headsets either to call during the match all day long. A coach behind the players is OK, but they shouldn't have their own headset imo.
2014-07-11 09:33
its far easier to execute in go than it was in cs. its all about learning grenade spots, which every bot can do.
2014-07-11 09:39
Older players will return to the role of coaches, it's very cool!
2014-07-11 09:45
I think this is a good thing as long as the coach is allowed ONLY to talk on a time out. On Lan tourna this could work but on online tourna i don't think it's going to be fair atm.
2014-07-11 10:02
1 reply
#159
 | 
United States lurppis
so basically not even remotely what i've suggested.
2014-07-11 10:44
Good read, would be cool to see it but I really think it's "to soon" like you pointed out in the article, not enough conditions to do it properly. Although would be like the new role to "older" players, continuation of the "career". Would also be cool to see CS:GO implementing like a 5 split-monitor for coach-mode, useful on online games (but maybe also offline).
2014-07-11 11:01
Almost everything is TRUE imo. Specially this, "The drawing map could be a key feature for coaches in-game ". Having more than 10 seconds freeze time will give the team with coach to talk using the the drawing map. That's cool ;)
2014-07-11 12:54
i agree
2014-07-11 15:23
I think in sport, doesn't mater is it basketball or is it e-sport, teams should have coaches. This is the nature of sport... Team leader is like captain in football, or basketball, he inspires people. Coaches is for teaching people some techniques or tactics.
2014-07-11 15:30
im not sure we should allow coaching at all. that would mean basically 6-player teams playing 5-player teams unless everybody has a coach. coach as much as you like, but the question comes to should events allow 6th player talk to other players during the match. and for low resource teams hiring a full-time coach isn't an option.
2014-07-11 15:48
1 reply
Exactly. The dilemma here is that if its the future of CS then you'd have to pay a dude to coach.
2014-07-11 18:12
so tactical, just point and click
2014-07-11 19:06
"why playing 6 vs 5 will help you win more at 11" Stop going full retard please.
2014-07-11 21:06
will give undue advantage to bigger teams .....also you will essentially be ending the career of a lesser skilled but better tactical IGL, by taking the mouse from him , who otherwise would have been able to turn into the next xitz(gr8 individual and tactical imo)
2014-07-11 22:25
being an coach youll need to coach the players your team has. being an manager you can choose the players in your team...
2014-07-11 22:36
#220
 | 
United Kingdom jMz86
Lurppis, What do you think will happen with CARN, as devilwalk will be taking up the coaching role? Will he take on a bigger role within fnatic? Surely they can't have two people doing the same thing or was carn's role not as specific as what devilwalks coaching role might be. Loved this article and I have always been skeptical of a coach but I actually think it could benefit a lot of teams in CS:GO, particular with the older generation who may not want to put as much time into the tactical side of the game as they have done in the past.
2014-07-16 11:31
2 replies
#223
 | 
United States lurppis
carn was never a coach (standing behind them at two dreamhack events doesn't count as coaching), he works in the organization itself as the "chief gaming officer."
2014-07-16 13:29
1 reply
#224
 | 
United Kingdom jMz86
Yeah I get that, I just assumed he might have had more involvement within team than he probably does, because of his knowledge. Thanks.
2014-07-16 13:37
I fully support this idea. Comparing CS:GO to football is a great way to show the essence of the problem. Imagine yourself playing football with your friends. Are you talking about formation before match? I don’t think so. You just play and try to score the goal. Professional football players also don’t care about the tactics, they just focus on the game. Coach will tell them what to do. It should be the same in CS:GO. CS:GO is very similar to football in the tactical way, and it could be the most popular game in the world, but nowadays professional matches are more about killing than playing tactically.
2014-09-28 23:10
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.