!!!

Toxjq
Cypher
Stermy
Strenx
Rapha (planner)

= UNSTOPPABLE

- Strenx
+ Cooller

He would be main awper tbh and another tactical mind = profit

cs is all fucking aim and being a bitch, so rapha can just plan the routes and shit and the aim whores will win it. dont need 2 geniuses on the team that suck at aim lol

Bollocks is it :p

Best team tbh:

Toxjq - Mad fragger
Cypher - Entry fragger / mad fragger
K1llsen - Main awper (ordinarily I would put Stermy, but k1llsen really is all rail :D)
Cooller - Ingame leader
Strenx - Rifler


Why are we even discussing the possibility anyway? :D

Quake players most suited for cs would be, mainly because of strong railaim.

fox
toxic
strenx
stermy
k1llsen

garpy maybe?

av3k and stermy talked about it on the stream

http://www.own3d.tv/lvlup#/watch/42994

not sure if serious

I remember watching it live and being "lol trolling us" but watching it back, they do seem quite serious :|

I'm too gullible

dunno about their plans but it is fairly obvious there is no way cooller is gonna start playing cs, seeing he only plays quake short amounts of time before tournaments and cant even be arsed learning new maps :p

they were trolling.

U reads Anton perfectly :D

heh you guys got it all wrong:


with "cs" they did not mean counter-strike but cam-sex, and tbh, there is probably more money in that than in cstrike :>

cum-shot

i'd watch CS if this was true

this

it would be still utterly boring:(

.

aahahaha :D: D took the bait like hungry fish :D

that's a forum post only

OMG stop scaring me off

Dunno why you didn't think they were serious about it when they repeatedly said they were serious. No implication of them joking around. I bet they think it's easier than it really is. But if they can get really good aim, learn to anti-strat, and realllllly learn the money system, then they can do alright I'm sure, but there's no way they'll win, or be in the finals of any tournaments with pros there. I really doubt they'll learn all the CS team strats, master the economy, or master the aim in CS in just 6 months.

It does kind of make sense to move to CS. CS is just a bigger community than quake. There were tournament streams this past year that got over 20,000 viewers, compared to levelup's 2,000 so there's good chance it will stick around for awhile.

I think it reached almost 4000 at one point, probaly not unique since some ppl were watching both streams. It was something like that: hq1 + hq2 about 3000 and lq1 + lq2 about 1000, which is pretty good if u compare the size of the 2 communities.

hq1 alone had over 3500 at some point, didnt check the other lvl^ streams.
the german stream also had over 1000 for the final.

If I remeber correctly ESWC finals this year had about 6000-7000.

I saw hq1 at like 2500 max on the last day, but I wasn't watching that closely. And yeah, a bunch of people were probably watching both. But even 6k for ESWC isn't even half of what CS pulls in viewers. I, personally, prefer to spectate quake, and was REALLY happy with lvlup's coverage of dreamhack, but quake just doesn't pull in the same numbers as cs. The community there is just so much larger. 20k+ for big events. It was approaching 30k at one of the bigger events this past year, and that was just the main stream. A bunch of people watch using HLTV servers instead of streams too. Those things fill up big time for events, so that's even more viewers. I wish quake's community was that large!

lol'd at this post though

why? aren't they all 14 and stupid? seeing that you have 500 posts there, you should know this :D

True dat. Some of the posts on HLTV make me laugh, especially the fanboys ones.

Seriously, some of the k1ck or Polish fanboys on HLTV would put Cooller fanboys to shame

there's nothing to be ashamed of when praising our fearless leader, don't you dare say otherwise

I didn't say we were put to shame for worshiping the almighty one. I was saying that we should be ashamed other people are more fanatical at worshiping false deities

You're lucky it's not late to send off my assassins

Hehe, it would be a fun experiment! I'm all for it, as long as they continue playing quake too!

they'd surely have to pause it. And probably pause quake tournaments, (no cooller - no viewers) too.

I'd follow the CS scene if this actually happened. They better make sure they rape before playing in anything big.

edit: Forgot about the whole mouse accel thing + the movement in quake. This means their current quake aim won't necessarily translate into the same for CS.

have you tried mili..... :) CS?
Let me remind you that we are talking about a game where movement is penalized!
The only way this will happen if they will do it for the money, because CS for a quaker is just pure pain.

This, it's disgusting really. My guess - if they did this, they'd get sick pretty soon.

Their aim will be decent, but CS takes more precision than quake since it's a slower game, and just an overall different mindset than quake. I don't think their aim will be even up to par with low tier teams in CS in just 6 months. And there's a lot more to it than just aim. The strats and the money system are so much more in depth than they/you probably think they are. 6 months is nowhere near enough time for them to play at a pro level. They'll get embarrassed if they show up to any big events in 2011. I doubt they'll advance from group play if they show up to any of the big tournaments next year. I'll definitely watch those tournaments closely though. I'd love to see them try! XD

I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be able to win, cs might not take as much skill as quake but it just focuses on a few skills too much to have somebody without LAN experience winning a major even. How do you incorporate your braingame into camping LOL.

Any top quaker would be in top CS tier in less than 2 months for sure (if he can coop with the pain :P). Railing or MG-ing an NME moving with 500+ ups takes way much more precision than ducking in a corner, (and please let me not start arguing about how deeper the metagame is in a q3 game)

I wont say CS is for noobs or anything like that, I'm not a CS pro to judge the game, and since so many people playing it, I'm also sure that there are many very talented players playing it. If people play a game for many years, it must be a lot of knowledge and experience gathered in that game too..

All I'm saying is that quake and pro quakers are one level higher, period.

Ducking in a corner? lol
Completely different aim styles anyway.

CS:
- Slower targets but smaller targets
- Recoil

Quake:
- Faster, larger targets
- No recoil


Besides, the game isn't only about aim. You can have the best aim in the world and still lose due to tactics. The short of it is, you can't aim at someone if you're blinded by a well-placed flashbang.

It's painfully obvious how little you know about CS. You think top quake players would be a top tier team in CS in 2 months? Honestly, you're an idiot. They won't be "top tier" in CS at any point in 2011. NaVi, fnatic, mTw, SK, FX, Lions, WMF, EG, mouz would all take them EASILY. First of all, CS required MUCH more precision than quake does (quake is just faster-paced so it balances out), but then you add the money system and team tactics/strats? From the beginning? They won't be able to keep up with mid-tier teams even, at least not in 2011. GL to them, it'll be interesting to see, but this thread is full of a bunch of really ignorant people. I mean, I'm a quake fan, but I used to be into CS and it's annoying to see how stupid some of you are, and how little you know about what goes into it.

the precision is no different than twitch rails.. you're talking about high level players here. aim is the least of their issues.

the issue would be learning the plentiful unforgiving angles on every map :>

this

also:

Look at this game and this people, you can't be serious you comparing this to quake?

http://vodpod.com/watch/3145426-best-counter-strike-match-ever

And yes, what I said still stands, even Kodiak was ducking in corners a lot.

ps.: And I'm not a quake fanatic nor an addict at all, I only play a few hours per week, but I know and played a lot with tier1 CS players.. I'm not hating CS, I accept its the the favorite of many.. still

Q3>CS

That video is so old it's not even funny. It's like comparing Quake3 when people weren't timing items to now...

CS was about 6 years old:)

What's your point? It's almost double that now

Stop already, you have absolutely no clue about CS. If you put five quake players together and asked them to complete in CS they would get raped into oblivion for at least a year, and that's including if they were heavily coached by CS pros.

I never said they would win or anything, all I said that if they would play for two months (practice 1 map with a pro coach ofc) they would be in tier 1. And I still think I'm right.

No they would not be in tier 1. You're wrong.

:)

You are most definitely trolling, or you just don't know what tier 1 is. Either way, 2bad.

don't be stupid lol, even i that have like 5 hours of cs can do a decent score playing with friends inside top tier
just ask deus, he plays with fnatic cs guys from time to time and he's able to hold his own

deus said himself in a previous thread about cs that the people saying how easy it would be to get to the top at cs were clueless. And by the way I'd like to add that playing random mixes is nothing like competing with your actual team. That's like comparing getting frags in CA and in duel.

no, it's like a practice Duel and a tournament Duel.

minus some synergy ofc.

No, because in mixes you do not have essential elements of the team aspects I mentioned. In practice duel, you have the same elements as in tournament duel, except the impetus to win/the pressure is not the same.

A player in position X vs a player in position Y is the same no matter how serious the match is, as player's don't really move too far from their starting positions in battle, unless their opponent fails to hit.

I don't see how what you just said goes in any way against what I argued regarding essential team aspects of cs being absent in mixes as opposed to team matches, while such essential elements do not disappear when you go from tournament duel to practice duel.

The difference between tournament duel and practice duel can be likened to the difference between tournament cs (team) matches and practice cs (team) matches, but not to the difference between tournament cs (team) matches and practice cs _mixes_.

He can hold his own in these simple 1vX situations, else is not much if you practice your strats and somebody gets them called.

The second part of your post is yet again an incorrect assumption from your part. Again, the difference between tournament duel and practice duel can be likened to the difference between tournament cs (team) matches and practice cs (team) matches, but not to the difference between tournament cs (team) matches and practice cs _mixes_.

No it's not, I just don't think there's much of a "braingame" there.

It is NOT a matter of opinion. Do you even understand what we're arguing?

- tournament duel vs practice duel: same dynamics, but one is tournament play and the other is practice
- tournament cs (team) matches vs practice cs (team) matches: same dynamics, but one is tournament play and the other is practice
- tournament cs (team) matches vs practice cs _mixes_: NOT THE SAME DYNAMICS

(just to clarify further, when practicing you can choose to only practice a tactic and run it all game, which you wouldn't do in a tournament, but that's not what I'm addressing here)

Yeah and I think that these skills used in actual games but not used in mixes are very much learn-able if you can hold your own against a top team in a mix. Because of that, I think doing well in a mix is very much more indicative of your skill\talent than doing well in CA, in comparison, and so is more similar to practice Duel.

CA... it says nothing about your individual skill really, other than aim. A mix can say a lot more.

I didn't say the skills couldn't be learned. I said mixes do not call for the skills I mentioned.

very much learn-able

Quoting myself, what I said is that they're way less than what a Dueler would miss in CA.

The point I was making with that comparison is that in both duel vs ca and cs team matches vs cs mixes the need for certain skills disappears. It was NOT a question of degree. In tournament duel vs practice duel, it's not the case except for the ability to play under pressure and in different conditions than at home. How is this not clear already?

BUT IF we compare degrees, it's more to the practice Duel rather than the CA side.

Obviously not for the reason I JUST explained. The entire point of MY comparison was the disappearance of the need for some skills.

You look one way and don't look the other:
you say, skill dissappears
I look how it rises from 0 to the point, and it rises more than halfway from CA to practice Duel if we had a scale where 100% QUAKE SKILL = 100% CS SKILL

The comparison was made under my terms since I'm the one who made it. I explained the logic of my comparison several times and why your comment did not apply to it.

You said this:

And by the way I'd like to add that playing random mixes is nothing like competing with your actual team. That's like comparing getting frags in CA and in duel.

and did not retract this statement, thus I'm free to argue however I want to prove it's wrong if we're trying to find out what's right here.

Your argument sounds better in a general - look type of view, mine in a view appreciating the skill differences. I think mine is better.

Why would I retract that statement? I carefully explained the logic of the comparison and you're trying to impose your own which has absolutely nothing to do with the comparison __________I__________ was making.

If my logic is better (and I think it is) then it doesn't matter that you made the statement

That's like comparing getting frags in CA and in duel.

If my logic is better, then this statement is not correct (can't be entirely subjective ofc) even though you made it and with your logic it's good.

Your logic can't be better for a comparison I'm the one making. Otherwise no comparison can EVER be good because you can always find aspects that don't compare or other aspects to compare. What matters is the logic of the one making the comparison.
Example:
Person 1: Hey, this bridge (A) is really big! It's like this other big bridge (B)!
Person 2 (you): No it's more like this bridge (C)! Because even though bridge C is way smaller, bridge A and bridge C are both painted red.
Person 1: The entire point of my comparison was about sizes.
Person 2 (you): MY LOGIC IS BETTER

Haha, yeah you are right if you only meant it the way you said it but if smart enough, Person 1 should agree with Person 2 that he's right if the context (and there's none in your example so this wouldn't happen) is very much about color.
it's:
you: this is more similar to this
me: no this is actually even more similar to that, because skill is more of a context and matters more here.


And I'm not saying that your comparison was wrong because it is your comparison and so it's right in your way, but I'm saying that mine is better overall and that the next time, using mine would be smarter (couldn't think of a better way to express self here so I'll just clarify that it's not about following me but about using a better comparison and that only).

If you wish to argue the actual comparison please clarify because this has become a different topic now :)


PS. A very much nicer way to put it for person 2 would be not using flat out "no" and going for something like:
"In my opinion color characterizes the bridge more so I'd say it's more like bridge C".

I don't see how using yours would be smarter since (AGAIN) it does not fit the point I was making. Can we stop running in circles here and agree once and for all that the comparison I made was perfectly fine for what I was arguing?

what son1dow said

and ofc it would be hard, but i doubt they would take 1 full year if they played 3 hours a day everyday with coaching
they're pros already, they only need to adapt.. -.-

no1 said here that it would be easy.

You said two months, which implies an incorrect assertion of how hard it would be to make the transition.

@ #79

You're fabricating scenarios that prevent discussion, while I addressed your prior more general claim regarding the two months period. How do you define the "worst tier 1 cs team"? Which one is it?

In QL ctf terms, they would never beat (not even close) LLL, but they could get LKFF with some luck.

ROFL.

1) deus is a noob (i'm even better than him @ FFA without using the rail -_-)
2) deus is a kankerson
3) deus isn't smart at all
4) quake requieres more skill than cs
5) i don't care about the rest, it's just blablabla managing the eco, blablabla mastering the recoil, blablab team strats blablabla

Just look at most of the CS players : they are ugly or fat, or both. Their brain is like °.
I'm not even kidding. There is so much people playing CS because it is EASY & realistic. But, CoD4 to 6 is EVEN easier and prettier ----> even more people play it.

Now just stfu with your bullcrap, cs IS easy compared to quake.
CPM is the real shit.

U can lame all u want on a forum but u'll never be half as good as deus in in both ctf and tdm. And i'm not exactly kown as a gzd fan

yeah and ?

Your admittance to that fact means you are effectively <= half a noob since deus was " a noob" according to you.

I'm definetely not seeying that so called huge brain of yours

Deus doesn't play with the fnatic cs team... They speak Swedish...

oh silly me, ofc they don't know how to speak english :|

Have you heard GTR speaking English? lol

They do all their plays in Swedish. It's difficult to change language

ET god feruS seemed to do alright when he switched to cs...

Never heard of him. Are you sure he played 1.6?

Nah source ( url url )

The point stands that people can successfully transfer from very different games. ferus was a top ET player but not a 'pro' when he switched.

Man, the money system is NOT complicated....... a large spreadsheet with 10 minutes of explanation from someone who has played CS at a decent level for a while, and there would be nothing more to learn......


Their aim would be as good as anyone's with just a couple of weeks practice, the only thing imo that would take a decent amount of time would be the teamwork/strategy, learning to push/rotate etc etc etc. Thats the only thing holding them back from raping everyone.

The money system at a competitive level is far more advanced then you'd expect

no

no it's not.

I was never anywhere near a pro level in CS, and I can already tell you don't know the money system that well. You probably just pub and yes it is as simple as you think it is in your pubs. ;)

i don't play cs

would you please provide an example?
i've played some cs, tho 10 years ago, i cant imagine why it would be that complicated.

http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1997857#pid1997857

Just one small example

read that, two questions.

how did the terrorists get usps in tie initial setup?

what advantage do 2 players gain if they both buy an ak, and drop them for each other?

Tie initial setup? Don't really understand it, but they'd pick the USPs up from dead CTs.
I don't quite understand the dropping AK question you said, but I guess you mean if they're dropping it to the other person because he can't buy an AK + helmet/vest. He can only buy either or, so he just buys helmet/vest and the other guy drops him an AK

Care to explain how cs requires more precision than quake when trying to hit those, for example, t7 rails through doors, when you only see a sliver of your opponent? Or how the money system is actually hard to learn? Or, how the team strats, however easy to learn (seriously, only a retard couldn't learn something like that running through it over and over), are somehow also really hard? All it takes is aim, a fuckload of angles\mapknowledge, 5 timings and good reaction coupled with some quick strat-calling and good preparation to win in cs, and I'm yet to see anyone give any real arguments against that. Anyone care to shed some light on how I'm clueless? :)


PS. This is not happening, btw. They were joking ;)

You're clueless not only because you're forgetting fundamental skills (movement (yes, it may not be as apparent to the untrained eye as in quake but the movement skills of a pro and a new player are worlds apart, whether it's about positioning, using features of the maps in your movement, or the actual model movement itself), weapon control (including but not limited to recoil control) and the ability to read your opponent's tactics AND strategy and adapt being good examples), but also because you're approaching these skills as if they were something that you either have or do not have, when for almost every single one it's a matter of degree. The best teams are so far above everyone else that the placings are EXTREMELY consistent, even though the community and the number of people training extremely hard to win are much bigger than for quake. The fact that you're describing the team aspects as the process of learning and running pre-determined strats also says a lot about how clueless you are since working as a team (and often also with your immediate team-mate with which you are paired) means much more than that.

You're clueless not only because you're forgetting fundamental skills (movement (yes, it may not be as apparent to the untrained eye as in quake but the movement skills of a pro and a new player are worlds apart, whether it's about positioning or the actual model movement itself), weapon control (including but not limited to recoil control) and the ability to read your opponent's tactics AND strategy and adapt being good examples), but also because you're approaching these skills as if they were something that you either have or do not have, when for almost every single one it's a matter of degree. The best teams are so far above everyone else that the placings are EXTREMELY consistent, even though the community and the number of people training extremely hard to win are much bigger than for quake. The fact that you're describing the team aspects as the process of learning and running pre-determined strats also says a lot about how clueless you are.

Positioning = angles,
I'd love to hear what kind of special trickery cs players use for the actual model movement. Last time I heard, bunny hopping was obsolete.
weapon control = aim
reading tactics\strategy = a part of strat calling obviously

but also because you're approaching these skills as if they were something that you either have or do not have, when for almost every single one it's a matter of degree

Oh yeah? Well thanks for letting me know ;)

The fact that you're describing the team aspects as the process of learning and running pre-determined strats also says a lot about how clueless you are.

Care to explain how your strats aren't pre-determined in a cs match? I know that they aren't once you adapt, but then again there's only so much you can do, and once you do you can only hope you guessed right and you'll hit your lucky shots.

I'd love to hear what kind of special trickery cs players use for the actual model movement. Last time I heard, bunny hopping was obsolete.

First of all, no, bunny hopping is not obsolete. Although you can't gain speed as was the case pre-1.4, you can still avoid losing any speed when you hit the jumps at exactly the right time. You see players use that feature all the time to escape from difficult situations, even if it's only for one or two jumps. Second and to answer your question, I'll give you a good example in crouch running, look it up. I also edited my post to add "using features of the maps in your movement", such as ladders on de_train.

weapon control = aim

No. Aiming at the exact same pixel will still result in the bullet going different places based notably on your rate of fire and your movement (look up "spawn jump").

reading tactics\strategy = a part of strat calling obviously

Still no. Good strat calling requires the ability to read the opponent's tactics and strategy well, but the said ability to read the opponent is not limited to being a part of strat calling, it also influences how each player behaves around the map and in 1vX situations.

Oh yeah? Well thanks for letting me know ;)

You're welcome (your fault for using "all it takes" as if they were definite quantities).

Care to explain how your strats aren't pre-determined in a cs match? I know that they aren't once you adapt, but then again there's only so much you can do, and once you do you can only hope you guessed right and you'll hit your lucky shots.

Not only aren't all strats pre-determined precisely because you have to adapt, but you're also trying to reduce the team aspects to fit into the "strats" category, something I already pointed out as an inaccurate representation of the team aspects of CS.

First of all, no, bunny hopping is not obsolete. Although you can't gain speed as was the case pre-1.4, you can still avoid losing any speed when you hit the jumps at exactly the right time. You see players use that feature all the time to escape from difficult situations, even if it's only for one or two jumps. Second and to answer your question, I'll give you a good example in crouch running, look it up. I also edited my post to add "using features of the maps in your movement", such as ladders on de_train.

Your all the time equals rarely, also as you said yourself, that's just a couple of jumps. I can just lol @ this crouch running example, looked it up to make sure it's the same thing I was thinking about and this is what I found on ehow.com:

While disallowed in some circles, this move is somewhat simple to execute and does not take much practice to master.

Now, about ladder movement\etc... Are you serious? Have you seen quake players mentioning "using jump-pads" as one of the skills used in quake ? This is getting funnier and funnier :)

q[]No. Aiming at the exact same pixel will still result in the bullet going different places based notably on your rate of fire and your movement (look up "spawn jump").[/q]
Which is still in the aim category and also pretty silly to mention in this argument as it also includes a big degree of randomness. Plus, it's about battling the game here, like in many of the exclusive skills cs has, absolutely no evolution possible from you opponent's side.

Still no. Good strat calling requires the ability to read the opponent's tactics and strategy well, but the said ability to read the opponent is not limited to being a part of strat calling, it also influences how each player behaves around the map and in 1vX situations.

If something gets called you act accordingly, whatever you might think as an individual in a game of cs there's hardly anything more you can do in a specific situation other than the few very basic things, individual skill is just too limited for more variation. The more I talk to you cs peeps the more I realize it's the years of following the scene and respecting simple things that's not letting you grasp simple things as simple things.

You're welcome. Don't use "all it takes" as if they were definite quantities next time.

I cannot see how these are definitely definite quantities, but may very well be my english skills.

Not only aren't all strats pre-determined precisely because you have to adapt, but you're also trying to reduce the team aspects to fit into the "strats" category, something I already pointed out as an inaccurate representation of the team aspects of CS.

This adapting is done by calling, you guessed it, a strat, (which is also the job of a single person mostly), in which other people from the team basically just have to execute the few roles they have, not much thinking involved. What other team aspects do you mean? Sounds like nothing complicated is left off to me, just having a good routine and not much else.

Your all the time equals rarely, also as you said yourself, that's just a couple of jumps. I can just lol @ this crouch running example, looked it up to make sure it's the same thing I was thinking about and this is what I found on ehow.com:
"While disallowed in some circles, this move is somewhat simple to execute and does not take much practice to master."

They are refering to mousewheel crouch running which is simpler to execute but is banned from leagues or matches. To do it in an allowed way, you would have to use the keyboard only which is a ton more difficult

Now, about ladder movement\etc... Are you serious? Have you seen quake players mentioning "using jump-pads" as one of the skills used in quake ? This is getting funnier and funnier :)

I don't think you understood what he was saying. Just one feature he mentioned (being ladders) has plenty of different dynamics to them. For example, going up a ladder by just walking into it results in going up with the sound. Crouching whilst going up results in no sound but slower. Moving into it whilst adding strafe movement adds acceleration which can allow you to boost up unobtainable places (like this). Plenty others I can't think of off the top of my head.

That's just one aspect... Ladders. There's plenty more with other elements. It's these little tricks that can win games

They are refering to mousewheel crouch running which is simpler to execute but is banned from leagues or matches. To do it in an allowed way, you would have to use the keyboard only which is a ton more difficult

It's still just about hitting a timing :)

I don't think you understood what he was saying. Just one feature he mentioned (being ladders) has plenty of different dynamics to them. For example, going up a ladder by just walking into it results in going up with the sound. Crouching whilst going up results in no sound but slower. Moving into it whilst adding strafe movement adds acceleration which can allow you to boost up unobtainable places (like this). Plenty others I can't think of off the top of my head.[q]

Yeah and you can jump in various angles and speeds into a jumppad to get speed with different angles... So?

[q]That's just one aspect... Ladders. There's plenty more with other elements. It's these little tricks that can win games

Honestly I can't remember of too many others, can to help me here? :) Unless they're all like jumppads or sliding doors on t4, in which case don't bother.

Nothing to do with timing. If you've keep one timing on a gradient uphill or downhill you'll fuck up, make a sound and blow the round

The point is, Quake and CS are both highly skilled games, just the skillsets between the different games are completely different.

Nothing to do with timing. If you've keep one timing on a gradient uphill or downhill you'll fuck up, make a sound and blow the round

Why can't it be called a timing?

The point is, Quake and CS are both highly skilled games, just the skillsets between the different games are completely different.

Disagreed, I think cs is severely limited in personal skill. But to be frank I think I would believe that if I had been directed in the right direction myself most likely :<

Personal skill still comes in at a high level. One person can clutch a round and the fact that there's no respawn and it's do or die makes it more crucial.

It doesn't really make it that much more crucial as there are 5 people so it evens out a bit and cs isn't that much of a slippery slope as quake, new round = new story.

But my point is that the skill is severely capped which has nothing to do with how important it is :)

new round =/= new story. You lose a round, it f**ks your economy. If you can't learn to play the money game, you will not win against an equally skilled team. You guys who think money is some simple formula probably haven't gotten out of open. =/ It's not a one-night learn. It's a bit more complicated than you think, but it's the strats and team awareness that take years and years and years to learn and master. That and the aim in CS is so precision-based versus quake's more forgiving aim which is still very skillful because quake is a much faster-paced game.

This thread is so full of misguided, misinformed, ignorant, arrogant quake players (I, myself, am more of a quake fan than a CS fan, but wow, you guys don't even understand the BASICS and still try to argue) who are just completely biased against something that they so clearly don't even understand. It's a completely different game, requiring a lot of completely different skillsets.

You guys don't understand how having to hit some small head is different than being able to hit an entire body anywhere with lg or rail or plasma or even just close to them with rockets? You have such a small targer. Quake moves faster, but gives you a larger target to hit, so they both take a lot of skill, but cs does require more precision than quake. And with quake, you can miss shots plenty of times in a match and get away just fine. In CS, most of the time, if you miss, you're dead. Like these guys have said, it's a completely different style of game.

I think it's pretty cool that they want to switch over and try CS out. The community is certainly a lot larger than quake's anyway, and more tournaments throughout the year too. It'll be interesting at least.

I think it's pretty cool that they want to switch over and try CS out. The community is certainly a lot larger than quake's anyway, and more tournaments throughout the year too. It'll be interesting at least.

Don't have time to address your whole post (maybe later), just wanted to point out that you got trolled ;D

the money system really isnt that complicated

all I know is that if they were serious, 600 hours of practice is easily enough time to catch up to high level players(that's a reasonable amount of serious practice time in 6 months) given their experience in fps games already.

http://www.hltv.org/news/1329-zonics-zoom-gaming-advanced

yes, minmaxing. im aware of its existence, although i was never on a team serious enough to put things like this into practice.

new round =/= new story. You lose a round, it f**ks your economy. If you can't learn to play the money game, you will not win against an equally skilled team. You guys who think money is some simple formula probably haven't gotten out of open. =/ It's not a one-night learn. It's a bit more complicated than you think, but it's the strats and team awareness that take years and years and years to learn and master. That and the aim in CS is so precision-based versus quake's more forgiving aim which is still very skillful because quake is a much faster-paced game.

oh man, I'm sorry I'm posting ambiguously but you guys sure do take it out of context :) What I mean is that all 5 of the players respawn and you can do whatever your economy allows to counter your opponents actions', which is way more of a restart than youy'd ever get in a Quake game, be it TDM, 2v2, CTF or Duel. I don't think that the money system is a one night learn, but it very much is what you said, a "learn". Something you can just learn, pretty much all the variables are clear so there's no magic to it.

Now, these strats... if something is prepared pre-game, it might be clever, but it doesn't take a genius to execute. If it's in the game it's a little bit different but again it's the strat caller's job so if he manages to call it it's pretty simple from there.
Team awareness obviously takes experience (and LAN experience) to do right, would never argue that.

On cs's aiming I pretty much agree, I might despise it because it's JUST hitscan AIM created with the weapons and it's flawed as there are really no projectiles apart from the nades but for what it's worth, it is about as hard as such a type of aiming can be and it also has many talented people giving their best to prefect it.

This thread is so full of misguided, misinformed, ignorant, arrogant quake players (I, myself, am more of a quake fan than a CS fan, but wow, you guys don't even understand the BASICS and still try to argue) who are just completely biased against something that they so clearly don't even understand. It's a completely different game, requiring a lot of completely different skillsets.

It surely does require a lot of talent and drive to excel at but it also highly limits players in many areas, that's my position, so this is a strawman attack.

You guys don't understand how having to hit some small head is different than being able to hit an entire body anywhere with lg or rail or plasma or even just close to them with rockets? You have such a small targer. Quake moves faster, but gives you a larger target to hit, so they both take a lot of skill, but cs does require more precision than quake. And with quake, you can miss shots plenty of times in a match and get away just fine. In CS, most of the time, if you miss, you're dead. Like these guys have said, it's a completely different style of game.

Importance of shots = unrelated.
Hitscan aim hard? Yes.
Still hitscan? Yes.
Read what I said above.

BTW, in case you don't know, this "missing" shots thing in QL really depends on the player. You can put yourself in a position where it will matter if you miss and you can put yourself in one where it won't. Oh and obviously, quake isn't a game where it's even remotely possible to hit all those shots.


Since so many people seem to misinterpret my point I'll summarize it here:
CS limits personal skill. How? Round gametype (heavily minimizes the range of decisions a player other than the strat caller will have to make), minimal movement capabilities (so not just travel but also in-fight movement is way too easy to count for a skill, even), hitscan weapons and no items (again, fights won or lost mostly because of aim unless a team gets heavily countered, no real incentive to move around the map based on anything but the other 9 players (can be basically summed up to [5 - dead_count], you should know what your mates are doing) and the bomb), and FUCKING RANDOMNESS IMPLEMENTED ON PURPOSE. Really, if the game wasn't designed after actual life combat it would be plain obvious that it's designed to limit personal skill, you have to be blind to not see that.

Now, what this doesn't mean:
That cs hitscan aim is easy
that cs has no teamwork
that a team of quakers could easily own the cs scene
that jonesy is sane

As the guy that replied to you said. New round = new story is as wrong a statement as you can get. You lose the round and your weapons? Goodluck buying weapons next round. You'll be punished further which is why you see some people making tactical decisions to save their weapons when they're in a highly unlikely un-winnable situation.

And the amount of amazing 1vsX clutches you'll find on youtube or whatever just go to show that personal skill can play a huge roll in a game. One person can carry a team if he plays exceptionally well. It's not often but it's happened. As one smaller example, lets say you've got an incredible awper who can play aggressive and take many picks. As soon as he gets one pick that's more chance of picking up the round. More then one kill and you're in a better position.

read #174


I really don't argue against any points in this post of yours, just because the skill is limited it doesn't become useless, it could still constitute the whole game as far as I'm concerned.

"The point is, Quake and CS are both highly skilled games, just the skillsets between the different games are completely different. "

NO FUCK NO, THIS IS A MYTH.

CS = cancer
Quake = the real shit

I don't want to write you a book to enlighten your lost mind, mainly because i'm not a native english speaker and i'm lazy. Also, you would need to pay me for that, because i'm not your slave.

But first, i would say that if you deeply understand how the fps genre works, how the fps evolved from wolfeinstein 3D to nowadays, then it becomes FAR easier to understand WHY counter-strike is a dumbed down realistic so-called 'tactical' version of half-life, and why it is/was SO popular.
But anyways counter-strike 1.6 is going to die, and i'm not sure if CS Promode will be a 'good' replacement at all, for many reasons. At least you can still play CS:S (even worst than 1.6) or if you're a fat american, let's go for CoD 7.

Your all the time equals rarely, also as you said yourself, that's just a couple of jumps.

You said bunny jumping was obsolete, I explained why it isn't.

I can just lol @ this crouch running example, looked it up to make sure it's the same thing I was thinking about and this is what I found on ehow.com:
While disallowed in some circles, this move is somewhat simple to execute and does not take much practice to master.

Of course you "can just lol", that's because you still don't know what you're talking about. I checked ehow's page and sure enough, like ZeritoN mentioned, they were talking about crouch running with +duck on mousewheel, which is prohibited in tournaments. Not only is it harder to execute properly with the keyboard, but most importantly it's not actually crouch running itself that is the difficult part but integrating crouch running into your movement patterns and using it in the right situation + learning to transition effectively from it to other positions. Besides, crouch running is only an example, since you were asking for particular model movements.

Now, about ladder movement\etc... Are you serious? Have you seen quake players mentioning "using jump-pads" as one of the skills used in quake ? This is getting funnier and funnier :)

Could you please stop using strawman arguments left and right? I gave ladders as an example of using features of the map for your movement, and like ZeritoN pointed out ladders can be used in very different ways. You won't ever see a beginner use the all the possibilities of the ladders on train the way pros can.

Which is still in the aim category and also pretty silly to mention in this argument as it also includes a big degree of randomness. Plus, it's about battling the game here, like in many of the exclusive skills cs has, absolutely no evolution possible from you opponent's side.

No, it's not in the aim category, it's in the weapon control category. I very precisely explained why. You're trying to make everything fit into your preconceived categories, but sorry, it's not working. Your argument about possible randomness is irrelevant to what we were discussing.

If something gets called you act accordingly, whatever you might think as an individual in a game of cs there's hardly anything more you can do in a specific situation other than the few very basic things, individual skill is just too limited for more variation.

Again, 100% assumption. I love how you criticize cs players for not arguing but all you do is come up with your very own assumptions about how cs is played when you have absolutely no clue. Following what the strat caller says doesn't mean that the players don't also behave according to how they read the enemy. What the IGL calls never covers everything in-game. Read what I wrote again.

The more I talk to you cs peeps the more I realize it's the years of following the scene and respecting simple things that's not letting you grasp simple things as simple things.

The more I talk to you the more I realize you are trying to discuss something you know nothing about.

This adapting is done by calling, you guessed it, a strat, (which is also the job of a single person mostly), in which other people from the team basically just have to execute the few roles they have, not much thinking involved. What other team aspects do you mean? Sounds like nothing complicated is left off to me, just having a good routine and not much else.

First of all, from what I understand you seem to think that teams have a repertoire of tactics, and pick one according to what the enemy is doing. This is way too simplified a view. Teams do have repertoires of tactics and setups, but they also have to produce attacks and backups that are not pre-planned, and this happens all the time. In fact usually the two dynamics are combined. Regarding your last sentence, again, working as a team means much more than learning tactics together. You have to develop a real sense of teamplay and know each other inside out to work effectively as a team, and not just know what your mates are doing in a given tactic.

You said bunny jumping was obsolete, I explained why it isn't.

I stand (verbally) corrected

Of course you "can just lol", that's because you still don't know what you're talking about. I checked ehow's page and sure enough, like ZeritoN mentioned, they were talking about crouch running with +duck on mousewheel, which is prohibited in tournaments. Not only is it harder to execute properly with the keyboard, but most importantly it's not actually crouch running itself that is the difficult part but integrating crouch running into your movement patterns and using it in the right situation + learning to transition effectively from it to other positions. Besides, crouch running is only an example, since you were asking for particular model movements.

I'm sorry I didn't read the article to see that it was actually about mwheel ducking. Yes, it is harder on a keyboard but can you really compare it to strafejumping on a q3 map? I don't think so. I also don't think any of the other movement types can compare, too.

Could you please stop using strawman arguments left and right? I gave ladders as an example of using features of the map for your movement, and like ZeritoN pointed out ladders can be used in very different ways. You won't ever see a beginner use the all the possibilities of the ladders on train the way pros can.

Ofcourse you won't, but that doesn't mean that they're actually hard. How is it a strawman argument really, if I do think that these tricks ARE simple.

No, it's not in the aim category, it's in the weapon control category. I very precisely explained why. You're trying to make everything fit into your preconceived categories, but sorry, it's not working.

Huh? I'm not trying to fit stuff into the categories I first specified, we actually have different definitions of aiming it seems. I've had this argument before and it was with you IIRC, I'm too lazy to redo it so I'll just say that I count all the mouse movements (and keyboard movements if they're used for aiming) and button clicks used for shooting into the term "aiming". It seems most other people use this definition too.

Your argument about possible randomness is irrelevant to what we were discussing.

It does have a lot to do with the importance of the said skills.

Again, 100% assumption. I love how you criticize cs players for not arguing but all you do is come up with your very own assumptions about how cs is played when you have absolutely no clue. Following what the strat caller says doesn't mean that the players don't also behave according to how they read the enemy. What the IGL calls never covers everything in-game. Read what I wrote again.

What the IGL doesn't call is self explanatory, even if not easy to master is the point I was trying to make

First of all, from what I understand you seem to think that teams have a repertoire of strats, and pick one according to what the enemy is doing. This is way too simplified a view. Teams do have repertoires of tactics and setups, but they also have to produce attacks and backups that are not pre-planned, and this happens all the time. In fact usually the two dynamics are combined.

Geez, can you stop assuming that I'm stupid without a actual reason? Why can't a strat include something you haven't done before?

Regarding your last sentence, again, working as a team means much more than learning tactics together. You have to know each other inside out to work effectively as a team and develop a real sense of teamplay, and not just know what your mates are doing in a given tactic.

Well obviously :D However, can't it be fit into the word "preparation"? I can't see how it couldn't. Overall, what you're saying about teamwork is pretty obvious and it's not like anyone with half a brain and just a bit of knowledge couldn't at the very least guess these things, so we should just stop arguing about the team side of things. I don't think they're bad or anything like that in cs, and even if I might think that it doesn't have as many tools as quake to express teamplay (and I'm not gonna argue about that, too lazy) it's purely the individual skill side of things I despise and started this argument for.

This is also looking very much like a straw man argument, btw ;)

Yes, it is harder on a keyboard but can you really compare it to strafejumping on a q3 map? I don't think so. I also don't think any of the other movement types can compare, too.

I never compared duckrunning to strafejumping. I gave it as an example of a feature of the cs movement that you have to go through the process of learning.

Ofcourse you won't, but that doesn't mean that they're actually hard. How is it a strawman argument really, if I do think that these tricks ARE simple.

It's a straw man because instead of answering my general point you are trying to reduce it to ladders. There are differences in terms of movement between the pros themselves so reducing to "a few easy tricks" is ignorant, end of story.

Huh? I'm not trying to fit stuff into the categories I first specified, we actually have different definitions of aiming it seems. I've had this argument before and it was with you IIRC, I'm too lazy to redo it so I'll just say that I count all the mouse movements (and keyboard movements if they're used for aiming) and button clicks used for shooting into the term "aiming". It seems most other people use this definition too.

I don't see how controlling a rate of fire, _regardless_ of where you're aiming, can possibly be called "aiming".

It does have a lot to do with the importance of the said skills.

No, it does not. It's an additional factor which takes nothing away from the fact that the other skills improve the precision with which you hit your bullets.

Geez, can you stop assuming that I'm stupid without a actual reason? Why can't a strat include something you haven't done before?

You are now contradicting yourself, since you originally argued that strats were pre-determined. Regardless, team mates can act together and in unison to react to something without anything being called by the IGL, so your interpretation of cs team play being based on pre-determined strats called by the IGL is wrong.

Well obviously :D However, can't it be fit into the word "preparation"? I can't see how it couldn't.

I don't see how that's even remotely part of what we were talking about. Yes, you have to prepare together to work effectively as a team. How is that related to what we were talking about?

Overall, what you're saying about teamwork is pretty obvious and it's not like anyone with half a brain and just a bit of knowledge couldn't at the very least guess these things, so we should just stop arguing about the team side of things

You are making an incorrect assumption that it's something easy to learn. It takes time. When Fatal1ty tried cs he was absolutely terrible at working with his mates (he had no in-game sense whatsoever either, he couldn't read what the opponent was doing).

if I might think that it doesn't have as many tools as quake to express teamplay

Quoting this for comic relief :)

individual skill side of things I despise and started this argument for

Having in-game sense and being able to read your opponent is an individual skill. You certainly can't depend on your IGL for that, it goes WAY beyond his calls. Again, you are not familiar with the skills cs requires.

6 months of focused practice is enough to catch up when you are already have been top players and know how to practice.

if this were taken seriously:

there is no cl_mouseaccel in cs

avek and cooller are ragey as fuck. they don't seem to quit at quake though so I'm sure their dedication would persevere. It's likely possible that getting gayed 10 rounds in a row as t could push either of them over the edge though.

no 5th. tox or fox are the most likely quake players to fill the spot. fox likes hopping games, and tox is uncommitted to quake and likely has the best aim in the world regardless of game. A better idea though might be to just have a 5th be a cs player to accel their learning..

there is no cl_mouseaccel in cs

There is. And there are ways to scale it like q3's accel.

no there isn't

there is in source but no one is talking about source :>

I'd be surprised if 1.6, based on quake's engine doesn't have accel.

based on quake2 engine which also does not have accel

They both have fps dependent mouse accel as default iirc You would use noforce commands in launch parameters to remove them in CS

assuming you dont have one of the 99999 mousefixes that have been out for 10 years

either way no one would use the shit pointer precision windows accel

Half Life 1 used a modified Quake 1 engine.

regardless there isn't an accel command :<

Just wanted to be a smart ass :>

It always amuses me of how ignorant players of different games are of stereotyped games.

And yet those that see the "truth" never actually argue, just laugh the "unknowing" off.

I played CS only once and I killed all the other team's players in one round. It was probably luck, but that was enough for not playing it ever again. That thing can never happen in quake, and I mean a noob can't take a single frag.

If someone else other than a quaker was in my position would had thought “ooooohhh I fucking own on this game” and would had stick around. A true quaker though, is someone that likes challenges and things like this repel him/her.

Mix or public? Because taking out the other team in public isn't exactly hard...

yes public

I agree that 80% of the quake players there are clueless about CS. But tbh they don't need to know a shit about this game, why ? Because it's useless, you know, it's like mastering poo-eating, you don't need it, it's not even fun, it's painful.
That said 95% of the counter-strike players have 0 clue about quake aswell, actually it's EVEN worst than the quake players about cs.... Because most of the counter-strike players are brainless semi-humans.

Btw, for me it's a different story, i'm way smarter than most quake players, and for the counter-strike players, i'm like a fucking genius, i mean, a fucking god. You might not notice it with cuz of all the crap i'm posting here @ ESR, but if you knew exactly what goes throught my mind 16/24 6/7 (which is obviously impossible), you would be like "OMFG HOW COMES THAT A FRENCH FAG LIKE HIM KNOWS MORE ABOUT THE UNIVERSE THAN MY WHOLE FAMILY WILL EVER DO ?".
So, when i say that for competition, for real serious business money & drugz & bitches competition, quake > cs by far, you just have to trust me, don't try to explain me why this or that is harder/easier than that or this, i already know it, and i can actually think way deeper than you, but don't be afraid, i'm on your side at the end.

If you want to have fun with friends who aren't THAT good at video games : play counter-strike (preferabely source) or even better ---> CoD 7 (on console). If you want something more serious, if you're a true badass beautiful nerd and you are quite smart and like the competition ---> go for quake.

Ok stop talking now. Period.

If you want to have fun with friends who aren't THAT good at video games : play counter-strike (preferabely source) or even better ---> CoD 7 (on console). If you want something more serious, if you're a true badass beautiful nerd and you are quite smart and like the competition ---> go for quake.

that sums it up. Word for word, best advice in this thread.

That's what I'm talking about, in quake you can use your movement to make adjustments to your aim. In CS you can't because of the movement penalties.

stearmy?

i'll go as a 5th ! :|

Bollox. It's hard to even express how retarded that idea is. It's one thing for a casual player to switch between games, but in the higher echelons, it's unforgiving. First thing to go is positional sense and map awareness - absolutely crucial at pro level. Aim only takes you so far, and if the game has a different aiming system, you're basically fucked and need to completely revamp your aiming patterns. Then, of course, is the movement, carefully practiced for years, something you rely on, suddenly obsolete. Learning weapon choices for specific situations, angles, team coordination, all that shit. It would take them years to reach the very top.

skill never goes out of the windows, no matter what, if does, you never had any.

Yes, but what does it matter, if the skills you have do not apply in the new environment?

you use it to adapt fast, like a winner would do:)

Like i said, a few years (2-3). And i only say that because i realize how immensely talented those guys are. 2 months, 6 months is a silly pipe dream.

I respect your opinion, but I think you are heavily underestimate the power of the human brain. If you are a pro player and you play online fps-es for many many years at the highest level, you will end up with a shitload of "gamer synapse" (lol). And wisdom is the most important element beside experience, luck and being gifted..

My opinion was formed by observing the end results of similar transitions. It's really, REALLY hard for people who played one game for years to switch to another game and catch up to years of experience of that game's top players. Sure, they'll be able to do it a lot faster than a random mid-tier player, but it'll still take time, and lots of it.

Well, everybody saying I'm wrong, but my opinion is still the following:

5 of the best q3 players (and without any fanboyism, its very important that we are talking about q3 players), so 5 of them practicing (obviously pickups and pcws with a pro CS coach) 1 counterstrike map for two months (6-8 hours a day like they do before q3 tournaments) . and they would beat the worst team in CS tier1.

hit me:D

Yeah because that would really happen... Considering Cooller doesn't even practice new Quake maps

its a "a what if conversation". why would a q3 player play CS? xD

We'll just have to agree to disagree, then. But consider all the switches we've seen from game to game and how successful they really were (excluding new games that everyone needs to learn from scratch).

what movement? :D

xD

Um, Quake movement?

What I meant was that while you throw your Quake movement skills out through the window, you also DO NOT have to learn a new type of movement.

Yes you do. CS pros move absolutely nothing like you would when starting the game.

Well yes, the movement in CS is more complex then people would want to lead on. Not to mention if you don't cancel your movement perfectly you'll be so inaccurate you won't hit anything at all..

you're just praising comments of people that you've listened to for too long to not get brainwashed.


+forward is always just +forward

No it's not (the amount of incorrect and uneducated assumptions you make in this thread is quite impressive). Example: I can be pressing +forward constantly, my movement in cs will not be the same whether I'm also intermittently pressing +duck or not (see "crouch running").
Like ZeritoN mentioned, where your bullet lands also depends on your movement, and more precisely in some cases on how you stopped moving.

this was the longest definition if random, ever :D

ps: j/k don't get mad xD

(the amount of incorrect and uneducated assumptions you make in this thread is quite impressive)

It might seem so to you, as you believe these simple things to be work of genius :)


To be honest I thought crouch running was still banned but how does it matter, really. On the simple terrain of cs, it and the other movement tricks in cs are way too easy to really count them for anything.

It has nothing to do with me thinking highly of cs, it has to do with you making assumptions and those assumptions being false.

Or what I said. No real argument in your post. But what can I really say, you give those kids way too much credit and I might be doing that too had I have followed cs for so long.

Truth is, as usual, in the middle - movement is faaaaaaar less important in CS than it is in Quake, and is also much easier to learn and master. Nevertheless, it is there, and is another bump on the road to becoming a good/great/pro player.

I admit I was wrong in the way that I didn't know that crouch walking was used in tournaments, but it still is easy and it most definitely wouldn't be any kind of a hurdle if they did try to learn cs.

You made a precise claim, that there was no new type of movement to learn, and I called you out on it. Personal preferences have nothing to do with the fact that your claim was wrong.

I already admitted I was wrong, for a couple of times actually. What I was talking after that was about the movement being easy and you giving far too much credit for cs players.

avek was saying some mad shit on stream,like 5 hours for 5 days a week for 6 months or roughly that so i dont think its serious :p

would certainly be cool though :D

CS? LOL, they're surely joking, Quake players have dignity, they usually despise even looking at CS games when they're shown on stage, those who are in multi-gaming teams are often putting rat poison in their CS teammates food, etc.
But what they can do is to play in Starcraft II tourneys, like GSL for example. SC2 is a primitive game, and any Quake player who can time more than 1 item, will easily have capabilities to beat all korean pros after 1 month practice. And then they'll just have easy money, 80k USD per month is some serious shit.

lol :D

Actually the game is very new and if they practiced hard, they could be on par with everybody, but that doesn't mean they could be able to come up with tournament wins. Most likely, not.

Cooller watches the CS all the time. Hangs around with Na'Vi. Avek is friends with the Polish team FX. Stermy played/plays CSS (which is worse then 1.6 :D) so it's a bit harsh to say they would despite looking at them ;)

not to defend his attempt at trolling but it's something that friendship does to you, compromises. But that's only if they actually bothered to form an opinion, ofc.

Cypher has connections with best Belarus CS team (k29) too. At least he was practicing at the same gaming center for years.

most quakers would transfer great into cs, cause they play like +b cs tards

lol this :P

u r talking about the ztn prodiges aren't u?

Anyone who would give up Quake for CS would only prove that they know nothing of EITHER game.

also, way too many CS fags in this thread.

I'm shocked that people here even consider that it might be true.

LOL YOU WERE PUNK'D HARD. How stupid you are to even think so? It was a joke/troll and I thought everybody in Quake would understood it, hilarious.

About CS bashing here: do you really think that those CS 1.6 top teams are unskilled and that best Quake players gathering a team, with let's say 2 years of practise would be a world class clan competing with the likes of fnatic and Navi? ;]]]]]]]]]]

ROTFL. You have absolutely NO CLUE WHATSOEVER.

Not really, hardly any people believed that, read more carefully ;)

About CS bashing here: do you really think that those CS 1.6 top teams are unskilled and that best Quake players gathering a team, with let's say 2 years of practise would be a world class clan competing with the likes of fnatic and Navi? ;]]]]]]]]]]

ROTFL. You have absolutely NO CLUE WHATSOEVER.

Hmm. Let's try something.

About Halo bashing somewhere: do you really think that those Halo 3 top teams are unskilled and that best Quake players gathering a team, with let's say 2 years of practise would be a world class clan competing with the likes of Str8 Rippin' and Final Boss? ;]]]]]]]]]]

ROTFL. You have absolutely NO CLUE WHATSOEVER.

This one's both a straw argument (as it's evident you were also pointing this at me) like the first one and also obvious BS.

Hey:) I'm one of the absolutely clueless ppl. \:D

FYI: No1 said that they would beat fnatic, the specultation was that they would get onto tier1 level with intense practice and with pro coaching.

I personally saw it many times that how f0rest (for example) took out an entire tier1 nme team alone again and again, without any other fnatic member doing any serious damage at all. If one guy can take out a whole tier1 team alone, there must be some serious skill differences inside tier1.

imo:)

I personally saw it many times that how f0rest (for example) took out an entire tier1 nme team alone again and again, without any other fnatic member doing any serious damage at all. If one guy can take out a whole tier1 team alone, there must be some serious skill differences inside tier1.

Quite possibly the stupidest thing I've heard in a while... It's all about decisions and positioning. How many times have you seen Cypher absolutely rape someone in "tier1"? Does that mean there are huge skill differences between players?

omg, why mix up teamgames with duel ? :(

Because he is right ;)

FYI: Yesterday wasn't my first day on the Internet.

Can you even read?, I said: taking out whole nme team again, and again. I was not talking about one time or lucky position/momentum situations, I said he was just on a way higher level, period

Hahaha if they would practice the game for 6 month they would still get butthurted by navi and co :D.
Sry, but I think even I could still rape them with my old mix ;).

I don't get it how clueless some people are about cs in this thread.

Zeta and forest (only two cs-players I know of ;) raped ra3 as well as fox would've, but I guess they are the only two cs-players with good aim. So a few good q3 duelers, many of whom are not so good at tdm, would surely rape all those cs noobs.

f0rest's QL acc: http://www.quakelive.com/#!profile/statistics/iznogouud :P

You can find various other CS players QL accounts in friends I think

would have thought his rail was more impressive, since that is probably the weapon that translates best.

47% rail is pretty average for duel considering that seems to be all he really played

that's probably on old netcode as well

The fnatic CS team tend to play QL when they're at LAN events or bootcamping. Have played with cArn recently a few times in CTF pickups and he's no slouch either

I played some CA with forest on the server and he wasn't really impressive :)

Ofcourse he might have been very inactive at that time.. I have no idea, but it was nothing special.

Well, this was a few years ago, but neither really ever dropped below 50% lg and 60% rg. Anyway, I know nothing about cs but I can still tell it's a retarded discussion, seeing how cs is a much bigger game, I really doubt that there isn't an abundance of great aimers.

"Well, this was a few years ago, but neither really ever dropped below 50% lg and 60% rg."

Yes that's definitely possible. CS is all about precise aim/controled aim.

But i guess he's still bad at dodging and moving all around the map. Basically someone like cooller or me would make his stats drop from 50% average to 20%. And we would still hit high accuracies because he wouldn't dodge at all.

f0rest played RA3 and defrag iirc

he was crap at defrag.

And if he was decent/pretty good at it, then that's cuz he was a q3 player 1st then cs player. I mean, he isn't only a CS player.

Btw, you know that trying to convince quake players that CS is as hard as quake, but just different is just like saying to rapha that homomen relationship is as hard if not harder than heterosexual relationship, but just tastes differently. Blasphemy.

They better drop their sensitivities if this is true :D

Why? Again clueless

CS is more about recoil accuracy, than real accuracy. By this I mean that in QL, you're only focused on aiming at your opponent and the hitbox (for hitscan weapons).

In CS, you need to not only control recoil, but make an effort to aim for the upper body, and head (more damage is done that way, more likely to get the frag, etc). Because of this, you need a low sensitivity. Almost all top level CS players use a low/med sens, or low sens with some accel (n0thing from EG).

All those players have high sensitivity, some with accel, some without. With those high sensitivities, controlling recoil and trying to pull off extremely accurate shots will be near impossible.

EDIT: apparently you're all fucking retarded - THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE NERDS

yeah, the guys who are aim gods in quake obviously won't be able to be good at


...wait for it...





...counterstrike.

If you think aiming in Quake is the same as aiming in CS, you've obviously don't understand competitive CS.

<mTw|madferret> cs is more skill cause your shots don't hit where you're aiming at.

nuff said.

Hahahaha my cs sense is way higher :D. Have u ever seen a f0rest, neo, get right, zonic or any other mid-high sense player? As I said u have no fucking clue about cs. It might be true that a lot ot american players are known for their lowsense but in europe it isn't like that.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule, you act like what I said NEEDS to account for ALL cs players.

wat?! lol

No sensitivity isn't too much of a difference. Sure lower helps, but you'd be surprised. f0rest (as someone mentioned earlier in the thread as being a crazy good player) uses a fairly mid-sensitivity and plenty other players use mid-senses

cooller is bad luck, kick him out


also - cs lmao wtf ok

CS > QL
cos i wouldnt get errors trying to load CS right now

lol esr got trolled gg

ROFL, these guys can't even get into TDM, especially Avek and Cypher. Cooller is a little better but still can't switch from dueller mind to tdm. Stermy is decent tho.

Ofc they are trolling and ofc they wouldn't stand a fucking chance vs. the top tier CS teams. I am no CS-fan but this is fucking obvious. The top CS players have been playing the game for years do you really think that 5 quakers can dominate anything just because they are able to aim well? Don’t you think that the CS has evolved thru all these years? Aiming is such a small part of the game so obviously they can’t just dominate the CS scene because they get great aim. They have NO experiences in positions and decision-making (in all kind of unusual situations, like 1vX) in this entirely different game.

It would take them years to get close (if they ever would) to the professional level.

And aiming in CS isn't even easier than aiming in Quake. It's just another style. Doing multiple headshots with a recoil affected gun while dodging is just as hard as hitting insane rails and shafting 50+%. CS’ers are not quitted Quakers that failed due to the lack of aim, but simply players that enjoy another kind of fps, you know.

Stop being retarded everyone.

/thread

Damn straight!

dodging? lol

Strafe shooting or w/e.

fuck me, you guys are taking this more serious than the players themselves. They won't stop practicing serious for QL, it will most likely start casual.

And no, they weren't trolling.

they were and you are too!!

w/e you'll see

lmao @ that

stearmy is my fav tho!

1 week at cs and any quake player would be top tier pro rapist cs player.

nuff said and if you reply to this cs fagg0ts you know its true. stfu n die.

hellz yea muh nigga, cs is for weak knee'd bitches that get cockslapped in da face. word

oh thinkin same, mya boy. that quakey thing is yer only place to be, ain't it? yeeha

stunt.us,

I love America
But I hate fat americans,
You are not fat,
But you look muscular and badass,
You are my friend,
And what you said about CS,
Is 100% true.

Peace.

lol at how fucking stupid this thread is.

cs used to be fun when there was no recoil, had qw bunny hops and insta weap switching

i would play this game. It sounds like the reaction quake 3 mod (when it was early release) and it was SUPER fun. then they added cripple and weird shit and fucked it up

and the 4-3 weapon had a scope,

and cs_mansion!!

lol @ people making asumptions that top quake duellers would do awesome in a TEAMgame...

bollocks:)

A team with like draven, linkin, spartie, etc... would be miles better in cs than any of the guys you keep naming from the top of the duel scene...

your assumption is that teamplay from q3 carries over to cs. i don't think that's true, as ability for teamplay in cs comes from your general understanding of the fundamentals in cs as well as general experience. i don't think there is any an inherent carry over advantage for a q3 player of any game-type when coming into cs. that's my opinion at least, and in the past i've played a lot of cs.

lately i've been playing a lot of qw 4on4 for the last 3 seasons, and it's only in my 3rd season that i feel of division 1 calibre (after nearly a year), and in q3 i had been playing tdm for many years already. As far as i'm aware I might be the only guy who has ever accomplished that in qw. it's easy if you don't play something at the top level to not realise the complexities of it.

so I agree with what jalle says.

I'm sorry but dont go and overrate the complexity of team strategies in cs. Let's just guess it's more complex than quake... it's 10 times slower so it hugely balances out.

Remember the eurosport cs video ? Where the guy explains that one of them goes into B and the 4 others wait next to A and the B is a fake to make the enemy believe the fight is happening at B ?

Tell me just how hard that can be to make strategy wise, how deep is it ? Its nowhere near impossible for experienced 10 years quake teamplayers trust me...

Since you were also topnodge in Q3 your transition to qw is easier compared to someone who never played fps or at an mediocre level.

Still it's impressive, but it's not like I didn't expect it :)

true but, it's not likely i'll get to the level of the true top tier in qw 4on4 before i stop, like milton, ihminen, xantom, murdoc, zero, para, bps etcetc - and as far as i've understood the context, that's what we're talking about here. the ability for top tier quake players to be of an equal tier in cs - or at least i think it is :E.

Funny thing... agent from Russia is ex cs player, but I guess it's now a shocking news :DDD

i've seen you around, was your old nick by any chance megaexplode2k7?

HAIL 2 THE KING!

cypher needs a rocket though :D also they wrote "stearmy"...

SK-vs-mTw

Just watch this matchup. There's nothing special about this game or pros in this game. No special movement, not much tactics going on and no fast gameplay.

If Quake Live pros would switch to CS I'd assume it wouldn't be that hard. The only downer would be that they'd be almost bored to death with such a lame game, coming from a pace-breaker such as Quake Live.

No special moves? Every cs player has some serious dj skillz chopping their movement and delaying player animations / weapon sounds like this.

"delaying sounds!"

now just think about this a little bit please:)

Yes and they are not the only ones suffering from heavy "delay" I see

Yea, I'm a stupid quaker, we just frag and having fun instead of delaying sounds and animation:)

Please enlighten me, is the amount of delay counts? I mean a pro CS-er can delay the sound further than a noob CS-er?

............................................________
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?......................................................\,
.................../...........................................................,}
................./......................................................,:`^`..}
.............../...................................................,:"........./
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.\`~,......"~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\
................................`:,,...........................`\..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_\..........._,-%.......`\
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`

nor I can copy-paste:(