Thread: Pathetic Show of teamplay.

Originally Posted by MeBad

EVERYONE needs to get back into the habit of AUTOASSIGN. People generally do not RTV when the teams are even, and will most certainly RTV if they are getting smoked

in theory that works. in practice though, autoassigning is just a way of avoiding the choice of the team that needs help imo. follow the logic:

team a is stacked with good players and i know team b needs help.
1. if i select team b, 100% of the time i've helped the server.
2. if i select team a, 100% of the time i'm hurting the server.
3. if i autoassign, 50% of the time i'm helping, the other 50% i'm hurting. the computer doesn't know who good players are, regs are, noobs, etc. autoassign only works if one team already has more players (like 2 more than the other), in which case choice 1 still works.

therefore choice 1 is the best option: select team b. not team a, and not autoassign. autoassign is just a cop-out, giving yourself a chance to end up on the stacked team (which works in your favor and against the server so i'm never suprrised when people say "i auto though". damn right you do, it's like saying you're smart enough to not choose the fail team), even though you could easily select the team that needs help.

while i'm at it. we can't have guys that go camp side all the time. almost 80% of my time is spent playing as a terrorist. i do this because objective teams are the team most likely to fall apart... there are bomb issues, afk issues, call issues, money issues, nade stack issues, asshat issues that just 1 person can cause and wreck a team with. even if i'm not making calls, i'm one less potential thing that can go wrong. as a camp team, 1 person will almost never break you.

if you want a better playing experience, the objective team has to function properly for the benefit of the server. otherwise, it's dysfunction only serves the defending team stats... and regs that favor camp side too much (not to mention any names... jesus take the wheel) need to man up and go objective. more regs on objective teams = better playing experience for all.

and since i'm on a roll and it was brought up, the awp rule still needs to be changed. it only serves the side that gets it first. this is usually the side that junki (aka nub) plays on or the side that is up on cash and doesn't need to rush (that's the ct's). once it's destroyed the rushing team (usually t's) for a round or two, it gets voted off.

think about that. the most likely scenario by far is that it destroys the team that is already getting destroyed or fighting the uphill battle, and then gets voted off... how is that a good thing? it's not, and it's no wonder it is so hated by many regs and consistently voted off immediately.

to make it fair and unhated, 1 awp per team no matter what. that's fair. if junkii wants to embarrass himself continually and kokes wants to awp himself into the record books, i say let them as long as someone on the opposite team can buy one and give them a fair run for the money. it will either make the no awp/auto more popular, or settle the awp issue once and for all becuase right now, the awp server is really no awp/auto anyway.

I thought that was the point of auto-assign? It automatically puts you on the team that needs help.


That's the way it works in DoD:S anyway.

Originally Posted by Toker

Originally Posted by Guyver

I thought that was the point of auto-assign? It automatically puts you on the team that needs help.


That's the way it works in DoD:S anyway.

LOL, no. It puts you on the side that needs +1 player. I never auto assigned and always always ALWAYS joined the team that I knew would need my help.

See not much has changed from what I read about certain peeps... :3

It may not work that in CS:S, but that is how it works in DoD:S...even if the teams are even number-wise.

It may not work that way in CS:S, but that is how it works in DoD:S...even if the teams are even number-wise.

Hmm i didnt make this post to call out names i made it as a wake up call to the people around here, and if infact "nub" IS junkii then i am Highly HIGHLY dissapointed.

Originally Posted by Stealthyking

Hmm i didnt make this post to call out names i made it as a wake up call to the people around here, and if infact "nub" IS junkii then i am Highly HIGHLY dissapointed.

If it is, then that figuers

Originally Posted by ~BigTymer~

Originally Posted by Stealthyking

Hmm i didnt make this post to call out names i made it as a wake up call to the people around here, and if infact "nub" IS junkii then i am Highly HIGHLY dissapointed.

If it is, then that figuers

Well not that im trying to now point out anyone, but isnt his behavior the kind TTP DOESNT condone? im confused once again. :8