Thread: CS:S Main Server

or the 13 T's not following the call, clusterfucking trying to awp mid on D2....



EDIT: added the word "clusterfucking", felt it was appropirate

5 Ct's a choke point, with more to spare...Some maps are hard enough to rush as is.

Imagine the voice chat... What a pain.

Originally Posted by Kraker Jak

Originally Posted by ...bigdog...

20v20 = bigger than CSS. If you want that kind of rock and roll, it's time to switch to BF2 or 2142.

Well put....


And even on a 64 man BF2 server...it gets hectic...But atlest you have squads. You should write to valve and tell them we want a Squad base CSS game.

another perk of the BF games. VOIP is a must...but if all 32 people are on the same channel, it's useless. That's where the "get on the vent" arguments make sense......but we don't condone such exclusionary behavior.

CSS would benefit from the ability to create fire teams. The A and B team for CT's, or the rush and counter teams for T's, or the hostage rescue and lock-the-map-down teams.

Originally Posted by ...bigdog...

CSS would benefit from the ability to create fire teams. The A and B team for CT's, or the rush and counter teams for T's, or the hostage rescue and lock-the-map-down teams.

That makes it sound like old America's Army 3....

Originally Posted by Kraker Jak

Originally Posted by ...bigdog...

20v20 = bigger than CSS. If you want that kind of rock and roll, it's time to switch to BF2 or 2142.

Well put....


And even on a 64 man BF2 server...it gets hectic...But atlest you have squads. You should write to valve and tell them we want a Squad base CSS game.

Neotokyo started to work towards this. That game had a lot of good ideas. With some work, that game had some damn good potential.

10 v 10 is perfect for losttemple. 40 would be ....( can't think of a bad enough word )

on a side note fireteams is something i wish you could have as a squad leader in PR. for some reason people just can't keep up with you if you start making fireteams and they get confused.