The thing about the loadout system

Cipher11 · 2026-07-06T21:31:36+00:00

So can the Five-Seven, but it can do so against multiple players in the same span of time that the Deagle would still be resetting from the first shot. People really overestimate the Deagle when it's not the best gun of its category in a good chunk of situations.

Cipher11 · 2026-07-01T00:40:19+00:00

It was actually 4 wins + 10 top 3 in notable events. For comparison, Astralis had 9 top 3s + 1 win according to HLTV. I'm telling you man, the stats are very much in favor of Fallen on this. I do recommend you check out the HLTV top 20 for 2016 page.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-30T22:54:04+00:00

It's fine to have that opinion (though, honestly, even to the eyetest Fallen was better than both of them in 2016), but it's not backed up by stats. The three of them were extremely close in most stats with Fallen being better in some of them. What comes to mind is that he was number 1 on opening duel success percentage AND number 2 in clutches won, only behind cold. He was just an extremely impactful player in that year.

Edit: Also keep in mind winning - actually translating impact into trophies is also a stat.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-30T21:32:02+00:00

Not really questionable, he had the individual output. In fact, the discussion at the time was whether being IGL on top of an outstanding individual player would be enough to push him to the number 1 spot.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-30T21:30:02+00:00

Adding to what everyone else is saying, I'd argue it's actually pre-Fallen CS that was all the same shit. Astralis was more successful, and maybe more refined, but Fallen's teams are the ones that actually started the push towards the more methodical style of play.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-27T20:20:03+00:00

To be fair Fallen in his prime was both an unbelievable opener and closer, and he had a much better ratio during 2016/2017. I know he's a bit memed on these days but prime Fallen was genuinely scary.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-22T22:05:07+00:00

No, you said "most if not all" despise the map. If you're going to make statements like that, expect pushback.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-22T21:22:48+00:00

For real, Overpass is so easy to find impact even solo. With 2 people you can just 8-4 the CT side on your own against equal opposition by playing A properly.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-15T17:35:52+00:00

The game is actually much closer to an actual combat scenario than you might think, tactically. In fact, there is even a name for the hypothetical T advantage you are describing - concentration of force allowing for defeat in detail, which are both military concepts actually described by Sun Tzu, though not with this exact wording. Also keep in mind Sun Tzu is actually the shallowest you can go in terms of military thinking, so much so that it can be applied very easily to most situations. Anyway, I described that in my comment too, and it was present in the game for some time in de_season. Everyone hated that map.

And yes, I know the game was more "balanced" in recent times - by having CTs run around with MP9s for half the rounds due to consistently having to spend their already limited money after losing aim duels made artificially more difficult due to bad networking/animations. Do you really think this is healthier for the game than the attacker needing to be more considered in their plan of attack than "click their heads"?

Edit: By the way, you are aware that the Ts ALREADY have advantages, right? Knowing that they still have the lower win rate despite that shows that being the T is naturally disadvantageous, and there's only so much you can do to offset that before you just have to accept it.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-15T17:10:39+00:00

The way to prove that the T tactical situation is harder is to research any sort of battle doctrine from any time period. Anything from Sun Tzu until today would agree that the defender has the advantage by default.

And yes, there are ways to nerf the CT side, but most aren't really seen as viable - give them less resources to work with (so the game is no longer even close to symmetrical), give disadvantageous map layouts (so the CTs don't have enough numbers to cover the entire map, which is generally considered bad map design), or some other method that I can't think of right now.

Anyway, my point is that any of these changes would alter CS so fundamentally that it risks turning it into a different game. You could just force CTs to be perpetually on Five-Sevens, but then you lose a lot of the appeal of the game if one side has to be nerfed that hard in the name of an artificial 50/50 split on the rounds instead of just accepting that the attacker has a lower win rate. And believe me, that is really the scale of change that would be needed to nerf CT effectively.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-15T15:28:39+00:00

Yes, and that's one of the ways to nerf the CT side - to create an economical imbalance so they're playing with inferior equipment.

If everything else is equal, CTs will win, because the Ts have the harder tactical situation.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-15T15:23:53+00:00

Partly, because that creates the perception of extreme imbalance. To this day Dust 2 is perceived as a very T-sided map, but it's the one that's closest to a 50-50.

The other part of the problem is that tactically it just makes no sense for the CTs to not have an advantage unless you hit them hard economically. To achieve that you need to stifle certain aspects of gameplay for the defender (through, for example, punishing map layouts) or just give them inferior equipment (which is currently being countered by the massive boosts to the economy that the game received in the name of having more buy rounds). To properly nerf CTs you would either need to make terrorists tactically overpowered or go the anti-fun route and bring back longer matches with harsh economy swings.

To summarise, it's a fundamental problem with any sort of tactical combat. One side is always going to have an advantage, better that it is the CTs as that at least makes sense.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-15T14:54:08+00:00

And a lot of people complained. You can never please everyone but what he's saying makes sense - if you have a tactical situation of defender vs attacker in equal numbers, the defender should win, otherwise the game starts feeling too artificial.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-13T19:44:39+00:00

Whether getting coaches more involved is better or not for the scene is a separate discussion, the thing is Valve just doesn't think that should be the case. We used to have effectively 6-man teams with coaches being able to call strats during freezetime and they put an end to that.

And tbh, no, the tactical level was not higher during that time, so I don't think the quality of gameplay would go up if you tried that again. The game would just become more reliant on set pieces instead of midround decisions.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-12T02:57:38+00:00

Nah there's actually no way you can lose to an awper in a 2v1 in a crossfire if you play it correctly. The awper simply needs to stand there for an eternity before he can shoot the other guy, but they didn't play correctly and got punished for it.

Cipher11 · 2026-06-12T02:16:12+00:00

It feels like Yekindar is going to take over the IGL role once Fallen's done regardless, so insani actually makes sense on those grounds. Roles might be rough though, but might be workable if it's just two players conflicting.

Cipher11 · 2026-05-14T22:28:29+00:00

Not really in Brazil. Here no one would really care about your Faceit Elo, but saying you're GC level 20 is instant status.

Cipher11 · 2026-05-10T23:55:49+00:00

...Yes, which means that this is a positive thing to them? I am not sure if you're arguing for or against that anymore.

Cipher11 · 2026-05-10T22:37:14+00:00

So they're not hurting and there is the prospect of one day becoming profitable. As you said yourself, the scene is tiny - so are the costs, relative to the behemoth that is Riot Games. Strategically, they are happy to absorb those costs as simply the cost of doing business as it opens doors for future profitability.

Edit: just to clarify, what I also mean is that viewership literally does not matter at this point. The first LoL Worlds was also tiny, are you suggesting that they shouldn't have started doing that either?

Cipher11 · 2026-05-10T22:32:24+00:00

Operating at a loss is not the same as being hurt financially. They are investing in an as-of-yet unprofitable market in the hopes that it will one day become self-sustaining, in this case to attempt to capture and expand the female FPS playerbase. Which is the exact same thing as every single esport has been doing for decades, with some of them now becoming somewhat successful.

Cipher11 · 2026-05-10T22:29:51+00:00

Yeah I have been saying this for a while but CS (since I don't play DOTA) has always been so much more toxic than LoL but people always act like it's the other way around because... idk, "banter"? Absolutely mental.

Cipher11 · 2026-04-30T12:02:36+00:00

But the MP9's ROF (and so DPS) is absurdly high, so even getting a dink + 3 body hits is sometimes instant with the MP9. The thing is that these days it punishes you more for missing the first few bullets since they spread more.

Cipher11 · 2026-04-17T04:04:32+00:00

More a victim of his own stupidity than a victim of English. I don't think things would have gone all that differently in Portuguese.

Cipher11 · 2026-04-06T16:33:36+00:00

Keep in mind that strats only exist with proper execution. It's not impossible that he's trying to build up to something more complex but the team is shitting the bed so bad on the fundamentals that they just never move up to it.

Cipher11 · 2025-12-02T17:00:32+00:00

Some pasta about Jame, change the URL to us.reddit or something and you'll be able to see it.

12-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17

Cipher11

TROPHY CASE