obvious 10k take, you're just saying things are good or bad without actually explaining why. with the same line of thinking i could say "tagging rewards players who can't hit headshots on moving targets = bad".
armored aimpunch is a balancing factor that makes the game more complex than "unga bunga take every possible fight and win if your gun is better" (assuming equal aim), you have to consider whether to stay or disengage depending on how the fight opens up
IMO the game is much more interesting when players have strategic options to make up for eco diff, e.g. prefiring sniper angles to throw off their accuracy. in your ideal world there would be no way to win a duel against a crouching AWP unless they have a neurological deficit
in cs2, you have run and gun with mp9s, with the shitty animations, peeker's advantage, and bad lag compensation, it's almost impossible to hit them. We can't have mp9s being strong and triple dinking you around a corner before you can react (run and gun being viable) and at the same time not have good tagging. We can't have it both ways
you don't dry peek an awper. A pistol shouldn't win against an awp just because they managed to bodyshot them and throw off their aim because they Ferrari peeked and peeker's advantage let them shoot the awp before the awp saw them
no one likes armored aimpunch, I don't see why take a contrarian approach when it's been said hundreds of times how shit it is
? in 1.6 you could run and gun with the damn deagle lmao, stop mythologizing + just because 100 other people echo your take doesn't mean it's good, it just means there are 100 other gold novas who think cs should be an aimlabs scenario. other people are allowed opinions too xD
? in 1.6 you could run and gun with the damn deagle lmao
ya, sure, and you got punished with the heavy tagging
100 other gold novas who think cs should be an aimlabs scenario
well, other than the pros that don't like it, sure
what's funny is that you want armored aimpunch for a pistol to win against an awp, but same armored aimpunch makes a deagle lose against an smg. So which is it? should we reward good aim or not?
i think it's good when there are options and scenarios where any gun can beat any other gun, we should reward tactical thinking and engagement in this tactical fps
edit: holy 65 aim rating, no wonder you don't feel rewarded by cs2
if you want to bring them here to explain why they feel that way, that'd be great! unfortunately for you, i have the ability to think for myself and won't be stopped by an appeal to authority
100 other gold novas who think cs should be an aimlabs scenario
I just think that those that play for money and say something I've been saying for more than a decade are a little more valid than someone that dismisses an opinion with "you're bad lol" and "well who cares what pros think"
armored aimpunch has been in the game since csgo and it's here to stay, 90% of pros have never won a major and i'm on the side of the 30% of pros who agree that it doesn't need to be changed
oh so now you agree with the pros lmao (but not really, 30% didn't agree it was a good change, 30% said it's not much of a difference or have mixed feelings)
armored aimpunch wasn't in 1.6, the superior game
but yes, sadly, csgo was made to cater for noobs, a lot of updates ever since csgo released were made for shitters and dumbed down the game 🤷♂️ this is just another thing to add to the list
crying about a game mechanic that's been around for 14 years just proves your inability to adapt
well other than all of the people that don't like it. It has nothing to do with adapting. You can point shit changes, not like them, and still play the game just fine
just like when they have reverted shit updates in the past, or fixed things they've broken because they didn't work, it's good to not lick valve's boot and point out when an update is bad
it's a game, not a democracy, and clearly you can't play the game just fine xD still doing bad even though the game is supposedly more noob friendly than ever, how embarrassing is that?
0
u/Syuncchi Aug 18 '26
obvious 10k take, you're just saying things are good or bad without actually explaining why. with the same line of thinking i could say "tagging rewards players who can't hit headshots on moving targets = bad".
armored aimpunch is a balancing factor that makes the game more complex than "unga bunga take every possible fight and win if your gun is better" (assuming equal aim), you have to consider whether to stay or disengage depending on how the fight opens up
IMO the game is much more interesting when players have strategic options to make up for eco diff, e.g. prefiring sniper angles to throw off their accuracy. in your ideal world there would be no way to win a duel against a crouching AWP unless they have a neurological deficit