meh...I am lost on this....whats this thread about again?
Leave the AWP restrictions the way they are...if you cant figure out how to bind a weapon load out then you do not deserve to have an awp and yes even Tea dies while awping, wait your turn. FFS!!!
!RAGE! lawl.

edit- I rarely have a problem buying an awp. I also use it about once a map but If I wanted to play on a server with five plus awpers I would........

23-6 against the recent AWP change. Strange.

The main limitation wasn't removed. I have seen many rounds AWPless because people had used their buy. With latency, timid teams, and other C:SS banter, the new rule in 24/7 D2 has made it ridiculous for the everyday AWPer. It benefits the no buy deag or p90 rusher to eliminate an experienced AWPer aspirations to hold key choke points. It favors the winning team due to the fact that every time the weak team buys an AWP it gives the winning team another one if they wish.

[M. Bison]

It favors the winning team due to the fact that every time the weak team buys an AWP it gives the winning team another one if they wish.

I have an idea for that. What if every time the winning team picks up an enemy awp the losing team gets a free awp buy on round start? I could limit the free awp buy to positive KDR. This would also offset the benefit given to negative KDR players (stimulus money up to 6000). I could limit the free awp purchase further by ensuring the player isn't consistently one of the last 20% to die (might keep it out of camper hands). :eek:

I also could replace the system with maybe something like this:
The player gets awp vouchers and can purchase an awp after 3 vouchers?

1). +1 voucher when they die before 1:00 (losing team).
2). -1 voucher when they're alive while the bomb is defused.
3). -1 voucher when they die beyond 1:00. Exceptions apply.
- a). The player planted the bomb.
- b). The player defuses the bomb.
- c). The player dies near the bomb (planted).
- d). The bomb was planted and the player was within x range of bomb.
- e). The player died within x range of bomb/bomber.
4).-1 voucher when they're far away from the bomb.
- a). Exception: the majority of players weren't anywhere near the bomber. (rambo doesn't screw you over!)
5). -2 vouchers when the player loses the round by round_end.
6). -2 voucher when player buys auto.
7). +5 vouchers when a player makes it to the bombsite (the bomber was heading towards) before 1:00 and before the bomber gets there, he dies a large distance away from site. :eek:
8). +1 voucher when the player kills the player who killed the bomber.
9). +2 vouchers when the player kills the original bomber. (whoever didn't die with it)
10). +1 voucher for killing an awper.
11). A voucher for x rounds on losing team?

We can come up with a lot more situations for rewarding players and change around the # of vouchers given for situations.

Basically, you could build up vouchers for a day, and awp all of the next day.

Note: I can make vouchers last indefinitely, not just until half. Also no, this wouldn't hurt performance. A very simple plugin to make when it's thoroughly planned out. :p


I want to work with the system until it fulfills the following points:
1). Maintains a moderate level of awps.
2). Reduces user reluctance for purchasing awps (wasted effort, hogging, etc).
3). Encourage gameplay which is useful for the team.
4). Reduce camping (commonly attributed to auto/awp on most maps).
5). Negligible impact on team balance.
6). Minimal impact on routine awpers who are beneficial to the team.

It's an interesting idea, and one that has a lot of planning, but I'm a bit worried on how its going to work, implemented, and how our players, especially non-steamers who don't speak English will understand these rules.

It's def. a better alternative to the 1 awp per half rule.... seems like a lot of work tho.

[M. Bison]

If the system works it doesn't matter how much work is necessary. It'll be easier for me to code when the system is completely planned out. Meaning, anyone wants to help moving around the weights of various behaviors and changing the amount necessary, it'll help me a lot.

non-steamers who don't speak English will understand these rules.

If you're always following objectives, you'll have no trouble getting an awp.

I have an idea for that. What if every time the winning team picks up an enemy awp the losing team gets a free awp buy on round start? I could limit the free awp buy to positive KDR. This would also offset the benefit given to negative KDR players (stimulus money up to 6000). I could limit the free awp purchase further by ensuring the player isn't consistently one of the last 20% to die (might keep it out of camper hands). :eek:

I also could replace the system with maybe something like this:
The player gets awp vouchers and can purchase an awp after 3 vouchers?

1). +1 voucher when they die before 1:00 (losing team).
2). -1 voucher when they're alive while the bomb is defused.
3). -1 voucher when they die beyond 1:00. Exceptions apply.
- a). The player planted the bomb.
- b). The player defuses the bomb.
- c). The player dies near the bomb (planted).
- d). The bomb was planted and the player was within x range of bomb.
- e). The player died within x range of bomb/bomber.
4).-1 voucher when they're far away from the bomb.
- a). Exception: the majority of players weren't anywhere near the bomber. (rambo doesn't screw you over!)
5). -2 vouchers when the player loses the round by round_end.
6). -2 voucher when player buys auto.
7). +5 vouchers when a player makes it to the bombsite (the bomber was heading towards) before 1:00 and before the bomber gets there, he dies a large distance away from site. :eek:
8). If the player hits -5 vouchers, it'll strip the player of the halftime free buy whenever he gets it in order to cover losses.
9). +1 voucher when the player kills the player who killed the bomber.
10). +2 vouchers when the player kills the original bomber. (whoever didn't die with it)

We can come up with a lot more situations for rewarding players and change around the # of vouchers given for situations.

Note: I can make voucher tracking last indefinitely, not just until half. Also no, this wouldn't hurt performance. A very simple plugin to make when it's thoroughly planned out.

I don't like this suggestion. It is forcing people to play a certain way(must rush) to get rewarded. If you are gonna to do a penalty it should apply to only when time expires and they fail to do the objective. I don't think it would be fair to implement free AWP to only positive KDR. Players that are consistently last 20% are usually top on their team. There are occasional rushers that are exceptions to this rule.

I want to work with the system until it fulfills the following points:
1). Maintains a moderate level of awps.
2). Reduces user reluctance for purchasing awps (wasted effort, hogging, etc).
3). Encourage gameplay which is useful for the team.
4). Reduce camping (commonly attributed to auto/awp on most maps).
5). Negligible impact on team balance.
6). Minimal impact on routine awpers who are beneficial to the team.

1). Old system was fine. There was also favorable response to more AWPs when more people were present, as well as, double AWPs on more difficult side.
2). Allow a person to override the AWP restriction once. It solves the original qualm for the 1 AWP per user. This is the root of the disputes. When someone can't buy an AWP they get upset. When someone buys the AWP and doesn't do what they want them to do with an AWP they get upset. When someone rushes, almost flanks the enemy team, but gets killed by an AWPer holding a flank they get really upset.
3). No reasonable weapon restriction may help team play. It is usually better players balancing the sides, a group of friends playing together, or a losing team listening to there top fraggers on how to win the map.
4). Allow zero AWPs/Auto camping will occur. It is a valid/effective strategy depending on the map/side. Most of the time it is used to stop or delay an enemy massing on a flank. When done properly, it allows you to counterattack or buy time and space for your team to flank the rushers. It gets tiresome when a person camps an obscure location and just wastes everyone's time.
5). All these rules/limitation help people that do not like to AWP, as well as, people that like to rush, but hate it when an AWP stops them in their tracks.
6). All these rules effect them. I have oodles of stars from the other team choking. If I am AWPing, I am usually the last player because I look for an opening to exploit/people's impatience to kill them. I manage my time to win a round in the last 20secs if things are going well. When I fail and waste my team's time I usually type "kill" in console. If it is a 2 v 6 with 1minute left, I completely understand the 2 waiting for the 6 to get impatient and widdle their numbers. Usually, comments of the dead players are "slay! Slay him!" When the 2 beat the 6, people change there comments on that team to "Nice job!" If the 2 don't do anything and have no concern in the objective they get usually get prompted to remember them or get slayed when they ignore the comments. Often times, warnings aren't necessary because it is obvious they are slow playing in accordance with the rules. They just understand if they fail due to time they will most likely get slayed.

As this thread illustrates most people prefer it the old way or more AWPs, NOT this type of restriction. Just let everyone have the ability to override the AWP 1x time. The thread suggested the new rule was opposed to it and this thread show that players who frequent the forum do not like this. If people are really that impatience join the wL Death match server where they can get that Call of Duty ADHD play style.

[M. Bison]

I don't like this suggestion. It is forcing people to play a certain way(must rush) to get rewarded. If you are gonna to do a penalty it should apply to only when time expires and they fail to do the objective

Did you read the exceptions listed as a through e? This is an alternative method which can be unrelated to the existing one.

3). No reasonable weapon restriction may help team play. It is usually better players balancing the sides, a group of friends playing together, or a losing team listening to there top fraggers on how to win the map.

The better players tend to be more versatile and able to use awps. We could implement a variety of systems to encourage gameplay on the losting team, such as #11.

PS: It seems you were beginning your reply while I was still editing and moving stuff around. Look at it now.

Did you read the exceptions listed as a through e? This is an alternative method which can be unrelated to the existing one.

I did, and I don't like it. The RED conditions I really don't like. a through e only rewards slow playing if it works. It actually punishes them when they fail. If you wanted to do vouchers like that penalize only for time running out.

I still think if people want more opportunity to AWP, let them override the AWP restriction Buy 1x

[M. Bison]

The majority of players are dead within the first 30 seconds. If the player didn't die by 1:30 they were probably lurking for quite some time. If the player manages to survive that long and none of the exceptions apply, then they were obviously baiting, camping, or not following objectives. They shouldn't have an awp in this case as it'll probably exacerbate this behavior.

The majority of players are dead within the first 30 seconds. If the player didn't die within 1:30 they're lurking around. The fact of the matter is if the player has survived this long and none of the exceptions apply then they were obviously baiting or camping.

That is only case when people are blindly rushing. Why are the better players usually alive after the first 30 seconds? Probably because they are thinking.

If I am a T rushing on Office. I try to take the T-side of garage and hold it. Often times, when it works, I am alive beyond 30 secs. When people try to push through to CT spawn and Die after my warnings not to go into a kill zone. Camping is fulfilling the objectives and often times gets a W.

These rules reward stupidity.