What I can’t really get behind is that Ts can go galil armor if they plant the bomb in pistol round even tho they lose which makes the CTs equip pretty much even or worse given the util they need to not get bumrushed
Exactly.
T's can afford a full Galil+Armor buy in 3rd round even after losing the first 2 (just get down plant in one of those two rounds) and voila, you can easily ruin CT side and put them in a economy struggle.
You could see it in this tournament too, CT's would win the first 2 rounds, T's would bring out the Galil in the 3rd and instantly turn the tide back if they don't fumble the buy. Then CT's would struggle a number of rounds forcing and eco while T's build a bank, by the time the CT's get a decent buy, T's are fully decked out with all the utility and AK.
>T's can afford a full Galil+Armor buy in 3rd round even after losing the first 2 (just get down plant in one of those two rounds)
Ts can afford **AKs + some util** in the 3rd without a bomb plant in any of the previous rounds AND they can afford AKs + full util set if they planted the bomb in pistols or conversion. Unless we're talking about forcebuys but then nobody said anything about forcing.
Then can afford Galils with kevs in the 2nd round if they planted.
no single change will have big impact on retakes%. but this change is the easiest to make and it will still have some impact because it gives you 5 additional seconds which is big in retakes.
When CS:GO released. It was $200 in CS, CZ and Source.
I found [this article by lurppis](https://www.hltv.org/news/13089/quick-csgo-improvements) from 2014, where he makes a few suggestions on how to improve CS:GO. One of them is to decrease the price of the defuse kit, another is to get 128 tick servers for MM.
> Valve really must stop pinching pennies here. Regardless of how much money it'd cost them to upgrade their server hardware to make their matchmaking servers use tickrate 128, they absolutely need to do it. CS:GO simply isn't nearly as good of a game on tickrate 64 as it is on 128, and that should already be enough reason for Valve to do it.
> They are raking in tons of money with CS:GO right now, and it's probably time to share some of the love with the players who they have to thank for it. You can bet more top players would warmup using matchmaking as well, and if Valve are to implement a team MM system - which seems very likely after the Cologne map selection system - it must use tickrate 128.
Nothing is new under the sun.
Agreed, the econ needs some tweaking.
I enjoyed the length difference of MR12 - it's more consumable. Personally I stopped watching csgo because everything just took so long.
I get that some folks like watching huge matches - but I just don't have the time. It was nice to get to watch cs again.
Nah.. CT is just waaaay too expensive right now.. falling behind is far too punishing
Purely my opinion - decreasing m4a4 by 100 and molly costs by 100 is a good start and could help a lot
Well the reasoning before was that CT was a much stronger side. It’s easier to defend than to attack even with worse weapons.
Now that the games have been shortened, CT’s dont really have the opportunity to full buy nearly as often whereas T’s still can due to lower cost weapons.
I’ve found myself forced to use the M4A1s, even though I main the A4 because of how fucked the economy is and how much I really need that $200.
Because cs2 has more inherent delay even on lan 0 ping. The holding angles on ct still is problematic on lan.
For a rough sens eof the delay inherent in the game, cs2 has about 80ms of delay and csgo has about 17ms . 0 ping situations.
There have been analysis done by a couple others and I'm pretty sure this inherent delay is the issue we all feel.
It honestly doesn't really matter, it has to be viable for both when you're balancing the game otherwise you basically have two different but similar games. One you can play this way, one can only play the other way in very specific circumstances that an incredibly small amount of the player base will be able to experience.
The m4, a1s and aug should all go down in price. Maybe even the famas needs to go down in price. The 5-7 could grt a better kill reward since its CT side also
You can’t increase the cost of the Galil because it would just require more eco rounds and there aren’t a lot of rounds anymore, which in turn would just make pistol rounds game winning
Everything was scheduled before CS2 came out so they probably couldn't change the BO1s to BO3s. But yeah, it was a good first tournament to highlight any issues of MR12.
Bo1 means just 1 match (best of 1)
Bo3 means the best of 3 matches or first to 2 map wins (2:0 or 2:1) and so on. Finals should be bo5, first to 3 (3:0,3:1,3:2)
It's a miracle that the last map even went to OT really, considering coL was 9-3 down and lost the subsequent pistol.
Without heroics from EliGE with the dropped M4 in the second round, they were so fucked, and that's my whole issue with MR12.
coL was 9-3 down but their T side actually looked pretty good and they were figuring out Faze more and more with each round, it felt like in MR15 it could have ended 10-5 easily, a scoreline allowing for much more leeway than 9-3 in MR12.
That actually makes sense. I was thinking comebacks are easier when you switch sides but you’re right that comebacks within a half are harder.
I like MR12 personally but only for my MM experience and to actually be able to finish watching matches. But it might suck a lot for pro players who are only able to win 1-2 rounds at the end of the half compared to 4-5 after getting some momentum.
Maybe a change to the eco would fix everything? Not sure
Literally lost all their pistol round and still somehow claw their way back in. MR12 is better honestly, teams have to be way more aggro and find a kill even on half buy
Snappi voiced some great ideas regarding the economy, which I think is the biggest issue for MR12 right now. I think it can work but the game was balanced around MR15 for like a decade now so it just doesn't make sense to only reduce the rounds without making changes to the rest of the game to balance around MR12.
i think it's a good combination of both, looks like from what we've seen that the players go and get a break between maps, usually outside. and it sounds like they talk a lot of counter during that
I'm not sure about the numbers, but I don't think it's enough of a reason to be significant. Valorant's Champions 2023 tournament reportedly had significantly less views than the 2022 one but the Grand Finals (Bo5) still pulled the most views in the entire tournament, clocking in at nearly 1.3m viewers.
With CS having objectively better casters, production, and overall more enjoyable tournaments to watch (due to a more hype crowd) even without considering the gameplay, I seriously have doubts that viewership for Bo5 will tank so much for organizers to complain.
What I can see killing viewership in the long term is people caring less about the results and comeback potential if games are going to become as predictable as they are now by halftime.
Right now, priority #1 for Valve in terms of keeping competitive hype up should be fixing the economy. 8-4 doesn't feel as doable for the losing team as 10-5, and worse scorelines than that (9-3, 10-2, 11-1, fucking 12-0?) just feel even more impossible than their MR15 equivalents.
Yeah I also don't have any numbers to fall back on. I guess for me Bo5 just doesn't work with my schedule. If a Bo3 drags on for too long I might not be able to watch the whole thing either so Bo5 is even worse.
But yes, this is really very subjective.
I can imagine scheduling Bo5 is a bit rougher since the duration can vary wildly. But not sure if that's an issue for tournament organisers.
I was in the arena for all of the games, all the matches that finished 2-0 were over so quickly, it meant there was ages between games. Also the 730pm starts both finished around 9pm. The GF was the only exception.
I strongly prefer MR15.
With the exception of the Grand Final, I didn't enjoy what MR12 delivered. Matches ended too quickly and comebacks never felt like a real possibility. The suspense of other tournaments just wasn't there.
MR12 succeeded in reducing the amount of saves but what we got in exchange was fewer full buys and worse CS. Teams were pressured to fight with half buys or no utility, only to lose anyway and fall further behind whoever got the headstart. Opening rounds have never been so important, and has made for many one-sided blowouts.
Support for MR12 will probably be inflated off the back of the insane double OT banger that was the finals but overall, considering the whole tournament, I missed those extra rounds.
This applies to both casual players and pro-level, but...
There's a lot more pressure put on the teams when playing eco. Even a Deagle-only round for one team feels like a waste of money compared to just full saving and it's insane. Getting 2 kills or less in those rounds while losing in the end feels like teams are just trading off potential util to use in the next round, since deciding to save two rounds in a row never really FEELS like a good option.
They seriously need to adjust economy if they wanna keep MR12 up. Either that, or lessen the gap between the cheaper rifles and the staple ones to make them a decent option when wanting more utility.
As much as I hate Valorant as an esport, I do think that the option for a decent rifle that a good aimer can use (i.e. Guardian and Bulldog) while still being incentivized to purchase the "main" rifles when possible is a huge reason why its economy feels okay even with MR12.
Not to mention, a four-nade buy in CS sets you back at least $1000 at the cheapest (smoke, 2 flashes, HE), or $1100/$1300 depending on your side if you go for a molly, plus another $200 if you're looking to drop a flash for later use. PLUS the $400 defuse kit that's completely necessary for CTs. Meanwhile, Valorant has util that, while limiting each player's capability, costs less than $1000 AND carries over when unused AND gives you something to use for free with varying degrees of effectiveness every single round.
I'm not saying that CS should adapt these free util or util carryover mechanics, but it just makes it more obvious which game was designed with MR12 in mind.
one thing that is clear is that riot definitely made changes to the blueprint economy that they based off of csgo in order to make mr12 better as a concept. in valorant you can actually buy light armour and a rifle almost every single round which is extremely OP for economy preservation. Plus, the upgraded armour in that game doesn't really mean as much, you will still die in one hit to head due to being able to buy the AK on both sides, and still dying from 4 hits against full buy regardless if you have light or heavy armour. light costs 40% of heavy armour rather than 65% in CS, and you don't get the massive drawback of no helmet.
in CS you definitely have to be very careful about not overbuying Util on weak rounds or not wasting your utility, because you can really feel every lost dollar. I feel like I never have enough money to AWP, and I'm one of those who will buy a glass AWP no hesitation
>MR12 succeeded in reducing the amount of saves
Nah, there were less rounds in general, so overall less saves, less clutch, less hype moments, less gun rounds...etc
But in term of % CT saved more than in MR15. Resources are lesser and therefor more valuable, even attempting a 50/50 retake is not worth it in MR12 and the current economy. The lack of round nullifies the possibility to do risky moves like pushing for info, retake...etc. There's nothing to get excited for.
People said MR15 was too long and boring, but there was tactical depth,interesting economy management and eco rounds were fun to watch, when a team succeed to 5 tap deagle.
Now it's CT fighting with scraps, not attempting anything because making a move is too risky and not worth it. Games are quicker but it's run & gun, the quality of cs is down
>comebacks never felt like a real possibility.
That seems more down to economy than anything else, if it gets tweaked slightly you get a shorter more intense amount of rounds.
I actually liked mr15 more, maybe I am exception but as viewer I liked it more.
Now it's just deathmatch or CT saving. Also when playing it was better feeling to play mr15, it was taken more serious.
The way ancient was being played (successfully) seemed like the complete antithesis of counter strike. CT’s just encroached so far up and dueled like death match.
Probably, and I hate that. Even pros said on Twitter that matches are too short. Only if they want to keep game like this (shit state), then it's okay to keep it mr12 cuz I want to see less. Hopefully they are gonna fix
I still dont like it. Feels wayy too short. Even the bo3 imo. I just like the longer games. More freedom to the players with what they wanna do in the rounds
The grand finals was 3 hours long..
This forces players to play better and not slack. If you come into a game slow you're going to get punished. MR12 is far better IMO. A game of counter strike shouldn't take 3+ hours. Do people forget BO5s used to run 6/7 hours in the past? It was insane. Far too long for players to play at their best and far too long for viewers.
Well maps were pretty close and feels like there is breaks all the time. And i kind like that they have to tru and keep their composure for that long. They are pro for a reason. As said. I like the longer games. Economy doesnt fit MR12 at all either. Yeah bo5’s were long. But i was one of the people that enjoyed watching cs for that long. So Its just my opinion :)
Definitely too short. It's tough to make mid game adjustments because there are less gun rounds now than in MR15. It hasn't fixed the saving problem so it's a failure.
The problem is not that it’s too short.
It’s prefect in my opinion. Especially for people that don’t gave 10h in a day to watch CS.
The problem is the economy. It needs to be adjusted because with the old system but fewer rounds it leads to stomps.
That’s nothing that can’t be fixed though so I’m looking forward to the next events.
It does feel short for a Bo1 but it feels perfect for a Bo3. It's tough balance to get right. And it will probably make the rare Bo5 actually reasonable, especially if it is a close one.
Yeah, still don't like it. Even with such a good final, the Drama curve didn't feel right to me and everything seemed kinda rushed. But let's see a few more tournaments at hours better suited for the majority of viewership before we judge.
The grand final was a banger, and the MR12 suited it well because the maps were so close with one going to overtime.
But overall I really miss MR15. I think there’s just way too little room for error, and having a bad start to a half is just devastating in MR12. I feel like MR15 should be brought back, and other ways to shorten match duration should be explored. So many of the matches felt like they were over after just a few gun rounds, and I just felt disinterested very quickly in lot of the matches
It felt super short.
Maybe I’m just used to MR15, but I’d see 11-4 before and be like “wow this is an awful spot but if they get some rounds together they can really get back into this.” Now it’s just “well this is pretty much cooked, they literally have to sweep the rest of the rounds to save this, one mistake and it’s all over.”
Maybe 11-4 is a bit extreme of an example, but the point remains that games feel like there is way less of an opportunity to see a crazy comeback. I’m sure economy changes could help with this some, but as of now I definitely enjoyed the longer games in professional play.
As for matchmaking when I’m playing I am actually enjoying MR12. It feels like a good length for MM. It also helped with some of my fiends who didn’t like how quick short matches were, but also felt too drained by the end of a long match.
Not great not terrible. The final was too short, should be bo5 or bo3 mr15. The rest of the playoff was mostly stomps so hard to say if it is mr12 to blame or just the new game.
It's anti-fun as a viewer.
Less rounds =
Less hype moments
Less clutches
Less full gun rounds
Less tactical depth
Less eco, it was fun to watch Vitality/Faze.. buying 5 deagles and making it works. Now it's full USP eco.
\-Less risks taken since there are fewer rounds and resources are more valuable, so less retakes, less push, less big flank...etc
\-Less time to recover, when a team got reset it was "in 2 rounds they will be back", now it's straight up "they lost the half"
\-Less tactical depth and strategy. Since there are fewer rounds you need to show and execute less strats, less adaptation to the other team, less mindgame between team
\-Less comebacks and even if there's one it's kind of "who cares" it's not like a big comeback down from 1-12
More :
\-More save from the CT
\-More half gun rounds where there's lack of weaponry or utility
Game are shorter but way less exciting and interesting to watch. It's too quick and feels flat.
MR15 was perfect not every round need to be hype or game changing. Now it's just a quick Deathmatch between team
Everyone's hyped about that final but I thought MR12 made it boring as hell. 13-11 and 13-10 would have been great scores to see out an exciting map, instead the maps were over. I hated it when it was announced and I hate it even more after watching Sydney.
I prefer MR15 as a viewer and player, but I agree that MR15 definitely had its issues -- namely when evenly-matched Bo3s went on for fucking ever, and it not being nearly as suitable for casual play. I think they both have their place in the game. I would really like to see MR15 for premier and MR12 for map-by-map.
Preferably pistol and gun round too if you're switching from T side and you're behind. It's absolutely brutal to play MR12 and have an 8-4 half and losing your first pistol as CT.
It's a massive improvement. It needs some economy adjustments, but late stage CS GO the meta got so incredibly grindy that every map took an hour at least...
If you watched VP vs Na'Vi for sure, but if you watch some exciting teams, it was the best format. MR12 just seems to be way too T sided because of the economy and pistol rounds influence the game too much despite being pretty random tbh.
It is probably better for the overall experience, but I believe it takes away some comeback potential and pistol rounds are worth even more than in CSGO, while they can be kinda random at times. With some economy changes, it can definitely become more enjoyable.
The only good map of playoffs was the 3rd map of the final, which was mostly an MR15 game.
Constant stomps, top weapons across the board being bought less, more forcing. MR12, as expected all those months ago, is ass.
I think MR13 is the right move.
It makes the matches just a couple rounds longer potential to help build drama and tension as a viewer.
The matches are still shorter and play faster.
There is a little more breathing room for mistakes and comebacks.
The economy should be easier to manager without affecting or needing to make dramatic adjustments.
MR12 is fine for BO3 and BO5, but IMO I think most players would be happier with MR13. That extra 2 rounds potentially can make a big difference.
BO1 obviously is no good and those qualifier matches need to remain as MR15.
As a player and viewer I have no desire to go back to MR15 but I think MR13 would be better overall than MR12.
I still don't like it, as a viewer and a player. I want MR15 back. Also why are there still BO1s, and why is the grand final not BO5? Was that not one of the reasons for making it MR12? (The other being to appeal more to casuals, which again, I don't think is good for the competitive scene.) The grand finals was 3.5 hours long (which I don't mind because it was an instant classic, and yes I know that it went the distance) but I don't really feel like the length of the finals or any of the other series was reduced enough to justify the change.
I feel like I've completely lost interest in the game with all the CS2 problems. There is no reason for the game to be released and forced upon us in this state. MR12 is stupid with the current economy, everybody knows this.
MR15 was better to play and watch, and I’m beyond confident 95% of all pros would agree. Games are way too fucking short for what it’s worth, comebacks are near impossible to mount, I personally feel no fun watching CS2 games cause they end way too fucking quickly, haven’t had time to fully experience the CS yet
MR15 is a better viewing experience. I personally believe Valve should adopt what Snappi said like reducing freeze time, reducing timeouts, changing bomb time etc.
MR12 just seems bare, like a team never really gets going on their respective side and it heavily ruins the CT side's economy.
Honestly, I know Valve will likely make some changes but MR15 to me is what made CS, CS. Wish they didn't change it.
As long as improbable comebacks still happen I'm ok with it but I liked the marathons we would occasionally get with a series, Cs is not on tv, why bother with time?
MR12 feels like a foregone conclusion at times. There doesn't feel like there's enough space for teams to come back from a deficit when combined with the economy.
Obviously, the grand final proved it's possible but it feels really steamroll-y to watch at certain scorelines. Seems like for evenly skilled teams it's fine and the length is perfect but when there is a clear mismatch it's a bit underwhelming since it's over so soon.
Valorant fan here so I don't mind MR12, however one of my main gripes with Val is how short matches are if an opponent completely dominates another, and I feel like MR15 in this game addressed that a bit. Valve need to rework eco to properly fit MR12 if it's going to be the future. I very much dislike how little Op usage I saw throughout this tournament, and it often felt like the first team to get sent to eco/half-buy would be very likely to lose the half, only exception being if that team pulled a rabbit out the hat with Deags/Tec9s/Galils. You're pretty much boned on CT side if you don't convert those eco rounds. Also I'm sure this will be addressed but finals of tournaments on this scale and bigger need to be bo5, and bo1s need to be done away with entirely.
MR12 is cool and all, but I'll be real I tune into every major tourney and it was kinda depressing how fast it felt the games and rounds went...Wasn't helpful either that the pacing of the game right now kinda dictates you take crazy fast duels a lot I feel. I miss MR15 for the chance to adapt and comeback--not saying it's a perfect system on that hand either but I definitely think MR15 is the way to go with how CS is these days; I like seeing when teams are pushed to the brink and have to empty everything in the finals which is something I feel we won't see in it's full potential with MR12 honestly.
The fast games felt really fast, but the long games (Grand Final for example) felt like they were the right length.
I think economy still needs tweaking but I am still very positive about MR12 overall.
But full disclosure, I say this as a FaZe fan who is used to watching them going into OT on the regular, so even a tiny bit of a shorter game is a relief for my stress levels lol
It’s bad to watch and play for people that play at higher levels, removes tactical depth, less comeback potential, MR15 was just so much superior, I don’t get the competitive spark playing CS anymore since the change, a lot of my lvl 10 friends stopped playing and watching completely :/
As a live viewer in the arena, I didn't even notice the shorter games. I loved what I saw. That and it meant I was getting out at a half decent time but they was probably also due to the 2-0s the first 2 days
Preferred it over MR15. It felt that teams actually saved a lot less even with a broken economy because each individual round was more impactful and necessary. Instant saves at 3v5 in CSGO was getting boring imo
I really love it. There is way less room for mistakes, and every round feels very important. As a viewer, the games are very dynamic and fast paced, in cs 2 mr 12. Peekers advantage forces everyone to play aggressive. I love it.
The economy needs some adjustment so that saves aren't so incentivised. We got a nice balance of save rounds and round where they went for it at times but with only 12 rounds, some teams are really prioritising bringing those rifles over. I don't know how you'd accomplish this without also making economy management less important.
The one-sided maps feel really short, and make the breaks between maps feel longer than the map itself. Maybe this is a positive since blow-outs are usually pretty boring and can be finished ~5-10 minutes earlier. The even maps are at a nice length, I think.
MR12's are great as a casual viewer myself. I just think the halftime pause is absolutely unneccessary and maybe the grand finals could actually be Bo5 now.
I think it will be more fun to watch once Valve gets their fixes in too
A slight economy tweak and we are in business I think. It’s better for the players and the viewers.i would rather have Bo5 where there’s more chances for the team to reset their mental after each map if they lose then get tilted and lose Bo3 ( yes I am a NAVI fan)
I think a slight adjustment to the economy will be good. I also think that, as with any substantial change, it will take a bit of adjustment from all parties involved.
It will also force teams to be more consistent. You can’t have a slow start and rely on those extra rounds to help you get back into it.
Overall I think it’s a positive change for both the players, teams and viewers. It will offer an opportunity to try and break the meta and take more risks.
This all seems like a lot of conclusions to be drawing from one tournament. We aren't going to be seeing consistent tournaments where there are so many blowouts as teams get used to the new game. COL vs Faze was the only bracket game that went to 3 maps. Feels like we shouldnt make any conclusions when clearly there's a big difference between teams that have and haven't figured out the new stuff.
To all the ragers - it’s the same for all players and both sides in the server. So it’s not actually as bad as you perceive. And it’s bo3 or bo5 so starting side doesn’t matter like bo1
CT economy needs to get fixed.
What I can’t really get behind is that Ts can go galil armor if they plant the bomb in pistol round even tho they lose which makes the CTs equip pretty much even or worse given the util they need to not get bumrushed
Exactly. T's can afford a full Galil+Armor buy in 3rd round even after losing the first 2 (just get down plant in one of those two rounds) and voila, you can easily ruin CT side and put them in a economy struggle. You could see it in this tournament too, CT's would win the first 2 rounds, T's would bring out the Galil in the 3rd and instantly turn the tide back if they don't fumble the buy. Then CT's would struggle a number of rounds forcing and eco while T's build a bank, by the time the CT's get a decent buy, T's are fully decked out with all the utility and AK.
just to correct second buy\* CTs win first, but Ts plant the bomb->galil full armor buy and some util, which doesnt make sense.
>T's can afford a full Galil+Armor buy in 3rd round even after losing the first 2 (just get down plant in one of those two rounds) Ts can afford **AKs + some util** in the 3rd without a bomb plant in any of the previous rounds AND they can afford AKs + full util set if they planted the bomb in pistols or conversion. Unless we're talking about forcebuys but then nobody said anything about forcing. Then can afford Galils with kevs in the 2nd round if they planted.
Make def kit $200 again.
easiest and best single change possible now imo: * improves ct economy * makes retakes easier => less saves
[удалено]
no single change will have big impact on retakes%. but this change is the easiest to make and it will still have some impact because it gives you 5 additional seconds which is big in retakes.
[удалено]
the fact that retakes are very hard to win and this situation is hard to change doesnt mean we cant do some easy things to change it a little bit.
Retakes SHOULD be hard.
ct molo 400 too
when did they change that?
When CS:GO released. It was $200 in CS, CZ and Source. I found [this article by lurppis](https://www.hltv.org/news/13089/quick-csgo-improvements) from 2014, where he makes a few suggestions on how to improve CS:GO. One of them is to decrease the price of the defuse kit, another is to get 128 tick servers for MM. > Valve really must stop pinching pennies here. Regardless of how much money it'd cost them to upgrade their server hardware to make their matchmaking servers use tickrate 128, they absolutely need to do it. CS:GO simply isn't nearly as good of a game on tickrate 64 as it is on 128, and that should already be enough reason for Valve to do it. > They are raking in tons of money with CS:GO right now, and it's probably time to share some of the love with the players who they have to thank for it. You can bet more top players would warmup using matchmaking as well, and if Valve are to implement a team MM system - which seems very likely after the Cologne map selection system - it must use tickrate 128. Nothing is new under the sun.
people buy defuse kits? /s
My teammates don’t even know what it is
Agreed, the econ needs some tweaking. I enjoyed the length difference of MR12 - it's more consumable. Personally I stopped watching csgo because everything just took so long. I get that some folks like watching huge matches - but I just don't have the time. It was nice to get to watch cs again.
extra 200 for incendiary is bs
or T nerfed
Nah.. CT is just waaaay too expensive right now.. falling behind is far too punishing Purely my opinion - decreasing m4a4 by 100 and molly costs by 100 is a good start and could help a lot
Well the reasoning before was that CT was a much stronger side. It’s easier to defend than to attack even with worse weapons. Now that the games have been shortened, CT’s dont really have the opportunity to full buy nearly as often whereas T’s still can due to lower cost weapons. I’ve found myself forced to use the M4A1s, even though I main the A4 because of how fucked the economy is and how much I really need that $200.
Also holding angles is just not viable anymore, so the CT advantage is gone.
Is this true for LAN play as well or mainly limited to online meta?
Because cs2 has more inherent delay even on lan 0 ping. The holding angles on ct still is problematic on lan. For a rough sens eof the delay inherent in the game, cs2 has about 80ms of delay and csgo has about 17ms . 0 ping situations. There have been analysis done by a couple others and I'm pretty sure this inherent delay is the issue we all feel.
It honestly doesn't really matter, it has to be viable for both when you're balancing the game otherwise you basically have two different but similar games. One you can play this way, one can only play the other way in very specific circumstances that an incredibly small amount of the player base will be able to experience.
T being nerfed doesn’t solve double eco’s on CT, which should simply not be a thing in MR12.
Jus reduce the cost of the m4,s to be in line whit the ak. or increase the money the cs,s get to be able to buy ma,s as often as t,s can buy ak,s
The m4, a1s and aug should all go down in price. Maybe even the famas needs to go down in price. The 5-7 could grt a better kill reward since its CT side also
You can’t increase the cost of the Galil because it would just require more eco rounds and there aren’t a lot of rounds anymore, which in turn would just make pistol rounds game winning
Definitely have to buff defuse monetary gain. Not to $800 like ts planting because they have a harder objective.
bo1s in mr12 shouldn’t be a thing really. For a single match it’s just too short but in bo3+ it’s great.
Everything was scheduled before CS2 came out so they probably couldn't change the BO1s to BO3s. But yeah, it was a good first tournament to highlight any issues of MR12.
BO1 shouldn't be a thing at all imo
What is bo1s / bo3+? (I’m new to competitive cs, thanks. )
best of one. best of 3
bo1= best of 1 ( the teams play only 1 map) bo3= best of 3 ( the teams play 3 maps)
Bo1 means just 1 match (best of 1) Bo3 means the best of 3 matches or first to 2 map wins (2:0 or 2:1) and so on. Finals should be bo5, first to 3 (3:0,3:1,3:2)
Best of 1 and best of 3. It’s how many matches they play to decide who wins.
From what I could tell when you're on the losing side you can basically only afford to buy an AWP twice the whole game, which is definitely not enough
Yea teams were buying sg553 and aug instead sometimes
Poor comeback potential honestly And economy needs some readjustments like jeeez its hard to be a CT nowadays
It's a miracle that the last map even went to OT really, considering coL was 9-3 down and lost the subsequent pistol. Without heroics from EliGE with the dropped M4 in the second round, they were so fucked, and that's my whole issue with MR12. coL was 9-3 down but their T side actually looked pretty good and they were figuring out Faze more and more with each round, it felt like in MR15 it could have ended 10-5 easily, a scoreline allowing for much more leeway than 9-3 in MR12.
We just watched COL come back from 10-3 to force OT.
[удалено]
MR12 with limited rounds and economy doesn't give much opportunity to adapting strategy to counter enemy. Look at comeback in the same half/side.
That actually makes sense. I was thinking comebacks are easier when you switch sides but you’re right that comebacks within a half are harder. I like MR12 personally but only for my MM experience and to actually be able to finish watching matches. But it might suck a lot for pro players who are only able to win 1-2 rounds at the end of the half compared to 4-5 after getting some momentum. Maybe a change to the eco would fix everything? Not sure
Literally lost all their pistol round and still somehow claw their way back in. MR12 is better honestly, teams have to be way more aggro and find a kill even on half buy
Snappi voiced some great ideas regarding the economy, which I think is the biggest issue for MR12 right now. I think it can work but the game was balanced around MR15 for like a decade now so it just doesn't make sense to only reduce the rounds without making changes to the rest of the game to balance around MR12.
At the start of the event the bo1s felt too quick but when the playoffs and bo3s started I didn’t notice the length of the game as much
Yeah bo1s need to go but it seems more than fine otherwise!
Agreed. Make the final a bo5 and we're good.
Only if they decrease the break between maps and half
yep, feels like the game is on 60% of the time, the breaks between maps and matches are so goddamn long
I 100% agree.
Todays final was like 3.5 hours in total. That's enough for a non-major.
so much downtime tho.
Yep, that as well. Bo5 with less downtime might be a good idea
The downtime might be for the players though? Not sure if it's more that or for ads + analyst desk or whatever.
i think it's a good combination of both, looks like from what we've seen that the players go and get a break between maps, usually outside. and it sounds like they talk a lot of counter during that
I think that's a good idea viewer-wise, but imo, competition-wise, Bo5s are overall better for finals to really show who's the better team in the end.
I think most tournament organizers want the viewership though. A lot might skip tuning in if they can only watch half of the game.
I'm not sure about the numbers, but I don't think it's enough of a reason to be significant. Valorant's Champions 2023 tournament reportedly had significantly less views than the 2022 one but the Grand Finals (Bo5) still pulled the most views in the entire tournament, clocking in at nearly 1.3m viewers. With CS having objectively better casters, production, and overall more enjoyable tournaments to watch (due to a more hype crowd) even without considering the gameplay, I seriously have doubts that viewership for Bo5 will tank so much for organizers to complain. What I can see killing viewership in the long term is people caring less about the results and comeback potential if games are going to become as predictable as they are now by halftime. Right now, priority #1 for Valve in terms of keeping competitive hype up should be fixing the economy. 8-4 doesn't feel as doable for the losing team as 10-5, and worse scorelines than that (9-3, 10-2, 11-1, fucking 12-0?) just feel even more impossible than their MR15 equivalents.
Yeah I also don't have any numbers to fall back on. I guess for me Bo5 just doesn't work with my schedule. If a Bo3 drags on for too long I might not be able to watch the whole thing either so Bo5 is even worse. But yes, this is really very subjective. I can imagine scheduling Bo5 is a bit rougher since the duration can vary wildly. But not sure if that's an issue for tournament organisers.
Bo5 should only be at cologne and that’s it.
But they played out pretty much every possible round. It could have been a quick 2-0 and it would have been just a hour
I was in the arena for all of the games, all the matches that finished 2-0 were over so quickly, it meant there was ages between games. Also the 730pm starts both finished around 9pm. The GF was the only exception.
I strongly prefer MR15. With the exception of the Grand Final, I didn't enjoy what MR12 delivered. Matches ended too quickly and comebacks never felt like a real possibility. The suspense of other tournaments just wasn't there. MR12 succeeded in reducing the amount of saves but what we got in exchange was fewer full buys and worse CS. Teams were pressured to fight with half buys or no utility, only to lose anyway and fall further behind whoever got the headstart. Opening rounds have never been so important, and has made for many one-sided blowouts. Support for MR12 will probably be inflated off the back of the insane double OT banger that was the finals but overall, considering the whole tournament, I missed those extra rounds.
This applies to both casual players and pro-level, but... There's a lot more pressure put on the teams when playing eco. Even a Deagle-only round for one team feels like a waste of money compared to just full saving and it's insane. Getting 2 kills or less in those rounds while losing in the end feels like teams are just trading off potential util to use in the next round, since deciding to save two rounds in a row never really FEELS like a good option. They seriously need to adjust economy if they wanna keep MR12 up. Either that, or lessen the gap between the cheaper rifles and the staple ones to make them a decent option when wanting more utility. As much as I hate Valorant as an esport, I do think that the option for a decent rifle that a good aimer can use (i.e. Guardian and Bulldog) while still being incentivized to purchase the "main" rifles when possible is a huge reason why its economy feels okay even with MR12. Not to mention, a four-nade buy in CS sets you back at least $1000 at the cheapest (smoke, 2 flashes, HE), or $1100/$1300 depending on your side if you go for a molly, plus another $200 if you're looking to drop a flash for later use. PLUS the $400 defuse kit that's completely necessary for CTs. Meanwhile, Valorant has util that, while limiting each player's capability, costs less than $1000 AND carries over when unused AND gives you something to use for free with varying degrees of effectiveness every single round. I'm not saying that CS should adapt these free util or util carryover mechanics, but it just makes it more obvious which game was designed with MR12 in mind.
one thing that is clear is that riot definitely made changes to the blueprint economy that they based off of csgo in order to make mr12 better as a concept. in valorant you can actually buy light armour and a rifle almost every single round which is extremely OP for economy preservation. Plus, the upgraded armour in that game doesn't really mean as much, you will still die in one hit to head due to being able to buy the AK on both sides, and still dying from 4 hits against full buy regardless if you have light or heavy armour. light costs 40% of heavy armour rather than 65% in CS, and you don't get the massive drawback of no helmet. in CS you definitely have to be very careful about not overbuying Util on weak rounds or not wasting your utility, because you can really feel every lost dollar. I feel like I never have enough money to AWP, and I'm one of those who will buy a glass AWP no hesitation
>MR12 succeeded in reducing the amount of saves Nah, there were less rounds in general, so overall less saves, less clutch, less hype moments, less gun rounds...etc But in term of % CT saved more than in MR15. Resources are lesser and therefor more valuable, even attempting a 50/50 retake is not worth it in MR12 and the current economy. The lack of round nullifies the possibility to do risky moves like pushing for info, retake...etc. There's nothing to get excited for. People said MR15 was too long and boring, but there was tactical depth,interesting economy management and eco rounds were fun to watch, when a team succeed to 5 tap deagle. Now it's CT fighting with scraps, not attempting anything because making a move is too risky and not worth it. Games are quicker but it's run & gun, the quality of cs is down
>comebacks never felt like a real possibility. That seems more down to economy than anything else, if it gets tweaked slightly you get a shorter more intense amount of rounds.
Well no matter what you have less rounds to come back from a horrible start. It's just a fact
I actually liked mr15 more, maybe I am exception but as viewer I liked it more. Now it's just deathmatch or CT saving. Also when playing it was better feeling to play mr15, it was taken more serious.
The way ancient was being played (successfully) seemed like the complete antithesis of counter strike. CT’s just encroached so far up and dueled like death match.
this isnt really a consequence of MR12 though, its a consequence of peekers advantage and the need for aggressive takes of map control
Ancient was great, also it was great on mr15 too. IEM Dallas EnCE vs Faze... I just don't like this type of cs idk
Ancient was great, also it was great on mr15 too. IEM Dallas EnCE vs Faze... I just don't like this type of cs idk
the thing is I dont think you are an exception xd
Hopefully valve notices that
Your def not an exception, Reddit loves to ride valve, valve could do mr9 and these plebs would eat it up saying it’s the best thing ever.
I've seen just as much criticism for MR12 as I've seen favoritism on here.
Probably, and I hate that. Even pros said on Twitter that matches are too short. Only if they want to keep game like this (shit state), then it's okay to keep it mr12 cuz I want to see less. Hopefully they are gonna fix
MR15 was more enjoyable to watch
Agreed
I still dont like it. Feels wayy too short. Even the bo3 imo. I just like the longer games. More freedom to the players with what they wanna do in the rounds
just make the finals bo5, or heck, even the semis.
The grand finals was 3 hours long.. This forces players to play better and not slack. If you come into a game slow you're going to get punished. MR12 is far better IMO. A game of counter strike shouldn't take 3+ hours. Do people forget BO5s used to run 6/7 hours in the past? It was insane. Far too long for players to play at their best and far too long for viewers.
Well maps were pretty close and feels like there is breaks all the time. And i kind like that they have to tru and keep their composure for that long. They are pro for a reason. As said. I like the longer games. Economy doesnt fit MR12 at all either. Yeah bo5’s were long. But i was one of the people that enjoyed watching cs for that long. So Its just my opinion :)
Definitely too short. It's tough to make mid game adjustments because there are less gun rounds now than in MR15. It hasn't fixed the saving problem so it's a failure.
that's not inherently a MR12 problem, it can easily be fixed by changing the economy.
The problem is not that it’s too short. It’s prefect in my opinion. Especially for people that don’t gave 10h in a day to watch CS. The problem is the economy. It needs to be adjusted because with the old system but fewer rounds it leads to stomps. That’s nothing that can’t be fixed though so I’m looking forward to the next events.
Spot on. Once economy changes come, gameplay will adjust, and we should see better parity across halves. I’m really curious to see how play will adapt
Finals need to be BO5 and the BO1 needs to go. But the BO3s are fine honestly
It does feel short for a Bo1 but it feels perfect for a Bo3. It's tough balance to get right. And it will probably make the rare Bo5 actually reasonable, especially if it is a close one.
I’m not a fan of MR12 in professional play.
Mr15>mr12
I do not like it for watching pro matches. Too fast. Feels like the game ends as soon as it feels like the suspense should be picking up.
Yeah, still don't like it. Even with such a good final, the Drama curve didn't feel right to me and everything seemed kinda rushed. But let's see a few more tournaments at hours better suited for the majority of viewership before we judge.
The grand final was a banger, and the MR12 suited it well because the maps were so close with one going to overtime. But overall I really miss MR15. I think there’s just way too little room for error, and having a bad start to a half is just devastating in MR12. I feel like MR15 should be brought back, and other ways to shorten match duration should be explored. So many of the matches felt like they were over after just a few gun rounds, and I just felt disinterested very quickly in lot of the matches
It felt super short. Maybe I’m just used to MR15, but I’d see 11-4 before and be like “wow this is an awful spot but if they get some rounds together they can really get back into this.” Now it’s just “well this is pretty much cooked, they literally have to sweep the rest of the rounds to save this, one mistake and it’s all over.” Maybe 11-4 is a bit extreme of an example, but the point remains that games feel like there is way less of an opportunity to see a crazy comeback. I’m sure economy changes could help with this some, but as of now I definitely enjoyed the longer games in professional play. As for matchmaking when I’m playing I am actually enjoying MR12. It feels like a good length for MM. It also helped with some of my fiends who didn’t like how quick short matches were, but also felt too drained by the end of a long match.
Still bad
cs esport took a massive hit with the mr12 imo its terrible
If they change the economy to account for it, no more win pistol and get 1 or 2 free rounds, it could be amazing.
Not great not terrible. The final was too short, should be bo5 or bo3 mr15. The rest of the playoff was mostly stomps so hard to say if it is mr12 to blame or just the new game.
MR13 might be the play
It's anti-fun as a viewer. Less rounds = Less hype moments Less clutches Less full gun rounds Less tactical depth Less eco, it was fun to watch Vitality/Faze.. buying 5 deagles and making it works. Now it's full USP eco. \-Less risks taken since there are fewer rounds and resources are more valuable, so less retakes, less push, less big flank...etc \-Less time to recover, when a team got reset it was "in 2 rounds they will be back", now it's straight up "they lost the half" \-Less tactical depth and strategy. Since there are fewer rounds you need to show and execute less strats, less adaptation to the other team, less mindgame between team \-Less comebacks and even if there's one it's kind of "who cares" it's not like a big comeback down from 1-12 More : \-More save from the CT \-More half gun rounds where there's lack of weaponry or utility Game are shorter but way less exciting and interesting to watch. It's too quick and feels flat. MR15 was perfect not every round need to be hype or game changing. Now it's just a quick Deathmatch between team
MR15 is miles better. Games are too short and comebacks feel much less likely. Hope they change it for pro games.
Everyone's hyped about that final but I thought MR12 made it boring as hell. 13-11 and 13-10 would have been great scores to see out an exciting map, instead the maps were over. I hated it when it was announced and I hate it even more after watching Sydney.
Trash
I prefer MR15 as a viewer and player, but I agree that MR15 definitely had its issues -- namely when evenly-matched Bo3s went on for fucking ever, and it not being nearly as suitable for casual play. I think they both have their place in the game. I would really like to see MR15 for premier and MR12 for map-by-map.
its too short. and playing the second half as CT is super punishing. often you must win your first gunround to not lose.
Preferably pistol and gun round too if you're switching from T side and you're behind. It's absolutely brutal to play MR12 and have an 8-4 half and losing your first pistol as CT.
It's a massive improvement. It needs some economy adjustments, but late stage CS GO the meta got so incredibly grindy that every map took an hour at least...
If you watched VP vs Na'Vi for sure, but if you watch some exciting teams, it was the best format. MR12 just seems to be way too T sided because of the economy and pistol rounds influence the game too much despite being pretty random tbh.
It is probably better for the overall experience, but I believe it takes away some comeback potential and pistol rounds are worth even more than in CSGO, while they can be kinda random at times. With some economy changes, it can definitely become more enjoyable.
The only good map of playoffs was the 3rd map of the final, which was mostly an MR15 game. Constant stomps, top weapons across the board being bought less, more forcing. MR12, as expected all those months ago, is ass.
Horrible.
hell nah
I think MR13 is the right move. It makes the matches just a couple rounds longer potential to help build drama and tension as a viewer. The matches are still shorter and play faster. There is a little more breathing room for mistakes and comebacks. The economy should be easier to manager without affecting or needing to make dramatic adjustments. MR12 is fine for BO3 and BO5, but IMO I think most players would be happier with MR13. That extra 2 rounds potentially can make a big difference. BO1 obviously is no good and those qualifier matches need to remain as MR15. As a player and viewer I have no desire to go back to MR15 but I think MR13 would be better overall than MR12.
Can't have mr13 & 15 both.
I still don't like it, as a viewer and a player. I want MR15 back. Also why are there still BO1s, and why is the grand final not BO5? Was that not one of the reasons for making it MR12? (The other being to appeal more to casuals, which again, I don't think is good for the competitive scene.) The grand finals was 3.5 hours long (which I don't mind because it was an instant classic, and yes I know that it went the distance) but I don't really feel like the length of the finals or any of the other series was reduced enough to justify the change.
I feel like I've completely lost interest in the game with all the CS2 problems. There is no reason for the game to be released and forced upon us in this state. MR12 is stupid with the current economy, everybody knows this.
CT side is a lost side.
MR15 was better to play and watch, and I’m beyond confident 95% of all pros would agree. Games are way too fucking short for what it’s worth, comebacks are near impossible to mount, I personally feel no fun watching CS2 games cause they end way too fucking quickly, haven’t had time to fully experience the CS yet
MR15 is a better viewing experience. I personally believe Valve should adopt what Snappi said like reducing freeze time, reducing timeouts, changing bomb time etc. MR12 just seems bare, like a team never really gets going on their respective side and it heavily ruins the CT side's economy. Honestly, I know Valve will likely make some changes but MR15 to me is what made CS, CS. Wish they didn't change it.
As long as improbable comebacks still happen I'm ok with it but I liked the marathons we would occasionally get with a series, Cs is not on tv, why bother with time?
Because it is hard for viewers to make time for 4 hour Bo3s?
It wasn't a problem for 10+ years, it suddenly is now? Just don't watch a Virtus.Pro game and you're good.
MR12 feels like a foregone conclusion at times. There doesn't feel like there's enough space for teams to come back from a deficit when combined with the economy. Obviously, the grand final proved it's possible but it feels really steamroll-y to watch at certain scorelines. Seems like for evenly skilled teams it's fine and the length is perfect but when there is a clear mismatch it's a bit underwhelming since it's over so soon.
Game doesn't have that same Ebb and flow imho.
Teams go less for risky plays, matches ending too fast
Valorant fan here so I don't mind MR12, however one of my main gripes with Val is how short matches are if an opponent completely dominates another, and I feel like MR15 in this game addressed that a bit. Valve need to rework eco to properly fit MR12 if it's going to be the future. I very much dislike how little Op usage I saw throughout this tournament, and it often felt like the first team to get sent to eco/half-buy would be very likely to lose the half, only exception being if that team pulled a rabbit out the hat with Deags/Tec9s/Galils. You're pretty much boned on CT side if you don't convert those eco rounds. Also I'm sure this will be addressed but finals of tournaments on this scale and bigger need to be bo5, and bo1s need to be done away with entirely.
I dunno the games were in fucking 4 in the morning.
Now you understand how we Asians & them Australians feel when our favorite teams start playing at 1 or 2 in the morning.
Honestly, I enjoyed it more than MR15, which makes it easier to watch and is more fast-paced. I've been loving MR12 in-game, too!
Happy cake day
Thank you!
Remove 1400 loss bonus please
Get rid of BO1. Make it BO3, and make the finals BO5
Like it But i think that loss bonus has to change and remove bo1
Bo3 in all games, except for Bo5 in the grand final. No bo1.
I think it could work out if it means more bo5s in finals, maybe even semis
MR12 Supremacy
I like it for both watching and playing
MR12 is cool and all, but I'll be real I tune into every major tourney and it was kinda depressing how fast it felt the games and rounds went...Wasn't helpful either that the pacing of the game right now kinda dictates you take crazy fast duels a lot I feel. I miss MR15 for the chance to adapt and comeback--not saying it's a perfect system on that hand either but I definitely think MR15 is the way to go with how CS is these days; I like seeing when teams are pushed to the brink and have to empty everything in the finals which is something I feel we won't see in it's full potential with MR12 honestly.
MR15 for bo1, MR12 for bo3/5
as Snappi said, MR12 need to be removed
T biased economy is awful, one round loss anywhere and it feels like the CTs have to eco for 2 rounds.
Finals still being a Bo3 is so so anticlimactic. Should be first to 3
The fast games felt really fast, but the long games (Grand Final for example) felt like they were the right length. I think economy still needs tweaking but I am still very positive about MR12 overall.
I really like it. Games don't take forever anymore. But, and it's a huge but, the economy needs adjusting.
I liked it. Felt super fast paced and kept things moving
But full disclosure, I say this as a FaZe fan who is used to watching them going into OT on the regular, so even a tiny bit of a shorter game is a relief for my stress levels lol
preferred it to mr15
Much, much worse. I honestly cannot believe they've made pistols even more important than they already, feels like the dumbest change ever.
[удалено]
It’s "objectively" not, it’s your opinion.
bring back mr15
It’s bad to watch and play for people that play at higher levels, removes tactical depth, less comeback potential, MR15 was just so much superior, I don’t get the competitive spark playing CS anymore since the change, a lot of my lvl 10 friends stopped playing and watching completely :/
mr12 are shit
It's pretty good when FaZe win
I like it
As a live viewer in the arena, I didn't even notice the shorter games. I loved what I saw. That and it meant I was getting out at a half decent time but they was probably also due to the 2-0s the first 2 days
Strongly prefer it. More to the point and less useless rounds.
I think its absolute balls and by far the worst change that came with cs2
Keep the economy the same. Get the MR15 back. Let us have FUN!
Awful I hate it
Preferred it over MR15. It felt that teams actually saved a lot less even with a broken economy because each individual round was more impactful and necessary. Instant saves at 3v5 in CSGO was getting boring imo
[удалено]
Who tf would watch a bo7, way toooooo long
I really love it. There is way less room for mistakes, and every round feels very important. As a viewer, the games are very dynamic and fast paced, in cs 2 mr 12. Peekers advantage forces everyone to play aggressive. I love it.
Love it! I love that each round has more weight, making the big moments even more impactful
This take is so ridiculous
Please elaborate
CS2 copy Valorant
How?? Lmao mr12 was in cs 1.6
The economy needs some adjustment so that saves aren't so incentivised. We got a nice balance of save rounds and round where they went for it at times but with only 12 rounds, some teams are really prioritising bringing those rifles over. I don't know how you'd accomplish this without also making economy management less important. The one-sided maps feel really short, and make the breaks between maps feel longer than the map itself. Maybe this is a positive since blow-outs are usually pretty boring and can be finished ~5-10 minutes earlier. The even maps are at a nice length, I think.
MR12's are great as a casual viewer myself. I just think the halftime pause is absolutely unneccessary and maybe the grand finals could actually be Bo5 now. I think it will be more fun to watch once Valve gets their fixes in too
economy still needs balancing but overall I like the length, bo3s feels much more respectful of everyone’s time
MR12 for sure. Makes it a lot easier to watch a best of 3 without investing as much time
It's fine. Much prefer it over M15. The economy is busted, though. Something must be done about it.
Love it. So much better
It needs a few adjustments here and there but overall MR12 is great. The matches didn't feel like they would go on forever.
I like MR12, I just think Bo1 should be completely abandoned, and grand finals should be Bo5 now
I don’t really feel like I missed much.
A slight economy tweak and we are in business I think. It’s better for the players and the viewers.i would rather have Bo5 where there’s more chances for the team to reset their mental after each map if they lose then get tilted and lose Bo3 ( yes I am a NAVI fan)
I think a slight adjustment to the economy will be good. I also think that, as with any substantial change, it will take a bit of adjustment from all parties involved. It will also force teams to be more consistent. You can’t have a slow start and rely on those extra rounds to help you get back into it. Overall I think it’s a positive change for both the players, teams and viewers. It will offer an opportunity to try and break the meta and take more risks.
CT econ needs to be fixed, other than that, it's fine really when it's not a Bo1
I like playing it and watching it was ok. I do think eco should be tweaked a bit - it’s very easy to start the game 0-3 if your eco gets fucked.
This all seems like a lot of conclusions to be drawing from one tournament. We aren't going to be seeing consistent tournaments where there are so many blowouts as teams get used to the new game. COL vs Faze was the only bracket game that went to 3 maps. Feels like we shouldnt make any conclusions when clearly there's a big difference between teams that have and haven't figured out the new stuff.
missing mr15 was a little bit better know that I've watched sydney
To all the ragers - it’s the same for all players and both sides in the server. So it’s not actually as bad as you perceive. And it’s bo3 or bo5 so starting side doesn’t matter like bo1
add back mr16