Steel's Thoughts: The Compensation Paradigm

Описание: Yes, I'm mad

The Compensation Paradigm

One of the most recurring themes in CS:GO, and other team-based games, is the overcompensation that a player will have to do to make up for the weak-link in the team. I call this the compensation paradigm. In the compensation paradigm, a player who is competent and well rounded will defer intelligent, safe plays in exchange for riskier, more aggressive plays as they feel the need to compensate for the lesser skilled teammate. An example of the compensation paradigm in action would be playing hyper aggressive and looking for early kills to make the playing field a 5v4 in CS:GO, or a 6v5 in OW, generally against their better judgement. In a lot of these situations, since the player puts himself in riskier plays, he or she will often times end up costing the team big time, but the player feels that if he doesn’t make the risky play, they are doomed to lose the round anyways. This is how some players win or lose games on their own. The weak-link players need the self-awareness to identify that they are not as strong as they think they are, and opt to play smarter and safer/more passive as to avoid putting their more skilled teammates in difficult situations.

Taking aim duels over and over again and losing them in the same fashion should be a big indication that you should stop taking them. Set your ego and pride aside and stand down for a change. Your teammates will appreciate you doing it. You can still be useful and learn a lot by being a team/role player and assisting your more skilled teammates in securing the round. Dying early and constantly being on eco rounds doesn’t teach you anything and is less fun/rewarding than winning and learning from playing well against challenging opponents.

I urge everyone out there who plays OW and CS that if you lose a battle more than 50% of the time on Terrorist side to stop taking it. On CT side, it is even more important that you stay alive. Terrorists going 1 for 1 is generally a very acceptable situation, but going 1 for 1 on CT side is not. If, as a Terrorist, you kill a player one round then lose the next two battles, stop doing it. As a CT, if you die playing aggressively one time, play to win three passive battles utilizing choke points and the map design to your advantage before attempting to play aggressively again.






Looking to sign-up to ESEA? http://play.esea.net/?r=368438

US Customer looking for the same gear as me?
https://goo.gl/sCyeeR

CANADIAN Customer looking for the same gear as me? https://goo.gl/iOdwVv

Remember to follow me!
  / joshnissan  
  / joshnissan  
  / steel_tv   -- Watch live at   / steel_tv