Counter Strike Confederation

1:25 AM

Why do you want to be a player representative for Rules Committee?I have been here a while and would like to give back to the community

@FA | Bimmy

1

Any rules that you specifically disagree with? Think are too vague or too specific?

Hi v0ic3! Appreciate the application and your dedication to giving back to the community.

what exactly is your plan to give back while on RC? (edited)

I believe that with my countless hours in CSGO and the many seasons I have played in the CSC, I can be a fair and accurate representation of the average player. That is my plan to give back to the community, by representing them adequately in RC. I personally disagree with the banning of agent skins in rule 6.6.1 Now It was brought to my attention that there is a head hitbox difference between certain skins (well every skin thats not SAS) But with that in mind, even on a beloved map like mirage, there is a hitbox difference there on the default player models. I can sort of understand the banning of them so it's not a "pay to win" aspect from hitboxes, but considering there is already a disparity between the default models. I don't fully understand why we are "banning" them in the first place. I also think that rule in particular, just needs to be rewritten because it does have a sense of vagueness to it as is. "The opposing team may request at any time to remove the skins" So I feel you could have some matches were nobody cares, or even some cases where they make you leave mid match because they forgot to say something about it at the beginning, or they just didn't notice it. (I personally have experienced that in one of the prior seasons) having that happen can kill momentum in a match. Having the rule state that the use of skins is prohibited, then turning around in the very next sentence and having it appear to be a choice, just contradicts itself. Matches shouldn't even start until all agent skins are unequipped.

So are you saying you want to rewrite the rule or abolish it completely?

FA | Bimmy

I believe that with my countless hours in CSGO and the many seasons I have played in the CSC, I can be a fair and accurate representation of the average player. That is my plan to give back to the community, by representing them adequately in RC. I personally disagree with the banning of agent skins in rule 6.6.1 Now It was brought to my attention that there is a head hitbox difference between certain skins (well every skin thats not SAS) But with that in mind, even on a beloved map like mirage, there is a hitbox difference there on the default player models. I can sort of understand the banning of them so it's not a "pay to win" aspect from hitboxes, but considering there is already a disparity between the default models. I don't fully understand why we are "banning" them in the first place. I also think that rule in particular, just needs to be rewritten because it does have a sense of vagueness to it as is. "The opposing team may request at any time to remove the skins" So I feel you could have some matches were nobody cares, or even some cases where they make you leave mid match because they forgot to say something about it at the beginning, or they just didn't notice it. (I personally have experienced that in one of the prior seasons) having that happen can kill momentum in a match. Having the rule state that the use of skins is prohibited, then turning around in the very next sentence and having it appear to be a choice, just contradicts itself. Matches shouldn't even start until all agent skins are unequipped.

There are custom agent skins that blend in to background colors on certain maps better than the default skins. Particularly on maps like ancient. What is your thought process on allowing this in a competitive league? What exactly is CSC gaining for losing visual clarity?

yeah afaik the hitbox issue wasn't really a factor in all of that as much as visibility

Why do you want them? What benefit do agent skins provide that outweighs that they're competitively unbalanced? (Not to mention the more important accessibility issue for those with color-blindness or reduced vision...)

NAN | JermzPC

So are you saying you want to rewrite the rule or abolish it completely?

I think the rule needs to be updated to reflect how the skins are actually being treated. I think it could definitely be shortened and/or simplified to help clear up any misunderstandings. The reason I brought up the hitboxes, was because that was the last thing I heard about them as to why they were "banned", as opposed to just visibility. Certain maps, like Ancient and Overpass, already have visibility issues with default player models as is. spots like donut, tunnels and even the connector on overpass specifically come to mind when mentioning lower visibility. MM, Faceit, and even Mythic league have enabled the use of these skins, so what makes us any different? I believe as players we have a right express ourselves with our in game items, If I wanna be a super muscly guy with a neon pink shotgun, I believe we should be allowed to do that. CSgo is no stranger to terrible visibility https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/795190793293366364/0EB03EBBC5CF69E78F8031ACC2F8A50AADAF472A/ that old spot on dust 2 in particular is infamous for being difficult to spot the default ct model. and that was in the game for YEARS and we just accepted it. Valve have taken multiple steps to try and make the models competitively "balanced" even going as far as to change sections of maps and adding a "boost player contrast" setting into the game. The next thing I want to bring up about them. Is something from the CSC website. "WHAT EVEN IS CSC? Here at Counter-Strike Confederation (CSC), we are essentially a sports organization that runs different tiers of play and a draft for players. It is all free and laid back, so you can enjoy competitive CS:GO, casually." that is on the homepage. So if csc is laid back and casual. Why are we banning something that nobody else is banning in a for fun league? Now to wrap this up. I think the rule itself, needs to be updated and simplified. It's not even about them being banned. That topic itself is very controversial and I feel everyone has an opinion on it. (which is why i picked it) I wanted to showcase my ability to represent every player. I know the common view of that issue is "oh boo hoo the visibility is bad" but not everyone thinks that way. I'm sure some would ask, why ban all of them outright, when only a handful of them are an issue? All in all, I think I would make a great player rep because I think out of the box, and would take the time to consider all possibilities from a player stand point. Thank you guys for your time! (edited)

1

Its not just visibility for the average sighted player. It is to be more inclusive to those that may deal with color blindness or other visual impairments

we strive to be an inclusive environment here. (edited)

1

it's also visibility for the average sighted player imo lol

sorry i meant its not "just"

like I'm not playing against anyone who has green skins on ancient

5:04 PM

I am reporting that player to the fucking fbi

but yes - its visibility for everyone. It just has significant impact especially on those who may be color blind

Are there any specific "sections" of rules you see as having issues, or types of changes you want to make in rules? If not: what role do you see yourself as taking within RC discussions?

TFR | 42Firehawk

Are there any specific "sections" of rules you see as having issues, or types of changes you want to make in rules? If not: what role do you see yourself as taking within RC discussions?

I have not seen any glaring issues in the sections of rules. They appear to be structured in a way to allow any mis-steps to be caught rather quickly, with failsafe's in check. My ideal role in discussions would be a pseudo "devils advocate" approach where I Would attempt to bring in counter arguments or viewpoints, not to be malicious but to test the strength of the initial rules/ changers being proposed. I want to get to the core of the debate and guarantee these things are being proposed for the right reasons. My goal would be to ensure that when we are working on rules or whatever else it may be, we are thorough and get it right the first time so there's no need to go back and fix something we didn't think of!