Reprise du message précédent :

 
Je disais juste ça comme ça j'en sais rien réellement  

 
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L8dPZ_qFZI
 
 

 
SAALLLOOOOOOOO !!!!!!!!!!

 
HAHAHAHAHA Merci Kiwidou <3

 
Le problème c'est que tu auras du mal à tenir au moins 144fps en 2560×1440.

 
Faut souligner que juste avant, Nico dit "C'est un filou ce Kiwi"

 
Exact  
 
Trop de pression d'un coup et voilà le résultat.

 
Sur une 690 ?
 
Apres si faut changer de CG... On changera !

 
Ba ça dépend du jeu en question et des options graphique. Genre BF4 TAF tu oublies

 
Je play juste a CSGO, plus le temps.
C'est pas grave je prendrais la nouvelle génération de carte ou alors SLI !

Quasiment, mon CPU c'est un hexacore avec hyperthreading, ça aide (j'utilise pas le nvenc, la qualité est moins bien).

On peut fermer le topic alors

Opération Fénix peut-être ?

 
Lien du topic CS:OF pls ?

Le smiley condescendant, le ton, tout y est. A dans deux jours.

 
Je crois qu'on a compris, un modo peut faire une erreur, woah, maintenant passez à autre chose.

Noraj
 

Il y est pour rien Simer, il a clairement pas lu la dernière page, un peu de mesure plz...
C'est quand même le mec à l'origine du HS qui a alerté, c'est vraiment nawak...

test 1-2

ou alors il a pas assez de débit pour charger les pages précédente, img, smiley tout ça

Même pas sur qu'il ai pu charger le gif de la nazicratie. Ça tire à vue   remember MH17  

Je propose qu'on mette tous 16-0 en 1v1 au coupable afin de lui apprendre le respect    
 
Sinon j'ai un gros soucis, quand j'appuis sur TAB (pour voir le score), j'ai du lag, pendant toute la période ou j'appuie le jeu est très ralenti, des solutions ?  
 
Fixed, réglé tout seul sans rien touché  

alt+F4

T'as pas signalé mais je te mettrais bien 16-0 pour te (re)apprendre le respect    Je me suis toujours pas remis du TK sur nuke  

En plus mon problème s'est réglé de la même manière qu'il est arrivé

Moi non plus    
Je joue quasiement plus depuis. Ca a cassé un truc à l'intérieur de moi    
 
 

 
Déjà eu ce bug, ça m'arrive assez souvent en plus.    

Grandiose  

Deux des trois parties d'hier avec Jeff, Simer, Bonay et un pote à Bonay: http://www.twitch.tv/calcifear/b/548482991
Nouvelle souris depuis une soirée d'où l'aim approximatif
J'ai pas activé mon micro parce que le son était trop fort, je réglerai ça pour la prochaine fois

Ne cliquez pas, c'est un rickroll !

Le mix sonore, LE truc bien relou sur OBS...

Recentron un peu :   Bonne lectutre

SOURCE LUPRIS HLTV.
PHOTO HLTV
SOURCE MANUSTRITE HLTV.org
SOURCE MAJ : VALVE CORP

Les groupes de la DH annoncé :

Group A      Group B       Group C      Group D
 HellRaisers       LDLC        Epsilon       OverGaming
 Hybrid       webSPELL  gBots        k1ck
Planetkey         Dynamics  Outbreak       Platinium  INSHOCK
 Anima         Geduld  FTW             Legacy

MaJ Cette nuit qui corrige notament le bug de la M4-S qui est pas silencieuse quand on possède pas l'item
17 Jul 2014 -

[OVERPASS]
- Fixed the A box not having its clip brush enabled.
- Fixed some unfair peek and boost spots around the map.
- Added some clip brushes to smooth movement.
- Fixed the sign decal on the bank.
- Thanks AreUhungry.

[GAMEPLAY]
- Fixed a surround spatialization issue caused by not handling angle wraparound properly at 0/360. ( thanks derpylurker )

[MISC]
- Fixed a networking regression with M4A1-S when fired by a player who is not the owner of original item.
- Fixed M4A4 | Howl showing as the wrong quality in GOTV streams.
- Fixed decay lerp on non-default crosshairs, crosshairstyle 5 now decays linearly and is now frame-rate independent.
- Fixed equipped collectible items not networking correctly for other players.

NaVi Gagne le Caseking of thehill

Un article intéressant sur le nouveau mapool en compétition : J'ai fait ressortir les passages intéressant avec un code couleur.

A look at changing the map pool

Following criticism directed at Valve for their decisions regarding the map pool at ESL One Cologne, we look at how they could do it differently in the future.

Valve has been criticized by plenty of top players via their Twitter accounts and on reddit. We also put out a short article with opinions of various top players about the change.

The supporters of Valve's decision seem to agree this is the only way to introduce new maps, and it is the players' fault for not accepting them. In general, it's been a very controversial issue.

It's also worth pointing out that all these changes - first to de_mirage and non _se maps, and then adding de_cobblestone and de_overpass while changing the veto system - have been forced by Valve, not by ESL or other organizers.

Considering our take on the integrity of tournaments being the number one priority, we disagree with Valve's approach. Therefore, we have decided to suggest alternatives.

Fifflaren had a rare positive outlook on the new maps

Do we even need new maps?

Before we delve into our suggestions for introducing new maps, one has to wonder, is there even a problem in the first place? Is this something that needs fixing? Is there another way around it? Are people making a mountain out of a molehill?

It is safe to say the standard five map pool that Valve has previously enforced at their events isn't working, as we've pointed out in articles after EMS One Katowice and ESEA Invite Season 16 Global Finals. The map balance simply isn't there. However, it hasn't always been that way, and it still isn't when seven maps are used in the pool.

We saw seven maps played at ESEA Invite Season 16 Global Finals at the end of June, and the split among all maps was fairly good. Obviously with such a large map pool some maps, namely de_train and de_nuke, will gain less traction than others, but overall we were definitely headed in the right direction with de_cache and de_season played more than any map aside from de_inferno.

Interestingly enough, this issue is partly Valve's fault in the first place. Many events including SLTV StarSeries, ESWC and RC EMS One were using the seven map pool a year ago - after agreeing to it as a group - when de_inferno wasn't dominating every tournament. Old version de_mirage_go was also much more popular than Valve's edition; in fact it used to be the most popular map among top teams.

Once Valve forced everyone to switch to the non _se versions of the standard maps, the split among all maps played got worse, and forcing de_mirage on us also hurt. I think there is an argument for this entire problem being caused by Valve in the first place, which is why it is all the more important they at least fix it in the right manner instead of forcing more change on the scene.

It also makes sense that nearly all event organizers instantly followed suit as Valve told DreamHack and ESL what maps to use, as everyone is obviously doing what's possible to try to gain a piece of the $250,000 events. So far only those two have been awarded the funds, but nearly everyone, except for ESEA, have done exactly what Valve has wanted.

Seeing as Valve won't let us go back to the _se maps, best we can hope for is they make changes to de_mirage - some ideas were posted online last weekend - and improve de_train, which is rumoured to be happening as we speak. They should also do their best to include the new version of de_season, which Shawn "FMPONE" Snelling is working on, in the next Operation update.

You can argue adding more maps is catering to the wrong audience. The fans of Counter-Strike who have been around for a long time certainly aren't bored of the standard maps, and I think a main factor in newer players being bored is their lack of understanding of the meta-game. If it all looks the same to you, it's probably because you haven't been taught to notice the subtle differences that make CS exciting. How do we improve that? Better casting.

If events started using more expert commentators instead of pairing play-by-play casters together so often, the fan base would learn more about the strategic aspect of Counter-Strike, and start embracing the current maps more. Asking for new maps means you're bored of the game and want change, period. I don't think most people need to be bored of the game; they simply don't realize all the things that are changing constantly.

Still, that is not realistic for now. The community who are pro-new maps still want the n[#5500AA]ew maps, regardless of the reason, and it is clear Valve intend to keep them happy. So here is where this article kicks in. Let's take a look and what they should have done differently, and what they can still do better in the future. Here are our suggestions.[/#00718D]

Map balance was ruined once Valve enforced their map rotation last fall

How to introduce the new maps?

The ideal way to introduce new maps depends on your goals with them. If you want them to be tested, which means you want teams to practice them and then actually play matches on them, you might want to look into places where you can force those maps to be played. That includes leagues with weekly matches, such as ESEA League, and small tournaments, such as Caseking of The Hill, where you could pre-determine the map for each round of play.

Ideally you would give promising maps - which could be determined by pros, via matchmaking popularity, a fan vote, or any other kind of measure - a chance in those, and the ones that players like, fans enjoy watching and seem to work well in a competitive environment would then get picked on for tournaments. The cycle would continue, and ultimately you could replace some of the current maps in the pool by the newcomers.

Considering Caseking of The Hill tournaments currently have a thousand euros each in prizes, it is not inconceivable to think they would add a pre-determined round featuring de_overpass and de_cobblestone in exchange to Valve donating another grand into their prize purse. That is a mere rounding error for a plus $3,000,000,000 company, and generally keeping your customers happy should be worth spending a little money here and there.

ESEA League would be an optimal suitor because they have pre-determined maps played on a weekly basis on all levels of competition. If Valve put in some money to convince ESEA to use a new map in one week of play, they would have hundreds of matches of data to look through from games that are much more competitive than what matchmaking produces. Let's not forget about all the practices games those teams would play, either.

The league approach makes sense because it means every team will be playing those maps, and considering those wins can make or break a team's hopes of traveling to the global finals in Dallas, it would make little sense for teams to not practice them. Another great target would be SLTV StarSeries, but it would require them to change their format by eliminating the map veto process and installing a pre-determined rotation.

This would be a great way to figure out which maps are good, and which maps aren't, while also giving teams enough time to practice them. In fact, Valve could likely finance these map runs by actually running some similar weapon skin projects that FACEIT lucked into, that allowed them to finance their Spring League. If there is will, there is a way. We just need Valve to summon that will.

ESEA could ease new maps into tournament play

How can Valve decide which maps to add?

First of all whoever actually gets to talk to Valve needs to tell them their matchmaking statistics must be shredded the second they start thinking about map pools at the $250,000 majors that have become the backbone of CS:GO's competitive community. Those statistics are surely great for a lot of other things, and for improving matchmaking games - but for the professional scene's adjustment they do not work.

Seeing how surprised just about everyone in the professional community was regarding the decision to add de_cobblestone an de_overpass, it is clear Valve did not consult them whatsoever when it came to this decision. That is a mistake. I don't suggest the pro players themselves should decide it completely either - seeing as that would ignore all the fans - but consulting no one is the worst possible course of action.

As usual, there is a middle ground to be found, and it ties in with our previous point on how to introduce new maps. If we do that in a smart manner, it really won't make that big of a difference whether Valve chooses poorly or doesn't consult the right people on the new maps. Their quality will be determined by players, and the best ones will get the nod for bigger tournaments, where it truly matters which maps are played, and which are not.

If a map turns out not to be suited for competition or disliked by a majority of players, we can simply let it be forgotten and move on to the next one. There are plenty of mapmakers out there, and if they knew their maps had a legitimate chance of getting picked up through the system outlined above, they should be even more motivated to try to make the best maps possible. The key here is eliminating randomness at the biggest stages.

It makes no sense to gamble on untested maps like Valve are doing at ESL One Cologne, when they could so easily avoid all of it. Their image isn't exactly shiny from all the unpopular decision they've had to make, and someday someone at the company will stop being stubborn and realize how little effort and planning it would take to be loved by the community. Hopefully it will be sooner rather than later.

Many suggest de_crown as a potential new map for tournaments

What part does the veto system play?

The veto system may be the most underrated part of this equation. Often overlooked, a weak veto system alone can take away everything gained from introducing new maps. ESL's new system where teams remove one map each before picking theirs, followed by one more removal by each before a random draw will determine the decider, is a step in the right direction, but it goes too far. It compromises the tournament's integrity.

With a seven m

• [*][*][*]ap pool and only one removal before teams pick their maps, it is important teams can also affect what map is going to be the decider in the series. When only one map is removed per team, it means they will have to practice six maps - more than you can realistically be strong on at any given time - and most of the time there will be clear favorites in each of the first two maps. Even among top teams there are always maps you're very strong on, and the other team is weaker on.

If the first two maps are likely to be split, the decider of the series will, naturally, be the most important map of the series. Wouldn't it then make sense to give the players, who sacrifice months of their life to prepare for these tournaments, some control over the outcome? Valve seemingly doesn't think so. With three maps left, there is a good chance each team has a map they would rather not play, and drawing that can be a death sentence.

Virtus.pro's Wiktor "TaZ" Wojtas tweeted saying he expects the same maps to be played, only the random third map draw will make the outcome more random. Joona "natu" Leppänen pointed out via Twitter no team has been seen practicing the two new maps - de_cobblestone and de_overpass  - though Anders Blume claimed differently on RoomOnFire. It remains to be seen if these maps will be played at all in Cologne, and who will gain the most from their additions.

The best-of-three system isn't actually half bad in comparison to the group stage format. In the best-of-one matches each team removes two maps, and the sole map played will then be randomly drawn from the three remaining ones. That can make results very random - much more so than in the playoffs - and seeing as it could knock teams out very early, it is even more important. For teams on the verge of advancing, their tournament life can now be decided by a coin toss.

I stand by the two map selection processes I outlined in my article last month, and based on conversations with a number of players who actually compete in these tournaments they seem like solid choices. It remains to be seen whether Valve will listen in the future and potentially make a change, or if seeing de_inferno played a few times less at this cost is worth it to them. To me, integrity of the tournament is, and always should be, priority number one.

TaZ thinks the new changes will randomize results

These are just a few quick ideas on how Valve could improve the process of adding maps in the future in order to keep the casual and hardcore fans and players happy.

Certainly there are more ways to go about it and we could discuss these in more depth as well. Hopefully in the future Valve will do that, instead of coming out with these changes out of the blue.

 
Le truc chiant c'est le fonctionnement avec des gains > 1 alors que perso il me suffirait juste de baisser le gain sur l'enregistrement de mon micro. Je ferai des tests ce soir.

I see what you did there  
Sinon cite tes sources quand même sinon ça va encore trancher

edit: Oh putain j'avais pas vu le troll de lurppis: "If events started using more expert commentators (lui quoi ) instead of pairing play-by-play casters together so often, the fan base would learn more about the strategic aspect of Counter-Strike, and start embracing the current maps more."
Il peut pas s'empêcher de basher Fifflaren ou Anders dans tous ses articles

 
C'est corrigé

 
Oui en effet
 
Je sais pas si tu a vu la tribune de NBK concernant le mappool.
 
Je le met ici au où. Bonne lecture.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SOURCE HTVL WRITTEN BY TITAN NBK.
 
My two cents to the map changes.2014-07-10 14:49
 
----- THIS BLOG REFLECTS MY OWN VIEWS AND NOT NECESSERALY THE VIEWS OF TITAN
 
Hello everyone,
 
I'm writing this whole column in order to explain my point of view about the changes I've witnessed on CS:GO, my experience with new factors, the developers point of view (from what I've heard/read from them) and how it could affect high-level games.
 
 
My point of view about change
 
 
Change is good, a breath of fresh air if you will. Furthermore it propagates growth of the community and e-Sports.  
 
In the beginning, players were reluctant to the switch. I wrote a few blog entries on ESEA to prove that after a few tweaks the community could flourish. I also tried to motivate teams to give the game a chance on a competitive level.  
 
As the game and the scene surrounding it is my job, I really want it to develop and continue to grow. As such I try my best to promote it through regular streaming, producing quality content and actively voicing my opinions on things within the scene.  
 
I am only trying to push the game forward, regardless of what the community thinks of my opinion. Content creators and differing opinions are for me essential to the e-Sports scene. My goal is to share my thoughts on the game in order to spark discussion about the development of the game and potential improvement.  
 
 
Developers and maps
 
 
There has been a lot of contact between the pro-scene and Valve (such as private steam forum/meetings at LANs). Hopefully our communcation can have an impact on the direction the game is heading (still waiting for Tuscan though!).  
 
Here is my take on it:
Valve are mainly relying on analysing statistics (in both casual and professional matches) in regards to map changes (i.e. where most fights are, nade spots, weapons bought etc.).  
 
When discussing balance with the developers you have to be able to back up your claims whether something is imbalanced or has a possibility of being exploited in tournaments (Tec-9 for example). Personally I feel balance has always been fine in CS:GO, which is part of the reason all top teams are capable of beating each other.  
I tried out the new operation maps and was really hyped about it. The new maps are good for casual players, which is perfect for the expansion of the game. However, none of these maps are suited for competitive play and the only maps that look even remotely usable are Castle and Cobblestone (only maps with clear paths). The other maps are very reminiscent of Call of Duty; they're either very short- or long range, hard to smoke off and very dark, shotguns and SMGs would be the weapons of choice, changing the meta-game.
 
The most important and main difference between the classic maps contra the rest is simplicity. You are able to create strategies based on several game plans—something which on the outside may look simple but is in actuality very complex. Overpass already looks complicated, therefore learning the principles of the map and creating strategies around them would be an arduous task. There is a reason why the standard map-pool has been used for so long, you can still have casual/fun maps to play outside of competitive play.
 
I would love to see a map-pool that includes Cache, Tuscan and Train. Changing the map-pool drastically will give underdogs a better chance to upset, as preparing for a new map can take up to weeks for a pro team.
 
 
How it will affect the competitive scene
 
 
Multiple leagues changed their map-pool to Valve’s standard map-pool in order to be a contender for hosting the 250K$ events. These maps are all simple, well-known and can be researched by looking at previous matches. As a professional player I want as few random aspects to the game as possible. With thousands of hours under my belt I would probably be pretty upset if an unknown team gets an edge on us due to new maps being relatively uncharted waters. If a drastic change to the map-pool is made it needs to be tested in the smaller tournaments/qualifiers first.  
 
A few likely scenarios:
- Teams start practicing the two new maps, as a result performance on the classic maps will suffer.
- Teams completely ignore the two new maps, which would make the change pointless.
- Only some teams play the maps; other teams will veto them and they will rarely be seen in professional matches. No team will sacrifice their spot in a 250K$ tournament by playing maps they don’t feel confident on.  
 
To learn a new map takes an incredible amount of time and effort. You need to learn: how to create proper cross-fires, which angles are held, different ways to re-take sites, all the different nade spots and timings, which weapons are most suitable for certain spots, managing your economy etc.  
 
The new veto system is essentially trying to force the new maps being played (if you are lucky they will never get picked due to the random aspect of it). The idea is good in essence, especially from a spectator’s point of view, but only if the level of play lives up to their expectations. However, with only a one month warning prior to ESL One it is likely that we will see decreased performance on the standard maps and mediocre performance on the new maps. Randomness should not play this big a part in an event.  
 
 
Future possibilities/solution?
 
 
If new maps are introduced in a major tournament, they need to notify teams about it a lot earlier than one month prior to the event.  
When Cache was introduced it was first played in online leagues and smaller tournaments. You had to practice it at least a bit in order to stay high up in the league (best example is ESEA). If the maps are tested in this way you are able to see if the map is suited for competitive play in the long run.  
 
Instead, we are now forced to practice a map (mainly because of the veto system) that has never been tested at pro level. Teams and developers don’t really know if these maps are suited for competitive play, unlike Season/Tuscan/Contra/Mil.  
 
To sum things up; the new maps need to have a trial run in leagues or smaller tournaments before being adopted by major events. Another possibility would be creating “seasons” (like in Starcraft 2) where there is a different map-pool every 9-12 months. This would mean that the new maps are tested in a competitive environment. It wouldn’t necessarily mean changing all 7 maps every season but make huge changes (replacing 3 out of 7 maps is a huge change) and keep them for a year. This would require more communication between Valve and tournament organizers as well as the major tournaments agreeing on it. I think it could definitely work though.  
 
The scene generally welcomes change, if the changes are agreed on to make the “big picture” better.
 
 
 
P.S Valve are listening to the community and fixing bugs even if we don’t always get feedback from them (For instance the smokes, some map tweaks etc.).

Merci Jeffmaski62
 
Non à HS

Belle mise en page

La dreamhack est retransmise en Français ici
 
http://www.twitch.tv/officiel_jvcom

Ceci étant, il a raison sur le fond (même si y a d'autres candidats analystes potentiels ); la plupart des casts anglais sur CS sont aussi quasi que du play by play, avec très peu d'analyse; j'ai du coup toujours eu un peu de mal à comprendre la branlette qu'il y avait à écouter un stream UK (a part le snobisme habituel à dire qu'on est bilingue); y a des casteurs FR qui savent aussi bien faire vivre l'action que des casteurs UK. Et pour l'analyse, le cast de Poireau ou Scara à l'époque passait très bien et n'avait rien à rougir de ce qu'on peut entendre dans la lanque de Shakespeare.

On voit que l analyse est efficace quand on regarde les perf de titan.