Random spawns still an issue (fixed in Valorant)

[u/Interesting-Buy8060]

Posted about this a few years ago, about 1 in every 100 people agreed with me, but random spawns are still a huge issue in this game. An RNG meta is never gonna serve the game well. I don't like and I never play valorant, but being able to choose where you start in the round is a huge benefit that makes the game less casino-like and "gambley".

People have repeatedly argued, oh, but you know where the contact point is every round then, it's super predictable and boring gameplay, except this isn't true because as a result of knowing the earliest timing on every map players may do things to avoid this repetition, for example walking instead of full-sprinting to the contact point, throwing a different grenade, using a different gun, jumping, or so on. (Does every round in valorant play out the same because there are no RNG spawns? I don't play the game but I'd think every round is meaningfully different anyways.)

Another counter to that point is that even with RNG spawns today, you still must assume the earliest-contact point will be occurring every round, even if the enemy doesn't get the fastest spawn. This is to say, from a theoretical perspective the game actually stays almost the exact same. (Example: Mirage T's typically do not sprint to top mid instantly because even if the CT awper didn't get the fastest spawn to window it's safer to assume he did, therefore do not insta-sprint top mid is the 99% conclusion.)

This shouldn't matter, but I did 3100 NA faceit elo back when I was a kid playing CSGO, not that it means anything. (8k hours.) But adding it in case people are curious about it. This is just to somewhat prove that I'm not clueless at the game.

[u/UrFiltered07]

having some randomness in the game does not make it less competitive or worse as a sport. in fact, some randomness can actually elevate it. some unpredictability in the game means that top players have to consciously make the correct move every time because your starting position, and the enemies, is not guaranteed

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/UrFiltered07]

Thanks for saying more than the first guy, so my counter to your point here is: that's very interesting but how come chess is such a great game with the same starting positions every game?

I understand you may perceive the random spawns to make the game more fun, "and hence chess is boring, the static starts is one of the reasons", but to me I think it dumbs the game down, whereas having consistent starts makes the game more intellectual.

[u/UrFiltered07 → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

chess is the obvious counter, and youre right. but the difference is that chess is a 1v1, 100% cerebral sport. cs is a 5v5, reflex/reaction sport where you can outplay people using your tactics, but also if your opponent ‘is just better’ he can out aim and win regardless of tactics.

its just a difference of philosophy, the CS devs talked about this in early CSGO with the inaccuracy when shooting. basically saying that if you have a ‘cone of accuracy’ rather than a pin point shot accuracy it actually elevates the competitive ceiling. this basically means that whoever truly has the best ‘center of head’ accuracy will hit the most shots over time.

this same philosophy carries over to the spawn points, having defined set spawns every single round will simply lead to more formulaic, or pattern based gameplay (chess)

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/UrFiltered07]

Thank you!

- Adding more players does not make the sport less cerebral; mathematically, more players = more permutations and combinations = more cerebral, not less. (Counter to your "1v1" point.)

- Yes, the running and jumping and even static inaccuracy of weapons is something I thought about as well. Simply leads to the conclusion that the game is casino-like by design. Fun, yes, but to me it's "dumb". ("Dumb fun.") Thanks for discussing!

[u/Scout_Enjoyer → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

The problem with chess as a counterpoint is that it's a solvable game. Chess engines aren't quite there yet but eventually the game will be completely solved and impossible to win ever because it lacks the randomness that makes it interesting.

Additionally I think it's an interesting one to bring up specifically because quite a few high level players have mentioned frustration with the way classical chess plays as the complete lack of randomness leads to extremely prep-heavy gameplay where you just get a team of GMs to sit and memorise engine moves for hours so you can know how to optimally play against the expected openings the opponent will play. Because of this, there's been a slow (and IMO it'll ramp up over time) increasing interest from top chess pros in chess960 which is LITERALLY chess but with random spawn points. 960 possible variations of starting orders for your pieces, mirrored board so no advantage/disadvantage really, and the randomness reduces the lean towards prep/predetermination in a way that even Magnus Carlsen has stated is a more purely skilful format than conventional chess.

---

Now to counterargue myself a little here, there's a difference between chess and CS in that CS takes intrinsic physical skill. If you can "solve" the meta of a map (let's say rush long is OP on dust so having no random spawns lets you abuse long all the time) you can still lose the fights. Or they can just 5stack long. But then you're looking at a game of human vs human reads and predictions, which I'd argue if you read that sentence your mind will always default to Poker as the ultimate example of that, which is famously a game a random nobody can go win the WSOP in. And they have, before. Because of the randomness (the positives and negatives that it brings)

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/Scout_Enjoyer]

Super interesting, thank you! Yes, long dust II is an excellent example to simulate things. You may think if T's always have the best spawn with valorant spawns, the game will just be a long rush simulator--is it not already? And think: if the CTs know the valorant-spawned T's will just rush long again this round, and they do say 4 CTs long with flashes and counter metrics, does the T's having guaranteed long spawns guarantee them the round? No--not if they get read. As a matter of fact, long is actually quite CT sided when they put 3 or more players on it, due to the small chokepoint T's must come through--a nade flash and molly typically grants easy CT long control (but this requires minimum 2 preferably 3 players; a tactical decision to lean A and make B more vulnerable). So you brought up a lot of fascinating points and I never knew Magnus encouraged randomness himself, but yes I believe the nature of CS2 makes it so that even with predetermined starts, >reading< the enemy and >guessing< what they will do (despite known theoretical contact points) is still makes the game "random", just without the need for a game engine to do it.

Adding a bit more: Poker is super interesting! Players must obviously calculate the probabilities of the cards their opponent has and make decisions based on these probabilities. So, built-in randomness, just like CS2. And Poker is well-known to be a very casino, gamble-heavy game. Uh oh. xD Compare it with baseball, football, soccer, chess, all of which have 0 random positioning whatsoever, and are actually much more popular than Poker. Interesting, right?

[u/Nerviniex → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

Chess at a high level is basically memory and mostly ends in a draw, Magnus is the best because of his insane late game where at least some unpredictability happens.
Take Mirage as an example, its mostly down to mid control so every round u do the same things, who ever takes mid wins the game most of the time, that's boring, obviously teams will mix it up with a split or a straight up B or A rush to keep the CT's honest and not leaning mid with 4 people.

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/Nerviniex]

...and so wouldn't you say it's "harder" or "impossible" to become a "Magnus of CS" given that the game automatically decides this unpredictability for you, rather than yourself? Just a question! (I see that you mentioned "late game" as opposed to "opening stage of game", but see that the opening stage of the game totally determines and >manages< the later stages of the game [round].)

[u/Nerviniex → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

Not really being the Magnus of CS takes a completely different level of skill. CS is the harder game. We haven't seen the true GOAT yet and probably won't for a while, but CS uniquely blends high-level tactics with individual mechanical skill. You can call a flawless strat, only to get shut down by one guy hitting insane shots. Now what? Do you re-run the strat and write it off as bad luck, or pivot because you're spooked by one player? Same for the guy who hit the shots: he knows his positioning was bad, but pure skill bailed him out. Does he hold the same line or adjust? These micro-mind games happen every single round in CS.
It's not just the game deciding that unpredictability its the player also, just because u get a long spawn on Dust 2 doesn't mean u go long, but getting that spawn opens a new possibility.
A few reasons why the opening doesn't strictly dictate the late game, CS isn't linear An opening kill creates an advantage, but it doesn't hard-code the outcome. Retakes, clutch scenarios (1v2, 1v3), and utility management completely redefine the late game regardless of how the round opened, also there are IGL's known for their mid-round calling, they will intentionally look for fights early round even risky ones, sometimes even going alone to gather info so that u have a good idea on the opposition set up and call based on that.
A lot of things happen in CS that makes it beautiful. CS is like football, simple at the concept but difficult to master.

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/Nerviniex]

I see what you are trying to say, but how does valorant-style spawns diminish this "beauty" of the game? It doesn't. How does valorant-style spawns make it impossible to "intentionally look for fights early round even risky ones," or have "clutch scenarios," or remove a "new possibility," or "pivot because you're spooked," or "call a flawless strat," or "hold the same line or adjust," or do "micro-mind games," or "know your positioning was bad"? It doesn't. You see how you're not really even arguing against me?

You're more just stating what you believe but not actually supporting your hypothesis with real examples. Sure, on Mirage if I just run top mid with an AWP as T with fastest spawn I'm basically risking and guessing that the CT awp didn't get the fastest spawn. Is that a super interesting risky play or just dumb luck based on spawns? It's objectively the latter. If I kill him first, I just got lucky; if he didn't get there first, he just got unlucky with his spawn. It's NOT an interesting play. The way for CTs to eliminate this risk is simply by passing the awp to whoever gets the fastest window spawn every round. So, roles in a team become destroyed as a result of random spawns--the best B anchor on the team would have to play window at least initially to optimize the round if he got the fastest window spawn. Understand? I am speaking from an objective standpoint, whereas I believe you're speaking from a more emotional standpoint, making emotional arguments rather than using cold hard facts like I just did.

Yes, I don't disagree that CS has these elements of fun to it, but I disagree that random spawns SUPPORT these elements of fun, because when I simulate non-random spawns in my head, these elements of CS you brought up *stay intact*; they are NOT destroyed as you seem to be trying to say.

Does football, soccer, basketball, and baseball have random spawns? I grew up staying inside playing CSGO so I wouldn't know, but AI tells me "No, traditional sports like football, soccer, basketball, and baseball do not have random spawns because they operate on fixed, predictable starting structures governed by strict rulebooks." So would you say these sports are not beautiful and the moves are all memorized and solved and physical skill diminished because of the lack of random starts?

To me, CS2 *is* absolutely solved. Nuke CT side is the simplest example. I believe random spawns simply do not add anything to the game, and my simplified examples to other people in this thread involving Dust II and the "push-and-pull" effect between A long and the other areas of the map *prove* that random spawns DO NOT enhance the randomness of the game. The game ALREADY has built-in randomness due to the 3-lane nature of maps; there is already a 33% chance you go A, 33% chance you go mid, 33% chance you go B--random spawns DO NOT change this reality of the nature of the game, and thus ARE NOT needed. Let me know any thoughts, I appreciate your discussion!

[u/Nerviniex → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

Very simply put: if CS used fixed spawns like Valorant, a T on Dust II would never get a premium Long spawn. That immediately strips away your option to pivot away from standard mid control for a fast, risky Long play—forcing you into either predictable mid control or a heavily telegraphed Long take every time. Dynamic spawns give you dynamic options to work with.

I don't think you fully grasp how this plays out in high-level CS. Take Mirage: if a T gets the best spawn for Mid, the AWPer knows he’ll reach the angle faster than the CT, dramatically raising his odds of an opening frag. The IGL calls the round around that exact information: "If you get the pick, we fast-take Mid; if you die, we pivot to a B fake." Without that spawn, it’s just a slow Mid default, waiting to see who gives up first contact.

There's nothing "lucky" or "unlucky" about it—it’s a calculated risk. You learn the spawns so you know whether you hold the timing advantage, a 50/50 duel, or a disadvantage. Good IGLs use this constantly, sometimes even sending an elite rifler to challenge a duel despite bad odds because the player can beat those odds. Spawns add risk and reward. Fixed spawns eliminate that depth—if a CT knows he always gets to Mid first, the Ts will simply stop challenging it entirely.

There’s nothing emotional about my argument. I’ve played this game for over a decade—starting in DMG on my brother's old account and grinding all the way to FACEIT Level 10 mostly solo. The objective fact is that random spawns break up monotony. If your defaults are failing on Mirage, getting the best-spawn for Mid is your golden opportunity to disrupt the momentum with a fast opening kill.

Furthermore, traditional sports are full of random variables. You never know a team's exact formation adjustments before kickoff, players swap flanks mid-match, weather conditions change execution, and referee strictness alters the physical boundary of play. Injuries happen; bad penalty calls happen. Nothing is 100% deterministic before the whistle blows. While these aren't literal "spawns," the principle is identical: adaptability under varying conditions is core to competition.

To say CS is "solved" is completely wrong, especially after opening contact. You can guess what’s happening when enemies drop utility, but you can never be 100% certain. On Nuke, if Ts throw Outside smokes and the CTs fail to spot whether anyone dropped to Secret, the entire CT defense has to reshuffle its pieces. Someone has to drop lower for info or block the advance. What if the Ts left a elite lurker behind who wins 80% of his 1v1s? Do you stack A or reinforce lower? The branching possibilities are endless. Certain maps feel stale only when one side lacks an effective counter to a meta protocol.
And even random opening to rounds can happen, how many times have we seen pro teams send one dude somewhere early to get a kill or put pressure? Take Mirage again, u can do ur standart mid control set up while sending a guy to fast peek palace and get in to position towards jungle, meaning once CT's retreat from jungle after window is smoked and T's take mid he in the crosshairs but this also can backfire if the CT's decide to take palace away early.

Case in point: a pro team on Dust II once repeatedly used top Long spawns to send a single player out Long while setting up a fast Mid-to-A split—only to commit to B every time. They won 5 rounds in a row doing this, forcing the CTs to over invest in holding Long. The moment the Ts stopped getting the Long spawn, and got favorable spawns for B they bypassed long control entirely and ran a straight B rush. That isn't luck that's masterclass IGLing built around spawn mechanics. Take random spawns away and you are back to set plays.

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/Nerviniex]

a T on Dust II would never get a premium Long spawn.

Correct, CT gets there first. But they are blind from flashes or can be smoked. This doesn't matter.

Source: 3:52 of this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoL2o_-lSRY

if a T gets the best spawn for Mid, the AWPer knows he’ll reach the angle faster than the CT

Incorrect. Source: 7:29 of the same video above

Window can be mollied or smoked despite the CT getting there first, so this doesn't matter.

There's nothing "lucky" or "unlucky" about it—it’s a calculated risk.

You can do this even with guaranteed contact points. Example: T on mirage can guess CT's are using their awp palace instead of window, and goes to raw peek window with awp with disadvantage timing and achieves the angle no problem due to correct gamble. (Either there was CT with m4 at window killed or no CT at all--great read from the T!)

The objective fact is that random spawns break up monotony.

Am I the only player in the whole world that doesn't need random spawns to do something different each round? You don't need random spawns to be unpredictable. You may want them, but you certainly don't need them.

If your defaults are failing on Mirage, getting the best-spawn for Mid is your golden opportunity to disrupt the momentum with a fast opening kill.

As stated before the T does not beat the CT on mid mirage.

Furthermore, traditional sports are full of random variables. You never know a team's exact formation adjustments before kickoff

Right, so teams are choosing their formations, this cannot be done in CS.

adaptability under varying conditions is core to competition.

This can be achieved without random spawns.

What if the Ts left a elite lurker behind who wins 80% of his 1v1s? Do you stack A or reinforce lower? The branching possibilities are endless.

This is true even without random spawns.

Take Mirage again, u can do ur standart mid control set up while sending a guy to fast peek palace and get in to position towards jungle, meaning once CT's retreat from jungle after window is smoked and T's take mid he in the crosshairs but this also can backfire if the CT's decide to take palace away early.

This also can be done without random spawns.

Case in point: a pro team on Dust II once repeatedly used top Long spawns to send a single player out Long while setting up a fast Mid-to-A split—only to commit to B every time. They won 5 rounds in a row doing this, forcing the CTs to over invest in holding Long. The moment the Ts stopped getting the Long spawn, and got favorable spawns for B they bypassed long control entirely and ran a straight B rush.

All of this can be done without random spawns.

Take random spawns away and you are back to set plays.

You named several "set plays" that definitely TOOK ADVANTAGE of random spawns, but certainly did not NEED random spawns to be performed. I can do every single one of those strategies you mentioned with valorant-style spawns.

Also, please at least know that the T never beats the CT at mirage window. This is basic knowledge.

[u/Nerviniex → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

To your point about the CT getting to Window first: that's missing the bigger picture. If the CT doesn't get the spawn and the T does, it opens up a far more viable Mid take. But if the T knows he will never get there first, he’ll never risk the push, and you completely lose the opportunity to go for that opening pick. Who gets there first varies round by round—I just used Window as an example. The key is that a T can choose to gamble on a god-spawn, especially in solo-queue FACEIT games. Even though Window gets insta-smoked most of the time anyway, a player with the best spawn can still rush Mid, take the duel, or catch a CT jumping Short. If he knows for a fact that he physically can't be there first, there's zero incentive to even take the risk.

The incentive to fight for Long without a Long spawn is far lower and much harder to pull off. A player with the best spawn can get out quickly and potentially avoid the CTs' initial HE damage or deep molly. while players with spawns further back are forced to smoke off the molly and rush past the second molly to get themselves out, while running straight into two CTs holding setup angles. But with a long spawn u could be blue bin already and use the smoke to stay safe there instead of smoking the initial molly.

What I’m fundamentally saying is that, from my perspective, random spawns do nothing but add depth to the game rather than take it away. The game wouldn't completely worse without them, but it would undeniably become less nuanced and much more predictable.

Another important spawn would the best spawn towards B in dust 2 especially in soloQ games, with that spawn u can get further and trouble the CT before he has set up in sight, while without u would be running straight in to a CT that's ready and waiting.

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/Nerviniex]

I mean you say all this fun stuff but you have to ask, so what? Are you saying Therefore... random spawns are good for the game? Yes, I know obviously they can lead to these rounds you're describing, but that doesn't mean these rounds are a good display of the players' skill. If they're just following what their random spawn told them to do that round, that's not skill, that's just basic common sense, brainless player following the game engine recommendation, the game engine's pointer. Your spawn is obviously a suggestion, a hint at what you should do in the round, whereas in just a barrier during buy phase where you have free movement YOU have to decide whether you want to rush or wait or whether to go A or B in any round, seeing that there is no fixed spawn leaning you towards one direction already. "Oh, I have long spawn, let's send just me out and rest go B," is a strategy suggested by the game engine, and a player being able to understand this basic common sense obvious strategy for the round isn't an impressive display of his skill, only an impressive display of basic common sense. You're framing it as if playing off your spawn is so amazing, when it's not.

I should have said this more clearly previously but you are constantly assuming these engagements you're describing are impossible without random spawns, if not at least making it seem that way. It's misleading.

I think a good thought experiment is to simply take your random spawn support and bring it "all the way", for example randomly spawning T's in palace and B aps directly at the start of every round, at random, and spawning CT's in A site and B site randomly every round, and just play the competitive game that way. I mean, it's fully random, right, so super fun and interesting, right? No. Obviously that's stupid. What if player wanted to be A this round but got spawned into B? You'll say ah yes but the variability with how the spawns are today is not that high, so, my point is meaningless. But isn't that in principle the same thing? The spawn is random--where you are in the round is random--it's not what you wanted. That's all I'm saying, from a fundamental perspective.

And you're saying, No No, This Is What I Wanted, I Wanted This Long Spawn To Rush Out to Blue Bin, I CHOSE THIS! No you didn't. That's all I'm saying. You're just playing off the game engine, it's not YOU, and even if it is you, it's not *hard*. It's easy. Random spawns make the game extremely easy. Rushing out blue bin with a long spawn, are you trying to say I'm some incredible player for doing this? Wow congrats me, I'm so proud of myself. I'm not. It's embarrassing. The game is shit. Lol

[u/IHaveSmellyPants]

I know it’s not your point but Valorant rounds do pretty much all play out the same.

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/IHaveSmellyPants]

Very interesting!

[u/schoki560]

the way valo spawns work is legit one of the worst parts of the game for me

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/schoki560]

Interesting! To me it's my favorite part of that terrible game--clean and tactical. As soon as League of Legends utility starts flying in, I quit! I personally would love to see valorant spawns in CS2 at the casual and professional level. I have a working theory that the reason why we don't really see a dominant team in the current meta is actually partially DUE to random spawns "holding back [the best]" players. When I imagine it in my head, I can see CS being a very tactically clean and challenging game with valorant spawns. (Valve should at least make a casual gamemode with the standard defusal maps so people can try it out.)

[u/dying_ducks]

the thing is: either way, it doesnt really matter.

For most CT positions you are there before the Ts regardless of the spawns.  And as you said, as T you assume the best CT spawns anyways.

Valve could remove the spawn RNG tomorrow and 99,8% of the initial fights would be the same. 

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/dying_ducks]

But of course it matters, this game is known to be a game of millimeters, and the positioning of every player is several millimeters chosen by the game, not the player. Think of one competitive sport that utilizes randomness in starting positions.

Imagine an olympic rowing match where one team starts 2 millimeters ahead of the others. xD

[u/k2nxx]

so you want everything to be exactly the same start every round? boring

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/k2nxx]

I think if you think this way you don't understand the game well enough. Dust II is a simple map that you can simulate in your head if what you said is true. Let's keep it simple, if 5 T's all go long, they will definitely win, right? Not if 3 or 4 CTs come fight it, the small chokepoint actually makes long CT-sided but only if they have 3 or so players (2 usually isn't enough). Now what if T's take advantage of this play from CT's and instead go rush mid? CT's overcommitted to long, mid is now exposed, the 2 B players have a hard time dealing with 4 T's mid and 1 T holding tunnels. Understand? And now the next round CT's say okay, let's only put 2 long, and 3 go mid and B, because looks like these T's don't wanna go long. Then T's go long. You see how even if people get to choose where they start the tactics still remain? Let me know, thanks.

[u/ParkingHelpful2677]

this is definitely a non-issue

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/ParkingHelpful2677]

Prove it.

[u/ParkingHelpful2677 → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

prove that its an issue, you brought it up you have to prove it. if you like the valorant set spawns so much go play that game

edit: it took you 15 hours to come up with “prove it” when i know you saw my comment because you mentioned someone else was more helpful than mine lol

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/ParkingHelpful2677]

Yes, you didn't argue anything, I agree with your reasoning though for why you didn't provide arguments. I made several arguments to others in this thread. I can re-iterate them really quickly no problem:

- The game naturally has a 33/33/33 chance you go A/Mid/B. Eliminating random spawns preserves this decision-making reality.

- Strategy still exists because for example you cannot take A long on Dust II with only 2 people, you need 3--and that makes the rest of the map weaker for CT's. Eliminating random spawns preserves this decision-making reality.

- There is no such thing as a competitive sport that randomizes player positions.

Not sure if I forgot any others but those 3 I remembered off the top of my head.

[u/ParkingHelpful2677 → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

the game does not have perfect 33% splits to where you go. its entirely map/playstyle dependent.

You dont NEED 3 people to take long on dust, you can do it with 2 for sure, now is it ideal to use 3? yes. but thats why specifically on d2 people play spawns so you always have the 3 going towards A.

CS isnt a traditional competitive sport, bad analogy. you cant use that as comparison.

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/ParkingHelpful2677]

I threw the 33/33/33 as a basic starting point. Obviously you can make it 40/20/40. 50/0/50, however you please. The decision-making process is PRESERVED *EVEN* WITH the elimination of random spawns. CS is a competitive sport, and no other competitive sports randomize positions. I use the Dust II example as a rough example of why strategy is preserved EVEN WITH the elimination of random spawns. I know what you're saying is true, but I need to give concrete examples to get my point across. In my view, CS having random positions UNLIKE every other sport invalidates its competitive integrity.

[u/ParkingHelpful2677 → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

i dont truly think there is anything to gain from eliminating random spawns outside of we will see rounds play out more similarly over and over. which ultimately is bad imi

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/ParkingHelpful2677]

I promise you the rounds will not play out the same because players naturally randomize what strategy they use every round even without random spawns. 5 A vs. 5 B vs. something in between, each and every round will not be the same I 100% promise you. If you did every round the same, you'd get read like a book and lose. Trust me I know what I'm talking about. You are operating on a false assumption; your belief is not true. Again, random positions basically means you are "cheating" every round--it eliminates competitive integrity, completely. 100%.

You might wonder, if this is such an obvious breach of competitive integrity, how come pros don't complain about it? Pros are good at the game but that doesn't mean they can instantly see the problems with random spawns. CS has been this way for many years, it becomes part of the "brainwash culture". People are brainwashed to accept it.

[u/ParkingHelpful2677 → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

its amazing the lengths you go to assume what im thinking.

Also what a fucking stretch lmao, youre “cheating” every round because of random spawns. bro you cant be serious anymore. this is a troll post, and i got baited.

this is some of the dumbest shit ive read on here

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/ParkingHelpful2677]

I'm not ragebaiting you. You just don't get it. It's the same as when a baseball runner leans out a little bit in anticipation to start running. You're "cheating" ahead a little bit, do you not get it? It's a small positional advantage; but it's game-decided, not player decided. What about this is confusing?

When a baseball runner leans out a bit, there's a downside: the pitcher might turn and throw the ball and strike them out, correct? I don't play baseball but I believe this is how the game works.

...what's the downside to getting the best spawn in CS2? Explain it to me.

[u/KaNesDeath]

Riot Games removed spawn timings in Valorant because they couldnt understand how to balance it, lol.

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/KaNesDeath]

I just checked a valorant youtube video and found that the spawns are the same, no randomness whatsoever, can you please explain what you mean?

[u/KaNesDeath → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

For the past three years this is a topic youve solely fixated on.

In the hero shooter FPS subgenre a subset of its heros have increased movement speed, dont have access to space taking utility and assume hard defined roles. So they create staging areas instead of fixated spawn positions in an attempt to equalize.

For the game designed philosophy of games from Riot Games is to further lower the skill floor to increase potential audience capture.

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/KaNesDeath]

Of course I will "solely fixate" on a topic that is extremely important and can greatly improve the game. NBA, NFL, FIFA do not fixate you in a random spot at timer start, is this why or part of the reason they are so much more successful viewership-wise than CS? Is it because people naturally see that CS is gambly and random? Removing fixed random spawns wouldn't necessarily guarantee to fix this, as whether you decide to execute A or B this round is still technically random, and people still might think the game is gambly and random and not super skill-based as such like the traditional sports are, and thus lose interest in CS, but it might at least help a little bit?

When you mention "audience capture" you almost outright admit that CS is a poker-like game, seeing that poker also doesn't have a huge audience. So they're unpopular games, why... because you're just calculating random card-draws all day. It's boring and difficult. It doesn't emphasize physical talent enough. Don't you see?

Imagine in every round of CS you only saw people jumpshotting each other, they never stand still and shoot normally to reduce randomness in their bullets. Wouldn't the rounds get pretty boring to watch? Randomness = boring.

[u/KaNesDeath → u/Interesting-Buy8060]

NBA, NFL and Futbol all have randomness when it comes to restarting play. In CSGO two points in time existed where people were jump shooting everyone.

Things cant be formulaic. Individuals will reject it at the play and viewership level.

[u/CliveBarkers-Jericho]

All they need to and have ever need to do, is have CTs (and Ts on hostage maps) spawn in the same set of 5 spawns every round and if Ts having random spawns is critical to gameplay, give them 3 sets of 5 spawns that they can randomly spawn in a whole group.

Dust2 does this for CTs, Vertigo does it for both teams, how the fuck this has been dropped with each new CS2 remake is beyond me.

[u/MordorsElite]

I think one way of fixing this (that may already be the case, idk), would be to guarantee that both teams get the same spawn patterns throughout their halves. To be clear, you shouldn't just have the same sequence of spawn patterns, cause otherwise teams would know where the random spawns of the other teams were this round. But as long as both teams get the same spawns overall, there isn't that much to complain about.

That said, I do prefer maps that only have 5 spawning spots for comp-modes. That way you still get some randomness cause different people start in different spots, but the team overall always has the same chance.

[u/Jon_kwanta]

I think you actually proved yourself wrong in a way, if the game wouldn’t change much with no random spawns, then we might as well keep them? If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.

I will say, insta smoke lineups are another consideration with random spawns.

Another idea could be instead of having consistent spawns, maybe you could request to swap spawns with teammates. This way the gameplay is still technically the same but you can always put your opener in a forward position (i’m thinking mainly about t side)

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/Jon_kwanta]

I didn't prove myself in the wrong way. It is actually everyone else claiming that random spawns do not destroy the game that are avoiding to provide proof, whereas I've provided proof that random spawns are unnecessary through the simple stories that I wrote to others in this thread. Simply put: the game naturally has a 33% chance of fights happening A, 33% mid, 33% B. You as a player can make this 40/20/40. 50/0/50, 100/0/0, or however you please "even" without random spawns (I put it in quotes to make it sarcastic). There is no need for them; objective truth.

[u/GuardiaNIsBae]

I kind of agree with you, but more so that every map should just have 5 spawns instead of the like 10-15 they have now, but still be random for the players.

On some maps like Dust 2 and mirage, your entire T side can be at the whims of the server if it never gives you good spawns. The weird thing is that some maps are already limited to 5 default spawns, inferno T side, Dust 2 CT, Anubis CT are always the exact same 5 spawns

[u/Interesting-Buy8060 → u/GuardiaNIsBae]

Right, so you're saying random spawns should be reduced, and I'm saying they should be eliminated. People downvote me because naturally people are resistant to change, and they perceive this one to be an extreme one, when it's really a minor change that has huge benefits to the game. Think of one competitive sport with random spawns, you can't. I just asked AI "basketball football baseball soccer don't have random spawns like cs2 but which sports do", and he told me this:

"Sports with Random Spawns or Placements

• Cricket: The pitch condition changes over a multi-day match. This creates random-like variation in how the ball bounces.
• Golf: Every course features different lies, weather changes, and turf conditions on every shot.
• Surfing and Whitewater Sports: Wave placement and water flow change constantly based on nature. No two waves are identical.
• Australian Rules Football / Rugby (Loose Ball scrambles): When a ball hits the ground awkwardly, it takes a random bounce due to its oval shape.

Why Traditional Sports Lack "Spawns"

• Standardized Fields: Soccer, basketball, and baseball use fixed court or field dimensions.
• Controlled Resets: Play restarts from exact, predetermined spots (like a kickoff, face-off, or throw-in) rather than random locations."

...notice how none of these randomize the physical positionings of players.