I was going to post this in a few weeks time… but while the map’s still hot…
Below is a conflict map for de_dust_pcg… this shows the rough path points at which ‘first-contact’ is made by both teams (assuming all routes are taken). The two coloured zones indicate the playable areas for each of the conflicts. CTs have blue arrows, Terrorists red.
The interesting thing about de_dust_pcg, compared to de_dust, is how the Terrorists have the theoretical upper hand - they have more positions to attack from in the yellow area, and need only consider one point for CTs to appear (the double arches). However, this is only true if their defence on the green area is up to par. Once CTs break through there, defending the bomb at site B becomes much tougher since CTs have 4 points in which to attack.
The restricted initial movement of the CTs is one of the major failings of the map… for CTs, the gameplay is more about interrupting the planting of the bomb (or defusing it) than about prevention of the plant at all. This means strategies must be formed much more like de_dust2.
It’s a bizarre layout, and not ideal… but it’s interesting how it balances out once a bomb is placed. The best strategies for Terrorists is to ignore the mission objectives, spread out to cover both sites, and concentrate on killing the CTs, since this is the easier task. For CTs, the best approach is to outnumber and overwhelm the Terrorists at one of the conflict points, such that they can loop round and take advantage of the Terrorist landscape. It’s a reversal of the strategies one would use on de_dust.
That’s the theory, anyway…