Since the early days of competitive CS, the maps we have come to know and love have simply been looked upon as the standard. Back in the day, when teams would scrim, they would play on the few maps we had: first de_dust and de_nuke, then later moving to de_dust2 and de_inferno when more updates were released. I suppose a rather intriguing question could be posed about the evolution of mapmaking: if the maps we have grown up on were changed, would the game have been different, and if so, how?

For example, if the most popular map in CS history, de_dust2, had not been used for so many of the first leagues and big tournaments, would the game be different? What if de_survivor had been chosen? Survivor, a MUCH larger and slower paced map, has a completely different style of play than some of the others. Playing a match on a map like survivor would be like playing a football game on a field a half-mile long.

Let’s take a look at the beginning years of CS competition, which were a perfect example of how slow the game could be. The most infamously dominant team in gaming history, Schroet Kommando (SK), was enjoying a reign of supremacy at the time. By taking advantage of the longer rounds and unbalanced money system, SK literally monopolized the CS world scene, taking no less than 2nd place in every tournament they entered for more than a year. Though most top tier teams were able to match their skill level, SK took advantage of the system by delaying their rushes to lower the attention level of the defense. They also capitalized on the problems with the money system, that have been changed to prevent such advantages.

By no means am I trying to take any credit away from SK though. To do that would simply be criminal. Their skill, team chemistry, and unmatched dominance changed how the game of Counter-Strike is played forever. But at the same time, it is very interesting to recognize some of the advantages they created for themselves. Regardless of the level of competition or sport you play, if you have to wait minutes at a time without any kind of action, mistakes will undoubtedly be made.

Imagine being a defensive lineman in an NFL game. If you had to wait in your stance for two minutes while waiting for the snap, we would see an exponential increase in offside penalties. It isn't reasonable for anyone to expect a player to wait for extended periods of time before the action has even started, in ANY field of play. You can also relate the idea to the basketball court: if professional teams could delay on offense by passing the ball around for minutes at a time as in high school basketball, the defense would break down due to pure boredom of having to play the same possession for so long. This is precisely what SK did, and they did it well.

By having the opportunity to create the maps for CS updates, the mapmakers of the past have single-handedly put their personal stamp on the game we know today. If, by chance, the mapmakers had game speed in mind when creating maps, Counter-Strike’s evolution may have been very different. The game would have evolved to the current fast-paced standard much faster. Recently, the CPL tried to continue the trend we see of the increase of speed in CS by having a mapmaker recreate the historically popular de_aztec. Though aztec did not turn out to be much of a better map after the updates, the intentions CPL had with it do bring up an interesting point: if the founding mapmakers had a fast gamespeed in mind, would we have ended up with a much more fast-paced game? Maybe a Five versus Five version of Painkiller, a game infamous for its fast paced gameplay? It's certainly a good question to ponder.

Shifting to the current CS scene, we can see how the game has changed. Take a look at maps like de_train and de_inferno. A few years ago, train used to be infamous for its delayed rushes. Very rarely were there rushes on either site for teams’ gun rounds. Now, almost every professional team’s default strategy is to do a 3-2 or 2-2-1 split attack on the outside bombsite.