One common practice among Counter-Strike teams is to employ the top two or three skilled players in a manner that effectively balances out an attack. The most conventional concepts used to do so are to spread out the top players into each of the different attacking elements of a strategy, or to combine all of the team’s forces into one group. Team leaders hope this approach will give the team its best chance for success. In theory the above concepts sound like they will do well, but in practice they don't always work out that way.

Team chemistry and the proper utilization of all five players are important parts of any team’s offensive arsenal in Counter-Strike. Still, each player’s individual potential is often neglected because of the skill gap between the team’s best player and weakest player. When considering skill gaps between players on the same team, these two factors - chemistry and utilization - play an even more vital role in developing strategies. So, it is important to consider what the impact will be to a team’s chemistry when the best offensive players are spread out into the different elements of a split attack.

In such a situation, the elite players are forced to do too much. The tone is set that they must individually lead their element of the strategy to success. This puts added pressure on them to avoid making any mistakes, for if they do, the group as a whole - and, in turn, the team - will lose the round. Another negative side effect is that this sort of tactic inherently leads to a lack of faith in one’s teammates. A common concern for many a top player is that their weaker teammates may bait him, not support the attack effectively, or - even worse - flashbang him in the middle of a rush. Faith in one’s teammates is critical to the success of a team, of course, so what is the solution?

---

The key to a successful Blitzkrieg-style attack is to understand team chemistry and proper utilization of talent. First, let’s make sure we all understand why I am using the term Blitzkrieg to describe this style of an attack; I am borrowing from the popular term used to describe a type of German offensive commonly seen in World War II, where Blitzkrieg attacks used overwhelming forces in a given area to knock out the Allies’ defenses. A Counter-Strike equivalent in most people’s minds would be to bring together all five players in a rush and attack one choke point. That may seem to make sense, until you consider the second important piece of a Blitzkrieg offensive: the opportunity to exploit any holes in the defense that are created when the overwhelming force attacks.

Consider for a moment the likely result of a five-man all out rush during a game between similarly skilled teams. Most of the time, a full team rush into a choke point is met with disproportionate losses, generally with the offensive team losing more men than the defensive team. This makes sense, because there is an obvious tactical advantage in defending a position with stacks or other crossfire setups versus just rushing in on offense. The result of this defensive advantage is that the attacking team is often left in a three versus four or even three versus five situation. While they may be able to plant the bomb, the problem still exists that the remaining players face a lot of pressure to “clutch the round.” Shouldn’t there be a better way to avoid this pressure?

Now, consider the skill gap issue as it relates to an all out rush. When a rush takes place the result tends to be that the less skilled players are just used as shields, either rushing in first or ending up unable to protect themselves by staying near walls to avoid spam fire. Most of the time these losses are unnecessary, giving the defensive team an advantage. It would, then, make more sense to allow the stronger players to breach the choke point themselves since they can make more effective entries by using their skill to gain initial frags. An obvious example for this scenario is found in the random strategies, pub or pug strats, where a team allows players to freelance and work individually, with the team’s success coming from their top skilled players working at their own pace to get entry frags.

So, if all-out rushes don’t work, what sort of attack would be more effective? We can learn from the Blitzkrieg style attacks of World War II and their use of the strongest weapon at the time, the tank, to punch a hole in the defensive line – a hole that was then exploited by infantry. The infantry would then have an easy job of attacking the adjacent defensive forces, who would be weakened as they scrambled to fill this new hole in their line and reinforce the area under attack. In Counter-Strike, an equivalent of the World War II tank battalions can be created by collecting the strongest players of a team into one offensive element, which can then be used to punch a hole in the defense, allowing the team’s weaker players to exploit the holes created in the defense.

Let’s take this Counter-Strike example a little further. Dust2 is a perfect place to start. A common strategy on this map is to attack bombsite B with all five players. As discussed above, the defensive team will then have a good chance of picking off one person in the initial entrance exchange by way of grenades, AWP, or spam fire; then, the attacking team will usually trade frags with the defensive players guarding the bombsite. This will leave the offense at a disadvantage, with a three versus four situation by the time the bomb is planted. Of course, this can still lead to a round win, but let’s consider our other option.

Instead of sending all five offensive players into the bombsite, send the best three. First of all, they will tend to trust each other more and feel that they will be supported. With all three top players together, each has confidence that if he misses the shot, one of his teammates on the rush will take care of him. The team’s three best players should be just as likely to overrun the defensive players in an area as a five man rush would be. With only three offensive players approaching a choke point, there is less chance of grenades or spam fire hitting the entire team, along with the added benefit of letting the offense exit the choke point as a pack rather than one by one.

And what about the other two players? For Dust2, the answer is to hide them in the middle and let them wait for the defense’s rotation. Instead of setting them up for failure by forcing them to rush with the better players, this will put them in a situation where they can get the jump on the defense. They are the weaker players on the team, so giving them an easier chance to succeed makes sense. While some teams prefer to have their strongest player on the flank, having the weaker players in the middle allows them to give the initial damage to the remaining defenders, leaving the stronger players for any last-minute heroics.

Obviously, Dust2 isn’t the only map where a Blitzkrieg style of attack would work effectively. Inferno’s banana bombsite or left middle rush through spawn, and Nuke’s attack at the squeaky door or outside would also qualify. The beauty of this strategic concept is that it’s not limited by the style of the map, but rather by the ability of the team. Good team leaders hide their weakness and use their strengths, so try collecting the strength of your team instead of spreading it out and success might come easier.