Lewis

u guys have changed ur 5th more than nip

Still working on that one. 

u guys have changed ur 5th more than nip

2 weeks

What about motos
 
 
 
xd
glgl

ok lad
here we go
fukin bacon sarney every morning chips for tea get yourself some iron bru or lucozade to keep ur sugar levels zazzed cheap icecream nesquik if u wanna treat yourself  

Holy shet 160 members?

Have fun watching boys.
I didnt use every clip in my posession, cuz you know saving that content for later.
Also im still accepting clips from everyone just saying

I need names of the vent guy in the last clip

Let's first look at this graph:

It shows that Intel had no competition for the last 5+ years or so. No reason to make massive improvements as there was no competition. 
If you have an intel CPU. Do not upgrade to anything between 3rd and 7th gen. 8th gen is where to go for actual improvement for your money. Alternatively, if you're looking to build on a budget then I highly recommend buying a used intel CPU around the 3rd or 4th gen area. It's cheaper and basically the same as 7th gen.
There was an obvious catalyst for the 37% performance increase:

Intel released 2 generations of CPUs in the same year. AMD Ryzen came along and kicked the market. Intel then actually DID SOMETHING. This is excellent news for us consumers. AMD's tactic is to be the cheap underdog for enthusiasts. On a side note they are actually beginning to get back into the enterprise market.
(Below pic of one of last year's server showcases, the server grade stuff is named EPYC as a competitor to Intel's Xeon lineup)

They are even coming back to laptops.

This is actually Uuugee  for AMD. When is the last time you saw legitimate competition from AMD in the mobile market? Arguably never, AMDs older mobile CPUs have been notorious for mega battery consumption and heat output. This is changing now... 
I'm not an AMD fanboy. But I am a person who always builds computers with price to performance being the most important factor in my considerations. If you are also like me, then AMD should be your next choice for a CPU.
Real world - 
AMD Ryzen 5 1600x  ~£170
Intel Core i5-7500 ~£170
(Amazon prices as of right this now.)


CineBench is a software that utilises all cores to render a 3d image. Ryzen has 8 cores, so can make use of them all. 
The gaming results are often quite even, often a tit-for-tat scenario. Intel's single core performance is often better than AMD's but the future holds better optimisation for AMDs CPUs to efficiently utilise all of their cores. Many games are limited to what they can use. 
TL:DR, the future just gets better for AMD. If you buy one today, software updates and developer optimisation will allow AMD to thrive in the future, as it already does when it is capable of using all the cores available.  A popular analogy I've seen over the internet is: Intel is 10% better for gaming, but Ryzen is 40% better for everything else.
 

#deadhub

#deadhub

me jgreg and bonje will come

https://www.hltv.org/stats/players?startDate=2017-12-11&endDate=2018-03-11&matchType=Lan&minMapCount=30
not even top 20, just like u peanut brain

Both ways are bad for deciding it IMO. People have already highlighted the average kills problem, I'd add that it doesn't take into account rounds played. So if one guy is playing loads of overtime games, and the other is winning games 16-3, then obviously the former will have a lot more average kills.
This is a tournament/HUB for playing 5v5 team CS. The winner, while possibly reflecting an underrated pick, has clearly displayed good comms, teamwork etc etc.
'1v1 aim' is just a very small part of cs. It ignores so many fundamentals. Sure, byali and tarik would probably beat flusha and krimz in a 1v1 aim map, but are they better players? No. When you play a 5v5, gamesense, positioning and calls all come into play.
The best way IMO is the player who's played more games should get it. As they show they deserve that position more. 

https://www.hltv.org/stats/players?startDate=2017-12-11&endDate=2018-03-11&matchType=Lan&minMapCount=30
not even top 20, just like u peanut brain

Honestly, average kills wouldn’t be a good way to decide who gets a prize when people are tied on points. Kills are important but impact frags are still a thing and people can win their team games even when they have 10 kills in 30 rounds. Like @w33zy said, people will bait for kills, which some people do already even though there is no reward for doing it, it is just some people’s playstyle. I feel like 1v1s would be the closest you can get to comparing the 2 players’ skill levels. Unless you had a bunch of people who weren’t going to be bias towards one person and they would all review both players demos, stats and teamplay, and vote on which of the 2 they think is better, but that’s probably not going to happen. A 1v1 also gives people who played good most of the season a chance, and actually forces the people who fluke up to the top of the leaderboard, to prove how good they are.

Both ways are bad for deciding it IMO. People have already highlighted the average kills problem, I'd add that it doesn't take into account rounds played. So if one guy is playing loads of overtime games, and the other is winning games 16-3, then obviously the former will have a lot more average kills.
This is a tournament/HUB for playing 5v5 team CS. The winner, while possibly reflecting an underrated pick, has clearly displayed good comms, teamwork etc etc.
'1v1 aim' is just a very small part of cs. It ignores so many fundamentals. Sure, byali and tarik would probably beat flusha and krimz in a 1v1 aim map, but are they better players? No. When you play a 5v5, gamesense, positioning and calls all come into play.
The best way IMO is the player who's played more games should get it. As they show they deserve that position more. 

Well done to all players. It's been a really good experience having this queue system. It has made me want to play CS again, albeit at a very low level compared to the OB pro players.
The current scoring system works really well, however at the end of the seasons I have noticed the queue lacking in activity. People wanting to keep their positions perhaps? Don't be one of these people. If you want to play CS, then play it. The scoreboard will place you appropriate to your effort and teamwork. If you deserve top 5, you'll be in it from normal play.
 

Would it make sense in a tie situation to award the player with the most games played? I feel like those grinding out games should be rewarded.
also the larger sample size means that they are more likely to belong in their current position.

People should 1v1 for the prize if they are tied on points

Off back to uni. I imagine I will be back briefly in 8-9 weeks, before grinding all the way to the end (July). RIP Wist

Such a good song:
Edit: realised my dyslexia, still keeping it anyway.

oh so my entire team peeked mikes awp with like 20 secs left
 
nice

HF watching.
BTW if you have clips for me you can send them to me, idk how you want to send them but just send them in so it doesnt take long to make another csgo moments. Maybe i could even make them weekly. Either msg me on steam or post ur clips in this thread