Money matters in CS:GO.
If you’re not careful, you might have to settle for a galil instead of an AK, or to
go without a smoke that with hindsight could have proven to be very useful.
You might even end up forcing your team to eco, when they would have otherwise spent.
It always helps to have more money for the extra opportunities it opens up.
So clearly, any ways in which you can save money without jeopardising the round are very
helpful.
Today I’ll be investigating if it’s worth buying a vest on its own.
Rather than a vest and a helmet.
This can save you $350.
But it does mean that almost any weapon in the game can one-hit kill you.
But when is it worth doing?
There’s no simple answer to this.
If it means that you can get a proper rifle instead of settling for an SMG then it could
give you a huge advantage.
But you also have to be aware of what your enemies will be buying.
And there will be times where you wish you had chosen the other option, either way.
Let’s look at some situations you might find yourself in.
Say you win the pistol round.
You can expect the enemies to be packing weaker pistols or SMGs for the next few.
In this situation, buying a helmet should be your top priority as it stops them from
getting lucky one-taps on you.
In this case, getting a helmet is worth it, even if it means opting for a cheaper rifle
or SMG as your weapon instead.
Plus let’s face it, even if they’re ecoing and manage to bring you down in your full
armour, you don’t want to award them with a decent weapon that they can then use against
your teammates.
So this is one situation where you should get a helmet.
But there are certainly occasions where the money you save from not buying a helmet can
be better spent elsewhere.
Especially if you’re on CT-side.
If you know that the terrorists have the money for AWPs and AK’s then a helmet isn’t
going to stop them from killing you in a single headshot.
Rather than wasting $350, you’d be better off getting a grenade or a full-blown M4 instead.
And yet, Hastecsgo posted an interesting picture from a pro game, showing Astralis- one of
the best teams in the world- buying helmets when going up against enemies who were all
packing one-hit-kill AK’s and AWPs!
Clearly, helmets won’t help in this situation.
So why did they buy them?
In many cases I could understand it if there was some confusion regarding the state of
the enemy’s economy.
You don’t want to go without a helmet, only to realise that the enemies all skimped and
bought SMGs.
But having won the previous 5 rounds, it is clear in this case that helmets would be of
no use at all… and yet Astralis still invested in them any way.
Suggestions were made, one possibility being protection against headshot wallbangs.
Maybe.
But I don’t like it, it doesn’t seem worth the investment for something so unlikely to
make a difference.
I mean, sure, if CT’s all had enough money to buy everything then maybe.
But money was tight.
These CT’s favoured a helmet instead of extra grenades or a defuse kit!
Stere over on reddit raised an important point, saying that helmets could be an investment
for future rounds.
Even if the enemies aren’t using pistols and SMGs this round, if they lose then in
later rounds they might be.
And although it’s only an extra $350 to upgrade from a vest to a helmet and vest,
if the vest takes as little as 1 damage then you have to spend a full $1,000 to upgrade
in later rounds.
At least by taking the plunge now they’ll be saving themselves $650 the next round.
In other words, they’re investing in helmets, gambling that they’ll survive this round.
Or maybe they just bought them, not analysing the situation as much as I am.
It could happen!
In conclusion, there can be cases where it can help to not buy a helmet.
But there are always ways in which you can argue that a helmet is still a good investment,
so if you have the money then it’s probably a good idea to get one.
I personally don’t mind going without when if it means that I can buy a better weapon
with the money instead.
Especially if I think that doing so would help my team’s chances of survival.
It’s ultimately down to me and my best judgement, as that’s what defines me as a player.
But I think this is the beauty of CS:GO.
It’s a complicated game, your choices are never black and white, but merely your best
judgement of the current situation.
With hindsight it’s always easy to say that you made the wrong decision.
But looking forward and preparing for the future… that tends to be a whole lot harder.
And a lot more useful, too!
Take this clip: Magisk can’t win the round, but wants to survive to save the vest that
he’s bought.
Since it’s at 100% health, this means that he has the option to upgrade to a vest and
helmet for $350.
But oh no!
The bomb explodes and takes 1 health off his vest, meaning that he’ll have to spent a
whole $1,000 if he wants to get a helmet now.
It’s stupid.
Of course, we wouldn’t have this problem if we could buy a vest and helmet separately.
Imagine that!
You’d be able to buy a helmet and p250 on pistol rounds.
It would be a defence against flukey one-hit-kill headshots.
Body shots could become the new meta!
Admittedly, this isn’t the first time an anti-Scream update has been suggested - and
the reception hasn’t exactly been positive.
It’s been argued that it would upset the balance of pistol rounds, putting CT’s at
a major disadvantage.
It could make force rounds even more OP.
It could risk throwing away the years of balancing that CS:GO has had up to this point.
The debate was even likened to slavery!
What do you think?