The unresolved issues with Counter-Strike’s shift to MR12

Counter-Strike 2’s shift to MR12 (12-round halves) has been a hot topic for debate ever since it was implemented. Valve aimed to streamline matches and reduce fatigue, both for public matchmaking and the pro scene, but failed to update the game to the new format. 

It’s been two years since the sequel was released, but many unresolved complaints remain. Is Valve blind to these talking points that even professional players communicate, or are they simply satisfied with the game’s direction? Let’s take another look at the present and future of Counter-Strike.

MR12, or max round 12, refers to the maximum number of rounds in each half, but the first to 13 wins. This isn’t Valve copying its popular competitor, VALORANT, but rather a return to its roots. Competitive Counter-Strike originally used shorter lengths, as seen in the Cyberathlete Professional League (CPL), but was changed to MR15 due to an unbalanced money exploit that the T-side was abusing

Since its adoption in tournaments, MR15 became the standard from Counter-Strike 1.6 onward, continuing for two decades until the end of Global Offensive. However, it was reverted to MR12 with the move to Counter-Strike 2, citing their reasons in a blog post:

Over the past decade, we’ve shipped updates to the economy and weapon balance to trim the fat and reduce the number of uncontested rounds in a match of CS.
Because of these changes, exciting competitive matches can be resolved with fewer rounds. And shorter matches mean players can play more, and more often. So with CS2, we’re moving to a maximum of 24 rounds in regulation time (with a 6-round overtime in case of a tie) for Premier, Competitive, and the Majors.

As expected with Counter-Strike players, the community was resistant to the change. However, there’s merit to this discussion because the arguments from before remain the same, two years later. 

The shift to MR12 is generally considered a good change, as Valve’s aim for shorter matches was achieved. Analysis of one million CS2 premier matches reveals that regulation maps are around 85% shorter in length compared to CS:GO. 

One-sided stomps average 21 minutes, a full 10 minutes less than CS: GO’s 31 minutes. The average game length in the sequel stays shorter, but a closer match can go up to 47 minutes.

Meanwhile, in professional broadcasting, the average duration is shorter. ESL reported that single matches see 10-15 minutes less, while a best-of-three is shorter by 30 minutes.

The benefits for the casuals and average players outweigh the cons. Players can squeeze in an extra game of Counter-Strike and quickly conclude stomps. Watching CS esports is less exhausting, as a best-of-three series can last more than three hours. However, the shortened half-length intensifies the game’s fragile economy.

Valve implemented MR12 without recalibrating the core economy, last tuned in 2019 by adjusting the loss bonus. This wasn’t an issue in MR15 as teams had enough room to recover even with modest loss bonuses. However, under MR12, the $1,400 base loss bonus is ruthlessly punishing.

Beyond losing the first pistol round, two eco losses assume the losing team will have $3,300 in the bank, which is not enough for a full buy round. However, the shorter halves mean that teams will forgo the second eco and contest with their disadvantaged economy. 

The double ecos prevalent in MR15 are boring for both players and spectators. But to prevent lopsided blowouts, Valve needs to start the loss bonus at $1,900 (or even a rounded-up $2,000) instead of the outdated $1,400.

CTs feel the brunt of these effects, turning their finances into a full-blown crisis each round. They’re burdened with costly loadouts that deliver less value: Defuse Kits cost $400, the inferior Incendiary Grenade costs $500, and two M4s cost $2,900. CTs should get used to playing the $1,250 MP9 because they’re going to fall back to it in most force or half buys. After all, the mid-range $1,950 FAMAS is unreliable even after the buffs.

Meanwhile, Ts profit handsomely from planting the bomb, receiving a $600 cash bonus when losing the round. Additionally, the attackers have better and cheaper guns without needing to worry about Defuse Kits. A Tec-9 costs $500, the powerful and consistent Galil is only $1,800, and the iconic AK-47, the best rifle in the game, is $2,700.

Ts can lose the pistol as long as they plant the bomb. They’ll be able to afford a Galil and armour, with one or two members buying cheaper guns for utility, making a stronger buy than the winning defenders. Meanwhile, when CTs lose, they’ll have to save for round three, and still have to sacrifice utility to buy a gun and armour.

Granted, it’s easier to play CTs, especially in uncoordinated environments. But MR12 penalises CTs with its outdated economy, making winning feel like an uphill battle, and losing plummets them back into poverty.

Pistol rounds dictate the momentum of every half in Counter-Strike 2. Losing the opening round is devastating, as this almost guarantees a conversion in the second round, followed by a high-stakes third round. It’s common to see a three-round lead snowball the half because of the punishing economy, where the losing team is still at a disadvantage even after a full eco.

Pistol rounds have always been important in the game, but now their impact is more felt in MR12. Surprisingly, not too far from CS:GO. Data collected from IEM Sydney 2023 shows that winning both pistols leads to a 60% chance to win, but winning and converting both pistols leads to a staggering 77.8% chance of victory. In MR12, this is four of the 13 rounds teams need to win and a high chance of securing the subsequent gun round.

Counter-Strike’s opening rounds always had a reputation for randomness or not fully representing the tactical depth of the game. This comes from common tactics like Ts running and gunning with their accurate Glocks and the lack of utility to make strategic plays. There are even pros like two-time Major winner ropz advocating for the removal of the pistol round. 

But pistol rounds are one of the few honest rounds in the game, a chance to challenge enemies in aim duels without any gimmicks. The issue is how much winning the pistol affects the next two rounds, often leading to lull experiences before the real game starts.

The shift to MR12 was made to reduce uncontested rounds and stage more high-stakes buy rounds. In an ironic twist, gun rounds matter more, meaning teams won’t risk anything less than success. 

The economy is too fragile to go for risky retakes, and pros would even save on pistol rounds just to keep their armour. Whether it’s MR15, MR12, or no matter how long or short the rounds are in Counter-Strike, a team’s true fight is with their economy.

Saving leads to fewer gun rounds, chaotic tactics, and fewer chances to adapt to the enemy. A round-table discussion with notable IGLs apEX, karrigan, and AleksiB, talks about how they often don’t bring out their stratbook well until round six. 

Playing safe and playing with the harsh economy means that there’s less control, and teams have to make do with what they have. While this creates occasional exciting moments of beating teams with a lower buy, there are more actionless rounds to get through before that. 

Although what goes on in pros doesn’t reflect in pugs, as Deagles, shotguns, and mid-range weapons frequently find their way into rounds. In this context, MR12 dumbs down Counter-Strike tactics in favour of dynamic gameplay and raw mechanics. 

If this is the direction Valve was going for with CS, was MR12 necessary in the first place? Round timers used to take place within 1:45 minutes with a 0:35 second bomb, lasting around 40 minutes per map. However, rounds were extended because of the stall power of a coordinated smoke grenade stack. 

Shouldn’t these grenades see a balance adjustment, instead of the game’s length? Shorter timers but longer rounds could strike a healthy compromise between strategy and a quicker pace. Also, no one likes standing behind smokes, waiting for it to fade out, only for another to take its place.

Overall, Valve’s shift to MR12 is a welcome change, but they’re taking unacceptably long to address these pains. Faster matches are great for the playerbase and pro matches, but it doesn’t have to come at the cost of strategic depth, which Counter-Strike is known for.

Given the economic imbalance between the two sides, the lopsided benefits of winning the pistol round, and the limited number of full gun rounds, CS is slowly reverting to chaotic deathmatches characteristic of the game’s early days, when players were still learning. It’s been two years since MR12 was hastily implemented for Counter-Strike 2, and at this point, the community just wants to know if Valve is aware of these issues.