How a WON Round Still LOST 100T the Game
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- Coaching and Watch parties:
Sentinels faced off against 100 Thieves in the VCT Americas 2023 inaugural match. In this video I break down the pro strategy used by both IGLs and a key round which despite 100T winning, had major ramifications for the rest of the match.
Half armor video • How FNATIC used DATA t...
• / platoonval
•
#valorantesports #valorant #vct
Gameplay footage from VCT main streams.
Music from Streambeats & RUclips music library Business inquiries: platoon@withmonroe.com
Derrick also overplayed his position on round 22 regardless of his loadout, after he blew his stun in the beginning of the round he should have retreated to tower and stalled with his utility. I guess he was trusting his team to back him up with utility or push the smoke instantly but the SEN hit was too fast and Sky and Brim were too scared of throwing the round to push the smoke. It was hopium that he thought he was gonna get any kills standing mid site when they fast execute with full breach utility.
Holy NERDGE
@@Jkwonval 😂😂
derrick overplayed to
Good analysis only at 10-10.
Amazing analysis, but i cant listen to you saying Sacy wrong😢😂
I will say it correctly next time 🙏
@@platoonval technically its pronounced correctly... more like the name should have been "Saucy" instead?
@@gojonissan5567 sacy is a mythical creature in brazillian folklore
@@lungzs thats not really gonna help your argument 😭😭
@@ffukamizu ooo i see i see
1:20 you're very critical of sentinels here for playing off-site but I'm going to be honest holding site against a breach/skye while the rest of your teammates are smoked off is just pretty much always a losing proposition. Especially in pistol.
Breach can hit most of the right side with a stun and then flash anyone who moved left in response to it. It's just not a hold that has any chance of payoff against a half decent execute.
i agree
Exactly and it’s always better to stop the door crunch and have control of backsite rather than playing on site and getting spammed with util. Unfortunate that the first two kills were spams through the smoke
nah if its a stacked site you 100% need someone on site or you lose all the advantage of stacking. Also, sure breach can stun and flash, but he didnt. instead he stun jett who was drop, if there was one site and the skye dog somehow sees him, breach can either stun jett, and risk a cheeky classic right click or shorty kill, or stun site and breach can flash site for jett to peek, easily pick one off and dash away. If you dont have someone on site while stacking, you might as well default, it doesnt make a difference(unless you wanna flood)
17:22 Tenz had 10 armor when score was 11-11 & didn’t buy shield with 7300 free LMAO
Don't forget Deph also forgot to buy on their last round with like 8k credits left. Sentinels trolled and won 😅
Great video and analysis, very informative. 10/10 for quality
I actually don't think Stellar's decision was a mistake, but I understand how it's easy to see it that way given the outcome of the round. Whenever something pivotal like this happens in Valorant I think it's best to first analyze the situation realistically from the players' perspectives before jumping to conclusions. From Stellar's position, he knew Sentinels were reactively hitting B because they got pushed from A main by the utility of 4 agents. On top of that, shortly after zekken starts planting 100T triggers Sentinels' flank alarm bot. With all of that info combined Stellar has to know Sentinels is going to expect the same B Main retake from previous rounds. However, he also knows Sentinels hasn't pushed tower, yet are aware of his presence detached from the flank due to his activated turret they broke upon entry. Stellar even hears TenZ running up to Canteen to clear it and check for rotates, which is why he initially tucks close to the wall. All of this leads me to believe Stellar was worried Sentinels would reactively crunch him to take CT control in order to both obtain better positioning and to focus all of their attention on B main like what ended up happening anyways. When teams are down in numbers in rounds like this, this is quite a common play. Therefore, Stellar was looking for a timing for a 1v1 on one of the supposed crunchers instead of waiting to fall into a 1v2. He didn't feel he had time to wait for his team to push further as they were already making a bunch of noise, meaning it was then or never for Sen to crunch him. And you can actually see that this was in fact what Sen were thinking as both TenZ and pANcada suddenly turn around to clear CT, causing Stellar to miss the timing by just a fraction of a second and allowing pANcada to reposition.
I get that there's a fair amount of trolling that goes on in pro play, but they are still pro players, so I like to give them the benefit of the doubt. This is especially true for an IGL like Stellar who tends to play way smarter with his team in man advantage situations than the vast majority of other teams.
There are also countless variables that lead to economic differences in the long run in any given Valorant match. You point out Stellar's decision and show the economic ripples it created throughout the rest of the game while simultaneously criticizing Sen's strategy to use light shields even against weak buys. But it can also be argued in the same way that that is what allowed Sentinels to buy guns in later rounds they otherwise wouldn't have been able to, thus contributing to their win.
I love your content and really appreciate your round by round analyses, they are incredibly intriguing and create a conversation I feel I can contribute to. Keep it up!
Stellar's decision was definitely a mistake. You say he had no choice but to push but he did have a better decision. He could have retreated even further. It sounds very dumb considering how far he has to retreat but his presence is enough of a distraction to prevent sentinels from fighting all out against the 4 stack. We can see how all 3 sentinels players, after killing stellar, just turned arohnd to fight b main. Something else he could have done was wait a few more seconds despite the risk and time it with his teammates.
And also, just because the result was good, doesn't take away from the fact that something was a mistake. I am talking about the half shield strategy. Just because it allowed their economy to be really strong, they could have easily lost any of those rounds because they didn't have full shields and that means overtime at least here. They got lucky that they won the rounds.
@Just some dude
I understand the retreating play and considered it when writing my comment. However, my conclusion was that in order to pull this off, Stellar would have had to retreat before he even confirmed Sentinels were B with his turret. This would have given up all of B and deactivated his util, which Sentinels likely would've responded to by planting in a better spot and clearing tower. You can see Stellar reacts as soon as his turret is broken but knows he can't retreat further since he hears TenZ running to clear Canteen immediately. After this point it's far too risky to retreat since there's too large of a timing window for Sentinels to peak him from either Canteen or Gen as he's backing up. It's sort of weird because as soon as Stellar gets the info it's already too late to retreat, but until he gets it he doesn't know for sure that Sentinels are going B. I think to preemptively leave before any of that happens only makes sense in hindsight. In the round itself, I don't see any other player making that play. If anything the mistake comes in the pre-round plan and setup, not in Stellar's decision making in the moment. 100T could've easily had Stellar with the rest of the team like in previous rounds, or they could've had Bang play with him since he would've still been able to use all the same utililty from CT.
As for the other point, I never said buying light shields against an eco is good. It was meant as another example to compare to the video's example of Stellar's "mistake" in order to demonstrate how that line of reasoning isn't exactly complete. You can't just point to one thing as the reason for an outcome. My point was to show if you can say Stellar's decision caused 100T to lose because of its effect on the economy, then you can say the same thing about Sentinels' decision to buy light shields on eco rounds and it causing them to win. In order to make a distinction between the two you have to consider more than just a single moment and rather look at every little thing that happened in the game to determine how they interact with both each other and the final results. Every decision has impact that can create a ripple effect if changed. It's extremely difficult to make a straightforward statement like the video does essentially claiming Stellar lost 100T the game as there are millions of other variables contributing to that as well. Many may even be far more significant. I felt the "would've could've" talk near the end of the video was biased towards 100T and wanted to show that you can make the same exact kind of reasoning from the other side of the coin. For example, the videos says 100T would've traded much better in the round where Sentinels all push up dish and three get killed by Frenzies had they been able to buy better guns. However, how can you know that that scenario would even happen if 100T had better guns. It's entirely likely that the strat is only reserved for ecos due to its gambling nature. The reality is 100T might've played the round entirely different with better guns. There's no way to say what would've happened.
Thanks for your response!
Thanks for your replies! I love the discussion points you bring up :)
1. I believe that holding their swing or retreating and playing a different angle after allowing his strong side to gather information for him was still the correct play. If he holds his position to stall time or plays a different spot like Boaster does here ruclips.net/video/uyNCr-uvu1o/видео.html, the ball is in SEN's court to punish him. In this case he didn't really make SEN work for it. Even if they did flank him from Gen, that's a lot more space that SEN have to push. He just needs to buy a little more time for his B main players to come out. SEN are really frantic looking for space before it's too late and find Stellar at the perfect time that they need to because of how he played it. I'm not trying to knock on Stellar's ability or contributions to the team. He's definitely an amazing player but wanted to point out how a seemingly small mistake is actually much larger than it seems. You mention the mistake could be from the pre-round plan, but I think they were setup perfectly to win this round convincingly (probably credit to Stellar's calling!) but a mistake in micro choices cost them.
2. I was trying to make this clear throughout the video but it just wasn't meant to be the centerpiece of the video. SEN's half armor strategy and risks (even buying during ecos) resulted in their unbreakable economy late into the game despite an even scoreline at that point. This is why I pointed it out often. This line of reasoning is certainly incomplete and partly for storytelling purposes, but I would say that my analysis method is still to look at rounds firmly within the team's control. 100T were in the drivers seat this round but fumbled their economy and it was a key round for the rest of the match no matter how that money distributed into the later rounds. You're right that it doesn't necessarily mean the game goes the exact same way but I'm showing real examples and outcomes from the match itself that make it easy to quantify the consequences of lost econ.
@@platoonval
1. That Boaster round is definitely interesting, I didn't consider that angle but can now definitely see the benefit of it. It allows you to keep the fights more in front of you and is also an off angle for both pushes and even a dish lurk. On top of that it would barely keep his turret activated, which wouldn't be the case if he went all the way back. Stellar's alarm bot would be deactivated, but that's not nearly as important as the turret. I think in order for this to work in the 100T round Stellar would've had to be in that position before Sentinels break his turret though, which was definitely still fully under his control. I mentioned this in my second comment, but once the turret gets broken it's too risky to cross the canteen line, Sentinels are just already there.
I agree that Sentinels became frantic looking for space, but I attribute that to them also slightly misplaying the round. I think if they had zekken plant in the corner right up against the back of dice instead of the further back corner while TenZ and pANcada split up Gen and Canteen, then it's a lot more winnable. The plant would be protected from the tower possibility, and even if Stellar happened to be there and sprays the box, the canteen pusher could just turn around instantly to kill him. Splitting up is risky but the reward is much greater; in a 3v5 you take that almost every time. If they kill Stellar untraded or go 1 for 1, the remaining player(s) can play gen and have an even better crossfire on main. Even when they get smoked off they can spam the spike. pANcada was forced to run onto site at the end because of the plant location. Sentinels were just too indecisive to take the space while they had the chance. All of this is to say that this being the better play is why I thought Stellar played the way he did.
But you're right, the Boaster angle would've bought enough time for Stellar's team.
I do still think Bang playing with Stellar pre-round would've been better, which you can see Fnatic doing in their round even though it is just a pistol.
2. I never meant to make a big deal out of the half armor vs Stellar's mistake thing. I fully understand that you're telling a story - I mean the title is why I clicked on the video - and I think you do a good job of it. The fact that you can win a round, but not win decisively enough to preserve the eco to close out a game is a very interesting concept. You're the RUclipsr, I'm just a commenter. This second point was something I added on to my original comment because I felt it contributed to my overall theme of multivariate analysis. I agree with you on the half armor vs. eco point and was moreso using it to play devil's advocate for Stellar's scenario. A lot of people probably would've lost interest in the video if you dragged it on long enough to explain every little detail or didn't use the hook you did. But I find the analysis extremely interesting and simply wanted to further the discussion, which is why I elaborated on it so heavily in response to @Just some dude.
It's so fun to think about all the different factors that influence decisions and how all those decisions stack up to lead to the outcome of any given game. This series especially is probably my favorite of the regular season so far. Every game was as close as it could get with each team constantly adapting to the other. I appreciate you engaging in the conversation! :)
@@vheissu5361 Thanks for the interesting discussion points!
An argument can be made that the mistake wasn't just stellar getting caught but more of the decision to buy bull dogs rather than stack econ the next round.
I think bulldog buys are fine, they are strong enough to deal with vandals and a 10-11 scoreline is pretty close. They are fine on game going OT if they lose this round since they only need 1 round while sen needs 3 to win.
you can't save after winning a round? your loss bonus reset after winning a round so saving is practically pointless
Saving like you mentioned is something you do when you have leeway in terms of rounds. Sentinels were on 10 and i would say that you should force in those rounds. You say that they lost anyways but honestly, that was a round they definitely would have won had stellar stayed alive
No, the term 'a Win is a Win' is only used at the end match.
In war, you dont say a win is a win after winning on the first hour. You say it after you won the war.
Stellar was not trying to chase free kills in a guaranteed round, he was trying to sandwich the 2 people in canteen with the rest of him teammates who were making a lot of noise running up B main he just messed up his timing and did it maybe 1 or 2 seconds earlier than he should've. Even with the timing that he took he has good odds because with 4 players running up B main not a lot of people would be looking canteen but pancada was and with all that still if he wide swung literally 0.5 seconds faster he would've gotten two players from behind because their attention was on B main but just pancada had insane awareness and looked literally at the right split second. Good analysis i love this video
TLDW: Video starts at 14:15.
thank you
Goat
Your analysis is good but I can't help but feel bothered about how you framed everything here.
The impression your video gave me at the start was that you were going to argue that it would've been better for 100T to have lost that crucial round. The phrase "a win is a win," the phrase you were trying to argue against, means that losing would be worse. I understand that some wins are indeed better than others but the way you went on felt like you were going to argue that losing is better when it isn't
yeah true lol i thought that also from the title it was more what happened during the winning round not that they won which made them lose
chamber says and I quote: "None of this a win is a win nonsense, we should win big and look good doing it"
3:00 yes sentinels did adopt the half armor strat, but in this round they just actually don't even have the money to full buy armor unless they would have worse weapons or less util because no one on the team has more than 500 credits during the round and full armor is +600 from half...
Good point to bring up though, this might be the only round where you should full buy armor if any just because of the weapon damage thresholds maybe??? I don't know the exact numbers, but even still SEN couldn't get full armor in this round any ways so it doesn't matter :)
It's not the best example (many more in the rest of the game) but they clearly forced more than they needed in the eco round beforehand (they didn't full eco) because they were comfortable playing this round without full armor.
A win is a win but not on 10-11 when you have 2 more rounds to play and you need every ounce of money and every ult point
Oh so this is what Chamber meant about "None of this 'a win is a win' nonsense. We should win big and look good doing it.".
Won the battle, not the war
I mean it’s always gonna be a battle it’s not gonna be a conclusion to this, everyone gonna just get better.
@@shocktown1024 what?
@@_wayward_494 tf u mean what
@@shocktown1024 I mean what is your goofy ass on about lmfao. They clearly lost the war, which was that match. Idk what you are waffling about
amazing video. so true. if kj just stayed for a few more seconds. the series outcome might be drastically different
My ears hurt every time he says Sacy the wrong way
very informative, not gonna stop me for hunting eco frags tho
i would love a video about NRG VS LEV
It may sound dumb to some people but because sentinels knew stellar was there, him retreating even further was the right decision. His presence alone is enough of a distraction. Also, if he stayed where he was, he could be hit from two different angles. This would prevent sentinels from entirely focusing on the 4 stack. Sentinels can't push too far anyways because they will end up leaving site essentially for free and they can't go all out against the main rush in case stellar hits their backs. Since stellar dies, you saw tenz just pushing back towards site immediately which ended up with a kill. Its small details that can change a match and that one decision snowballed into a loss. That's essentially what this video is about at the end
Fantastic video! Can’t wait to see more in the future hopefully!
I love watching valorant game analysis and do enjoy the content of this video. However, I think you talk very slowly and I had to watch in 1.5x speed. Just a personal note if you're debating your talking speed
Noted thanks!
Stellar free agent speedrun
W breakdown
i dont agree, that trap play was used cos they had the low buy
1:27 I'm pretty sure it's pronounced "Saahcee"
who's say-see i know sauce-e but who are you talking about
Isn't sacy's name pronounsed säsy, or the same way yo pronounce sassy
Learned alot from this bro
name of the music that sounds form 0:49 to 7:00
Tiny mistakes in pro-play can make you lose rounds... scary to think about
NRG are the first to use the half shield buy not fnatic, they just emplemented it to thier match against loud
sejsi instead of sacy is crazy
Hey I saw your comment that you’re looking for a video editor. How I contact you?
sacy - sa (a like nah) see
Super nitpick here but it's just "Hundred Thieves" not "a hundred Theives"
Cool but who tf Saysee??
These videos are soo good 😭
This goes hard
What's the music name in the first 5 minutes of the vid? pls
Its such a small issue to find but my ocd hated how you said "a hundred thieves" and not just "hundred thieves" but great video otherwise! No hate :)
Also a win is still a win then. Because it was still better than losing. All youre saying is in that cruicial round, 100 thieves should have won with more ppl alive.
SAUCY NOT SAYCY XD
naw sen was just on some brazilian shi to clutch up
a 100 thieves
moral lesson of the video: stellar threw the game
saesy
Sahcy*
stellar: waaa raa doo???
1404
Bro thinks he’s Sovereign Guides 💀
YES I LOVE CAZY
I was really hoping that there was somehow a situation where it would’ve been more optimal for 100t to lose the round than winning it
maybe all 5 saving the guns, lol
@@walkingtree2486 still wouldn't be more optimal since the guns cost less than the 3k you get for winning and you also are just down a round
But lil bro had they not been on eco they wouldn’t have stacked dish like that
They would still be on eco but have better buys that round if the game went the same way. Anyway the point is to just show the consequences of lost econ even from a round they won (with a real example that occurred from the game).
saisi
If I remember the strat about half sheild NRG had it first, if I am wrong correct me.
"a win is a win but not a win and i refuse to elaborate further so you have to watch my entire boring video of surface level analysis." this is barely analysis and almost like you're just verbally replaying the round so fucking slowly
I came to say the same thing.
My one gripe with this is the way you say 'a 100 thieves' every time is there something I'm missing or nah? apart from that great video :) earned a sub
"A" 100thieves is pissing me off idkw
The title does not imply that this is a full game analysis. I wanted to see that round thing you trying to sell as a big mistake, but then I ended up watching a 20 min analysis for something i already watched live. Maybe for the future get to the point faster(How a won round still lost bla bla bla) and then continue with the forced analysis that no1 came to watch buddy. You would probably get more viewers, cause I know I'm not the only one irritated by this. And no, I didnt just forward the video cause again, its a 20 min video, its like searching fora needle in a haystack to look for the specifics given in the title. kinda worse than child abuse what u did there...
Yea, stopped when you didn’t pronounce Sacy right.
Clickbait title and Nonsensical argument of showing losing that round was better then winning which in that case wasn't
i cant listen to a dude critically try to call out players 100x radiant compared to a dude that probably isnt even radiant
I'm 2 months late but that's not the best way to look at it. Coaches aren't always pro players or radiants. You can be extremely good at reading the game without being able to shoot your gun, which translates to good coaching
Bro says Asuna different every time
any girls pleeeeease talk to me
Long story short
During end rounds 100T won a round but didn’t had good economy which forced them to play with a weaker buy for the remaining rounds
Awesome video! Please pronounce "Sacy" correctly though :(
so losing that round is better? lol.
No you dont understand, they should have won that round with more guns saved, so rather than having 1 guy left alive they prefer having all 5 or at least 3
bro made a 20 min video just to explain how winning on a force buy works💀
So this vid technically blames stellar of 100T's lose lol
Bro said saysi
@16:00 yw
17:57 Hindsight Harry over here. They would not be stacked up in dish like that on a normal buy round.
learn how to say sacy
Saucy?
saycee
I never expected to watch a whole 20 min video just to be told "lol this guy overextended so 100t lost"