But he literally played the "2 player map veto" as the first player ONLY and not as 2 players. Which makes no sense whatsoever, that makes his fake analysis look better which it is not.
@dziugazz the theoretical veto was demonstrating what he would provide examples for later like 100T with breeze. It was just showing how one game plan can be advantageous when paired against another plan which doesn't capture the risk of anti-anti-stratting well (like you've noticed), but I thought it was a good demo to clarify what TMV is suggesting.
@@dziugazz thats what a simulated scenario is called. he shows the idea, not doing it. i can show lineups and whether it actually works you have to find out :)
This reminds me of EG fracture in 2023 where in Tokyo, no one banned it and EG went undefeated on it in Tokyo, then in champs teams finally realized “hey let’s ban fracture against EG” and EG had to put more time into other maps, the one time fracture was let through against DRX, well the rest is history
@@WataDraggon Nah, Termi didn't troll by letting fracture through. I would say DRX were the only team capable of beating EG on fracture back then. Just to point out, when the map veto ended, even TMV was excited for fracture. People seem to forget but DRX running the Neon comp is almost undefeated at internationals, with the Breach version being undefeated whilst the Kayo version has 1 loss. They would always dominate too. But yes, Termi did troll hard by not playing the Neon comp. 2023 EG fracture vs DRX Neon comp could have been the greatest showdown on a map of all time but nah, we instead got a game in which, whilst not as one sided as the score suggests, it was still one sided. Like Drx actually played pretty well so it really leaves you to yiur inagination of how well they could have played since they were significantly on the Neon comp. What a missed opportunity for us.
I love that the map veto can be considered some sort of mind games and a really interesting part of a match, but it turns out that its always just pick your best and ban your worst.
@@itsCynos thats cause they arent that good at that map and the other teams are. If the other team had a map that is clearly a better map than geng, they banned it. They let thru sunset vs drx in pacific stage 2 upper finals and lost so they banned it against them in the grand final. The other times they banned sunset was against teams like TH, who were one of if not the best sunset team in the world, and SEN, who were quite descent at that map with the mid roundings, and also PRX, who had one of the most hardest comps to play against in sunset with the sage wall
The worst part is when a pro player makes a wrong point, it becomes hard to explain why they’re wrong as somebody who was never a pro player. People care more about credibility than the point itself
This just reminds me of EG Fracture.... Watching Team Liquid play that against them felt like watching my favorite dog (redgar) get slaughtered (int heavily)
For the LOUD vs SEN match FNS was saying that instead of banning Split they banned Lotus because they suck at Lotus and SEN was GOOD at Lotus... so technically Loud did a smart thing but SEN was WAYYYY too good at the start of the season tbh
I think it was strangely poetic for FNC to get out in champs after a team FINALLY banning Haven. They had a 100% win rate on that map. Thinking back, G2 might be one of the worst offenders of ignoring the other teams good/bad maps and just focusing on theirs 🤔 I’m sure there are others, that team is just fresh in my mind.
yk what's funny? I became a coach for a team. The team became very good at Haven (they only played bind before me), and they had such a terrible map veto holy hell 😂
map vetos are like chess, the best moves are not just the ones that are clearly very good for you, but also the moves that deny sn advantage from your opponent, that is how grandmasters think
eSports still in early days, I think it'll take a bit till we see people that know the game and players well enough to analyse and provide advantageous information from it the coaches they've got are pretty good though, it's just there's a lot less wiggle room in valorant to get ahead unlike normal sports
its so weird coming from games where the best players/teams do that out of motion without really thinking about it like, yea this person is really good at this specific character/map/archetype we should ban them or prepare strats specifically to win against that player/team and only them, and then watching val coaches bash their head against a wall and letting +75%wr maps through just because they dont want to play their worst map, which arguably would give them a better chance at winning i remember watching val esports when SEN dominated split and i was thinking "oh these coaches are making strats to counter SEN split gameplan thats cool" but then watching everyone get annihilated, i was always dumbfounded like, just ban the map
The funny part is you don’t even have to be good at a map to pick it, you just have to know you’re noticeably better than them at it. Like literally a great strat is just picking their worst map if you’re half decent at it even if it’s like your 4th best map (if they don’t ban it first).
remember when acend floated fracture at champs 2021 and no one picked it; everyone just kept banning it since they thought acend had a good fracture since they were floating it. turns out, in the final, they had a shocking fracture and goat owned.
Remember when TH actually picked their permaban Ascent and looked quite decent on it? That just shows that Pro Teams can play any map at a high enough level and should always ban a map that the enemy is really good at
Idk man. One team's "mid" map can be a level above a team's perma ban. Of course there's variables to include like anti strat and rough off day with the players. Most teams in valorant don't want to focus all their attention on all maps with different comps, strats, etc because it's difficult.
This problem sounds like something that League coaches face every time during pick/bans, which makes me wonder if it’s the time crunch placed on coaches to make snap decisions while picking maps that might lead to second ban errors or first ban misplays. Maybe they should allocate more time to map bans and let the coaches have the breathing room needed to properly strat?
When even Twitch chat understands map pool/veto concepts as explained by TMV, suddenly Thinking Man’s Valorant is also concurrently Teaching Man’s Valorant!!!
You’ve already done a video on it, but it’s really helpful. But this style of map veto is what cost 100t champs. Teams started banning bind and 100t started losing those 50/50 BO3s. Going by that logic Sen shouldn’t be allowed to play on spilt next season. Also get ready for a very different map pool with lotus gone, and pearl sunset and split all being in. Going to be a LOT of corridor clearing and fighting.
the thing w fnatic tho was that they were rly good at all 6 maps (except maybe haven they were a bit mid) so they could essentially just pick the other teams perma ban if they banned lotus and still be 1-0 up
Well, you could have still tested that theory instead of doing the same thing that every other team tried and failed at. Also, I don't know if Fnatic would have actually picked your perma ban then, or would have just gone straight down their own list instead
@@thesilvanalyst6880 but they didn't have much of a list as they were rly good on all 6 maps better than 90% of teams on lotus loud was hte only team who beat them
I htink the problem is deeper, people don't want to play your worst map because "you don't feel well on that map", but contrary when you play against the opponend, you 'don't feel" that enemy feel well you picked this map
I think a perfect example of this working was GenG vs Sentinels during their rematch in lower bracket this VCT. Sentinels' usual permaban was Icebox up until that game, but they decided to instead ban Ascent, which was one of GenG's best maps. Instead of them just sticking to their permaban, they decided to build a strategy against GenG, and ended up 2-0'ing them. This came to Sentinels' favor because GenG picked and went into Icebox underestimating Sentinels.
If they know sunset is your worst map, maybe they dont feel comfortable but they might know they are better, so they could just pick into sunset as their first pick and throw you off completely
I can explain the decision of Leviatan to play ascent over abyss, and it's a championship decision this game was on group stage and they could lose this game and still go on to the next fase, and leviatan haven't shown until that time there abyss, so they risk ascent in order to hide there abyss of there opponents
And then Fnatic finally started losing on Lotus towards the end of this season, but it wasn't even because teams were realizing Fnatic was really good on Lotus and banning it, it was because Fnatic just started playing worse than usual on Lotus, its so stupid
What makes me sad is that PRX did what you said, they banned bind, they picked breeze to be a coin flip, and they should have won that match. So that means alecks is a good coach, but the players are just underperforming
They have been straying away from normal team comps more and more, and they have been performing worse and worse. I genuinely think that with all of the talent and explosiveness they have in that team they could play meta comps and still be W gaming. Sure the comp probably works in scrims, but t2 does NOT know how to deal with that aggression. Shit until this year no one in t1 knew either.
@@skelly_snipez1291 I don't think this is because the team comps. Their comps is basically made to maximize their mechanical gift. They are all mechanically gifted. PRX is a very creative team, and in their good form they will be very strong. And they know what the downside is from their comps. Alecks knows. What happened this year is only because underperforming player and outside the game issue
Couldn't you make a simple engine that would do this for you? Like, just based on pure VLR stats, how do you maximize your chance? There's what, at most 7! combinations ~=5000? You could just go through all of them, then add some simple rules. Does this exist already? Better markets would love this lol, if you can keep betting after the map bans.
What about exit strategies? Get exits isn't highlighted enough. I know that it it's a small part, but I think it effects the eco. I do think it risks ult orb feeding. But If you know you can't stop spike, why not try to damage enemy eco? This might also give deadlock (and maybe sage) a higher pick rate (unlikey). In the game, I always try to play exits (as kill joy or ratting in smoke). I know I might be wrong about it, but I still think it is important.
This would be really interesting since I watch CS and they do go for exit frags considerably more than in Valorant. But they also save so quickly... a 3v4 is already a save and they might leave one guy to go for exits.
From what I remember it was map1 and fns was talking about either they have to play sen on either split or lotus and they suck on both but they are better on split than lotus. That was his argument.
So let's try rating the maps as 1 to 5 from worst to best so they pick split: SEN(5) vs LOUD(1 or 2) lotus: SEN(3 or 4) vs LOUD(1 or 2) so they chose to play a 5v2 against a possibility of 3v2
does anyone else feel that teams have gotten worse at this over time? i remember back in 2021-ish no one let gambit play breeze for like the entire season
I understand letting your opponent's best through might mean giving away a map but doesn't playing your perma ban also mean giving away a map? The end result is the same. This only works if both teams has the same permaban like VCT champs where 3 out of the 4 teams in top 4 perma bans ascent.
Teams could also just play their perma ban. I don’t know why teams don’t make strats and scrim for their perma ban before going into a bo5. The other team is thinking “they don’t play x map, so we make Strats for every map but X map and our ban. It’s a curveball and they have to adapt on the fly.
@@skelly_snipez1291 becuz it’s time consuming to prepare all 7 maps. So rather than have 7 mediocre maps as their maps pool, teams usually resort to having one permaban to focus on perfecting the 6 other maps left.
@@huh-vc5ke you misunderstand my point. You have a perma until that bo5 you REALLY need to win. Let’s say lower bracket run, lower finals against a very good team. You ban their best map and strat for your perma ban so when they pick it against you, you have the advantage.
@@skelly_snipez1291 This still applies to bo5, it's ok to give up one map if you can be really good on the other 4 maps. Better than having 5 midiocore maps. Afterall, you only need to win 3 out of the 5 maps to win a bo5 and you definitely don't need to win 3-0 in bo5.
and then there's me still questioning why ZETA GC banned Abyss against Xipto, knowing they both have 0% winrate on it. At least try to level with the other team's worst, not like you guys already got your champs spot or anything.
I think you were underestimating LEV, (although im biased because im a LEV fan) although they did float a map that trace was really good at, while banning a map they were good at. i think they made a different mistake. I think that they are very confident with their abyss, and thats why they banned it. They were trying to hide their abyss because they are not using either of the common astra or kayo comps. they did the same thing thoughout americas finals. they hid their abyss until the finals where G2 had no prep against them. I think the mistake they made was they underestimated trace. I dont think they were even going to go to map 3. And even if they did go to map 3, I think they were confident that they were able to beat trace. They were looking forward, trying to elevate their chances at winning abyss in future matches. Whether its the correct choice or not, I do think there was thought behind their ascent pick. in short LEV underestemated Trace, and thought they could hide their abyss strategies (which they were already doing in americas playoffs) and get an easy win over a worse Trace team, and if backfired horribly. I would love to see what you think about this.
JDG tried to play Breeze against DRG because DRG was 0-3 on the map. However, Breeze was their 7th (worst map). They got rolled on Breeze, it wasn’t even close. They lost 2-1. Imagine if they had not overthought the veto and banned their worst map (by far)? Things are not as one sided as they are presented in the video, and you don’t really know the circumstances.
Well that's what he explained if it's your opponents worst map and your worst map as well just don't pick it or ban it and it will eventually get banned by the opposition because even they are not confident enough
In this video, TMV clearly shows that you should Ban the opponents best map, and then pick a map that you're decent at while your opponents aren't good at. That's completely different in this case where JDG decided to first pick their perma ban as you stated "Breeze." They could've clearly picked a different map allowed Breeze to go onto the 2nd round of bans, and win the match 2-0 with a map they are good at.
@@calvinwu4885 my memory was incorrect, thanks for the correction. I had believed that DRG banned Icebox because they sucked on it, and they banned it later. Regardless, still a sign to never play your worst map if it is a guarantee loss. (Guarantee loss against enemy good map vs guarantee loss on your worst map?) DRG could have not banned Lotus as first ban but they didn’t, and ultimately they were rewarded. I don’t think DRG would have banned Breeze given how well they were doing in scrims at the beginning of the year, and after that the picture gets muddy. I may still be wrong, this game was a while ago. I still believe that TMV is overthinking in this video, and that no one knows the circumstances that each team has. Perhaps Leviatan were not liking Abyss (I am not sure, only watch VCT CN), and didn’t want a rough 50/50 game against Trace, which they thought were weaker. Even if they were wrong, TMV should not criticise this harshly. He does have the right to criticise and is correct in this case though.
The theoreticap map veto was demonstrated very well and easy to understand
But he literally played the "2 player map veto" as the first player ONLY and not as 2 players. Which makes no sense whatsoever, that makes his fake analysis look better which it is not.
@dziugazz the theoretical veto was demonstrating what he would provide examples for later like 100T with breeze. It was just showing how one game plan can be advantageous when paired against another plan which doesn't capture the risk of anti-anti-stratting well (like you've noticed), but I thought it was a good demo to clarify what TMV is suggesting.
@@dziugazz thats what a simulated scenario is called. he shows the idea, not doing it. i can show lineups and whether it actually works you have to find out :)
This reminds me of EG fracture in 2023 where in Tokyo, no one banned it and EG went undefeated on it in Tokyo, then in champs teams finally realized “hey let’s ban fracture against EG” and EG had to put more time into other maps, the one time fracture was let through against DRX, well the rest is history
drx let fracture and lotus through idk what they were smoking
@@iwantwins8016lotus is in hindsight though, how would they know their lotus was that good? letting fracture through is mega troll from termi
@@WataDraggon Nah, Termi didn't troll by letting fracture through. I would say DRX were the only team capable of beating EG on fracture back then. Just to point out, when the map veto ended, even TMV was excited for fracture. People seem to forget but DRX running the Neon comp is almost undefeated at internationals, with the Breach version being undefeated whilst the Kayo version has 1 loss. They would always dominate too. But yes, Termi did troll hard by not playing the Neon comp. 2023 EG fracture vs DRX Neon comp could have been the greatest showdown on a map of all time but nah, we instead got a game in which, whilst not as one sided as the score suggests, it was still one sided. Like Drx actually played pretty well so it really leaves you to yiur inagination of how well they could have played since they were significantly on the Neon comp. What a missed opportunity for us.
@@WataDraggon drx is strongest team in fracture before EG. that's why
I love that the map veto can be considered some sort of mind games and a really interesting part of a match, but it turns out that its always just pick your best and ban your worst.
Only if you are a team that doesn’t play all maps. GenG plays all maps and if you look back at their games they don’t ever perma ban one map.
@@skelly_snipez1291 I thought GenG often perma banned Sunset throughout this year though?
@@itsCynos thats cause they arent that good at that map and the other teams are. If the other team had a map that is clearly a better map than geng, they banned it. They let thru sunset vs drx in pacific stage 2 upper finals and lost so they banned it against them in the grand final. The other times they banned sunset was against teams like TH, who were one of if not the best sunset team in the world, and SEN, who were quite descent at that map with the mid roundings, and also PRX, who had one of the most hardest comps to play against in sunset with the sage wall
TMV was Theoretical Map Veto all along
The worst part is when a pro player makes a wrong point, it becomes hard to explain why they’re wrong as somebody who was never a pro player. People care more about credibility than the point itself
This just reminds me of EG Fracture.... Watching Team Liquid play that against them felt like watching my favorite dog (redgar) get slaughtered (int heavily)
very true very wise
how do Piazza, District, Kasbah, Drift and the Range factor into this
arent in the map pool, those are just for tdm
@@podra4724oh really..
For the LOUD vs SEN match FNS was saying that instead of banning Split they banned Lotus because they suck at Lotus and SEN was GOOD at Lotus... so technically Loud did a smart thing but SEN was WAYYYY too good at the start of the season tbh
Was just about to type this
This was the same with paper rex and heretics with sunset, no one banned it
tbf they were both really good at that map
@@AverageMelody I mean when other teams faced them, I don't remember but I think paper rex had like a 9 win streak on sunset
I think it was strangely poetic for FNC to get out in champs after a team FINALLY banning Haven. They had a 100% win rate on that map.
Thinking back, G2 might be one of the worst offenders of ignoring the other teams good/bad maps and just focusing on theirs 🤔 I’m sure there are others, that team is just fresh in my mind.
legit though, the fact that teams just kept playing haven.
felt like at Shanghai when everyone played Sunset against TH
yk what's funny? I became a coach for a team. The team became very good at Haven (they only played bind before me), and they had such a terrible map veto holy hell 😂
It honestly insane how map vetoes can make or break a team’s game.
I hope everyone listens. This video is so important.
map vetos are like chess, the best moves are not just the ones that are clearly very good for you, but also the moves that deny sn advantage from your opponent, that is how grandmasters think
The thing is that "analysts" in this game are just retired pro players, and not a person that knows how to truly analyze
eSports still in early days, I think it'll take a bit till we see people that know the game and players well enough to analyse and provide advantageous information from it the coaches they've got are pretty good though, it's just there's a lot less wiggle room in valorant to get ahead unlike normal sports
Flashbacks to alecks making Preal as a decider map in Champs LA where they had 100% wr the whole series and gambled on bind and lotus
4:26 assuming team 2 using the same strat, then their best chance is to pick sunset no?
its so weird coming from games where the best players/teams do that out of motion without really thinking about it like, yea this person is really good at this specific character/map/archetype we should ban them or prepare strats specifically to win against that player/team and only them, and then watching val coaches bash their head against a wall and letting +75%wr maps through just because they dont want to play their worst map, which arguably would give them a better chance at winning
i remember watching val esports when SEN dominated split and i was thinking "oh these coaches are making strats to counter SEN split gameplan thats cool" but then watching everyone get annihilated, i was always dumbfounded like, just ban the map
The funny part is you don’t even have to be good at a map to pick it, you just have to know you’re noticeably better than them at it. Like literally a great strat is just picking their worst map if you’re half decent at it even if it’s like your 4th best map (if they don’t ban it first).
remember when acend floated fracture at champs 2021 and no one picked it; everyone just kept banning it since they thought acend had a good fracture since they were floating it. turns out, in the final, they had a shocking fracture and goat owned.
But why ban Sunset when you can let Team Heretics show off the map every series?
Prx did ban bind and left breeze for 100t. And they got destroyed on it
I really hope coaches watch this video and start implementing this into next season.
This video made too much sense
Remember when TH actually picked their permaban Ascent and looked quite decent on it? That just shows that Pro Teams can play any map at a high enough level and should always ban a map that the enemy is really good at
Idk man. One team's "mid" map can be a level above a team's perma ban. Of course there's variables to include like anti strat and rough off day with the players. Most teams in valorant don't want to focus all their attention on all maps with different comps, strats, etc because it's difficult.
They looked decent on it at champs. They looked like absolute shit on it at Masters Shanghai
This problem sounds like something that League coaches face every time during pick/bans, which makes me wonder if it’s the time crunch placed on coaches to make snap decisions while picking maps that might lead to second ban errors or first ban misplays.
Maybe they should allocate more time to map bans and let the coaches have the breathing room needed to properly strat?
When even Twitch chat understands map pool/veto concepts as explained by TMV, suddenly Thinking Man’s Valorant is also concurrently Teaching Man’s Valorant!!!
You’ve already done a video on it, but it’s really helpful. But this style of map veto is what cost 100t champs. Teams started banning bind and 100t started losing those 50/50 BO3s. Going by that logic Sen shouldn’t be allowed to play on spilt next season.
Also get ready for a very different map pool with lotus gone, and pearl sunset and split all being in. Going to be a LOT of corridor clearing and fighting.
the thing w fnatic tho was that they were rly good at all 6 maps (except maybe haven they were a bit mid) so they could essentially just pick the other teams perma ban if they banned lotus and still be 1-0 up
Well, you could have still tested that theory instead of doing the same thing that every other team tried and failed at.
Also, I don't know if Fnatic would have actually picked your perma ban then, or would have just gone straight down their own list instead
@@thesilvanalyst6880 but they didn't have much of a list as they were rly good on all 6 maps better than 90% of teams on lotus loud was hte only team who beat them
basically it's more important to make you opponent uncomfortable than to make yourself comfortable because you can control your prep and decisions
I htink the problem is deeper, people don't want to play your worst map because "you don't feel well on that map", but contrary when you play against the opponend, you 'don't feel" that enemy feel well you picked this map
someone should do a game theory model of valorant map vetos and figure out the optimal strategy
I think a perfect example of this working was GenG vs Sentinels during their rematch in lower bracket this VCT. Sentinels' usual permaban was Icebox up until that game, but they decided to instead ban Ascent, which was one of GenG's best maps. Instead of them just sticking to their permaban, they decided to build a strategy against GenG, and ended up 2-0'ing them. This came to Sentinels' favor because GenG picked and went into Icebox underestimating Sentinels.
Perfect highlight of lev vs trace
reminds me of the power move from astralis to team liquid where they actively picked the map tl were having 100% wr on
It's a power move if you win, it is utterly stupid if you lose.
@@thesilvanalyst6880 true. although maybe the surrounding context makes it different because it's a completely different game
100% agree with this
You should have used Crude Geniuses map veto during throw city (the veto's won the tournament)
I like these analyses. This might help predict pickems.
Or make you rage at a team for letting the opponents best map through for the 10th time this season.
@@thesilvanalyst6880 I've raged at choke moments so you right 😂
I feel like lev wanted to hide abyss or something cause they thought they would win anyway
If they know sunset is your worst map, maybe they dont feel comfortable but they might know they are better, so they could just pick into sunset as their first pick and throw you off completely
I can explain the decision of Leviatan to play ascent over abyss, and it's a championship decision this game was on group stage and they could lose this game and still go on to the next fase, and leviatan haven't shown until that time there abyss, so they risk ascent in order to hide there abyss of there opponents
Can't wait for Oiling Man's Map Veto
I came here to get better at valorant, this now has nothing to do with my ranked games, stayed for the oiling 😊
Hats off. That’s very smart
13:00 to be fair, 2023 FNC won all the other maps too
it’s coaching malpractice by T1 val coaches that this video even exists
And then Fnatic finally started losing on Lotus towards the end of this season, but it wasn't even because teams were realizing Fnatic was really good on Lotus and banning it, it was because Fnatic just started playing worse than usual on Lotus, its so stupid
game theory nerds been malding over some of these map vetoes over the past season
wait theres a tumb stiking out at 01.22
What makes me sad is that PRX did what you said, they banned bind, they picked breeze to be a coin flip, and they should have won that match. So that means alecks is a good coach, but the players are just underperforming
They have been straying away from normal team comps more and more, and they have been performing worse and worse. I genuinely think that with all of the talent and explosiveness they have in that team they could play meta comps and still be W gaming. Sure the comp probably works in scrims, but t2 does NOT know how to deal with that aggression. Shit until this year no one in t1 knew either.
@@skelly_snipez1291 I don't think this is because the team comps. Their comps is basically made to maximize their mechanical gift. They are all mechanically gifted. PRX is a very creative team, and in their good form they will be very strong. And they know what the downside is from their comps. Alecks knows. What happened this year is only because underperforming player and outside the game issue
Couldn't you make a simple engine that would do this for you? Like, just based on pure VLR stats, how do you maximize your chance? There's what, at most 7! combinations ~=5000? You could just go through all of them, then add some simple rules. Does this exist already? Better markets would love this lol, if you can keep betting after the map bans.
Clearly not as good at veto as Crude Geniuses
Pros: Its their best map i want to stomp them on it
What about exit strategies? Get exits isn't highlighted enough. I know that it it's a small part, but I think it effects the eco. I do think it risks ult orb feeding. But If you know you can't stop spike, why not try to damage enemy eco? This might also give deadlock (and maybe sage) a higher pick rate (unlikey). In the game, I always try to play exits (as kill joy or ratting in smoke). I know I might be wrong about it, but I still think it is important.
This would be really interesting since I watch CS and they do go for exit frags considerably more than in Valorant. But they also save so quickly... a 3v4 is already a save and they might leave one guy to go for exits.
Uh
From what I remember it was map1 and fns was talking about either they have to play sen on either split or lotus and they suck on both but they are better on split than lotus. That was his argument.
So let's try rating the maps as 1 to 5 from worst to best
so they pick
split: SEN(5) vs LOUD(1 or 2)
lotus: SEN(3 or 4) vs LOUD(1 or 2)
so they chose to play a 5v2 against a possibility of 3v2
does anyone else feel that teams have gotten worse at this over time? i remember back in 2021-ish no one let gambit play breeze for like the entire season
i thought this was common sense and always wondered why teams make such stupid map vetoes
I understand letting your opponent's best through might mean giving away a map but doesn't playing your perma ban also mean giving away a map? The end result is the same. This only works if both teams has the same permaban like VCT champs where 3 out of the 4 teams in top 4 perma bans ascent.
this does not only work if both teams have the same perma ban watch the video
Teams could also just play their perma ban. I don’t know why teams don’t make strats and scrim for their perma ban before going into a bo5. The other team is thinking “they don’t play x map, so we make Strats for every map but X map and our ban. It’s a curveball and they have to adapt on the fly.
@@skelly_snipez1291 becuz it’s time consuming to prepare all 7 maps. So rather than have 7 mediocre maps as their maps pool, teams usually resort to having one permaban to focus on perfecting the 6 other maps left.
@@huh-vc5ke you misunderstand my point. You have a perma until that bo5 you REALLY need to win. Let’s say lower bracket run, lower finals against a very good team. You ban their best map and strat for your perma ban so when they pick it against you, you have the advantage.
@@skelly_snipez1291 This still applies to bo5, it's ok to give up one map if you can be really good on the other 4 maps. Better than having 5 midiocore maps. Afterall, you only need to win 3 out of the 5 maps to win a bo5 and you definitely don't need to win 3-0 in bo5.
TMV has been very map veto pilled the past few days
Before announcement
The LS of Valorant.
Luckily, draft theory gets a lot simpler with 7 options instead of 168 (and counting).
and then there's me still questioning why ZETA GC banned Abyss against Xipto, knowing they both have 0% winrate on it. At least try to level with the other team's worst, not like you guys already got your champs spot or anything.
but edg banned th's permaban and still won kek
Stop traumatising me with showing the ZmjjKK 4k over and over again...the moment when i lost all hope for TH`s win
1 Minute ago is sexual harassment
I think you were underestimating LEV, (although im biased because im a LEV fan) although they did float a map that trace was really good at, while banning a map they were good at. i think they made a different mistake. I think that they are very confident with their abyss, and thats why they banned it. They were trying to hide their abyss because they are not using either of the common astra or kayo comps. they did the same thing thoughout americas finals. they hid their abyss until the finals where G2 had no prep against them. I think the mistake they made was they underestimated trace. I dont think they were even going to go to map 3. And even if they did go to map 3, I think they were confident that they were able to beat trace. They were looking forward, trying to elevate their chances at winning abyss in future matches. Whether its the correct choice or not, I do think there was thought behind their ascent pick. in short LEV underestemated Trace, and thought they could hide their abyss strategies (which they were already doing in americas playoffs) and get an easy win over a worse Trace team, and if backfired horribly. I would love to see what you think about this.
nature is healing, there are no oiling up comments
JDG tried to play Breeze against DRG because DRG was 0-3 on the map. However, Breeze was their 7th (worst map). They got rolled on Breeze, it wasn’t even close. They lost 2-1. Imagine if they had not overthought the veto and banned their worst map (by far)?
Things are not as one sided as they are presented in the video, and you don’t really know the circumstances.
Well that's what he explained if it's your opponents worst map and your worst map as well just don't pick it or ban it and it will eventually get banned by the opposition because even they are not confident enough
In this video, TMV clearly shows that you should Ban the opponents best map, and then pick a map that you're decent at while your opponents aren't good at. That's completely different in this case where JDG decided to first pick their perma ban as you stated "Breeze." They could've clearly picked a different map allowed Breeze to go onto the 2nd round of bans, and win the match 2-0 with a map they are good at.
@@calvinwu4885 my memory was incorrect, thanks for the correction. I had believed that DRG banned Icebox because they sucked on it, and they banned it later.
Regardless, still a sign to never play your worst map if it is a guarantee loss. (Guarantee loss against enemy good map vs guarantee loss on your worst map?) DRG could have not banned Lotus as first ban but they didn’t, and ultimately they were rewarded. I don’t think DRG would have banned Breeze given how well they were doing in scrims at the beginning of the year, and after that the picture gets muddy. I may still be wrong, this game was a while ago.
I still believe that TMV is overthinking in this video, and that no one knows the circumstances that each team has. Perhaps Leviatan were not liking Abyss (I am not sure, only watch VCT CN), and didn’t want a rough 50/50 game against Trace, which they thought were weaker. Even if they were wrong, TMV should not criticise this harshly. He does have the right to criticise and is correct in this case though.
5 views in 1 minute bro fell off 😞
"Map veto is a 2 player game"
*proceeds to play the theoretical map veto as a 1 player game*
OK
what?
me when I don’t understand the presentation
are you mentally challenged?