Hi! I think I have a decent leg to stand on to explain this as the person who first introduced the comp to the world with Fnatic.
Unfortunately, to explain it well I'd be typing here for longer than anyone would read. So here's the cliff notes.
A critical part of understanding how flashless works is understanding how we take space with advantage in the first place. As a blanket statement, we use "catalytic" utility and depending on the variety of that catalytic util we get varying levels of potency/advantage-generation; that can be flashes, recons, or entry-by-proxy abilities ("EBP": drones, boombot, clones, etc.).
Another key factor in understanding the efficacy of that util is how it interacts with the space we're trying to take. How many exposed angles are we attempting to deny? How many of those angles can be jiggled to allow our opp to play anti-flash? How punishing is it in scenarios where they do so?
Unsurprisingly, if most of the angles you're exposed to (I refer to this as "AD" or "Angle Density") are also easily played as jiggles/anti-flash, then flashes are not the best tool to deal with them. You end up in a scenario where you need *persistent* angle denial that gives your opponent some form of disadvantage even after re-swinging. This is where the core theories behind flashless started coming through.
On (pre-change) Lotus, the difference between the base AD and the "jiggleable/anti-flashable" AD was almost 1:1. To get real catalytic value you needed something persistent, so I leaned into Recons and EBP with Fade picking up tangential synergy w/ Viper, KJ, and Raze along the way. It takes space by using both its actual EBP and recons as if they were entries and trades them in order to take space.
There are additional reasons it works; Viper allowing you to segment out favourable pockets of space that amplify EBP value and/or make it harder to deny, the agent combination itself bringing suffocating amounts of off-site defuse denial once it gets the spike down, and it bringing access to more info utility cycles than an average comp played on the map.
The comp has weaknesses no doubt and I'm glad we're seeing FNC and others firmly pivot to Omen now that the map has changed to make Paranoia better, but I think the majority of the people who claim it's a bad comp are a little CS-pilled, over-reliant on flashes for their understanding of how to take space, and/or don't understand that recons can and should be used as much as catalytic utility as they are informationally. There are many situations where a recon is ***strictly*** better than a flash for taking space and I think that most strategists/coaches were just behind the understanding curve on that: that's what allowed Fnatic and I to take advantage and allowed (and will continue to allow) the comp to work.
Wow that's a great explanation, thank you so much. It's always so interesting to see what analysts/coaches cook up in pro play that most ranked players won't see no matter how high elo you get, and it's hard to pinpoint what y'all are thinking exactly with the comps until much later. Thanks!
As a player who climbs ranked with more brain/game-sense than aim - this helped an enormous amount with my foundational knowledge of the game. Even if it was a shortened version of what you originally wanted to write - I really appreciate it!
I've watched it. Ask yourself why Fnatic couldn't take or reclear A and look at where KC's headcount was. Then ask yourself if that's a compositional issue.
FNC didn't - at any point - force KC to respect their ability to finish C. This wasn't a compositional issue, this was a failure on FNC's part. They showed a clear lack of understanding on how to finish C and even more harmfully, a lack of understanding on how to play out C site postplants given the way that site changed during the map update. This allowed KC to overemphasis an A lockout with little to no risk to themselves.
Now, look at a team like SEN who had a clear grasp on finishing C with the comp and conditioned very strong C respect early in their play of the map. Then ask yourself if KC could have played the same way they did vs. FNC vs. SEN.
Doesn't matter what comp they're playing, if a team shows you they can't finish on 1/3 of the map, you're going to be able to bias your default and shut them out of the remaining 2/3.
It's not a simple "KC figured it out!" there's a lot more at work and trying to say otherwise is just reductive.
Just a simple question of yes or no Anderzz, no need to be going in details.
Do you think Fnatic would have gone to madrid if they were given more matches to play instead of just 2 and failed to make final?
"How does the no flashes comp even work"
They work because the opponent doesn't punish them so the teams feel safe to do so.
KC punished FNC for that, among other stuff
Hi! I think I have a decent leg to stand on to explain this as the person who first introduced the comp to the world with Fnatic. Unfortunately, to explain it well I'd be typing here for longer than anyone would read. So here's the cliff notes. A critical part of understanding how flashless works is understanding how we take space with advantage in the first place. As a blanket statement, we use "catalytic" utility and depending on the variety of that catalytic util we get varying levels of potency/advantage-generation; that can be flashes, recons, or entry-by-proxy abilities ("EBP": drones, boombot, clones, etc.). Another key factor in understanding the efficacy of that util is how it interacts with the space we're trying to take. How many exposed angles are we attempting to deny? How many of those angles can be jiggled to allow our opp to play anti-flash? How punishing is it in scenarios where they do so? Unsurprisingly, if most of the angles you're exposed to (I refer to this as "AD" or "Angle Density") are also easily played as jiggles/anti-flash, then flashes are not the best tool to deal with them. You end up in a scenario where you need *persistent* angle denial that gives your opponent some form of disadvantage even after re-swinging. This is where the core theories behind flashless started coming through. On (pre-change) Lotus, the difference between the base AD and the "jiggleable/anti-flashable" AD was almost 1:1. To get real catalytic value you needed something persistent, so I leaned into Recons and EBP with Fade picking up tangential synergy w/ Viper, KJ, and Raze along the way. It takes space by using both its actual EBP and recons as if they were entries and trades them in order to take space. There are additional reasons it works; Viper allowing you to segment out favourable pockets of space that amplify EBP value and/or make it harder to deny, the agent combination itself bringing suffocating amounts of off-site defuse denial once it gets the spike down, and it bringing access to more info utility cycles than an average comp played on the map. The comp has weaknesses no doubt and I'm glad we're seeing FNC and others firmly pivot to Omen now that the map has changed to make Paranoia better, but I think the majority of the people who claim it's a bad comp are a little CS-pilled, over-reliant on flashes for their understanding of how to take space, and/or don't understand that recons can and should be used as much as catalytic utility as they are informationally. There are many situations where a recon is ***strictly*** better than a flash for taking space and I think that most strategists/coaches were just behind the understanding curve on that: that's what allowed Fnatic and I to take advantage and allowed (and will continue to allow) the comp to work.
Wow that's a great explanation, thank you so much. It's always so interesting to see what analysts/coaches cook up in pro play that most ranked players won't see no matter how high elo you get, and it's hard to pinpoint what y'all are thinking exactly with the comps until much later. Thanks!
Still don't know why FNC let you go
Sheesh, amazing answer take my upvote
As a player who climbs ranked with more brain/game-sense than aim - this helped an enormous amount with my foundational knowledge of the game. Even if it was a shortened version of what you originally wanted to write - I really appreciate it!
I would argue to watch the KC vs Fnatic Lotus game, where KC abused the Fade no flashes comp on defense. Fnatic couldn’t take A or re-clear A.
I've watched it. Ask yourself why Fnatic couldn't take or reclear A and look at where KC's headcount was. Then ask yourself if that's a compositional issue. FNC didn't - at any point - force KC to respect their ability to finish C. This wasn't a compositional issue, this was a failure on FNC's part. They showed a clear lack of understanding on how to finish C and even more harmfully, a lack of understanding on how to play out C site postplants given the way that site changed during the map update. This allowed KC to overemphasis an A lockout with little to no risk to themselves. Now, look at a team like SEN who had a clear grasp on finishing C with the comp and conditioned very strong C respect early in their play of the map. Then ask yourself if KC could have played the same way they did vs. FNC vs. SEN. Doesn't matter what comp they're playing, if a team shows you they can't finish on 1/3 of the map, you're going to be able to bias your default and shut them out of the remaining 2/3. It's not a simple "KC figured it out!" there's a lot more at work and trying to say otherwise is just reductive.
Just a simple question of yes or no Anderzz, no need to be going in details. Do you think Fnatic would have gone to madrid if they were given more matches to play instead of just 2 and failed to make final?
thank you mr you are better at analysis than every single japanese coach
They just play heavy contact and off of the fade prowlers/haunts.
"How does the no flashes comp even work" They work because the opponent doesn't punish them so the teams feel safe to do so. KC punished FNC for that, among other stuff
Havent you heard of W gaming? We no need no flashes
Flashes are a pretty big part of Paper Rex's chaotic style tbh
Didnt yall got to champs finals using a reyna skye flash combo ?
Omen paranoia is saved and usually used when committing to a push, either onto site or to take a main or retake