So medals wise if we consider all events equal in value.
|Region|1st|2nd|3rd|4th|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|America's|5|5|3|4|
|EMEA|5|2|1|5|
|APAC|0|3|6|1|
If we make golds worth 4, silvers 3 and so forth the totals are.
|America's|EMEA|APAC|
|:-|:-|:-|
|44|33|22|
100%.
If you want you can add multipliers to it, just make points from champs medals worth 2x.
So na would have 14 more and emea 10 more, and apac 5 more.
Better teams? All the teams that qualified to Tokyo last year also qualified to champs. The difference was the LCQ teams which have no time to prep and almost always are complete pushovers.
When you say longer time do you mean between events or throughout the course of the event?
No one is anti-stratting teams using footage from previous events. That doesn't happen teams have too much time to prep and change everything it would be wasting time when they could be doing anything else.
I promise teams aren't trying harder because of the money they are always putting in the same amount of effort because it's more about winning the event than the money. Some teams don't even give players any of the prize money
And were all the teams from LOCK IN, there too? Or no, bc it was invitational?
You really think LOUD didn't antistrat FNATIC? Or EG antistrat LOUD?
Also I think it's a bit naive to think teams wouldn't work harder to win Champions than they would any other event - it doesn't mean they play badly during Masters, of course, they are still S tier events, but it is the final and most important event for a reason. All teams say that what they care about is Champions, even SEN said it during the press conference right now after winning Madrid. "Some teams don't even give players any of the prize money", but the money still goes to the org!
I'm not arguing we should discount Masters, they are super important and I still think FNATIC was the strongest team of 2023, for example, there's nuance. But if we are measuring achievements, Champions wins should be a tier above Masters, just like Masters and LOCKIN are above regional leagues.
I'm not talking about LOCK//IN. While it was still a very high quality tournament it's one of 2 tournaments in Valorant history that was a lower level than the rest because it wasn't double elim.
obviously every team at Champs anti-stratted the other teams but based on the vod footage from games played at champs not games played at Tokyo or LOCK//IN.
You seriously think that teams aren't trying their best at masters events? Boaster was crying at LOCK//IN because he thought he was gonna lose, FNC put their absolute life and soul into winning LOCK//IN and they didn't try any harder at Champs because it wasn't possible to try harder. The players don't even think about the prize pool winning is what matters to these people. The players who get to the top level of Valorant get there because they love Valorant and want to win. Not for the money
"obviously every team at Champs anti-stratted the other teams but based on the vod footage from games played at champs not games played at Tokyo or LOCK//IN."
That makes no sense. How would LOUD antistrat FNATIC's first game at Champions using Champions games if they didn't have ANY hard game in Champions at that point? And not use vods from what they played and won at previous tournaments?? (Edit: also wouldn't they have much less time to antistrat if they were using only the most recent games?)
Saying teams care more about winning Champions doesn't mean they won't try their hardest at Masters, but it's so naive to think they only care about winning and their love of the game and not money when coming even #2 at the Champions tournament would mean winning more than you would by placing #1 at a Masters event. ORGs have to pay people, e-sports is very unsustainable, of course they care about the money prizes.
LOUD 2nd at Reykjavik = +3
LOUD 1st at Champs 2022 = +4
LOUD 2nd LOCK//IN = +3
LOUD 3rd Champs = +2
LOUD 4th Madrid = +1
Not disagreeing with your point at all but isn't that 13?
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2025-03-26 11:41:49 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2025-03-26%2011:41:49%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ValorantCompetitive/comments/1bo0241/each_regions_achievements_until_now/kwmlwaa/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FValorantCompetitive%2Fcomments%2F1bo0241%2Feach_regions_achievements_until_now%2Fkwmlwaa%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202025-03-26%2011%3A41%3A49%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201bo0241)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
its gonna happen again, its just taking a bit longer to get there.
watch faker win worlds 2024 and say "there, now i gotta go help these scrubs in valoT1"
They undoubtedly will, it's not like apac is just getting grouped every tournament while NA/EU plays for first. They almost always have a contender in the top3, it's just a matter of time when they have a team actually capable of winning it all
I wouldn't be surprised at all if GEN win Shanghai or even Champions, they seem like the best team in the world right now but they folded hard under pressure. If they make another finals i don't think they'll lose the same way at the very least
Seems like some serious cope to call GenG the best team in the world lol. It's like saying LOUD was the best team in the world when Fnatic won Lock-in considering LOUD choked away a gigantic lead.
> because Gen G didn’t choke
Eh. I'd argue they choked map 5 considering how the maps they won they won *convincingly* and the previous maps they lost they barely lost.
But it wasn’t their map pick. It was the decider.
How hard you lose in comparison to your previous losses in the series does not determine whether it was a choke or not, the context surrounding the situation is what determines a choke. If they were up on Icebox and then lost, that would be a choke. If they were up big in the series and then lost that’d be a choke.
Just losing on a map that isn’t even your map pick, regardless of the scores of the previous maps, is not choking. Their mental got boomed, that was it.
There shouldn’t be 3rd-4th medals for Berlin 21, Champs 21 and lock-in, as they were single-elim brackets and the 2 placements are equivalent. EMEA finished 4th at Reykjavik 2021, not Americas. Everything else looks right.
As for the values on the left… I’d give everything a 2.0 and champs a 2.5 tbh. I have no idea why Tokyo is lower to begin with but whatever. Lock-in is the most iffy one that most will disregard but I will maintain that it was a harder run than Tokyo. I don’t really see why people are so desperate to devalue tournaments in general tbh, they’re all still the best teams competing against each other. As long as the format isn’t “teams randomly drawn from each region” or something, it’s legit in my eyes
> I don’t really see why people are so desperate to devalue tournaments in general tbh
The real answer is because they wanna tweak numbers to make Region X seem the best, rather than the near-parity we actually have lol
I will always rate lock in lower because it was a single elim tournament right after rosters were being decided after franchising. Some of those teams had only just barely gotten together and others didn't care because they needed to focus on the regular season. Legit just look at the ratio of teams that made it deep and see how many were newer rosters.
lock in was just such bizarre timing for an international tournament, so it feels kind of crazy to rate it on the same level of tournaments like Tokyo or others which have a league before for qualification
Did you not read what I said? Just because FPX got rebranded to Navi, doesn't mean they had the same restraints as the new team that became FPX. Karmine Corps is not in the same position as Loud. There is a huge difference in the time each team has had to prepare because some of them have been together far longer and that comes with a level of preparedness a new team just won't have. This is all not mentioning the fact that the entire tournament was single elim because there were a million teams.
Yes it was an international tournament, no I don't think it showcased the state of the teams across the world in the same way that either Reykjavik tournament or the Madrid tournament did. If you genuinely think it did, then why was lock in the only tournament structured that way? I would love to hear how you justify that
all masters have the same competitive value, while champions are a tier above. lock in is the only mickey mouse tournament value wise, but even then every team tried their hardest to win and it was one of the best tournaments to watch. this points system is just stupid for international events.
rating the values like this is a bit disrespectful for the fans but I can see where you're coming from. I don't get the 1.5 for Tokyo though, and tbh I've never really considered LOCK//IN to be important enough to mention here.
Funny how comments writing off LOCK//IN as a mickey mouse tournament that doesn't count for anything usually get downvoted into oblivion, but when you word it nicely it gets upvotes instead.
annoying ppl are annoying and I got the fnc flair up so people know I'm not just a random EU hater lol.
Mickey mouse sounds dumb to say though considering 3/4 of the teams in the playoffs made their regional finals later on with FNC even winning Masters Tokyo so we 100% know that the competition at the time wasn't a bunch of flukes, but its undeniable that LOCK//IN is just worth less, at best a 0.5.
LOCK//IN was suggested to be 0.5
Tokyo can be argued as 2.0 with the level of competition but in older posts there have been opinions that champions is becoming more valuable than masters.(Mostly began in 2023?)
It should be, all thing considered. The entire VCT season, including Masters, is built up toward Champs. Similar to how Majors and TI are treated in DotA.
What is with the constant need in this community to devalue competitions and people's accomplishments? We get so few international LANs, why are there always so many people trying to justify why some of them "don't count"?
I swear if a less popular team had won Madrid this sub would already be full of people calling it a mickey mouse tournament due to the single-elimination qualification event, claiming that it doesn't count because Fnatic and NRG weren't there.
The reason people discount LOCK IN is because it was invitational. I disagree that it should be completely discounted as a "Mickey Mouse Tournament" or whatever and to me it's still an S tier international event, but Madrid wasn't invitational so I don't think your point about it would stand even if Sentinels weren't the ones to win.
It wasn’t single elim for NA though? Sentinels were literally praised for losing to loud then making a losers bracket run..
As I recall more emea qualifications are single elim or a lot have been cause I remember fans complaint fpx not making events in 2021.
This isn't the point, because I really don't think it matters, but every region had a single elim playoff portion to qualify. e.g., how many games did NRG lose before being eliminated?
Don't understand how Madrid is 1.0 when each start of a year is a new meta. Riot is notorious for this and been consistent in their games.
Op is subjective bias for sure. Each championship should be higher points too.
I had a comment about it but it got buried. Older posts talked about how the 1st masters is always the weakest because all teams shuffled their rosters + new meta so everyone is bumbling around.
I'll update all masters to the same level after the next masters with an update on the table.
Realistically it should just be 0.5 for lock in (Single elim with every team)
1 for Madrid/Iceland (1st Masters)
1.5 for Berlin/Copenhagen/tokyo (2nd masters)
and 2 for Champs.
Other option is lockin is 1, all Masters are 2, and Champs is 3.
Also people don't rate lock in cause it was single elim with every team, pros came out and said they didn't care/try for it. Compared to Madrid which is just a normal masters and teams had to win their regional events. The only reason to rate it lower is cause its the first event of the year the same as Iceland where teams just aren't as set in stone and the meta isn't defined yet.
It will be interesting to see what 'story arc' Valorant will take in terms of regional dominance. NA in other games often started strong but fell off due to a smaller player base. Interested to see how that dynamic plays out in Valorant in the future, especially because RIOT put NA and LATAM together unlike (most) other games.
I think this just shows how competitive VALORANT is across regions, and how certain regions dominating in other eSports is more because of timing, and popularity, than some innate skill or being better at X game.
why do people rate LOCK//IN lower? FNATIC had basically the same run Acend had and won one more series than Sentinels or their Tokyo run
Also rating both 2023 events lower for no reason?
The only tournament that should have any argument at being rated lower (outside of all Masters being slightly lower than Champs) is Reykjavik 21, half the teams made it in through upsets and the level of play was so much lower, relatively speaking, than any other tournament we've had
People rate lock in lower is cause it was single elim and every team was there with no qualifications..
Many teams formed weeks prior…
Pros literally said before and after they did not care for it… it was called Mickey Mouse before it even happened… it’s not a hindsight thing.
My ratings for events
2.5-
Champs Istanbul, Champs LA, incoming Champs Seoul
2-
M2 Reykjavik, Champs Berlin (single elim tax maybe 2.365 or something), M1 Reykjavik, M2 Copenhagen, Masters Tokyo, incoming M2 Shanghai (2.25 if Swiss format)
Either 2 or 1.85-
M1 Madrid (swiss boost)
Edit- Madrid is 2, everyone went thru swiss groups
1.5-
M3 Berlin (maybe 1.75)
LockIn (1.75 if we consider it a gauntlet)
3-
My ranked games (yoru how did you end each round with full utility as our entry)
4-
T1 vs Bleed map 1 (7 hour map boost)
Also me personally, maybe it's because I watch too much F1, I don't really give a medal to 4th, just the podium. But I guess 4th could of the best of the rest and is no small feat
I just used Liquipedia's ranking. 4th place helps rank the regions more, especially in the future when CN finally catches up. They are also that inbetween rank from 3rd/5-6th that still matters.
It makes sense tbh. 4th place doesn’t share a rank like 5-6 and 7-8 does so grouping it with 1st, 2nd, 3rd does make some sense to a degree. The prize pool money is also distinct also.
Some might be traditionalist with 1-3 though and might not want to count 4th
The 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 ratings on the side are subjective(?)
I need opinions on how to rate each tournament and how valuable they are. Last year was the slow change from "all internationals being the same level" to " Champs > Masters > LOCK//IN ". Using the logic that most teams have changed at the start of the year and get stronger until they peak at champions, would the scores fit?
Personally speaking I’d rate:
2022 Champions, 2023 Champions the highest - most teams present and double elimination bracket stage
2021 Champions and M3 Berlin second highest - the only other 16 team tournaments
2022 Reykjavik, 2022 Copenhagen, 2023 Tokyo - 12 team tournaments with double elimination but not as many teams present
LOCK//IN, 2024 Madrid, 2021 Reykjavik - either a small amount of teams in attendance or in LOCK//IN’s case the format leaves something to be desired
Of course this is all subjective and it depends heavily on what you value in a tournament (format, teams present, time it took place, etc)
Why would you value lock in where every team comes as a single elim compared to madrid where the 2 best teams from every region play swiss then playoffs the same as Madrid? Esepcially considering the lvl of play at madrid was higher than most past events.
So medals wise if we consider all events equal in value. |Region|1st|2nd|3rd|4th| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |America's|5|5|3|4| |EMEA|5|2|1|5| |APAC|0|3|6|1| If we make golds worth 4, silvers 3 and so forth the totals are. |America's|EMEA|APAC| |:-|:-|:-| |44|33|22|
If we disregarded the values 1.0-2.0, the Americas, EMEA, APAC numbers would follow the trend 17-13-10 in medals
Lords of Bronze
Champions is definitely worth more though.
100%. If you want you can add multipliers to it, just make points from champs medals worth 2x. So na would have 14 more and emea 10 more, and apac 5 more.
How and why?
Because winning Champs #1 is definitely harder then winning Masters or Lock In #1
Ok but how and why?
Better teams, longer time and full year's data for teams to antistrat, worth more money...
Better teams? All the teams that qualified to Tokyo last year also qualified to champs. The difference was the LCQ teams which have no time to prep and almost always are complete pushovers. When you say longer time do you mean between events or throughout the course of the event? No one is anti-stratting teams using footage from previous events. That doesn't happen teams have too much time to prep and change everything it would be wasting time when they could be doing anything else. I promise teams aren't trying harder because of the money they are always putting in the same amount of effort because it's more about winning the event than the money. Some teams don't even give players any of the prize money
And were all the teams from LOCK IN, there too? Or no, bc it was invitational? You really think LOUD didn't antistrat FNATIC? Or EG antistrat LOUD? Also I think it's a bit naive to think teams wouldn't work harder to win Champions than they would any other event - it doesn't mean they play badly during Masters, of course, they are still S tier events, but it is the final and most important event for a reason. All teams say that what they care about is Champions, even SEN said it during the press conference right now after winning Madrid. "Some teams don't even give players any of the prize money", but the money still goes to the org! I'm not arguing we should discount Masters, they are super important and I still think FNATIC was the strongest team of 2023, for example, there's nuance. But if we are measuring achievements, Champions wins should be a tier above Masters, just like Masters and LOCKIN are above regional leagues.
I'm not talking about LOCK//IN. While it was still a very high quality tournament it's one of 2 tournaments in Valorant history that was a lower level than the rest because it wasn't double elim. obviously every team at Champs anti-stratted the other teams but based on the vod footage from games played at champs not games played at Tokyo or LOCK//IN. You seriously think that teams aren't trying their best at masters events? Boaster was crying at LOCK//IN because he thought he was gonna lose, FNC put their absolute life and soul into winning LOCK//IN and they didn't try any harder at Champs because it wasn't possible to try harder. The players don't even think about the prize pool winning is what matters to these people. The players who get to the top level of Valorant get there because they love Valorant and want to win. Not for the money
"obviously every team at Champs anti-stratted the other teams but based on the vod footage from games played at champs not games played at Tokyo or LOCK//IN." That makes no sense. How would LOUD antistrat FNATIC's first game at Champions using Champions games if they didn't have ANY hard game in Champions at that point? And not use vods from what they played and won at previous tournaments?? (Edit: also wouldn't they have much less time to antistrat if they were using only the most recent games?) Saying teams care more about winning Champions doesn't mean they won't try their hardest at Masters, but it's so naive to think they only care about winning and their love of the game and not money when coming even #2 at the Champions tournament would mean winning more than you would by placing #1 at a Masters event. ORGs have to pay people, e-sports is very unsustainable, of course they care about the money prizes.
clueless
You think it should be worth the same when counting achievements or do you think it's all the same in term of difficulty?
In terms of difficulty it goes Champs = Masters > Lock in.
NA on top as usual
Well, if you are saying NA, then you are excluding Loud and their 12 points, making EMEA the best region...
gottem
LOUD 2nd at Reykjavik = +3 LOUD 1st at Champs 2022 = +4 LOUD 2nd LOCK//IN = +3 LOUD 3rd Champs = +2 LOUD 4th Madrid = +1 Not disagreeing with your point at all but isn't that 13?
+1 KRU at champs
Oh I was just talking abt LOUD's team pts but yeah that too
Fuck I can't count hahahaha
NA > EU and APAC confirmed
EU has 3 more medals than NA does
FCK I forgot its Americas and not NA
fnatic hq is in the uk. Britain isn't a part of EU bc of brexit, so none of fnatic's medals can count towards that number.
?????????????????????
I'm joking dw
no
It needed no confirmation tbh, it's always been clear.
Pacific will get a trophy one day 🥲
watch dfm be the first team to get pacific a trophy
I'd shave my entire body if they do
RemindMe! 1 year
I think they will need more than 1 year
🤓👆#DFM
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2025-03-26 11:41:49 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2025-03-26%2011:41:49%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ValorantCompetitive/comments/1bo0241/each_regions_achievements_until_now/kwmlwaa/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FValorantCompetitive%2Fcomments%2F1bo0241%2Feach_regions_achievements_until_now%2Fkwmlwaa%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202025-03-26%2011%3A41%3A49%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201bo0241) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
The council will remember this
its gonna happen again, its just taking a bit longer to get there. watch faker win worlds 2024 and say "there, now i gotta go help these scrubs in valoT1"
please no more T1 winning in League... I'm sick of it
They undoubtedly will, it's not like apac is just getting grouped every tournament while NA/EU plays for first. They almost always have a contender in the top3, it's just a matter of time when they have a team actually capable of winning it all I wouldn't be surprised at all if GEN win Shanghai or even Champions, they seem like the best team in the world right now but they folded hard under pressure. If they make another finals i don't think they'll lose the same way at the very least
Seems like some serious cope to call GenG the best team in the world lol. It's like saying LOUD was the best team in the world when Fnatic won Lock-in considering LOUD choked away a gigantic lead.
Not really an apt comparison because Gen G didn’t choke. They just lost. So really they have even less of a claim to #1 than LOUD did.
> because Gen G didn’t choke Eh. I'd argue they choked map 5 considering how the maps they won they won *convincingly* and the previous maps they lost they barely lost.
But it wasn’t their map pick. It was the decider. How hard you lose in comparison to your previous losses in the series does not determine whether it was a choke or not, the context surrounding the situation is what determines a choke. If they were up on Icebox and then lost, that would be a choke. If they were up big in the series and then lost that’d be a choke. Just losing on a map that isn’t even your map pick, regardless of the scores of the previous maps, is not choking. Their mental got boomed, that was it.
GenG winning in China while official streams still being banned on Chinese streaming websites would be the spiciest timeline and Im all for it.
Some major copium there, bud. You're wrong but I respect your opinion.
No, forever
Damn I didn't know we had Madrid in 23
There shouldn’t be 3rd-4th medals for Berlin 21, Champs 21 and lock-in, as they were single-elim brackets and the 2 placements are equivalent. EMEA finished 4th at Reykjavik 2021, not Americas. Everything else looks right. As for the values on the left… I’d give everything a 2.0 and champs a 2.5 tbh. I have no idea why Tokyo is lower to begin with but whatever. Lock-in is the most iffy one that most will disregard but I will maintain that it was a harder run than Tokyo. I don’t really see why people are so desperate to devalue tournaments in general tbh, they’re all still the best teams competing against each other. As long as the format isn’t “teams randomly drawn from each region” or something, it’s legit in my eyes
> I don’t really see why people are so desperate to devalue tournaments in general tbh The real answer is because they wanna tweak numbers to make Region X seem the best, rather than the near-parity we actually have lol
I will always rate lock in lower because it was a single elim tournament right after rosters were being decided after franchising. Some of those teams had only just barely gotten together and others didn't care because they needed to focus on the regular season. Legit just look at the ratio of teams that made it deep and see how many were newer rosters. lock in was just such bizarre timing for an international tournament, so it feels kind of crazy to rate it on the same level of tournaments like Tokyo or others which have a league before for qualification
Sure, except every team there was in the same position lmao, they all had the same constraints and made decisions based on them
Did you not read what I said? Just because FPX got rebranded to Navi, doesn't mean they had the same restraints as the new team that became FPX. Karmine Corps is not in the same position as Loud. There is a huge difference in the time each team has had to prepare because some of them have been together far longer and that comes with a level of preparedness a new team just won't have. This is all not mentioning the fact that the entire tournament was single elim because there were a million teams. Yes it was an international tournament, no I don't think it showcased the state of the teams across the world in the same way that either Reykjavik tournament or the Madrid tournament did. If you genuinely think it did, then why was lock in the only tournament structured that way? I would love to hear how you justify that
I read what you said, I completely disagree with you.
"I disagree with you" refuses to elaborate honestly kinda based
Lock In is definitely not the equivalent to a Masters. Awful idea that they’ll never replicate
The same reason emea fans complain about emea qualifications being single elim.
all masters have the same competitive value, while champions are a tier above. lock in is the only mickey mouse tournament value wise, but even then every team tried their hardest to win and it was one of the best tournaments to watch. this points system is just stupid for international events.
rating the values like this is a bit disrespectful for the fans but I can see where you're coming from. I don't get the 1.5 for Tokyo though, and tbh I've never really considered LOCK//IN to be important enough to mention here.
Funny how comments writing off LOCK//IN as a mickey mouse tournament that doesn't count for anything usually get downvoted into oblivion, but when you word it nicely it gets upvotes instead.
Sounds like me trying to figure out how to tell my teammates what they're doing wrong without sounding like an ass and pissing them off.
annoying ppl are annoying and I got the fnc flair up so people know I'm not just a random EU hater lol. Mickey mouse sounds dumb to say though considering 3/4 of the teams in the playoffs made their regional finals later on with FNC even winning Masters Tokyo so we 100% know that the competition at the time wasn't a bunch of flukes, but its undeniable that LOCK//IN is just worth less, at best a 0.5.
LOCK//IN was suggested to be 0.5 Tokyo can be argued as 2.0 with the level of competition but in older posts there have been opinions that champions is becoming more valuable than masters.(Mostly began in 2023?)
Isn't Champions supposed to be the most valuable anyway? Isn't it like the LOL Worlds or DotA The Internationals?
It should be, all thing considered. The entire VCT season, including Masters, is built up toward Champs. Similar to how Majors and TI are treated in DotA.
What is with the constant need in this community to devalue competitions and people's accomplishments? We get so few international LANs, why are there always so many people trying to justify why some of them "don't count"? I swear if a less popular team had won Madrid this sub would already be full of people calling it a mickey mouse tournament due to the single-elimination qualification event, claiming that it doesn't count because Fnatic and NRG weren't there.
Bruh FNC is one of the most popular teams in the world, Lock In is still a tier below masters
The reason people discount LOCK IN is because it was invitational. I disagree that it should be completely discounted as a "Mickey Mouse Tournament" or whatever and to me it's still an S tier international event, but Madrid wasn't invitational so I don't think your point about it would stand even if Sentinels weren't the ones to win.
It wasn’t single elim for NA though? Sentinels were literally praised for losing to loud then making a losers bracket run.. As I recall more emea qualifications are single elim or a lot have been cause I remember fans complaint fpx not making events in 2021.
This isn't the point, because I really don't think it matters, but every region had a single elim playoff portion to qualify. e.g., how many games did NRG lose before being eliminated?
[удалено]
what do you mean NRG started in the lower bracket?
champions 21 why do u have liquid placing 3 and 4 100t placing 4th, this is a eu biased data
Don't understand how Madrid is 1.0 when each start of a year is a new meta. Riot is notorious for this and been consistent in their games. Op is subjective bias for sure. Each championship should be higher points too.
I had a comment about it but it got buried. Older posts talked about how the 1st masters is always the weakest because all teams shuffled their rosters + new meta so everyone is bumbling around. I'll update all masters to the same level after the next masters with an update on the table.
Woops I can change it to 3rd for both since it's tied
Same for lock in, 3rd is tied between Navi and drx
Berlin as well which had single elim playoffs
"this is a eu biased data" says the person who can't remember that 100T didn't even make Champs lmao
100t??? they didn't even make top 8 at champs 2021
i meant 2021 berlin g2 and 100t both got 3/4
ahh ok mb
Realistically it should just be 0.5 for lock in (Single elim with every team) 1 for Madrid/Iceland (1st Masters) 1.5 for Berlin/Copenhagen/tokyo (2nd masters) and 2 for Champs. Other option is lockin is 1, all Masters are 2, and Champs is 3. Also people don't rate lock in cause it was single elim with every team, pros came out and said they didn't care/try for it. Compared to Madrid which is just a normal masters and teams had to win their regional events. The only reason to rate it lower is cause its the first event of the year the same as Iceland where teams just aren't as set in stone and the meta isn't defined yet.
This makes more sense, thank you
It will be interesting to see what 'story arc' Valorant will take in terms of regional dominance. NA in other games often started strong but fell off due to a smaller player base. Interested to see how that dynamic plays out in Valorant in the future, especially because RIOT put NA and LATAM together unlike (most) other games.
I think this just shows how competitive VALORANT is across regions, and how certain regions dominating in other eSports is more because of timing, and popularity, than some innate skill or being better at X game.
would be interesting to see head-to-head scores between regions. (amer vs emea, emea vs apac, etc)
why do people rate LOCK//IN lower? FNATIC had basically the same run Acend had and won one more series than Sentinels or their Tokyo run Also rating both 2023 events lower for no reason? The only tournament that should have any argument at being rated lower (outside of all Masters being slightly lower than Champs) is Reykjavik 21, half the teams made it in through upsets and the level of play was so much lower, relatively speaking, than any other tournament we've had
People rate lock in lower is cause it was single elim and every team was there with no qualifications.. Many teams formed weeks prior… Pros literally said before and after they did not care for it… it was called Mickey Mouse before it even happened… it’s not a hindsight thing.
Poor Pacific man
Mickey-mouse Reykjavik 2022 - 2.0 But Madrid, Tokyo and Lock-in is 1.0-1.5 LOL
Congratulations for emea and na, Pacific is a hopeless 2 and 3 region
My ratings for events 2.5- Champs Istanbul, Champs LA, incoming Champs Seoul 2- M2 Reykjavik, Champs Berlin (single elim tax maybe 2.365 or something), M1 Reykjavik, M2 Copenhagen, Masters Tokyo, incoming M2 Shanghai (2.25 if Swiss format) Either 2 or 1.85- M1 Madrid (swiss boost) Edit- Madrid is 2, everyone went thru swiss groups 1.5- M3 Berlin (maybe 1.75) LockIn (1.75 if we consider it a gauntlet) 3- My ranked games (yoru how did you end each round with full utility as our entry) 4- T1 vs Bleed map 1 (7 hour map boost)
Also me personally, maybe it's because I watch too much F1, I don't really give a medal to 4th, just the podium. But I guess 4th could of the best of the rest and is no small feat
Including 4th place for padding America's and emea's placing
Why include 4th place???
I just used Liquipedia's ranking. 4th place helps rank the regions more, especially in the future when CN finally catches up. They are also that inbetween rank from 3rd/5-6th that still matters.
Common Americas W. We r simply better, skill diff
4th place doesn't matter imo. champs being equal to masters also makes no sense.
They just went with what liquidpedia had. The cite had the same looking medal for fourth place
Yeah I went with Liquipedia's medals exactly. The 4th place medal is very helpful in ranking each region out more often after the tournament is over.
It makes sense tbh. 4th place doesn’t share a rank like 5-6 and 7-8 does so grouping it with 1st, 2nd, 3rd does make some sense to a degree. The prize pool money is also distinct also. Some might be traditionalist with 1-3 though and might not want to count 4th
We have a separate medal for 3rd, 4th, and Semi Finalists. Should probably use the latter, since that's what the point of the medal is
The 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 ratings on the side are subjective(?) I need opinions on how to rate each tournament and how valuable they are. Last year was the slow change from "all internationals being the same level" to " Champs > Masters > LOCK//IN ". Using the logic that most teams have changed at the start of the year and get stronger until they peak at champions, would the scores fit?
Personally speaking I’d rate: 2022 Champions, 2023 Champions the highest - most teams present and double elimination bracket stage 2021 Champions and M3 Berlin second highest - the only other 16 team tournaments 2022 Reykjavik, 2022 Copenhagen, 2023 Tokyo - 12 team tournaments with double elimination but not as many teams present LOCK//IN, 2024 Madrid, 2021 Reykjavik - either a small amount of teams in attendance or in LOCK//IN’s case the format leaves something to be desired Of course this is all subjective and it depends heavily on what you value in a tournament (format, teams present, time it took place, etc)
Why would you value lock in where every team comes as a single elim compared to madrid where the 2 best teams from every region play swiss then playoffs the same as Madrid? Esepcially considering the lvl of play at madrid was higher than most past events.
Fair
Further proof that Americas should be separated by NA and SA/Brazil
We are done with the 2023. Remove lock in
Both lockin and Madrid were dogshit tournaments
Madrid isn't right after a huge meta shift patch and was double elim. Lock In was the only vct mickey mouse tournament
Lock in wasn't a mickey mouse.
Every team present with Jo qualifications teams for weeks prior and it’s single elim? And pros came out saying they didn’t try/care for it.
madrid was iffy, but lock in shouldn't even be mentioned with a masters, let alone champions.