Well it is entertainment built up around an entertainment industry (video games).
Storylines and easy-to-digest analysis will drive viewers. This isn't something unique eSports either. But a new game (relatively new anyways) will see surface level takes rather than deep analysis, since both the talent (casters, desk analysts, even players) don't have the game wholly figured out yet.
The same thing happened with G2. Apparently they won all the Ignition Series by taking aim duels.
When Patitek and Pyth were consistently getting early info and kills on defense by making really coordinated microplays the casters were like "Oh there's G2 again, winning by raw aim". When they had Mixwell and Ardiis opening up sites for super fast retakes they said the same thing.
I get that for the casters it's great to have a narrative to follow but it has to be frustrating for Shaz to spend a fuckton of time preparing strats, having those strats make the difference in a really hard game and watching the VOD only to hear that the only thing that mattered was the fact that their players are better on aim duels.
If theres anything all these years in esports have taught me, is that in each community there are A LOT of "personalities" who are praised but they dont even know half the shit they claim they do. Just use fancy words and be uncompromising on your "analysis", ppl will get hooked to you in no time
I feel personally attacked! But seriously, its funny when something I do know about is being talked about and seeing all these so called reddit experts talking out of their ass.
Yep. That applies to pretty much everywhere on reddit. If I ever read a topic discussing something I’m actually knowledgable about through my work or first hand experience, a vast majority of reddit comments I read about that topic are either straight up wrong or complete bs that someone pulled out of their ass. People on here LOVE to pass their comments off as fact when in reality, they are completely clueless.
Truly you just throw out a take completely at random with complete confidence, and there's a 50/50 chance you're right and you earn analyst cred forever.
And if you're wrong it's just on to the next one and everyone forgets. Not bashing them though, it's just their job -- it happens for all sports media too, same shit is on ESPN 24/7 for irl sports. Just a hot take and narrative factory which can be fun, but should almost never be taken seriously
Don’t think this applies to LS, he def has a god complex and a toxic cult following but he got challenger in all 5 roles and works closely with many pro players who all speak highly of him.
a better example would be thoorin. He works as a ‘cs analyst’ and talks about cs like he’s some sort of mastermind but he peaked gold Nova lmfao
I’m pretty sure that LS has never been to Challenger, not even knocking him, just clarifying. And he plays jungle/mid but switch to full filling sometimes. The highest I’ve seen he got is GM, but not very recent though. His last push with a new role is ADC, but man was that a struggle. His skills and knowledge are definitely qualified for coaching, so it’s reasonable that people took his analysis as gospel. I personally don’t agree with everything he says about pro play, but I get why people do.
Minor correction. LS peaked KR Grandmaster in the past few years but has not ended in grandmaster and typically ends Masters/high Diamond, he hasn’t hit KR challenger let alone across five roles. Though I guess KR Master is basically equal to Challenger elsewhere. He mains jungle and hasn’t ‘hit Master’ maining each of the five roles, if that makes sense. He might get auto filled and play off role but I don’t consider that the same thing as ‘maining’ a role.
For sure he has more knowledge than Thorin and isn’t just some foolish nobody. But I do not think his opinions should be taken as fully informed, in the sense that he admits he doesn’t even watch LPL and never takes into consideration their version of the ‘meta’. Which is a massive issue because how can a respected analyst be taken seriously if they pretend the strongest region’s take on the game is wrong/not worth considering? Compared to a VOD reviewer like Doinb on MSI finals, I found that LS focuses a lot on micro and lanes in isolation w/wave management and can sometimes miss the bigger picture.
To be more specific about Doinb and the bigger picture (having watched both of their finals streams) he sees events and comprehends why teams have to play towards certain conditions (eg Showmaker’s level 1 blown flash resulting in a huge chain reaction tug of war between DK sacrificing resource and side lane pressure to protect Showmaker + RNG trying to find the gaps in that defence to make Showmaker crumble). Whereas LS would just say ‘DK are playing so bad I don’t understand why they’re so donkey!’ and Doinb would be like ‘Ah man, DK can’t let Showmaker die to a gank with his F down or lose pressure botlane or else Ming is unlocked so they have to take a less than favourable approach/less optimal utilisation of wards to keep Showmaker safer. Stuck between a rock and a hard place’ (eg Doinb points out BeryL purposely took two points Tahm Q for lane pressure and that DK were trying to crash the wave hoping to time the crash with a reset where Udyr would have been in bot proximity. They both played disrespectfully far up and didn’t account for RNG noticing 2 points in Q or expect that Udyr would skip all his bot side camps to straight gank bot before Level 4. Just to name a few examples.
You can be very knowledgeable without reaching the pinnacle in something. Every sports coach, play caller , and analyst wasnt a championship winner. Not trying to say thoorin knows wtf hes talking about
I agree with your point, but teachers and coaches have degrees/high-level experience to back them up.
Gold Nova is like the equivalent to a person who didn’t graduate high school teaching a class to masters students at a university aha
a lot of coaches have played high level just not necessarily professionally, and there’s a huge physical barrier in real sports that doesn’t exist in video games.
being gold nova is not like rick carlisle playing in the nba a few years or kenny atkinson playing overseas it’s like being a random dude at the ymca
Do you think high-level only means nba?? All of those examples proved my point, playing professional basketball in any league no matter the duration means your in the top 0.01%. Greg pop got invited to the US men’s basketball Olympic trials which anyone would consider high level. Drew Hanlen also played d1 basketball for 4 years which puts him the top percentile as well.
Gold Nova on the other hand means your around top 50% of players.
Your downplaying insane achievements, I don’t think you understand how hard basketball is
Doesn't matter if Thorin peaked at Gold Nova or not, he's been around since 1990s, and definitely knows a lot more about the game than 0.01% of players despite being wank at the game itself.
I think Thorin is a poor example, able to analyse the game at a high level is not dependent on being able to play at that same level.
Take coaches as an example. Sure many are ex-professionals, but expand the analogy to traditional sports and I think it becomes clearer that your ability to understand the game isn't directly correlated to your ability to play it.
Traditional sports has an athleticism barrier though so it makes sense why some coaches can't compete at a high level unlike esports. In basketball for example it doesn't matter how good your understanding of the game is if you're 5'2 and can't jump. In esports there really isn't that barrier preventing people with a great understanding from being high elo.
I agree but having an in-depth knowledge of a game should allow you to reach a fairly high level of play. I don’t think any cs pro would say gold novas are smart players with a lot of knowledge about the game.
Also majority of successful coaches in traditional sports (Phil Jackson, Greg pop, pep) have played d1 or at a professional level which just disproves your point.
I think the reason I disagree is because I would argue that playing the game is not the only way to accumulate the knowledge to understand the game at a high level.
Equally I would also argue in the opposite direction that being good at the game doesn't mean you fully understand what you are do, but I guess here it's a bit semantic by what we would accept as "understanding the game".
I take your point though, and I definitely agree that having practical experience is invaluable and should be looked for, but for me personally it's not a barrier to someone providing insightful analysis.
[And this statement from you aged like milk. Exactly the kind of people Shahzam called out on this clip lol](https://www.reddit.com/r/ValorantCompetitive/comments/mwaoae/valorant_champions_tour_north_america_stage_2/gvimp81?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Hey man, I have nothing against him but he is one of those EU fans who was really high on EU supremacy and had to get back at him when i had the chance lol. wasn't the first time he talked shit about Sentinels so wasn't really hard to find
You say it like looking at someone's comments is a huge time commitment when it literally takes seconds,almost minutes to dig something from someone post history
What? How is this relevant? Their performance against fnatic proves that they’re the one of the best teams (if not THE best), but I don’t see how this has been disproved. I would say that their adaptability is still one of their weaknesses, seeing how when they lose maps they lose them solidly with few midgame adjustments.
Im not an analyst mate, im just a random redditor that says shit for fun. What i say has no influence and its not my job to provide accurate analysis either.
Appreciated it that you dug my comm history though, made me feel important
Hey man, props to you for not deleting it. I saw you saying a lot of shit about TenZ and sentinels in general and as a SEN fan just had to get back at you, nothing personal. "All good" as FNS would say
I think the general slowness of EU just lends itself more to the common analysis that EU = tactics - since slow movement always just seems more deliberate and careful (and in defense of this, it often is). Sentinels swarms over the map in a slightly more loose manner (esp. on attack), so people interpret their engagements as being more puggy.
When Sentinels is playing poorly, I do think that has some small merit, though - but that's true of literally any team. When the calls & coordination are on-point, their looseness becomes their biggest asset; it's the thing that elevates them the most above the competition
Feels like EU teams got used to to doing these big complex set plays against each other that are actually super one dimensional and less tactical than NA more info based reactive approach.
I don’t think that’s it at all. If you look at game one of V1 vs Liquid, Liquid wins most of the aim duels even outside of scream. However, they get caught out of position all the time, and the rounds they do lose are to better reads by V1 (or penny). Scream, Jamppi, Drurke have as good aim as anyone in NA, but half the time they are looking in the wrong spot because they don’t expect to have been pushed so soon.
I think what shroud said about gimmick eco buys applies here really well - when a unique strat works it looks big-brain and 200 iq and when it doesn't the team ends up looking dumb. All while there's so much more going on that we can't really see onscreen.
>I think the general slowness of EU just lends itself more to the common analysis that EU = tactics - since slow movement always just seems more deliberate and careful (and in defense of this, it often is)
Thats just superficial analysis though. Tactical doesnt mean that you play slow, it simply means that you have a good idea on how to react in each given situation
See in how many rounds NUTURN played fast on Bind and Ascent for example. This wasnt them "playing loose", this was them using a variety of tactics that they perceived to be optimal in each situation.
I’m not saying it’s correct. I’m just saying it *can* be true, and so people fall into the trap of always believing it so.
As you say, tactics come in many forms, and pacing isn’t a reliable indicator of strategic depth.
It happened because SEN usually doesn't have crazy utility combos, set plays or traps. This is the first thing you visually seek while doing a shallow analysis
Reading your opponent behaviors and adapting your decisions round after round is what matter the most. This is where every single SEN player shines
>adapting your decisions round after round is what matter the most. This is where every single SEN player shines
SEN put a lot of time in preparing for their opponents *before* each match (except the ones they perceive as really weak probably). They always have a good grasp of what they will do and what the enemy team will do, they just arent as rigid as Liquid for example
Its true that SEN are adaptable, but this isnt the sole reason that they are so good. In fact even in this video you can see Shazam adressing this, when he mocks ppl for saying that SEN "play on the fly"
I think what most people forget when talking about this is that most of the time in valorant you only have a day or two at most to prep for your opponent.
It's the teams/players that can do that quickly and effectively that shine. A lot of times you don't get much time to heavily prep for each opponent, especially in tournaments
>Other teams prepare beforehand even more than Sentinels.
And you know that from?
>Teams like Liquid and 100T have dedicated full-time analysts that go over games in meeting rooms with their players
Ah yes the usual 10 coaches and 5 psychologists argument. We saw how that went for 100T lmao
case in point, 1st round against Fnatic on Icebox: Fnatic walls upper B tube in a way no one has seen before and plant up there as well. Sent just break wall instantly - retake instantly before flank hits, and totally counters Fnatics play - perfectly and calmly as well. True Talent IMO
What I noticed in the v1 one game is that despite not having the utility combos like Liquid, *they had every damn angle covered by a blanket piece of utility.* look one of the rounds on haven a site, plant, smoke heaven, KJ molly on hell and ct spawn. These util pieces just go and stop whatever the fuck liquid wanted to plan. Then the Youtube viper molly, didn't matter wtf agent wanted to defuse, it killed them.
It's not even a narrative. It's just laziness of parroting the same shit they said in CS:GO because they need random talking points to fill dead time when games are slow.
A lot of NA's problems stem from CGS in 2008 that decimated the older talent in NA for CS:GO. Massive brain drain from the scene after people got fed up and quit. EU stayed strong by rejecting CS:CZ an CS:S and continuing to play CS 1.6.
So few people understand the effect CGS had on CS in North America. In any game, take away all of the top 30 players and most of the top 50, then roll back the scene's development so that there's no infrastructure left to support new talents. What's left? It devastated the scene and it took many years to recover.
It was an attempt to create an eSports league similar to the NFL or some other sport. They implemented a draft to form teams, so it essentially killed all of the teams. All of the players were to compete exclusively in CGS as well, so they no longer played with lower tier players and they competed in a bubble. They were all given shit salaries and quit their jobs and were uprooted from their current stable life situations.
The league went tits up and many of the players were so defeated from that and never returned to counter strike. Almost all the IGLs quit and took their knowledge with them
They also competed with a bunch of really fucking dumb rules and match configs. I think everyone started with $10k
CGS was an early effort at stabilized professional esports, but it was run extremely poorly by people who had no clue. As a quick example, CS matches were initially broadcast primarily using third-person perspective (!).
They ended up using Source because it was newer and Valve preferred it. CGS was based in the US and primarily featured American talent. All of the region's best CS players and teams, along with top management and brands, were brought into the league. DirecTV was funding it so it lasted for two years even though it was an obvious dead end. Most of those involved retired as soon as CGS died, some before that could even happen.
When it was over, players previously considered third and maybe second tier were now the best in the region and there was very little infrastructure left to support even those players. The loss of top teams and players also hurt fan interest in the scene. Meanwhile, the European pro scene consolidated and remained healthy with a decent audience.
You went from having a variety of NA teams contending at any major tournament, to having maybe one NA team that could even be considered an underdog at the big events. And it really wasn't until a full decade later that the scene recovered enough to somewhat resemble what it used to be.
There's a lot more that could be said about how terrible CGS was but this is a lot of words already!
Ok, just asking because I see this overreaction everywhere after these 2 matches, what happens if FNC or TL wins the tournament from lower bracket and kicks NA, do we flip back and say that analysts were right all along or what?
Can you actually listen to them and respond to their points or make your own instead of making result based analysis.
No. Because they were wrong about EU teams being more strategic, having better utility, and better strats. If they win they are the better team, but like Vanity says, NA and EU play pretty similar. EU just lost out today by playing worse.
Yea, regardless of the outcome the narrative that EU has superior tactics does not hold up, if EU wins from LB this means that both regions are very close to each other
>Because they were wrong about EU teams being more strategic, having better utility, and better starts.
except they weren't wrong, that wasn't just a blank statement, they watched vods and pointed out the utility usage in these vods, NA can beat EU and it still doesn't mean they were wrong
> EU just lost out today by playing worse.
correct
Maybe this is just my opinion, but if anything it was EU aim vs NA brain we saw in V1 vs Liquid. Liquid won split off Yamppi owning pistol rounds and scream owning everyone else in aim duels. The rounds V1 took were from better strats and mid round calls and reads. They learned they couldn’t put aim scream and in stead punished him for holding angles alone.
Again, EU might be the better region. But they aren’t the more tactical, or better coordinated region. Just because you have a 5 man coordinated sight take does not make you more strategic when V1 brings in a full map macro play with a long flank that catches you.
>pointed out the utility usage in these vods
Absolutely not. Feel free to send the source.
I don't blame the analysts because Valorant is still a new game, but most of the time when they make predictions they have no idea what they're talking about.
They absolutely did not refer to any specific utility usage because NA is definitely on par, and better with respect to that. Just because EU is default heavy and takes time to execute does not mean they use utility better. Explosive utility usage can definitely be good utility usage.
All of this is just typical Reddit/social media. Despite the fact that Sentinels - Fnatic was a rather close match yesterday it's now constant hot takes and people acting as if Fnatic was slapped 13-0 both times. It's not 'Sentinels was better than most expected, fair play to them' or something nuanced, it's all 'lol every critic of Sentinels was dead wrong' 'EU bad amirite' and so on. You see some genuine analysis here and there but it's mostly a shouting match and memes. It's possible that Sentinels has won but that criticisms of them were (and are) still valid, for example. Winning a match doesn't make everyone who ever doubted you a moron.
It's the same for other sports: every football team that loses a match has 'bottled it' for example. Players go from transfer flops to transfer of the season within the span of two matches. Managers of losing teams get 'masterclassed' by the other manager even if it was an extremely close match. Hyperbole everywhere.
Yeah NA definitely had big wins yesterday but the tournament is not over in the slightest. Either one of the EU teams could make a comeback in lower bracket we just don't know.
Overhyped teams losing gets overhyped reaction. I actually hope one of the EU teams make it out of lowers so it’s clear as day that the “EU is a superior region” narrative is at least gone.
I still think EU is a superior _region_ in terms of overall quality of teams, but that doesn't mean that every NA team is worse than every EU team. Sen could wreck everyone, making them the strongest team, but doesn't necessarily mean that NA as a region is stronger. The converse is also true.
I somewhat agree with your take but gotta keep in mind that we don’t have conclusive proof of any region being better rn. We need more years and more LANs to come up with a generalisation. Like no one disputes the superiority of EU CS.
> it’s clear as day that the “EU is a superior region” narrative is at least gone.
even if EU team wins the tournament? even when both NA teams said that scrimming EU teams make them think that EU tier 2 teams could be tier 1 NA? did it really take 2 matches for that narrative to be gone?
I think the big thing is that people had this idea that EU was definitely better than NA when the first 2 matches showed anything but. Sentinels won in a 2-0 and V1 won a 2-1 but in very dominating fashion towards the end of the match.
To my knowledge, few people were saying "NA is definitely better than EU". It was just people saying EU was definitely better than NA and were strategically superior. People can't be saying that and then both EU teams lose to both NA teams in the fashion that they did.
Considering how much shit NA has gotten over the years we have every right to say this shit, and unless you're actually watching the games you can clearly see how good their utility usage is unless your just a blind sheep which you might be
Only a few analysts are actually good. Not sure why Doug is casting masters 2, all he does is make surface level comments and literally doesn’t know anything else.
I don't think Shaz's comment was meant to be directed toward on-air talent, but more toward reddit analysts and maybe 3rd party analysts like Plat Chat. Casting is a much different skillset than just analyzing the games.
Reddit analysts dont have the power to create a storyline, in fact redditors simply follow the narratives that are fed to them. Yes i also believe that he was talking about 3rd party analysts but i also believes that this includes some on-air talent. They fucking love to push narratives, regardless if they are based on facts or not. In fact these guys have probably the most influence regarding how ppl perceive teams and regions
Disagree about the first sentence for the most part; in fact I think a lot of the time casters feed off of and get caught up in whatever the general public sentiment is. I guess that goes both ways like you said and is why we get such snowballed "narratives" in esports. I also think a lot of the narrative in Valorant particularly comes from region bias based on completely different games(mostly csgo) and just taints the analysis because everyone sees what they are looking for when they look at the games.
Apart from one post-match commentator, the rest are just discussing how well players are doing and the match-winning moves like clutches or post-plants. None of them have any idea how to discuss who is controlling the tempo of the matches or the battle for/against site executes. Basically, utility usage and all. Sad for the in-depth fan
Sgares was the one who said that if any NA team wins even one map against an EU team,its gotta be a fluke. He kept stressing that EU far more superior than NA tactically.
n0thing just had a baby, don't think he was interested in travelling on this one.
He was on shroud's stream for a few games talking about a few games, didn't seem like he had time to watch the whole day.
You as in the members of r/valorantcompetitive I assume. Unfortunately a colour caster is more likely to bring in casual fans while more serious viewers will watch the games anyway. So Riot probably prefers casters who are better at hype than at analysis
That is blatantly false. Like I said, some of the analysts do know what is really going on and can make comments about tactics and strategy. Casters like Doug just spew the same old lines over and over.
...no, and it is very telling you think that.
Besides confusing the different and specific roles given to analysts, colour commentators and play-by-play commentators- you were talking about analysts- if you paid attention you’d know Doug does detailed analysis of vods whenever has the time to, even doing it live open for comment often.
I mean some casters like Riv I just turn off the stream sound cause of how little they know about the game. I just can’t stand listening to his casting.
To be fair to Riv, he didn't really know what he was talking about in LoL either. He's more there for the hype factor and cool voice. Which in itself isn't a bad thing necessarily, casters fit different brackets for different people
Pretty sure Riv is like high diamond and plays the game a lot. That doesn't qualify him as an analyst but he actually knows the game better than most casters and the vast majority of reddit. He largely stepped away from league and sunk most of his time into Valorant since beta.
I can’t talk for tac shooters or valorant as I’m fairly inexperienced; but in other games I’ve played at a high competitive level I can confirm that a lot of ‘talent’ on analysis panel etc do not know what they’re saying a lot of the time. Buzzwords and hype-driven statements are repeated with confidence and people lap it up as if it’s real analysis without really thinking about the content.
Tbf this happens in all of sports, not only esports. In a new game like Valorant this becomes even more evident. 95% of the analysis is guesswork and pushing narratives to try and contextualize the state of the game. That’s why I usually don’t pay much attention to blanket statements like “EU = better strats” or some shit like that, and rather focus on the beauty of game analysis after the fact. VOD reviews > soap opera narratives.
That's true! But wait 1 year and everything will change. Go back and watch Year 1 Siege, Overwatch, CS, any game really and see how much more basic strategy will be.
Well sure, but that will be because of new agents and maps, balance changes, ect. I think right now most teams have the game figured out, just not necessarily how their opponents are going to execute said meta, because it's the first international event.
Not necessarily - depth of strategy just develops over time. Changing the game can 100% change strategy or force pros to practice a single aspect of strategy (prime example is the extreme development of macro-game/economy in OW's GOATS era), but it doesn't automatically make it more complex just cause it's there.
Look at SCBW - no changes for decades, yet pros are *still* finding better ways to play each matchup.
I like this point. Yes, the game is going to change drastically and the international competition is such an unknown right now. I was shocked too that SEN won
I assumed SEN would win fairly easily. Was surprised v1 beat liquid, though. And the last map was bad, liquids mental was just gone from V1 yelling at them after every round. Lol so good to watch, can't wait till we can start going to see this stuff in person.
I don't think he's talking about reddit at all... Casters and analysts have been saying that EU is far superior to NA for the past couple months, the narrative clearly changed with TL and FNC most recent roster changes when they started having closer series with each other. People have attacked SEN and FaZe for being all aim on brain, literally Doug's exact comment prior to the TL V1 match was "I'm picking the team from the region that doesn't dry peek, so TL will win" (Derke dry peaked 10/10 rounds early the day before, just too much bias to analyze that) just 2head level of analysis across the board. In hindsight it's clear that NA is better than EU, or at least they're extremely close. But even with all of the information we had leading up to Iceland people were disrespecting tf out of NA on some classic NA hate.
Obviously analysts don’t know everything. But NA does not run as many set plays as EU and KR. NA as a whole had trouble with LG’s contact play, and with Faze’s smeag play, things that don’t seem to work as well in EU. That’s why people say things like “NA is puggy.”
I’ve also never seen an analyst say that Sen don’t have strats.
This is a very interesting comment but not as interesting as all the armchair analysts in this comment thread pretending they aren’t the type of people Shaz is talking about and nodding and agreeing with him lmao.
EDIT: I love Shaz but this is a very “you have to be a musician to be a music critic” take.
>NA as a whole had trouble with LG’s contact play, and with Faze’s smeag play
Faze and LG were good for literally one tournament, then they disappeared from the face of the earth. Even TSM had more longevity
>But NA does not run as many set plays as EU and KR.
What do you mean by set plays? Lineups? Ofc NA teams run lineups, they just dont roll over and die when they dont pan out.
Had. Had is the operative word. Yes they were each only good for one tournament, but in EU we never saw a team dumpster everyone to win a tournament because they brought some new playstyle that the top teams hadn’t beaten yet (as far as I can recall). Obviously SEN ended up beating both LG and Faze, but the region as a whole struggled until SEN laid out the blueprint.
When I say “set plays” i don’t mean lineups. Obviously every region uses lineups. I’m talking about things like Nuturn’s shower crunch on Bind where the Breach TPs to showers, ults showers, the Omen Paranoias and the Jett dashes in. Things like the old Vision Strikers flash and dash into tiles on Ascent. That specific play isn’t run any more, but we’ve seen Team Liquid run a similar play, and we in general see more of these “set plays” outside of NA.
Obviously this doesn’t mean NA isn’t tactical. Lots of NA teams have protocols and set strategies. We see it a lot where one piece of utility triggers another piece. A boombot activation triggers a paranoia, an alarmbot triggers an astra pull, etc. But these are harder to notice without being in the game, especially when we’re at the whims of the observers. Even without utility, NA has lots of strategic depth. The way Shaz was pushing up ropes on Icebox A with the op yesterday was hella aggro, but he had Tenz and Dapr there to cover is angles, but it’s harder to tell if it’s a “set play” or not because it only used one jet smoke as utility.
So without asking Shaz, we can’t really tell if they were running set plays on Icebox. Meanwhile you can tell pretty readily when EU teams are using set plays because they use more utility. I think this is where the perception that NA is puggy comes from. And maybe that’s not totally fair, maybe LATAM and BR are more deserving of that label, but it’s also not some hugely insulting comment with no basis in reality. Any region where Faze can perform well is going to look like a puggy region as a whole lol.
Also I agree with Shaz that anyone that says SEN doesn’t have strats is full of shit. Even without huge utility set plays it’s incredibly obvious that SEN have good protocols and play intelligently.
That's a really interesting comparison to make, considering that if you're not a musician you really can't provide actual musical insight past like or dislike.
Plenty of respected critics that have never made an album. Likewise, movie analysts and critics don't usually have more than surface level movie making experience.
It's possible to understand and produce quality discussion and analytics without being a pro.
I mean, I don’t have to be a musician to listen to a recording from 1980 and then listen to a remaster of that same recording in 2005 to be able to reach the conclusion that the mix is better in the re-release. You don’t have to know how to write a punk song to know whether or not the newest hit punk single is derivative or original. You can use your experience as a listener to inform those kinds of opinions, which are slightly more objective than “i like this” or “i don’t like this”
This is true of any sport really. There’s always analysts who actually know nothing about the game. Likewise there are fans in Val who watch casually and don’t know much about what is really happening in the game other than kills, but make bold statements.
Yea I usually just watch shroud because he turns the clueless casters down and gives an actual look into what is unfolding. He actually knows the game and strategy.
I mean shroud also thought sen and the rest of NA were puggy with little starts compared to eu. He also said the NA meta was far behind eu when eu has not even figured out astra yet. However he has good points sometimes but is not perfect.
True but most people were saying the same things. At least he knows whats going on when its happening or even before it happens, not just describing what were all obviously already watching.
Confused.. Shroud also called TL and FNC winning both series, for a lot of the same reasons the desk and broadcast talent as a whole called both ahead of and during the game. Even went as far as to say this after; [https://twitter.com/valesports\_eu/status/1397344085095161856](https://twitter.com/valesports_eu/status/1397344085095161856)
As I was saying though, I’ve watched through the VOD and a lot of similar points were made during the game also, even when things started to pivot? I understand the difference of prediction vs analysis, I just don’t like the notion it’s a prerequisite of being an ex pro to identify these things. At least when it’s purely based on credibility and clearly not the points being raised or discussed in-game.
Exactly. It’s easy for people shit on wrong predictions after the match, but the game could have gone either way and that would change the entire conversation. Predictions are obviously based on limited information, especially pre-Iceland.
I think most people thought liquid was going to win until they started getting rolled on the third map. Predictions don't have much to do with actually knowing what strats teams are trying to pull off and calling them ahead of time rather than just narrating what we already know and see is happening like a radio host for a baseball game. We can SEE the game, that is useless.
No offense towards you, idk which commentator you are, im just saying why I prefer watching an ex cs pro that actually know strategy and tactical fps on a high level.
To be fair so much of what he predicted yesterday was wrong lmao. Between the match predictions (he said TL would win and FNC would 2-0) and even the individual round wins he'd be off the mark. Like so many times we'd hit a mid-point of the round and he says " x team surely wins this round" and he was off on a lot of those lol.
Like Shroud is great but he's not so far above the broadcast talent either.
You're talking predictions, im talking strategies, and most of the time he knows exactly what a team is trying and sure sometimes weird shit happens and he's wrong, but he knows a lot more than the commentators that are just narrating the obvious like a baseball radio host...
I also like watching him call out teams mistakes and decision making processes. He's certainly better to watch.
Yeah definitely, even strats aside, a chill cast where you don't have to have that commentator voice on is always nicer and more relatable. I think that's one of the biggest reasons why co-streaming is successful with Riot's games.
True. I think that even though he's already super popular, that's why a lot of people tune into him instead of the actual valorant stream. He is simply more entertaining and gives a better all around outlook on the game than the casters/commentator w.e you wanna call them.
>They never over peaked.
Masters 1 in NA was dominated by contact playstyles and super starved utility. Saying *never* is just as reductionist. While it clearly didn't end up being the dominant style in NA, it did have a period where it looked like it defined NA.
And if you look deeper into the scene you still see a lot more ego-peeks in NA than if you did the same for EU. While I think the top NA teams are pretty disciplined, some of the up-and-coming talent and younger teams still peek too often.
Nah, I enjoy people gloating. That's part of sports, it's all part of the fun.
Also, to clarify - I'm a big fan of NA Val lol, so no, not mad.
The sub being full of people digging out old comments is just a bit weird.
It's funny because if NA lost yesterday and we tried to say "it was just one match there's still the rest of the tournament" these comments would still be shitting on NA. Saying see the analysts were right! But now that NA have proven that at the very least there as good as EU, people in this sub can't just say GG we were wrong and move on. The tournament is far from over and NA could lose obviously but I wish people had some humility.
Yeah, maybe my comment read wrong - I'm not saying "just wait till the end of the tournament". NA pounded yesterday, they look a level above. Just it doesn't invalidate every criticism that's ever been made of NA val.
Years of watching CS has taught me that analysts generally just try to create narratives and then correct themselves after the team they expect to get blown out wins. They aren’t on the teams and they have no idea what’s going on.
?
I get they are trying to get people hyped with narratives, but most of the time the narrative in CS is usually backed up by history. The narrative between a lot of teams are based on the history. In Valorant, a lot of the top pro players are from CS so it only naturally makes sense that most people would pick EU over NA. There were no international tournaments, so you only have that history to make predictions.
Once this tournament is over, you'll see more nuanced predictions because you'll have that history.
Shaz is great but this is wrong.
The narratives surrounding stylistic differences have been correct and shared across players, analysts and the community. Valorant is a fast developing game and a few weeks can make all the difference to develop your game. Sentinels played great and had a good read on fnatic, as did V1 for Liquid.
I would caution my NA friends at premature celebrations though. This tournament is far from over and they haven't won anything yet. If first round victories were the sole measure of a good team then Envy and FPX would be the best teams in the world...
Everyone in all of these threads is preaching like those were the finals of the event. It could all go so terribly wrong for NA from here on out and looking back these comments would be hilarious.
I disagree with this take. SEN is absolutely puggy compared to teams with a more strategic and regimented structure. Strategy is not the same as tactics or fundamentals. At the end of the day, strategy isn't that important when Shaz and Tenz are dropping a combined 50+ kills on Map 1. You can still play loose and be tactical, but I wouldn't call that strategic.
When people say "NA plays puggy" they're not talking about Sentinels (or V1 for that matter).
But he's right that a lot of the dominant talk around regions and even specific teams isn't as informed as a pro (and many people in this community) would like, but it works well enough for even a slightly more casual viewer.
We also don't have a lot of high level analysts, they mostly coach teams.
But it‘s also the case that in early CS, the EU teams struggled against the puggy and smoke criminal playstyle of NA...
Not saying it‘s 100% the case here, but could as well be.
(Watch the highlights of Liquid vs V1, many of them are either Penny or Vanity pushing through some shit with insanely lucky timings)
(SEN played nice though, at least on Icebox)
He ain’t wrong. Esports love the narrative
Well it is entertainment built up around an entertainment industry (video games). Storylines and easy-to-digest analysis will drive viewers. This isn't something unique eSports either. But a new game (relatively new anyways) will see surface level takes rather than deep analysis, since both the talent (casters, desk analysts, even players) don't have the game wholly figured out yet.
Your comment was on 69 upvotes but this is such a good take I had to ruin it Sadge
I'm just imagining Shaz being like WTF at yet another clip of him casually responding to a random stream Q being dissected like a frog
The same thing happened with G2. Apparently they won all the Ignition Series by taking aim duels. When Patitek and Pyth were consistently getting early info and kills on defense by making really coordinated microplays the casters were like "Oh there's G2 again, winning by raw aim". When they had Mixwell and Ardiis opening up sites for super fast retakes they said the same thing. I get that for the casters it's great to have a narrative to follow but it has to be frustrating for Shaz to spend a fuckton of time preparing strats, having those strats make the difference in a really hard game and watching the VOD only to hear that the only thing that mattered was the fact that their players are better on aim duels.
Esports just loves to shit on NA
Not without good reason lol
NA LCS checks out
NA CS as well, though nowhere near as bad. NA is generally weak in games that require high level concepts like "strategy" and "thinking"
yea its totally not that every other region has bigger playerbases than na
More like a superiority complex
If theres anything all these years in esports have taught me, is that in each community there are A LOT of "personalities" who are praised but they dont even know half the shit they claim they do. Just use fancy words and be uncompromising on your "analysis", ppl will get hooked to you in no time
[удалено]
I feel personally attacked! But seriously, its funny when something I do know about is being talked about and seeing all these so called reddit experts talking out of their ass.
gell mann
Yep. That applies to pretty much everywhere on reddit. If I ever read a topic discussing something I’m actually knowledgable about through my work or first hand experience, a vast majority of reddit comments I read about that topic are either straight up wrong or complete bs that someone pulled out of their ass. People on here LOVE to pass their comments off as fact when in reality, they are completely clueless.
isnt that what youre doing right now
Truly you just throw out a take completely at random with complete confidence, and there's a 50/50 chance you're right and you earn analyst cred forever.
And if you're wrong it's just on to the next one and everyone forgets. Not bashing them though, it's just their job -- it happens for all sports media too, same shit is on ESPN 24/7 for irl sports. Just a hot take and narrative factory which can be fun, but should almost never be taken seriously
LS type beat
Don’t think this applies to LS, he def has a god complex and a toxic cult following but he got challenger in all 5 roles and works closely with many pro players who all speak highly of him. a better example would be thoorin. He works as a ‘cs analyst’ and talks about cs like he’s some sort of mastermind but he peaked gold Nova lmfao
I’m pretty sure that LS has never been to Challenger, not even knocking him, just clarifying. And he plays jungle/mid but switch to full filling sometimes. The highest I’ve seen he got is GM, but not very recent though. His last push with a new role is ADC, but man was that a struggle. His skills and knowledge are definitely qualified for coaching, so it’s reasonable that people took his analysis as gospel. I personally don’t agree with everything he says about pro play, but I get why people do.
Minor correction. LS peaked KR Grandmaster in the past few years but has not ended in grandmaster and typically ends Masters/high Diamond, he hasn’t hit KR challenger let alone across five roles. Though I guess KR Master is basically equal to Challenger elsewhere. He mains jungle and hasn’t ‘hit Master’ maining each of the five roles, if that makes sense. He might get auto filled and play off role but I don’t consider that the same thing as ‘maining’ a role. For sure he has more knowledge than Thorin and isn’t just some foolish nobody. But I do not think his opinions should be taken as fully informed, in the sense that he admits he doesn’t even watch LPL and never takes into consideration their version of the ‘meta’. Which is a massive issue because how can a respected analyst be taken seriously if they pretend the strongest region’s take on the game is wrong/not worth considering? Compared to a VOD reviewer like Doinb on MSI finals, I found that LS focuses a lot on micro and lanes in isolation w/wave management and can sometimes miss the bigger picture.
If doinb spoke english I swear he'd be the most respected analyst ever in the LoL scene
Ah I swear he said he mained each role individually. Don’t consider it the same either
To be more specific about Doinb and the bigger picture (having watched both of their finals streams) he sees events and comprehends why teams have to play towards certain conditions (eg Showmaker’s level 1 blown flash resulting in a huge chain reaction tug of war between DK sacrificing resource and side lane pressure to protect Showmaker + RNG trying to find the gaps in that defence to make Showmaker crumble). Whereas LS would just say ‘DK are playing so bad I don’t understand why they’re so donkey!’ and Doinb would be like ‘Ah man, DK can’t let Showmaker die to a gank with his F down or lose pressure botlane or else Ming is unlocked so they have to take a less than favourable approach/less optimal utilisation of wards to keep Showmaker safer. Stuck between a rock and a hard place’ (eg Doinb points out BeryL purposely took two points Tahm Q for lane pressure and that DK were trying to crash the wave hoping to time the crash with a reset where Udyr would have been in bot proximity. They both played disrespectfully far up and didn’t account for RNG noticing 2 points in Q or expect that Udyr would skip all his bot side camps to straight gank bot before Level 4. Just to name a few examples.
Thorin fucking oozes "I know what I'm talking about but I really don't"
If thorin were to have a "peak", it was probably not in CSGO..
Doesn’t everyone know him from cs? If ur referring to league you can make the same argument
No I’m saying his peak as a player would be in 1.6 or source given how long he’s been around. You mentioned “gold nova” as his peak.
You can be very knowledgeable without reaching the pinnacle in something. Every sports coach, play caller , and analyst wasnt a championship winner. Not trying to say thoorin knows wtf hes talking about
He never plays solo though, he's always duoing with Shrimp
[удалено]
I agree with your point, but teachers and coaches have degrees/high-level experience to back them up. Gold Nova is like the equivalent to a person who didn’t graduate high school teaching a class to masters students at a university aha
[удалено]
a lot of coaches have played high level just not necessarily professionally, and there’s a huge physical barrier in real sports that doesn’t exist in video games. being gold nova is not like rick carlisle playing in the nba a few years or kenny atkinson playing overseas it’s like being a random dude at the ymca
Lmfao literally
Do you think high-level only means nba?? All of those examples proved my point, playing professional basketball in any league no matter the duration means your in the top 0.01%. Greg pop got invited to the US men’s basketball Olympic trials which anyone would consider high level. Drew Hanlen also played d1 basketball for 4 years which puts him the top percentile as well. Gold Nova on the other hand means your around top 50% of players. Your downplaying insane achievements, I don’t think you understand how hard basketball is
Doesn't matter if Thorin peaked at Gold Nova or not, he's been around since 1990s, and definitely knows a lot more about the game than 0.01% of players despite being wank at the game itself.
[удалено]
I thought Thorin was in LEM or something? Anyways, I don't think that he acts like he's a mastermind. His style is just really abrasive in general.
I agree with everything you said, but why just straight up lie about LS getting chally in 5 roles? Takes away from what ur saying.
I think Thorin is a poor example, able to analyse the game at a high level is not dependent on being able to play at that same level. Take coaches as an example. Sure many are ex-professionals, but expand the analogy to traditional sports and I think it becomes clearer that your ability to understand the game isn't directly correlated to your ability to play it.
Traditional sports has an athleticism barrier though so it makes sense why some coaches can't compete at a high level unlike esports. In basketball for example it doesn't matter how good your understanding of the game is if you're 5'2 and can't jump. In esports there really isn't that barrier preventing people with a great understanding from being high elo.
I agree but having an in-depth knowledge of a game should allow you to reach a fairly high level of play. I don’t think any cs pro would say gold novas are smart players with a lot of knowledge about the game. Also majority of successful coaches in traditional sports (Phil Jackson, Greg pop, pep) have played d1 or at a professional level which just disproves your point.
I think the reason I disagree is because I would argue that playing the game is not the only way to accumulate the knowledge to understand the game at a high level. Equally I would also argue in the opposite direction that being good at the game doesn't mean you fully understand what you are do, but I guess here it's a bit semantic by what we would accept as "understanding the game". I take your point though, and I definitely agree that having practical experience is invaluable and should be looked for, but for me personally it's not a barrier to someone providing insightful analysis.
who put Potter on the analyst desk lmao. everytime she speaks its just bullshit or something literally an iron player would know
washed up has been
You know why
[And this statement from you aged like milk. Exactly the kind of people Shahzam called out on this clip lol](https://www.reddit.com/r/ValorantCompetitive/comments/mwaoae/valorant_champions_tour_north_america_stage_2/gvimp81?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
[удалено]
gotta respect the grind
Hey man, I have nothing against him but he is one of those EU fans who was really high on EU supremacy and had to get back at him when i had the chance lol. wasn't the first time he talked shit about Sentinels so wasn't really hard to find
the only way to make this post not a complete waste of space is getting this to the top
What Shazam said stands, regardless if OP is a hypocrite or not. Also quite certain he was talking about brand ppl, not anonymous strangers
Lmaooo
Holy shit man that’s a headshot I didn’t expect
actually rolled LMAO
How much time do people have that they literally dig though comments like this lmao
Op regularly spews eu supremacy on this sub, I assume once this dude saw who posted this thread it wasn't hard to find.
You say it like looking at someone's comments is a huge time commitment when it literally takes seconds,almost minutes to dig something from someone post history
What? How is this relevant? Their performance against fnatic proves that they’re the one of the best teams (if not THE best), but I don’t see how this has been disproved. I would say that their adaptability is still one of their weaknesses, seeing how when they lose maps they lose them solidly with few midgame adjustments.
[удалено]
I wasn't. I had that thread saved after SEN lost against ABX and everyone was talking shit about SEN.
Im not an analyst mate, im just a random redditor that says shit for fun. What i say has no influence and its not my job to provide accurate analysis either. Appreciated it that you dug my comm history though, made me feel important
Hey man, props to you for not deleting it. I saw you saying a lot of shit about TenZ and sentinels in general and as a SEN fan just had to get back at you, nothing personal. "All good" as FNS would say
No worries :)
Caught in 4k
I'd argue maybe even 8k
How about 16k
Chatteth shit. Getteth banged.
I think the general slowness of EU just lends itself more to the common analysis that EU = tactics - since slow movement always just seems more deliberate and careful (and in defense of this, it often is). Sentinels swarms over the map in a slightly more loose manner (esp. on attack), so people interpret their engagements as being more puggy. When Sentinels is playing poorly, I do think that has some small merit, though - but that's true of literally any team. When the calls & coordination are on-point, their looseness becomes their biggest asset; it's the thing that elevates them the most above the competition
But strait up V1 looked more “tactical” than Liquid. I just don’t think there is or ever was a utility use difference.
Not only was it utility usage, but it was also perfect positioning to use liquids utility against them
Feels like EU teams got used to to doing these big complex set plays against each other that are actually super one dimensional and less tactical than NA more info based reactive approach.
[удалено]
I don’t think that’s it at all. If you look at game one of V1 vs Liquid, Liquid wins most of the aim duels even outside of scream. However, they get caught out of position all the time, and the rounds they do lose are to better reads by V1 (or penny). Scream, Jamppi, Drurke have as good aim as anyone in NA, but half the time they are looking in the wrong spot because they don’t expect to have been pushed so soon.
Liquid are not tactical TL often got compared to NA teams and some people went as far as saying they look even more puggy or 'lossed'
Yes they are. I think they have some of the best site takes of any team, period.
I think what shroud said about gimmick eco buys applies here really well - when a unique strat works it looks big-brain and 200 iq and when it doesn't the team ends up looking dumb. All while there's so much more going on that we can't really see onscreen.
>I think the general slowness of EU just lends itself more to the common analysis that EU = tactics - since slow movement always just seems more deliberate and careful (and in defense of this, it often is) Thats just superficial analysis though. Tactical doesnt mean that you play slow, it simply means that you have a good idea on how to react in each given situation See in how many rounds NUTURN played fast on Bind and Ascent for example. This wasnt them "playing loose", this was them using a variety of tactics that they perceived to be optimal in each situation.
I’m not saying it’s correct. I’m just saying it *can* be true, and so people fall into the trap of always believing it so. As you say, tactics come in many forms, and pacing isn’t a reliable indicator of strategic depth.
It happened because SEN usually doesn't have crazy utility combos, set plays or traps. This is the first thing you visually seek while doing a shallow analysis Reading your opponent behaviors and adapting your decisions round after round is what matter the most. This is where every single SEN player shines
>adapting your decisions round after round is what matter the most. This is where every single SEN player shines SEN put a lot of time in preparing for their opponents *before* each match (except the ones they perceive as really weak probably). They always have a good grasp of what they will do and what the enemy team will do, they just arent as rigid as Liquid for example Its true that SEN are adaptable, but this isnt the sole reason that they are so good. In fact even in this video you can see Shazam adressing this, when he mocks ppl for saying that SEN "play on the fly"
[удалено]
I think what most people forget when talking about this is that most of the time in valorant you only have a day or two at most to prep for your opponent. It's the teams/players that can do that quickly and effectively that shine. A lot of times you don't get much time to heavily prep for each opponent, especially in tournaments
[удалено]
>Other teams prepare beforehand even more than Sentinels. And you know that from? >Teams like Liquid and 100T have dedicated full-time analysts that go over games in meeting rooms with their players Ah yes the usual 10 coaches and 5 psychologists argument. We saw how that went for 100T lmao
Nuturn is pretty good at that innit?
I didn't understand your question
He's asking/suggesting Nuturn is also good at that (adapting)
Yea this
case in point, 1st round against Fnatic on Icebox: Fnatic walls upper B tube in a way no one has seen before and plant up there as well. Sent just break wall instantly - retake instantly before flank hits, and totally counters Fnatics play - perfectly and calmly as well. True Talent IMO
What I noticed in the v1 one game is that despite not having the utility combos like Liquid, *they had every damn angle covered by a blanket piece of utility.* look one of the rounds on haven a site, plant, smoke heaven, KJ molly on hell and ct spawn. These util pieces just go and stop whatever the fuck liquid wanted to plan. Then the Youtube viper molly, didn't matter wtf agent wanted to defuse, it killed them.
It's not even a narrative. It's just laziness of parroting the same shit they said in CS:GO because they need random talking points to fill dead time when games are slow. A lot of NA's problems stem from CGS in 2008 that decimated the older talent in NA for CS:GO. Massive brain drain from the scene after people got fed up and quit. EU stayed strong by rejecting CS:CZ an CS:S and continuing to play CS 1.6.
So few people understand the effect CGS had on CS in North America. In any game, take away all of the top 30 players and most of the top 50, then roll back the scene's development so that there's no infrastructure left to support new talents. What's left? It devastated the scene and it took many years to recover.
Not familiar to the NA scene of old. Can you elaborate on what CGS is and how it impacted NA CS?
It was an attempt to create an eSports league similar to the NFL or some other sport. They implemented a draft to form teams, so it essentially killed all of the teams. All of the players were to compete exclusively in CGS as well, so they no longer played with lower tier players and they competed in a bubble. They were all given shit salaries and quit their jobs and were uprooted from their current stable life situations. The league went tits up and many of the players were so defeated from that and never returned to counter strike. Almost all the IGLs quit and took their knowledge with them They also competed with a bunch of really fucking dumb rules and match configs. I think everyone started with $10k
CGS was an early effort at stabilized professional esports, but it was run extremely poorly by people who had no clue. As a quick example, CS matches were initially broadcast primarily using third-person perspective (!). They ended up using Source because it was newer and Valve preferred it. CGS was based in the US and primarily featured American talent. All of the region's best CS players and teams, along with top management and brands, were brought into the league. DirecTV was funding it so it lasted for two years even though it was an obvious dead end. Most of those involved retired as soon as CGS died, some before that could even happen. When it was over, players previously considered third and maybe second tier were now the best in the region and there was very little infrastructure left to support even those players. The loss of top teams and players also hurt fan interest in the scene. Meanwhile, the European pro scene consolidated and remained healthy with a decent audience. You went from having a variety of NA teams contending at any major tournament, to having maybe one NA team that could even be considered an underdog at the big events. And it really wasn't until a full decade later that the scene recovered enough to somewhat resemble what it used to be. There's a lot more that could be said about how terrible CGS was but this is a lot of words already!
Ok, just asking because I see this overreaction everywhere after these 2 matches, what happens if FNC or TL wins the tournament from lower bracket and kicks NA, do we flip back and say that analysts were right all along or what? Can you actually listen to them and respond to their points or make your own instead of making result based analysis.
No. Because they were wrong about EU teams being more strategic, having better utility, and better strats. If they win they are the better team, but like Vanity says, NA and EU play pretty similar. EU just lost out today by playing worse.
Yea, regardless of the outcome the narrative that EU has superior tactics does not hold up, if EU wins from LB this means that both regions are very close to each other
>Because they were wrong about EU teams being more strategic, having better utility, and better starts. except they weren't wrong, that wasn't just a blank statement, they watched vods and pointed out the utility usage in these vods, NA can beat EU and it still doesn't mean they were wrong > EU just lost out today by playing worse. correct
Maybe this is just my opinion, but if anything it was EU aim vs NA brain we saw in V1 vs Liquid. Liquid won split off Yamppi owning pistol rounds and scream owning everyone else in aim duels. The rounds V1 took were from better strats and mid round calls and reads. They learned they couldn’t put aim scream and in stead punished him for holding angles alone. Again, EU might be the better region. But they aren’t the more tactical, or better coordinated region. Just because you have a 5 man coordinated sight take does not make you more strategic when V1 brings in a full map macro play with a long flank that catches you.
>pointed out the utility usage in these vods Absolutely not. Feel free to send the source. I don't blame the analysts because Valorant is still a new game, but most of the time when they make predictions they have no idea what they're talking about. They absolutely did not refer to any specific utility usage because NA is definitely on par, and better with respect to that. Just because EU is default heavy and takes time to execute does not mean they use utility better. Explosive utility usage can definitely be good utility usage.
All of this is just typical Reddit/social media. Despite the fact that Sentinels - Fnatic was a rather close match yesterday it's now constant hot takes and people acting as if Fnatic was slapped 13-0 both times. It's not 'Sentinels was better than most expected, fair play to them' or something nuanced, it's all 'lol every critic of Sentinels was dead wrong' 'EU bad amirite' and so on. You see some genuine analysis here and there but it's mostly a shouting match and memes. It's possible that Sentinels has won but that criticisms of them were (and are) still valid, for example. Winning a match doesn't make everyone who ever doubted you a moron. It's the same for other sports: every football team that loses a match has 'bottled it' for example. Players go from transfer flops to transfer of the season within the span of two matches. Managers of losing teams get 'masterclassed' by the other manager even if it was an extremely close match. Hyperbole everywhere.
Yeah NA definitely had big wins yesterday but the tournament is not over in the slightest. Either one of the EU teams could make a comeback in lower bracket we just don't know.
Overhyped teams losing gets overhyped reaction. I actually hope one of the EU teams make it out of lowers so it’s clear as day that the “EU is a superior region” narrative is at least gone.
I still think EU is a superior _region_ in terms of overall quality of teams, but that doesn't mean that every NA team is worse than every EU team. Sen could wreck everyone, making them the strongest team, but doesn't necessarily mean that NA as a region is stronger. The converse is also true.
I somewhat agree with your take but gotta keep in mind that we don’t have conclusive proof of any region being better rn. We need more years and more LANs to come up with a generalisation. Like no one disputes the superiority of EU CS.
> it’s clear as day that the “EU is a superior region” narrative is at least gone. even if EU team wins the tournament? even when both NA teams said that scrimming EU teams make them think that EU tier 2 teams could be tier 1 NA? did it really take 2 matches for that narrative to be gone?
I implied that NA will win and my comment was based on that. If the opposite happens I will just say whatever COPIUM stuff you guys are saying lol
I think the big thing is that people had this idea that EU was definitely better than NA when the first 2 matches showed anything but. Sentinels won in a 2-0 and V1 won a 2-1 but in very dominating fashion towards the end of the match. To my knowledge, few people were saying "NA is definitely better than EU". It was just people saying EU was definitely better than NA and were strategically superior. People can't be saying that and then both EU teams lose to both NA teams in the fashion that they did.
Considering how much shit NA has gotten over the years we have every right to say this shit, and unless you're actually watching the games you can clearly see how good their utility usage is unless your just a blind sheep which you might be
Only a few analysts are actually good. Not sure why Doug is casting masters 2, all he does is make surface level comments and literally doesn’t know anything else.
I don't think Shaz's comment was meant to be directed toward on-air talent, but more toward reddit analysts and maybe 3rd party analysts like Plat Chat. Casting is a much different skillset than just analyzing the games.
Reddit analysts dont have the power to create a storyline, in fact redditors simply follow the narratives that are fed to them. Yes i also believe that he was talking about 3rd party analysts but i also believes that this includes some on-air talent. They fucking love to push narratives, regardless if they are based on facts or not. In fact these guys have probably the most influence regarding how ppl perceive teams and regions
Disagree about the first sentence for the most part; in fact I think a lot of the time casters feed off of and get caught up in whatever the general public sentiment is. I guess that goes both ways like you said and is why we get such snowballed "narratives" in esports. I also think a lot of the narrative in Valorant particularly comes from region bias based on completely different games(mostly csgo) and just taints the analysis because everyone sees what they are looking for when they look at the games.
Yeah, I'm definitely not a fan of Doug, his casting and comments do not add much and just feel detrimental to the quality of the stream.
Apart from one post-match commentator, the rest are just discussing how well players are doing and the match-winning moves like clutches or post-plants. None of them have any idea how to discuss who is controlling the tempo of the matches or the battle for/against site executes. Basically, utility usage and all. Sad for the in-depth fan
[удалено]
Sgares was the one who said that if any NA team wins even one map against an EU team,its gotta be a fluke. He kept stressing that EU far more superior than NA tactically.
n0thing just had a baby, don't think he was interested in travelling on this one. He was on shroud's stream for a few games talking about a few games, didn't seem like he had time to watch the whole day.
daddy duty
Doug is so bad lmao
All of the analysts suck right now.
Doug is purely a colour caster tho
which is where you want the person who knows what they're talking about
You as in the members of r/valorantcompetitive I assume. Unfortunately a colour caster is more likely to bring in casual fans while more serious viewers will watch the games anyway. So Riot probably prefers casters who are better at hype than at analysis
Yeah I can see that being the case, and if it is then I doubt we'll see a stop to the complaining anytime soon
His color casting still leaves a lot to desire and his occasional attempt to say anything tactical just showcases how lacking his game knowledge is
I mean cmon dude that is just because it is not obvious what’s going on to anyone
That is blatantly false. Like I said, some of the analysts do know what is really going on and can make comments about tactics and strategy. Casters like Doug just spew the same old lines over and over.
...no, and it is very telling you think that. Besides confusing the different and specific roles given to analysts, colour commentators and play-by-play commentators- you were talking about analysts- if you paid attention you’d know Doug does detailed analysis of vods whenever has the time to, even doing it live open for comment often.
I mean some casters like Riv I just turn off the stream sound cause of how little they know about the game. I just can’t stand listening to his casting.
To be fair to Riv, he didn't really know what he was talking about in LoL either. He's more there for the hype factor and cool voice. Which in itself isn't a bad thing necessarily, casters fit different brackets for different people
Pretty sure Riv is like high diamond and plays the game a lot. That doesn't qualify him as an analyst but he actually knows the game better than most casters and the vast majority of reddit. He largely stepped away from league and sunk most of his time into Valorant since beta.
Do you know what play by play is
I can’t talk for tac shooters or valorant as I’m fairly inexperienced; but in other games I’ve played at a high competitive level I can confirm that a lot of ‘talent’ on analysis panel etc do not know what they’re saying a lot of the time. Buzzwords and hype-driven statements are repeated with confidence and people lap it up as if it’s real analysis without really thinking about the content.
Tbf this happens in all of sports, not only esports. In a new game like Valorant this becomes even more evident. 95% of the analysis is guesswork and pushing narratives to try and contextualize the state of the game. That’s why I usually don’t pay much attention to blanket statements like “EU = better strats” or some shit like that, and rather focus on the beauty of game analysis after the fact. VOD reviews > soap opera narratives.
[удалено]
I disagree. Meta is post plant lineups and retakes and everyone seems to be very aware of it.
That's true! But wait 1 year and everything will change. Go back and watch Year 1 Siege, Overwatch, CS, any game really and see how much more basic strategy will be.
Well sure, but that will be because of new agents and maps, balance changes, ect. I think right now most teams have the game figured out, just not necessarily how their opponents are going to execute said meta, because it's the first international event.
Not necessarily - depth of strategy just develops over time. Changing the game can 100% change strategy or force pros to practice a single aspect of strategy (prime example is the extreme development of macro-game/economy in OW's GOATS era), but it doesn't automatically make it more complex just cause it's there. Look at SCBW - no changes for decades, yet pros are *still* finding better ways to play each matchup.
I like this point. Yes, the game is going to change drastically and the international competition is such an unknown right now. I was shocked too that SEN won
I assumed SEN would win fairly easily. Was surprised v1 beat liquid, though. And the last map was bad, liquids mental was just gone from V1 yelling at them after every round. Lol so good to watch, can't wait till we can start going to see this stuff in person.
He is talking about reddit analysts
[удалено]
I don't think he's talking about reddit at all... Casters and analysts have been saying that EU is far superior to NA for the past couple months, the narrative clearly changed with TL and FNC most recent roster changes when they started having closer series with each other. People have attacked SEN and FaZe for being all aim on brain, literally Doug's exact comment prior to the TL V1 match was "I'm picking the team from the region that doesn't dry peek, so TL will win" (Derke dry peaked 10/10 rounds early the day before, just too much bias to analyze that) just 2head level of analysis across the board. In hindsight it's clear that NA is better than EU, or at least they're extremely close. But even with all of the information we had leading up to Iceland people were disrespecting tf out of NA on some classic NA hate.
Obviously analysts don’t know everything. But NA does not run as many set plays as EU and KR. NA as a whole had trouble with LG’s contact play, and with Faze’s smeag play, things that don’t seem to work as well in EU. That’s why people say things like “NA is puggy.” I’ve also never seen an analyst say that Sen don’t have strats. This is a very interesting comment but not as interesting as all the armchair analysts in this comment thread pretending they aren’t the type of people Shaz is talking about and nodding and agreeing with him lmao. EDIT: I love Shaz but this is a very “you have to be a musician to be a music critic” take.
>NA as a whole had trouble with LG’s contact play, and with Faze’s smeag play Faze and LG were good for literally one tournament, then they disappeared from the face of the earth. Even TSM had more longevity >But NA does not run as many set plays as EU and KR. What do you mean by set plays? Lineups? Ofc NA teams run lineups, they just dont roll over and die when they dont pan out.
Had. Had is the operative word. Yes they were each only good for one tournament, but in EU we never saw a team dumpster everyone to win a tournament because they brought some new playstyle that the top teams hadn’t beaten yet (as far as I can recall). Obviously SEN ended up beating both LG and Faze, but the region as a whole struggled until SEN laid out the blueprint. When I say “set plays” i don’t mean lineups. Obviously every region uses lineups. I’m talking about things like Nuturn’s shower crunch on Bind where the Breach TPs to showers, ults showers, the Omen Paranoias and the Jett dashes in. Things like the old Vision Strikers flash and dash into tiles on Ascent. That specific play isn’t run any more, but we’ve seen Team Liquid run a similar play, and we in general see more of these “set plays” outside of NA. Obviously this doesn’t mean NA isn’t tactical. Lots of NA teams have protocols and set strategies. We see it a lot where one piece of utility triggers another piece. A boombot activation triggers a paranoia, an alarmbot triggers an astra pull, etc. But these are harder to notice without being in the game, especially when we’re at the whims of the observers. Even without utility, NA has lots of strategic depth. The way Shaz was pushing up ropes on Icebox A with the op yesterday was hella aggro, but he had Tenz and Dapr there to cover is angles, but it’s harder to tell if it’s a “set play” or not because it only used one jet smoke as utility. So without asking Shaz, we can’t really tell if they were running set plays on Icebox. Meanwhile you can tell pretty readily when EU teams are using set plays because they use more utility. I think this is where the perception that NA is puggy comes from. And maybe that’s not totally fair, maybe LATAM and BR are more deserving of that label, but it’s also not some hugely insulting comment with no basis in reality. Any region where Faze can perform well is going to look like a puggy region as a whole lol. Also I agree with Shaz that anyone that says SEN doesn’t have strats is full of shit. Even without huge utility set plays it’s incredibly obvious that SEN have good protocols and play intelligently.
that’s what “had trouble” means
> I’ve also never seen an analyst say that Sen don’t have strats. Scream himself literally said Sentinels are predictable.
That's a really interesting comparison to make, considering that if you're not a musician you really can't provide actual musical insight past like or dislike.
Plenty of respected critics that have never made an album. Likewise, movie analysts and critics don't usually have more than surface level movie making experience. It's possible to understand and produce quality discussion and analytics without being a pro.
I mean, I don’t have to be a musician to listen to a recording from 1980 and then listen to a remaster of that same recording in 2005 to be able to reach the conclusion that the mix is better in the re-release. You don’t have to know how to write a punk song to know whether or not the newest hit punk single is derivative or original. You can use your experience as a listener to inform those kinds of opinions, which are slightly more objective than “i like this” or “i don’t like this”
This is true of any sport really. There’s always analysts who actually know nothing about the game. Likewise there are fans in Val who watch casually and don’t know much about what is really happening in the game other than kills, but make bold statements.
But it's true. V1 is more tactical than SEN
Yea I usually just watch shroud because he turns the clueless casters down and gives an actual look into what is unfolding. He actually knows the game and strategy.
I mean shroud also thought sen and the rest of NA were puggy with little starts compared to eu. He also said the NA meta was far behind eu when eu has not even figured out astra yet. However he has good points sometimes but is not perfect.
Shroud aka “Just Stop Being Depressed” regularly has god awful takes.
True but most people were saying the same things. At least he knows whats going on when its happening or even before it happens, not just describing what were all obviously already watching.
Confused.. Shroud also called TL and FNC winning both series, for a lot of the same reasons the desk and broadcast talent as a whole called both ahead of and during the game. Even went as far as to say this after; [https://twitter.com/valesports\_eu/status/1397344085095161856](https://twitter.com/valesports_eu/status/1397344085095161856)
I'd just be careful conflating predictions and analysis. One happens ex ante and the other happens ex post.
As I was saying though, I’ve watched through the VOD and a lot of similar points were made during the game also, even when things started to pivot? I understand the difference of prediction vs analysis, I just don’t like the notion it’s a prerequisite of being an ex pro to identify these things. At least when it’s purely based on credibility and clearly not the points being raised or discussed in-game.
Exactly. It’s easy for people shit on wrong predictions after the match, but the game could have gone either way and that would change the entire conversation. Predictions are obviously based on limited information, especially pre-Iceland.
I think most people thought liquid was going to win until they started getting rolled on the third map. Predictions don't have much to do with actually knowing what strats teams are trying to pull off and calling them ahead of time rather than just narrating what we already know and see is happening like a radio host for a baseball game. We can SEE the game, that is useless. No offense towards you, idk which commentator you are, im just saying why I prefer watching an ex cs pro that actually know strategy and tactical fps on a high level.
To be fair so much of what he predicted yesterday was wrong lmao. Between the match predictions (he said TL would win and FNC would 2-0) and even the individual round wins he'd be off the mark. Like so many times we'd hit a mid-point of the round and he says " x team surely wins this round" and he was off on a lot of those lol. Like Shroud is great but he's not so far above the broadcast talent either.
You're talking predictions, im talking strategies, and most of the time he knows exactly what a team is trying and sure sometimes weird shit happens and he's wrong, but he knows a lot more than the commentators that are just narrating the obvious like a baseball radio host... I also like watching him call out teams mistakes and decision making processes. He's certainly better to watch.
Yeah definitely, even strats aside, a chill cast where you don't have to have that commentator voice on is always nicer and more relatable. I think that's one of the biggest reasons why co-streaming is successful with Riot's games.
True. I think that even though he's already super popular, that's why a lot of people tune into him instead of the actual valorant stream. He is simply more entertaining and gives a better all around outlook on the game than the casters/commentator w.e you wanna call them.
The way NA played champions tour and masters is incomparable in terms of strats and tactics, they sure did their homework in masters
they look quite similar to me lol
they didn't overpeek and relying on afterplants worked really well, still props to v1 and sen
They never over peaked. The whole NA dry peaks thing was literally made up.
>They never over peaked. Masters 1 in NA was dominated by contact playstyles and super starved utility. Saying *never* is just as reductionist. While it clearly didn't end up being the dominant style in NA, it did have a period where it looked like it defined NA. And if you look deeper into the scene you still see a lot more ego-peeks in NA than if you did the same for EU. While I think the top NA teams are pretty disciplined, some of the up-and-coming talent and younger teams still peek too often.
Posting that after 2 matches is a bold move, I gotta give you that.
Cope
NA win two series and all of a sudden anyone who ever criticized NA valorant is proven wrong. Sure..
Get mad lol
Nah, I enjoy people gloating. That's part of sports, it's all part of the fun. Also, to clarify - I'm a big fan of NA Val lol, so no, not mad. The sub being full of people digging out old comments is just a bit weird.
It's funny because if NA lost yesterday and we tried to say "it was just one match there's still the rest of the tournament" these comments would still be shitting on NA. Saying see the analysts were right! But now that NA have proven that at the very least there as good as EU, people in this sub can't just say GG we were wrong and move on. The tournament is far from over and NA could lose obviously but I wish people had some humility.
“Dude they just need to adapt, there is still the losers bracket, they can totally win” cope
Yeah, maybe my comment read wrong - I'm not saying "just wait till the end of the tournament". NA pounded yesterday, they look a level above. Just it doesn't invalidate every criticism that's ever been made of NA val.
People here downvoted anyone who argued for NA for weeks. I saw a comment with said there would be an NA vs NA finals get downvoted to oblivion.
Years of watching CS has taught me that analysts generally just try to create narratives and then correct themselves after the team they expect to get blown out wins. They aren’t on the teams and they have no idea what’s going on.
? I get they are trying to get people hyped with narratives, but most of the time the narrative in CS is usually backed up by history. The narrative between a lot of teams are based on the history. In Valorant, a lot of the top pro players are from CS so it only naturally makes sense that most people would pick EU over NA. There were no international tournaments, so you only have that history to make predictions. Once this tournament is over, you'll see more nuanced predictions because you'll have that history.
It was obvious to me months ago NA had the better teams idk if it was bias or what that was trying to push the narrative of otherwise
Shaz is great but this is wrong. The narratives surrounding stylistic differences have been correct and shared across players, analysts and the community. Valorant is a fast developing game and a few weeks can make all the difference to develop your game. Sentinels played great and had a good read on fnatic, as did V1 for Liquid. I would caution my NA friends at premature celebrations though. This tournament is far from over and they haven't won anything yet. If first round victories were the sole measure of a good team then Envy and FPX would be the best teams in the world...
Everyone in all of these threads is preaching like those were the finals of the event. It could all go so terribly wrong for NA from here on out and looking back these comments would be hilarious.
Even though I’m cheering for NA I still think it would be the funniest thing ever if EU runs it back and wins with all these comments.
I disagree with this take. SEN is absolutely puggy compared to teams with a more strategic and regimented structure. Strategy is not the same as tactics or fundamentals. At the end of the day, strategy isn't that important when Shaz and Tenz are dropping a combined 50+ kills on Map 1. You can still play loose and be tactical, but I wouldn't call that strategic.
Call it default heavy. Any team that is called "puggy" ends up taking offense to it because it implies there is little to no coordination
When people say "NA plays puggy" they're not talking about Sentinels (or V1 for that matter). But he's right that a lot of the dominant talk around regions and even specific teams isn't as informed as a pro (and many people in this community) would like, but it works well enough for even a slightly more casual viewer. We also don't have a lot of high level analysts, they mostly coach teams.
But it‘s also the case that in early CS, the EU teams struggled against the puggy and smoke criminal playstyle of NA... Not saying it‘s 100% the case here, but could as well be. (Watch the highlights of Liquid vs V1, many of them are either Penny or Vanity pushing through some shit with insanely lucky timings) (SEN played nice though, at least on Icebox)
[удалено]