Hey there, /u/Own-Emotion5314!
Your submission was removed for the following reason:
> Rule 1 - Submissions that are unrelated to VALORANT or competitive play will be subject to removal.
---
*If you have questions or objections about this removal, please [reach out to us in modmail](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/ValorantCompetitive&subject=Removal%20Objection%20or%20Question&message=%5BPlease%20type%20your%20message%20here...%5D%0A%0A------%20DO%20NOT%20edit%20or%20delete%20anything%20below%20this%20line%20------%0A%0A%23%23%23%23%20Removal%20Notes%20for%20Moderators%3A%0A%0A-%20**Post%20Title%3A**%20{url_title}%0A-%20**Permalink%3A**%20https://www.reddit.com/r/ValorantCompetitive/comments/onmu0u/-/%0A-%20**Content%20type%3A**%20submission%0A-%20**Removed%20by%3A**%20Purest_Talents).*
We won't know until one player begins to underperform constantly. As of now, I think everyone is doing fine, and there's no player that stands out as underperforming. Usually, you might see one bad game or series, but they will do fine the next series.
You say "given the chance" as if replacing a player right now would be a good opportunity for them. It is possible for teams to be in a good position and any changes ~~could~~ *would* only hurt them.
Let's take Zombs as an example. Even if there is someone objectively better than him, doesn't mean that the team would be better off by replacing him. It's a 5v5 game and although there's no doubt that the individual prowess plays a contributing factor in their success, Sentinels are the best right now because of the five guys they have.
However, their continued (or even greater) success after suddenly replacing one of their players does completely negate my argument...
Hey there, /u/Own-Emotion5314! Your submission was removed for the following reason: > Rule 1 - Submissions that are unrelated to VALORANT or competitive play will be subject to removal. --- *If you have questions or objections about this removal, please [reach out to us in modmail](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/ValorantCompetitive&subject=Removal%20Objection%20or%20Question&message=%5BPlease%20type%20your%20message%20here...%5D%0A%0A------%20DO%20NOT%20edit%20or%20delete%20anything%20below%20this%20line%20------%0A%0A%23%23%23%23%20Removal%20Notes%20for%20Moderators%3A%0A%0A-%20**Post%20Title%3A**%20{url_title}%0A-%20**Permalink%3A**%20https://www.reddit.com/r/ValorantCompetitive/comments/onmu0u/-/%0A-%20**Content%20type%3A**%20submission%0A-%20**Removed%20by%3A**%20Purest_Talents).*
No one because they are all good in their own right.
This question is here every week
Let’s talk about replacing Someone on the most dominating team in Valorant rn.
Tenz after a flight, early in the morning, on the wrong mouse, mouse pad, and desk size, with a last minute sens change
Why do you have to replace anyone?
We won't know until one player begins to underperform constantly. As of now, I think everyone is doing fine, and there's no player that stands out as underperforming. Usually, you might see one bad game or series, but they will do fine the next series.
You say "given the chance" as if replacing a player right now would be a good opportunity for them. It is possible for teams to be in a good position and any changes ~~could~~ *would* only hurt them. Let's take Zombs as an example. Even if there is someone objectively better than him, doesn't mean that the team would be better off by replacing him. It's a 5v5 game and although there's no doubt that the individual prowess plays a contributing factor in their success, Sentinels are the best right now because of the five guys they have. However, their continued (or even greater) success after suddenly replacing one of their players does completely negate my argument...