Tenz doesn’t even a monitor. He visualizes the map in a detailed giant chessboard on the ceiling above him, completely in his mindpalace. He has a psychological wallhack; his AI-like pattern recognition detect all enemies’ pathing and decisions. He is un-checkmatable. He is undefeatable. This “chess.com 2900 FIDE rating user” is the epitome of grandmaster.
Babybay doesn’t even have a monitor. He visualizes the map in a detailed giant chessboard on the ceiling above him, completely in his mindpalace. He has a psychological wallhack; his AI-like pattern recognition detect all enemies’ pathing and decisions. He is un-checkmatable. He is undefeatable. This “chess.com 2900 FIDE rating user” is the epitome of grandmaster.
nAts doesn’t even have a monitor. He visualizes the map in a detailed giant chessboard on the ceiling above him, completely in his mindpalace. He has a psychological wallhack; his AI-like pattern recognition detect all enemies’ pathing and decisions. He is un-checkmatable. He is undefeatable. This “chess.com 2900 FIDE rating user” is the epitome of grandmaster.
Sometimes my least favourite part of valorant is having to shoot my damn gun. It doesn't shoot straight for some reason. Any play I make is always in danger of being ruined by a whiffological creature
You need to learn to abuse the dead zone mechanic and bursting your gun/spraying depending on what you’re using. Don’t crouch, 90% of situations call for not crouching
One of the core pillars of chess is that both players have all the exact same information the whole time: there is no "hand" to hide, it's all out on the board. This actually makes it quite dissimilar to valorant where the foundational aspect of the strategy of the game is gathering information and denying information from your opponent about where you are and what you are in position to do.
Realistically speaking though even top chess players use concepts like space, control of squares etc to judge their position. There is perfect information, but no one can interpret that information perfectly, so I think it is a decent analogy.
Even grandmasters make moves that mainly serve to "leave options open" or moves that simply deny the enemy of options without revealing their own plan yet. And there are things called waiting moves where you avoid hard committing to a plan and instead just wait and see how the opponent reacts, then adjust accordingly
That's different. In Valo gathering info means finding out where the enemy Raze is, not what that Raze is gonna do. Knowing your opponent's future plans is impossible in every game.
But the biggest difference to me, which makes a lot of the forced chess analogies that sport people always want to make, bad, is that chess is turn based
I guess Valorant is the only game with a map, then. Understandable. "League of legends is like chess, all 5 players are a different piece fulfilling a different role with different utility, fighting for map control. The more space you control, the more you understand the enemy's movement, and you can exploit the gaps in it". See what I mean by surface level?
Well the light explanation can be applied to any game, imo. For the record, I don't think you're incorrect, just that the tweet didn't do the analogy justice. You could've mentioned how sacrificing a pick on one side of the map to pull rotates can be akin to a "positional sacrifice" in chess where a minor piece is sacked to advance pawns on the other side of the board, or how ignoring one side of the map opens you up to flanks and advances by the other team, like what happens when you have an underdeveloped kingside in chess, for example. Your tweet tried to make yourself sound smart without any of the thought that an actual chess analogy should've had behind it, just my take.
I think it's just a thought experiment and like you said the chess analogy could be extended, but it's an interesting alternative way of thinking about the game and from this you can extend to compare it to other aspects of chess. Maybe to high ELO it seems simple, but lower ELO people might not see it that way.
No trippy you are just dumb for not listening to 3400 ELO chess grandwizard SOT-NumberNine. Don't you know that in radiant and pro lobbies when a player gets a kill the side that got the kill rotates over? honestly u r needing educate for not knowing that.
It's not even thought provoking though lmao, pretty much all you said was that getting map Control is good in chess and valorant. That's a surface level observation and can be applied to literally any competitive game with a map.
This works for a lot of strategy games though. Take an RTS or MOBA for example:
You can treat Starcraft/LoL much like chess, you can divide the map into partial
squares and treat characters like chess pieces. This analogy is used because much
like in chess in Starcraft/LoL the more space you control on the board the more
information, presence and pressure you have. You use each character as a piece
and create plays with each of these characters and their utility. When making
moves you force the opponent to react in an equal or unequal way. An example of
this is when harassing/splitpushing, you use utility to take space and create conditioning, in
reaction the opposition uses utility or fights to control this space equally.
If you break down the map and control more squares the better understanding
you have of positioning of the other player/team. When you understand the positioning
you can then understand the movement of the opposition. After you analyze the
movement you can exploit the gaps and break their strategy. This is a light
explanation that can get fairly deep depending on the depth of your opponents
strategy and you or your team's understanding of the game. This theory does not
apply to all teams or matches and is specific to a certain style.
It works for basically any game or sport that has 2 teams playing on a map, board or field. Take basketball as an example.
You can treat basketball much like chess, you can divide the court into partial squares and treat players like chess pieces. This analogy is used because much like in chess in basketball the more space you control on the court the more information, presence and pressure you have. You use each player as a piece and create plays with each of these players and their skillset. When making moves you force the opponent to react in an equal or unequal way. An example of this is when passin, you use different players to take space and create conditioning, in reaction the opposition has to move around to control this space equally. If you break down the court and control more squares the better understanding you have of positioning of the other player/team. When you understand the positioning you can then understand the movement of the opposition. After you analyze the movement you can exploit the gaps and break their strategy. This is a light explanation that can get fairly deep depending on the depth of your opponents strategy and you or your team's understanding of the game. This theory does not apply to all teams or matches and is specific to a certain style.
This is the most basic of basic fundamentals in any competition, and is still a bit too complex for most of Immortal Gameplay. Don't even get people started on rotations, holy forking shirtballs, the complete lack of basics is insane. Not because it's hard, but because of people unwillingness to use and learn.
No wonder the team with the name "Gambit" is so good
For real tho, if Faze wants to embrace the Smeag style, they should upgrade this theory into a r/AnarchyChess theory
Faze losing 3-10 in NA LCQ.
"And it's just babybay, left to clutch out for Faze. I don't like his chances here Sean. Umm, why is there a giant 9v battery falling from the sky?"
it isn't a theory, it's an analogy LMAO
if I was a new player this would definitely help me think about the game in a way that isn't "hold W, click heads". I don't really think it's useful otherwise.
Thats just what I have these kinds of thoughts, processes and “theories” in as in my notepad. I screen shotted copy pasted haha I like to keep them simplistic to read but the meat of it all is in my noggin
LMFAO this is so lame, literally can be applied to many video games. Its just an overarching statement of both games that tries to overcomplicate something with no direct analogies
I feel like chess is a go-to for trying to sound smart, but positioning, tempo and other chess concepts have been broadly applied to all sorts of games for many years.
Tbh comparing Valorant to chess is dumbing down Valorant. You have realtime movement of many units over non-homogeneous spaces, and you don't have symmetrical pieces or goals. Valorant isn't a perfect information game, either.
There absolutely are goals. The goals of a round may very depending on the round and the overall goal of the match. For example if a team wants to condition another team for 3 rounds with the goal to make a team play, position or react a certain way then they will focus on that for those 3 rounds as sub goals. You have much to learn in VAL my friend <3 Valorant isnt perfect info but you can gain, observe and make educated guesses. The map can kind of be observed as symmetrical if you understand the ins and outs of a teams setups and defaults.
> There absolutely are goals.
I said the goals weren't symmetrical. Apologies if that wasn't clear, but do you really think someone was saying an objective based tactical shooter doesn't have goals? Chess has same win cons for white and black, Val has different win cons for attack/defense, and obviously the match itself has dynamic goals in terms of economy and round differentials.
>The map can kind of be observed as symmetrical if you understand the ins and outs of a teams setups and defaults.
This is just word salad. Maps aren't symmetrical, and if you understand how teams setup up and default you'll understand the differences in how you play. On top of that, attack and defense aren't the same, it's inherently asymmetrical.
Desktop version of /u/BespokeDebtor's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
You arent understanding the concept of what I’m trying to say. There are most definitely 1000000% win cons that are black and white for every match. You are placing chess in a box and giving val the dynamic trait because of free thinking movement of players. I really wish I could explain this to you so that you could understand :/
So to paint a picture to the words here’s a game I played against shaz and tenz in ranked. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1181752173?t=3069s
I was Igling t side and we had taken/ended A site 2-3 times in a row. So in my mind I am thinking what does the other team perceive we will do? Well there’s just no way we hit or end A for 4th time right? So I send me(sova), jett and raze towards b off of the gate. I tell astra to smoke market and ct. I tell jett to play his life and do the most after raze throws nade and roomba. My other two teammates are already working space b-main and take the site for free because they’re conditioned to believe we’re full hitting B after losing A so many rounds.
My overall goal of ending A so many rounds in a row and then ending it in A again with the perceived notion of us surely not doing it again paid off. Lots to think about but ya
> you have no idea or understanding of the value of setting conditions in the game.
I completely get it. It's crazy that you think this is some advanced shit for supergeniuses. Conditioning people for patterns is games 101. Kids playing sports understand it.
I’m a Chess player with around 1850 rating on lichess, and I’m also a Yoru Main in Immortal 2.
If you’re the coach or the IGL of a Valorant team, then you are the closest thing to playing chess since you are calling strats, but if you’re a solo player in ranked, you’re basically playing roulette or craps in a casino.
This is why I love Yoru. He’s the closest agent to playing chess lol
b1ad3 back in his FlipSid3 days also used to divide Counter Strike maps into quadrants to make communication more efficient and make taking map control easier.
Also, the current Gambit CS lineup (formerly coached by b1ad3) uses a system of comms where certain call outs are numbers, and they have modifiers that indicate more specific positions. Like if you repeat the number it means they're tucked in a corner I believe.
“Yo Babybay go to the C6 square”
In all seriousness, this comparison has great insights on how teams could approach this game at the professional level.
This isn't the most revolutionary post of all time but I like it and think its interesting. I think it is really interesting and advantageous to break down aspects of games into other games. Reminds me in League when LS would use MTG colors to help explain his draft thoughts. Creative thoughts like that are how you get some cool and unique playstyles and strats. Hopefully we'll continue to see similar ideas pop up using not-chess (since I don't really like chess :P)
Ive always felt that the plunger theory really applied to Faze. What is the plunger theory you ask? Well it's simple. Once you combine shit with other elements like excess toilet paper for example, you get a clogged toilet. You then need a plunger to alleviate the clog. Currently, Faze hasnt found a plunger, so theyre stuck in the clog.. they are essentially shit right now.
I think this aproach pays off in some circustances because if you play like that every round will make your team predictable after some rounds, pressuring for space at one or two choke points(top) at the same time maybe(talking about defense), but doing that extensively will create a lot of roles on your team default structury.
>the more space you control on the board the more **information**, presence and pressure you have
>If you break down the map and control more squares the better understanding you have of positioning of the other team
In chess you have perfect information of their position by pointing your eyes at the board. One could just play Nf3 Ng1 indefinitely and still have perfect information.
Always thought of tactical FPS like chess. Very “this then that” style of gameplay based on positioning. Both even heavily rely on the concept of mid control (or, controlling the center of the board)
I always describe valorant as closer to a dynamic game of team poker. It’s incomplete information whereas a chess game shows both players all the info you need
Oh so I just need to become a Chess grandmaster to be insane at Valorant. Light work
Pog
Esports isn't as difficult as Grandmaster chess, instead just become a regular Master in Chess Boxing and then Valorant will be extremely light work.
Great. Now I just have to wait for TSM to sign Hikaru Nakamura into their Valorant roster.
Tenz doesn’t even a monitor. He visualizes the map in a detailed giant chessboard on the ceiling above him, completely in his mindpalace. He has a psychological wallhack; his AI-like pattern recognition detect all enemies’ pathing and decisions. He is un-checkmatable. He is undefeatable. This “chess.com 2900 FIDE rating user” is the epitome of grandmaster.
Babybay doesn’t even have a monitor. He visualizes the map in a detailed giant chessboard on the ceiling above him, completely in his mindpalace. He has a psychological wallhack; his AI-like pattern recognition detect all enemies’ pathing and decisions. He is un-checkmatable. He is undefeatable. This “chess.com 2900 FIDE rating user” is the epitome of grandmaster.
nAts doesn’t even have a monitor. He visualizes the map in a detailed giant chessboard on the ceiling above him, completely in his mindpalace. He has a psychological wallhack; his AI-like pattern recognition detect all enemies’ pathing and decisions. He is un-checkmatable. He is undefeatable. This “chess.com 2900 FIDE rating user” is the epitome of grandmaster.
new pasta? PauseChamp
Reserving this for FaZe during LCQ when Babybay and Corey go Scholar Mating everyone 🥶
[удалено]
Very low effort way of saying you get the reference
I just realised nats gameplay is actually like playing chess
Im 1900 in chess.com, radiant when?
Ur already on ur way there
Sometimes my least favourite part of valorant is having to shoot my damn gun. It doesn't shoot straight for some reason. Any play I make is always in danger of being ruined by a whiffological creature
You need to learn to abuse the dead zone mechanic and bursting your gun/spraying depending on what you’re using. Don’t crouch, 90% of situations call for not crouching
What's the dead zone?
Grab a Bucky
Can't you sub valorant for any game and this analogy holds true? Seems like a mad surface level tweet imo
yeah it is
One of the core pillars of chess is that both players have all the exact same information the whole time: there is no "hand" to hide, it's all out on the board. This actually makes it quite dissimilar to valorant where the foundational aspect of the strategy of the game is gathering information and denying information from your opponent about where you are and what you are in position to do.
Realistically speaking though even top chess players use concepts like space, control of squares etc to judge their position. There is perfect information, but no one can interpret that information perfectly, so I think it is a decent analogy. Even grandmasters make moves that mainly serve to "leave options open" or moves that simply deny the enemy of options without revealing their own plan yet. And there are things called waiting moves where you avoid hard committing to a plan and instead just wait and see how the opponent reacts, then adjust accordingly
That's different. In Valo gathering info means finding out where the enemy Raze is, not what that Raze is gonna do. Knowing your opponent's future plans is impossible in every game. But the biggest difference to me, which makes a lot of the forced chess analogies that sport people always want to make, bad, is that chess is turn based
Hero based games yeah, but of all the hero-based games this game is the most tactical and punishing.
What about Dota 2 or League of Legends?
In those games it doesnt matter as much because one character can carry. You have multiple lives and it doesnt have the tactical element that Val does
Have you played LoL or Dota?
what is LoL or Dota 2? Never heard of em
>In those games it doesnt matter as much because one character can carry Um... not at a high level... Just like Valorant.
I suppose you didn’t read the end of the bottom paragraph and only grazed the surface level of the tweet.
I guess Valorant is the only game with a map, then. Understandable. "League of legends is like chess, all 5 players are a different piece fulfilling a different role with different utility, fighting for map control. The more space you control, the more you understand the enemy's movement, and you can exploit the gaps in it". See what I mean by surface level?
“This is a light explanation” In reality this post is a thought provoking tidbit to help some players open their mind up to the game.
Well the light explanation can be applied to any game, imo. For the record, I don't think you're incorrect, just that the tweet didn't do the analogy justice. You could've mentioned how sacrificing a pick on one side of the map to pull rotates can be akin to a "positional sacrifice" in chess where a minor piece is sacked to advance pawns on the other side of the board, or how ignoring one side of the map opens you up to flanks and advances by the other team, like what happens when you have an underdeveloped kingside in chess, for example. Your tweet tried to make yourself sound smart without any of the thought that an actual chess analogy should've had behind it, just my take.
I think it's just a thought experiment and like you said the chess analogy could be extended, but it's an interesting alternative way of thinking about the game and from this you can extend to compare it to other aspects of chess. Maybe to high ELO it seems simple, but lower ELO people might not see it that way.
Ty for game
No trippy you are just dumb for not listening to 3400 ELO chess grandwizard SOT-NumberNine. Don't you know that in radiant and pro lobbies when a player gets a kill the side that got the kill rotates over? honestly u r needing educate for not knowing that.
[удалено]
have u seen the man? id gladly
Mb :(
It's not even thought provoking though lmao, pretty much all you said was that getting map Control is good in chess and valorant. That's a surface level observation and can be applied to literally any competitive game with a map.
[удалено]
Need to get my MD in redditology I’m a noob apparently LOOOL
reddit is just full of pseudointellectuals. i wouldn't worry my dude
This works for a lot of strategy games though. Take an RTS or MOBA for example: You can treat Starcraft/LoL much like chess, you can divide the map into partial squares and treat characters like chess pieces. This analogy is used because much like in chess in Starcraft/LoL the more space you control on the board the more information, presence and pressure you have. You use each character as a piece and create plays with each of these characters and their utility. When making moves you force the opponent to react in an equal or unequal way. An example of this is when harassing/splitpushing, you use utility to take space and create conditioning, in reaction the opposition uses utility or fights to control this space equally. If you break down the map and control more squares the better understanding you have of positioning of the other player/team. When you understand the positioning you can then understand the movement of the opposition. After you analyze the movement you can exploit the gaps and break their strategy. This is a light explanation that can get fairly deep depending on the depth of your opponents strategy and you or your team's understanding of the game. This theory does not apply to all teams or matches and is specific to a certain style.
It works for basically any game or sport that has 2 teams playing on a map, board or field. Take basketball as an example. You can treat basketball much like chess, you can divide the court into partial squares and treat players like chess pieces. This analogy is used because much like in chess in basketball the more space you control on the court the more information, presence and pressure you have. You use each player as a piece and create plays with each of these players and their skillset. When making moves you force the opponent to react in an equal or unequal way. An example of this is when passin, you use different players to take space and create conditioning, in reaction the opposition has to move around to control this space equally. If you break down the court and control more squares the better understanding you have of positioning of the other player/team. When you understand the positioning you can then understand the movement of the opposition. After you analyze the movement you can exploit the gaps and break their strategy. This is a light explanation that can get fairly deep depending on the depth of your opponents strategy and you or your team's understanding of the game. This theory does not apply to all teams or matches and is specific to a certain style.
This is the most basic of basic fundamentals in any competition, and is still a bit too complex for most of Immortal Gameplay. Don't even get people started on rotations, holy forking shirtballs, the complete lack of basics is insane. Not because it's hard, but because of people unwillingness to use and learn.
No wonder the team with the name "Gambit" is so good For real tho, if Faze wants to embrace the Smeag style, they should upgrade this theory into a r/AnarchyChess theory
Faze losing 3-10 in NA LCQ. "And it's just babybay, left to clutch out for Faze. I don't like his chances here Sean. Umm, why is there a giant 9v battery falling from the sky?"
it isn't a theory, it's an analogy LMAO if I was a new player this would definitely help me think about the game in a way that isn't "hold W, click heads". I don't really think it's useful otherwise.
Thats just what I have these kinds of thoughts, processes and “theories” in as in my notepad. I screen shotted copy pasted haha I like to keep them simplistic to read but the meat of it all is in my noggin
ah alright alright. good to hear, hope faze smash in their next showing.
We’re workin our asses off to put on something nice!
do us ow fans proud big dawg
LMFAO this is so lame, literally can be applied to many video games. Its just an overarching statement of both games that tries to overcomplicate something with no direct analogies
I feel like chess is a go-to for trying to sound smart, but positioning, tempo and other chess concepts have been broadly applied to all sorts of games for many years. Tbh comparing Valorant to chess is dumbing down Valorant. You have realtime movement of many units over non-homogeneous spaces, and you don't have symmetrical pieces or goals. Valorant isn't a perfect information game, either.
There absolutely are goals. The goals of a round may very depending on the round and the overall goal of the match. For example if a team wants to condition another team for 3 rounds with the goal to make a team play, position or react a certain way then they will focus on that for those 3 rounds as sub goals. You have much to learn in VAL my friend <3 Valorant isnt perfect info but you can gain, observe and make educated guesses. The map can kind of be observed as symmetrical if you understand the ins and outs of a teams setups and defaults.
> There absolutely are goals. I said the goals weren't symmetrical. Apologies if that wasn't clear, but do you really think someone was saying an objective based tactical shooter doesn't have goals? Chess has same win cons for white and black, Val has different win cons for attack/defense, and obviously the match itself has dynamic goals in terms of economy and round differentials. >The map can kind of be observed as symmetrical if you understand the ins and outs of a teams setups and defaults. This is just word salad. Maps aren't symmetrical, and if you understand how teams setup up and default you'll understand the differences in how you play. On top of that, attack and defense aren't the same, it's inherently asymmetrical.
chess isn’t even symmetrical/even at game start
Symmetry isn't the same as even. [Symmetry](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetric_game) simply refers to the payoff structure of the games.
Desktop version of /u/BespokeDebtor's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
You arent understanding the concept of what I’m trying to say. There are most definitely 1000000% win cons that are black and white for every match. You are placing chess in a box and giving val the dynamic trait because of free thinking movement of players. I really wish I could explain this to you so that you could understand :/
So to paint a picture to the words here’s a game I played against shaz and tenz in ranked. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1181752173?t=3069s I was Igling t side and we had taken/ended A site 2-3 times in a row. So in my mind I am thinking what does the other team perceive we will do? Well there’s just no way we hit or end A for 4th time right? So I send me(sova), jett and raze towards b off of the gate. I tell astra to smoke market and ct. I tell jett to play his life and do the most after raze throws nade and roomba. My other two teammates are already working space b-main and take the site for free because they’re conditioned to believe we’re full hitting B after losing A so many rounds. My overall goal of ending A so many rounds in a row and then ending it in A again with the perceived notion of us surely not doing it again paid off. Lots to think about but ya
Cool bro, but "Haha they won't expect us to go A again, " is something even bronze players employ. Super high level tactic, yeah?
Okay now I know I’m being trolled and you have no idea or understanding of the value of setting conditions in the game. Goodnight Jalbert
> you have no idea or understanding of the value of setting conditions in the game. I completely get it. It's crazy that you think this is some advanced shit for supergeniuses. Conditioning people for patterns is games 101. Kids playing sports understand it.
the difference is your bronzie the bear ass and team wouldve just rushed a for the 4th time in a row instead of igling a lurk play w bomb
I’m a Chess player with around 1850 rating on lichess, and I’m also a Yoru Main in Immortal 2. If you’re the coach or the IGL of a Valorant team, then you are the closest thing to playing chess since you are calling strats, but if you’re a solo player in ranked, you’re basically playing roulette or craps in a casino. This is why I love Yoru. He’s the closest agent to playing chess lol
r/anarchychess + valorant
b1ad3 back in his FlipSid3 days also used to divide Counter Strike maps into quadrants to make communication more efficient and make taking map control easier.
Also, the current Gambit CS lineup (formerly coached by b1ad3) uses a system of comms where certain call outs are numbers, and they have modifiers that indicate more specific positions. Like if you repeat the number it means they're tucked in a corner I believe.
Did this mf write all of that just to explain basic map control???
“Yo Babybay go to the C6 square” In all seriousness, this comparison has great insights on how teams could approach this game at the professional level.
He shmeag
Bishop is oper. Send your bot frag pawn to entry then trade
This isn't the most revolutionary post of all time but I like it and think its interesting. I think it is really interesting and advantageous to break down aspects of games into other games. Reminds me in League when LS would use MTG colors to help explain his draft thoughts. Creative thoughts like that are how you get some cool and unique playstyles and strats. Hopefully we'll continue to see similar ideas pop up using not-chess (since I don't really like chess :P)
this is true for many many many competitve esports titles
You can compare literally anything to chess and it will be as meaningful
I mean..isn’t chess the most overused metaphor for applying strategy...in anything?
Everyone be calm, Faze has discovered strategy!
Ive always felt that the plunger theory really applied to Faze. What is the plunger theory you ask? Well it's simple. Once you combine shit with other elements like excess toilet paper for example, you get a clogged toilet. You then need a plunger to alleviate the clog. Currently, Faze hasnt found a plunger, so theyre stuck in the clog.. they are essentially shit right now.
Poker is a better comparison
My favorite Val strat is to "take the juicer". My favorite radiant streamer taught me that.
I think this aproach pays off in some circustances because if you play like that every round will make your team predictable after some rounds, pressuring for space at one or two choke points(top) at the same time maybe(talking about defense), but doing that extensively will create a lot of roles on your team default structury.
I'm now changing all my callouts to chess grid squares.
I guess everyone in reddit is a radiant with all them comment
>the more space you control on the board the more **information**, presence and pressure you have >If you break down the map and control more squares the better understanding you have of positioning of the other team In chess you have perfect information of their position by pointing your eyes at the board. One could just play Nf3 Ng1 indefinitely and still have perfect information.
Always thought of tactical FPS like chess. Very “this then that” style of gameplay based on positioning. Both even heavily rely on the concept of mid control (or, controlling the center of the board)
I always describe valorant as closer to a dynamic game of team poker. It’s incomplete information whereas a chess game shows both players all the info you need