Should have read my novel. Glad he laughed at it. RIP Zikz.
| Flag: | United States |
| Registered: | February 20, 2024 |
| Last post: | January 25, 2026 at 1:08 PM |
| Posts: | 1537 |
Should have read my novel. Glad he laughed at it. RIP Zikz.
Accountability is the obligation or willingness to accept responsibility for one’s actions, decisions, and outcomes, including the duty to report, explain, and be answerable for resulting consequences. It involves taking ownership of tasks, admitting faults, and proactively correcting mistakes and proactively correcting mistakes and proactively correcting mistakes and proactively correcting mistakes and proactively correcting mistakes and proactively correcting mistakes and proactively correcting mistakes and proactively correcting mistakes.
Thank you for attending my TED talk.
m80 needs some serious help. I had to stop watching after the 2nd round.
How do three players run through a viper wall with pistols expecting to challenge a bulldog? Are they aware they lose health when they cross the viper wall? Do they think after the first teammate died, the person on defense would just give up and look at the sky?
Why are teams not progressing? We are legit almost 6 years into this game and I do not see an ounce of improvement. It's absolutely bewildering. It's hard not to believe the accusations when such blatant misunderstanding of the most basic things.
I love that in the end, I was right. Time for me to ride off into the sunset.
Definitely going to have job security this season.
I love how the whole community overestimates the impact of the agents people play and just can't see them whiffing or incorrectly holding angles... Valorant Fan Blindness Syndrome or VFBS is highly contagious.
I might lock in for fun.
They said they're picking someone Monday. Hard to prep 200 pages in two days.
Nepotism gave the greenlight. duh.
Immi coaching like its 2022. You simply just can't send someone out to get openings anymore. The situation has changed. But whatever, I know an infinite money hack now.
nrg stomps because no real coaching staff. Vibes and macha are fueling this team.
Icy vanished after they introduced encounters to tracker.gg.
One more try.
Aim trainers teach you that where my crosshair is, the bullet goes. There is spread in Valorant. In Valorant, the crosshair does not indicate exactly where the bullet goes. You are training for a situation that does not exist. Aim trainers can typically teach you how to recover from poor play. Proper play requires you to not open yourself up to multiple angles at once and where you do, utility should assist you. You should be controlling your peeks, pre-aiming, understanding where the players can come from and prepare for enemy movement.
Players are not static. Players have unpredictable movement. Why do you think that even pro players mess up shots when they encounter multiple players from flank? I play dynamic aim training scenarios. I, once again, have extreme amounts of time in these scenarios. I have placements higher than pro players in scenarios that account for this. Aim trainers are not what prepare you for that situation. The understanding that mirroring movement is better than mouse movement, does. Understanding that spread becomes random in Valorant and is not like CS where it follows a consistent pattern.
Aim trainers can teach you mouse control. Yes. I have 4000 hours in aim trainers, this point is not lost on me. But even for the "some" players you identify, aim training is not what makes them better. What makes someone better is the theory and understanding about the game. A person who puts 1000 hours into the game is not better because they have mouse control. They are better because they understand better the theory of the game than a person who is brand new.
You have no idea how much time I've put into this. Go through my post history and you can see the things I've posted to this website specifically about aim. And if you've feel you've lost and you want to recover, just ask me where icebox is. But I promise you, I'm not speaking for a place of ignorance.
If it makes you feel any better, I would argue for a 1:4 split in time when it comes to aim training vs game time. But any more than that is diminishing returns.
Go back and read my response. I'm not going to insult you but you didn't read what I put and assumed my argument. Mechanics without theory is useless was my statement.
If you do not know that each gun has a spread value and that you can just point and click, you will not understand how spread affects where you should aim. You will assume the center of the target is going to be hit every time. It doesn't. Vandal is a .25 degree spread and Phantom is a .2 degree spread.
If I don't know that with a Phantom I need to land two shots to kill, then once again, my aim mechanics do not matter. I don't know how to adjust for spread, so I am assuming that the crosshair is where my bullets land.
If I don't know that the speed of how fast my gun shoots demands I play from a certain distance or move in a certain manner, then once again, I am just shooting center of mass or at head level, and assuming the gun should take care of the rest and get me the kill.
How you are framing it is that mechanics should be developed prior to learning what demands the development. And that is just simply incorrect. Maybe you believe this and will out right reject what I'm saying because you believe you know best... but that's your decision. Your decisions don't affect the end state that Valorant is a different game than others, that it requires different demands on your aim positioning and player positioning. Playing Kovaaks is not a one size fits all and people constantly tell people to jump into Kovaaks to learn Valorant.
It's frustrating because it is supported by people like you and misses the point of the whole development process.
Yes and it completely leaves out the movement aspect of Valorant. This is why the all aim no brain concept exists. When you just have mouse control and no theory on how to apply it, you struggle and you're inconsistent.
Mechanics without theory is useless. Kovaaks doesn't teach theory and if you focus all your energy on aim training, you're not going to be consistent.
This is coming from someone who has 4k hours in aim training.
Good angles are not subjective. Aiming is more of a timing thing less of a mouse control thing in tactical FPS games. People try playing hero valorant consistently get slapped for it.
he's just abusing deadzone and spread values.
pos > aim.
theory > brute forcing aim practice
Waiting for the "100 Thieves are back!" thread when we win against LEV...
This community consistently forgets that vct is not about how good you are but who you know... "x" player deserves t1 is just a ignorant statement. There is nothing "deserved" in this league. Simply how good of friends are you with the coach, the gm and the players are your qualifications.
Qualifications:
20 years in competitive FPS games.
https://imgur.com/a/LUM5QAv
This comes up too often and it's been almost 6 years of Valorant and I still see people debating this wrong... The argument goes something like this, person A, uses Aim training but doesn't see the same results of their labor in Valorant and posts it on an internet forum. Person B jumps in and says that spending in time in an aim trainer doesn't make you good. Person C says that their personal experience is blah blah blah.
First, Valorant has spread or recoil. With most rifles, you are dealing a .2+ degree spread issue when aiming. Spread can be compounded by moving while shooting (insert deadzone discussion description) which increases your spread dramatically depending on the movement action (walk, run, jump) and the weapon you have. So even practicing aim training is going to be detrimental because it will teach your brain that you need to hit the center of a target. In Valorant, because of spread at distances, sometimes the headshot cursor placement is below the head.
Vandal spread (also I don't care if these are accurate anymore and yes I mapped these out for all the guns in Valorant)
https://imgur.com/a/i25YhVi
Phantom spread
https://imgur.com/a/hTegUM1
Second, Aim trainers do not teach you about gunplay optimization and positioning. Gunplay optimization is your planned start of a fight and the distance at which you take fights. Guns in Valorant are situational. This is based on spread and damage distance.
The connecting fabric is positioning. It's digesting angles at a process which you can actually handle. Good Valorant doesn't look like most highlights you see on X or Tiktok. Good Valorant is methodical, intentional and a bit of movement chaos.
Conclusion:
Use Aim Trainers to learn mouse control. Learn Valorant mechanics to apply mouse control to Valorant mechanics. Use brain to stop arguing about dumb things you pretend to know about <3
(Inspired by /r/valcomp post)
LEV doesn't have a wikipedia page. You can't be goated without a wikipedia page.
They have relatable influencers/owners that consistently make poor choices.
They honestly lean too much into the laziness of their team and think it's funny. Asuna could be a good player but has never had the structure nor the charismatic leader to make him put the time in.
Strategically the team was chasing the meta constantly and never had a firm understanding of it.
They spend tremendous amounts of money for very little in return.
Most of the management is living off of past accomplishments that have nothing to do with them.
They baited the hopes and dreams of a person who would have poured his heart and soul into making sure they never lost another game.
Can we just give me a holiday at this point? I already have two on Bennet Island. I want one on vlr.
Yeah I don't disagree with any of your points. Just tired of the savior narrative when it truly is just random person after random person with no provable impact. Feels truly like inauthentic experience of a league that's dying. But I'm huge franchise-hater so it makes sense.
I know I'm bias af because it should be me...
But just because someone has won in the past is not a guarantee that they will win in the future. To me this feels like a "I hired these people so I could explain my reasoning in case we lost." Speaking of losses, TSM lost to Envy in the finals. Some people think it was throwing and others don't. Regardless, Nbs was the coach. The way they lost didn't seem like some masterclass of coaching... I mean if you're losing to Stunner, how are you winning against VCT coaching, which is supposed to be the pinnacle of coaching in Valorant.
So I don't really see the logic behind your opinion. And in your response, if you can tell me where you would find the map Icebox then you can get bonus points.
LOL... no way this caught on... I'm unbelievably talented.
Exactly.
When I think about abilities like Reyna's Devour, Riot devs must have thought that armor would help with fights after the first encounter.
You're not wrong. But let's take a quick look at that, let's say that this is the 5th or 6th round of the game and you already have a rifle and full armor. Would you drop your current gun for an Outlaw? And what if the team played double smokes or was using smokes to cut long angles off in the map?
And to take it one step farther, who are you putting on this assignment? A rifler who is has been practicing that spot for two weeks in preparation for this game or forcing your OPer to this spot who has also been practicing his space for the last two weeks in prep for the game?
I think a lot of people just think that you can drop players into any space and they will perform the same. I don't think that's the case or if it is the case, the performance level will not be the same.
Yeah I think the key is the simplistic nature of rifle gunplay in Valorant that allows for the conversation at the least. When you get into the SMG and Odin spam, you're dealing with more complex damage interactions which I think full armor is a better option.
I think you have to watch the video plus read what I wrote. TMV finding that half-armor is more about the economy of it and not the gunplay. The natural next step is the question whether there is anything more to push as far as a boundary goes. And my post is saying that there is, there's justification for it and it is the same as half-armor. If half-armor provides more economy then no armor does the same but provides you with more.
If duels have a high chance in ending in a headshot, then armor is never a factor. If it's a body shot, the damage allows for no armor based on the way the spread values work out. You can survive an initial two shot burst from a rifle and then the ttk allows for a response. If you land a headshot before the 3rd body shot then you win the duel.
It's basically pulling all the gun mechanics under a single theory.
Quick overview, the half shield buy gives you the ability to absorb three body shots (120 and 117 respectively for Vandal and Phantom) However, if you consistently buy half-shield, you will have more chances to buy a rifle over the course of a game. If you play Valorant like a slot machine and are all about the probabilities then a Vandal or a Phantom will produce more kills over the course of a game or a series. Despite what the hive mind wants you to think about eliminations, they win games and make it infinitely easier to win rounds with every person you eliminate.
BUT! There is a world beyond half-shield meta. The truth of the matter is that you can play the exact same way without shields all together. I've been playing with this concept for two seasons now and there is no difference in results for me:
It's been a minute since I've wasted your time... BUT!
TMV finally arrives at half-shield meta and notices that tier 1 is finally using it. I've been using it for I think two years at this point.
Quick overview, the half shield buy gives you the ability to absorb three body shots (120 and 117 respectively for Vandal and Phantom) However, if you consistently buy half-shield, you will have more chances to buy a rifle over the course of a game. If you play Valorant like a slot machine and are all about the probabilities then a Vandal or a Phantom will produce more kills over the course of a game or a series. Despite what the hive mind wants you to think about eliminations, they win games and make it infinitely easier to win rounds with every person you eliminate.
BUT! There is a world beyond half-shield meta. The truth of the matter is that you can play the exact same way without shields all together. I've been playing with this concept for two seasons now and there is no difference in results for me:
What's going on here:
Both the half-shield and no-shield approach are based off the fact that the rifles have a 3 bullet low variation spread. For Vandal it's .25->.35 and for Phantom it is .2->.35. What this means in layman terms is that a fight usually (depending on distance with the Phantom but not with the Vandal) results in either 1 bullet win or a 4 bullet win. The one bullet case is easy, it's a headshot which is 160 damage or 156 damage.
For body shots, both rifles have a 3 bullet skill check, where if you do not pull down or attempt to control it, you will miss. This results in usually two bullets hitting and produces 80ish damage which is survivable with a starting hp of 100. Thus a duel comes down to whether or not you can hit a headshot consistently vs. your opponent. Since a lot of duels end in a headshot, the no shield strategy has some footing.
For half-shield it's even more dramatic because regardless if you have have full shields, you can still survive 4 bullets. For Vandal, the first 3 bullets are 120 (half-shield is 125) and the fourth bullet is not survivable, which will be 160 damage. The same for the Phantom, 39 damage, hit four times is 156.
One thing TMV got incorrect or missed the reasoning:
Outside of the Outlaw, there are only two real reason to buy full shields if you're going up against a SMG because you are absorbing more bullets over a shorter period of time or you are on a map that has many walls with easy penetration. So the higher the overall hp, the longer you will be able to survive the TTK and give yourself a higher probability of winning the fight.
Next stop:
Teams hopefully having a better understanding between gun-play and distance. Where they start capitalizing on cheaper guns but using utility to create high probabilities wins by (i.e. smokes) closing the distance gaps.
It only kicks in when you hit Ascendant though. And since you can party with an ascendant until you make it to ascendant, you can boost people to immortal with out ever having to register mfa.
In non-5 stack situations. If I'm boosting to Immortal, I can technically do this by playing with my duo in diamond. That's what I don't understand. Who is the MFA meant to protect? Immortal+ and only Immortal+?
If we can group with whatever rank we want then why have MFA at all? Wouldn't you just keep creating diamond smurfs and boost friends that way? Why have MFA at a certain level? Genuinely curious if I'm missing something.
It's located in NA/EU Val Esports official channel, multiple casters, a certified banger meme... 11k posts... nothing of relevance :/
just weird to accuse me of not being able to read but at the same time not spelling correctly... but its vlr... perpetually online warp brain be warped. Full of unaccountable hopium and illogical conclusions.
you spelled "better" as "bette" ... So I guess not :/ Broken English isn't my strong suit.
Discord