CS vs Valorant legacy

So being that CS is mechanically harder game it's assumed that individual legacies means more in CS.
So would team legacies mean more in Val since the game is ever changing and the ability to keep up with the meta is so hard to do?
By Legacy I mean difficulty of accomplishments and longevity not necessarily popularity or being iconic.

i would actually argue the opposite. obviously individual legacies in cs are important but i feel more people look at team legacies, ex: early nip and fnatic, astralis era, faze 2022.

with val since the meta is ever changing its hard to stand out as a super flexible player so the people that can are always talked about. i don’t know if we can really speak on team legacies yet other than loud as they’re the only team that has been decently dominant for more than one year.

then again this could just be me waffling

nah, only Astralis have more legacy than any val team being serious

Sort of but not really. When a team has an era in CS it usually lasts up to 2+ years, but that hasn't been the case in VALORANT yet. And CS in general has so many more tournaments and the gameplay is forever static so I think it's the opposite. We've seen teams in VALORANT who are really good fall off a cliff completely.

ballistA [#4]

Sort of but not really. When a team has an era in CS it usually lasts up to 2+ years, but that hasn't been the case in VALORANT yet. And CS in general has so many more tournaments and the gameplay is forever static so I think it's the opposite. We've seen teams in VALORANT who are really good fall off a cliff completely.

So would for example teams like Optic, FNC, and Loud be comparable to CS's best other than Astralis.

Coomerbot [#3]

nah, only Astralis have more legacy than any val team being serious

bruhwhat

Coomerbot [#3]

nah, only Astralis have more legacy than any val team being serious

NaVi CS certainly have more legacy than any Valorant team lmao, same with Fnatic CS

sheriffykw [#2]

i would actually argue the opposite. obviously individual legacies in cs are important but i feel more people look at team legacies, ex: early nip and fnatic, astralis era, faze 2022.

with val since the meta is ever changing its hard to stand out as a super flexible player so the people that can are always talked about. i don’t know if we can really speak on team legacies yet other than loud as they’re the only team that has been decently dominant for more than one year.

then again this could just be me waffling

So a player like Mako who is known for playing controller, reached his peak on controller, and is still playing the role to this day would this apply to him even tho he only plays smokes.

ButterflyEffect23 [#7]

NaVi CS certainly have more legacy than any Valorant team lmao, same with Fnatic CS

By legacy I mean difficulty of accomplishments and longevity. So Navi have a longer legacy but play a less volatile game so would you compare a team like NV/Optic or Loud to them.

i dont think any team in val will ever b able to reach the legacy of astralis. that astralis team was ranked #1 on hltv for like 2+ years and won 3 straight majors which in val is 3 straight champs

moshimoshiman24 [#10]

i dont think any team in val will ever b able to reach the legacy of astralis. that astralis team was ranked #1 on hltv for like 2+ years and won 3 straight majors which in val is 3 straight champs

So what if a team won 2 champs and 2 masters would you rate it the same or on the same level of difficulty?

Manaphy [#8]

So a player like Mako who is known for playing controller, reached his peak on controller, and is still playing the role to this day would this apply to him even tho he only plays smokes.

when i said flexible, i didn’t mean the flex position, i just meant keeping up with the meta changes within their own postion. it would apply to mako as he’s consistently been one of the best controllers

sheriffykw [#12]

when i said flexible, i didn’t mean the flex position, i just meant keeping up with the meta changes within their own postion. it would apply to mako as he’s consistently been one of the best controllers

I see thanks for the insight.

Manaphy [#11]

So what if a team won 2 champs and 2 masters would you rate it the same or on the same level of difficulty?

no not even close
https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/13itaws/greatest_csgo_team_of_all_time/
just read that

Manaphy [#11]

So what if a team won 2 champs and 2 masters would you rate it the same or on the same level of difficulty?

champs are the val equivalent of cs majors, while masters are the equivalent of like iem katowice or iem dallas, so if a team was able to win like 2 champs in a row while staying consistent both years at masters (maybe not winning but like top 3), then we could start talking about team legacy

but even then its not near astralis haha

moshimoshiman24 [#14]

no not even close
https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/13itaws/greatest_csgo_team_of_all_time/
just read that

Thanks for the article.

sheriffykw [#15]

champs are the val equivalent of cs majors, while masters are the equivalent of like iem katowice or iem dallas, so if a team was able to win like 2 champs in a row while staying consistent both years at masters (maybe not winning but like top 3), then we could start talking about team legacy

but even then its not near astralis haha

nah a masters is worth more than an iem tournament and a champs is worth more than a masters (game for game, im not comparing gmaes here) because they are rarer, you can get 2 majors in 1 year and MANY different iems but its always gonna be 2 masters and 1 champs in a year

Psion [#17]

nah a masters is worth more than an iem tournament and a champs is worth more than a masters (game for game, im not comparing gmaes here) because they are rarer, you can get 2 majors in 1 year and MANY different iems but its always gonna be 2 masters and 1 champs in a year

you’re right, but i didn’t fully mean 1:1 i was just explaining it to op as it seems they don’t know the cs scene and that was the easiest way to explain it.

the one thing i disagree with is the masters/iem thing. i would argue that masters is an equivalent to katowice specifically given the significance of kato within cs history (kato is held in higher regard compared to all other iem tournaments) but everything else you said is right

Can we just not do the CS to Valorant comparisons? As much as people want them to be the same game they are so different, it's actually not fair to compare them.

sheriffykw [#18]

you’re right, but i didn’t fully mean 1:1 i was just explaining it to op as it seems they don’t know the cs scene and that was the easiest way to explain it.

the one thing i disagree with is the masters/iem thing. i would argue that masters is an equivalent to katowice specifically given the significance of kato within cs history (kato is held in higher regard compared to all other iem tournaments) but everything else you said is right

which is why i said an IEM tournament, m3 berlin was worth more than any other masters event because it had 16 teams(and lock\in less) so we have to take the average IEM tourney and the average Masters tourney