not that liquidpedia is the end all be all but they have it listed as an S-tier and at least in my expirence most people gripes are the format and whose hosting it rather than completely disregarding it

LoL has basically the same situation (any event that matters is hosted by riot) and at least in my experience LoL fandoms care roughly the same about EWC as an MSI

only 2 teams from each region had to play in a qualifier everyone else qualified through stage 1 and you got me on the second fair enough

from every other E-Sport I've ever followed an event with the top teams in the world qualified in the same way as other every events with even bigger prize pools would be considered an S-tier event but only in this community have a seen EWC be disregarded take it away and Pacific still has some catching up to do but yes EWC should be included here

1. Americas: 3 champs, 3 masters, 12 finals
2. EMEA: 1 champs, 4 masters, EWC, 12 finals
3. Pacific: 4 masters, 7 finals (best BY FAR currently)
4. China: 1 champs, 1 final

With FNC, GMB and SEN all their finals were close but with NS it was 39-18 in comparison to 40-31 for FNC, 41-33 FOR GMB and 43-37 for SEN
This might have actually been the greatest run of all time

Xross was the highest rated player on the winning team and had the most insane finals performance I've ever seen

In terms of map W/L Reykjavík Sen but that was in the Valorant stone age
Tokyo FNC and Santiago NS only lost 1 map so probably NS not even joking

Me

Were you watching The Letter Kei most recent video?

That's my make him TP

Why does Mada's profile picture on VLR look likes he's in dune?

Perhaps I was too quick to assume they would win this event obviously they can still win it but holy shit NS are insane

He has great calls but he's a -30 merchant

I should've changed my wording, I meant (2023 FNC is widely regarded currently as the best team if NRG b2b though it would be more impressive because it would have a champs win so I don't want them to

That isn't what I said, the back to back makes currently 2023 FNC the best team of all time, now FNC is also probably the greatest valorant organization, with 2 titles, tied most and 6 finals the most of any team but that wasn't my original claim whatsoever, if NRG b2b Paris and Santiago that is clearly better than Sao Paolo and Tokyo so I don't want them to

1. NS, because it would be insane for them to win this event
2. G2, for Babybay
3. PRX, because I love them
4. NRG, I love them too but NRG would have a more impressive 2-peat than FNCs making them the greatest of all time and that's the only thing us FNC fans have atp

Both versions of their respective OTs make sense for each game, CS awps are WAY more common (it's a designated position) and with Valorant's OT economy you have to glass cannon which incentives you to not awp, so having that much money makes sense for CS and less so for Valorant also it makes OTs more nerve racking which is always great

The one thing I noticed was both teams went against the grain (which but FNC in the ass at champs) in 2023 the meta was perfected by loud with viper, harbor comps but FNC would run mostly double initiators comps whereas with NRG double duelist has been the meta and they have double scan initiator and combine the odin with it. Some of the best teams thus far in Valorant have been teams that went against the meta

If NRG B2B which is more impressive, them or FNC

Numbers:
FNC: 9-0 in matches (100%), 21-3 (~88%) in maps, 306-211 (~60%) in rounds in Lock-in Sao Paolo and Masters Tokyo
NRG: 10-1 (~91%) in matches thus far (12-1 (~92%) or 12-2 (~86%) assuming they win)
22-7 (~76%) in maps thus far, 357-288 (~55%) in rounds thus far in Champions Paris and Masters Santiago

Technically they still need to win it but I would be surprised if they don't at this point

Clearly FNC was more dominant but NRG would win more important events

Launders and Scrawny as well as the Vitality and Heroic lineups giving a moment of silence and paying their respects at the Blast Spring Final was very nice to see, Twisten's death hits VERY close to home for me and many others, forever in our hearts

Leo probably should be there now that I think about it, I though he missed too much of the year but it really wasn't that much overall especially when Trexx didn't play a whole lot of round more than him but put some respect on Trexx's name he was the 3rd highest rated player both overall and against top opponents

3 reasons:

1. KangKang's stats overall weren't any where close to Aspas at his role, (1.26 for Aspas) vs (1.10 for KangKang) which accounts for the majority of KangKang's matches being in a weaker China region at that point (China has undoubtable improved since then but no team other than EDG had international playoff win)
2. T3xture accomplished more across the year with GenG being by far the best team that year and T3xture's stats were equal if not better especially when accounting for #3
3. KangKang's stats drop off against top opponents (2000+) (Aspas has a 1.17 which is the highest) and (T3xture GOES UP from a 1.12 to 1.14) whereas KangKang goes down to (1.04) from a (1.10)

KangKang had an incredible year and that champs final performance was insane but similar to NRG this past year they had 1 good tournament and that really isn't enough for me to give the spot to him

Ethan was clearly a better mechanical player and Boaster did lose to him at champs but wasn't really good enough across the whole season for me justify putting him above Boaster, we really only judge IGLs off of success and FNC had the most success overall so it felt justified in giving it to him but Ethan was really good last year

He has a solid argument because FNC was so good but Leaf was so much better individually, better both overall and against opponents with 2000+ rating (top teams) and G2 wasn't that much worse than FNC across the whole year

I more so put those players there because they were great individual players not because of G2's success though they were great last year

It's sad to see just how far EMEA has fallen, they haven't won a VCT trophy in 2 years, it's not to say they aren't competitive, they have made VCT 4 finals in that span and won EWC with both finalists being from EMEA but EWC is widely regarded as a step below a Masters let alone champs which they have NEVER won, all time EMEA is 2 behind Americas but right now they are 3rd behind Americas and Pacific

It's like FIFA but Valorant, IGL will be a separate role
2021: Sentinel: NAts (1.15) 1x Masters champ, 2x finals, Initiator: Sacy (1.28), Duelist: CNed (1.28), 1x Champions winner, Controller: Marved 1x final, (1.03)(weren't many great options), Flex: Shao (1.29), IGL: Redgar (.89) 1x Masters champ, 2x finals
2022: Sentinel: Yay (1.22) 1x champ, 2x final, 3x Top-3, Initiator: Leo (1.23), Duelist: Aspas (1.20), 1x Champions winner, 2x final, Controller: Mako (1.21) 1x Top-3, Flex: Shao (1.17) 1x Masters champ, IGL: FNS (0.83), 1x champ, 2x final, 3x Top-3
2023: Sentinel: Alfajer (1.21) 2x Masters champ, Initiator: Leo (1.25), 2x Masters champ, Duelist: Demon1 (1.15 rating) 1x Champs winner, 2x final (VERY close between him and Aspas), Controller: Mako (1.16) 1x 3-4th Flex: Chronicle: (1.11) 2x Masters champ IGL: Boaster: (.97) 2x Masters champ
2024: Sentinel: Chichoo (1.11) 1x Champs winner, 3x China champ, Initiator: Leo (1.19) 1x EMEA champ, Duelist: Aspas (1.26) 1x Americas Champ, 1x Top-3, Controller: Karon (1.10), 1x Masters champ, 2x finals, 2x Pacific champ, Flex: Chronicle (1.15), 2x EMEA Champ, IGL: Munchkin (1.05) 1x Masters champ, 2x finals, 2x Pacific champ
2025: Sentinel: Leaf (1.12) 1x final, 3x Americas champ, Initiator: Trent (1.16), 1x final, 3x Americas champ, Duelist: Kajaak (1.13) 3x finals, 1x EMEA champ, Controller: Valyn (1.06) 1x final, 3x Americas champ, Flex: Brawk (1.11) 1x Champs winner, IGL: Boaster (.86), 3x finals, 1x EMEA champ

Stats: Shao, Aspas, Leo, Mako, Chronicle, made it twice for individual performance and Boaster made it twice as an IGL (Shao and Mako are really underrated)

where would you have them?

I wonder why you like this prediction so much

I don't know, that's probably the case, i would still say G2 wins and BBL wins, i will change that

Playoffs:
FUR-G2 - G2-NRG - NRG-PRX - NRG-G2
AG-NRG - BBL-PRX
BBL-T1 -
NS-PRX -

FUR-AG - NS-G2 - G2-BBL - G2-PRX
T1-NS - FUR-BBL

Groups:
(2-0) NRG, G2
(2-1) PRX, T1
(1-2) M8, TL
(0-2) XLG, EDG

1st: NRG
2nd: G2
3rd: PRX
4th: BBL
5-6th: FUR-NS
7-8th: AG-T1
9-10th: M8, TL
11-12th: XLG, EDG

Bold means team won

BRO WHAT I DO TO YOU😭

bro what I do to you bro😭

I want to use this ideology but in practice, it doesn't work like that, for example Chronicle in EWC, he was individually so far ahead of everyone at the event and the only person who had a legitimate argument for MVP other than him was Wo0t, whom Chronicle a .08 rating and .21 KD better than, which is an enormous gap and in the final which couldn't have been closer literally Chronicle wildly out performed him, I think it is unfair, the MVP is an individual award, I didn't want to take away from the fact that winning matters so the majority of all winners (12/16) but certain cases where a player had a great run to the final and that final was close and they were clearly the best player I gave it to them

both have solid arguments, I could totally see both sides considering NAts won the event and played crazy and certainly is deserving, my thought process was final was close, far closer than that 3-0, it does NOT do that final justice, map 1 could've gone either way EASILY, NV should've won map 2 but threw on CT side and map 3 was somewhat close and frankly throughout the whole event Yay was just a step ahead of everyone and making the final was good enough for me to give it to him

if you read my response whatsoever you have said otherwise, I have a feeling you were going to say that no matter what I type because you feel your right and I'm wrong and no one will convince you otherwise or your just rage baiting either way there is no point in continuing this conversation

that's not how this works, this is an MVP FOR MADRID, I don't care if someone is better than John at every event for the year except Madrid because the only thing that matters for an MVP at Madrid IS HIS STATS AT MADRID, also if it was just about stats then it would be Zekken but because value is not JUST stats John gets it

For Bangkok I think though Izu was really good but with just how close that final was and Frankly Trent was clearly the best player at the event, especially when we take away the Swiss-stage, Trent really separates from everyone else so for me I thought it was Trent but Izu was also quite deserving

I'm not saying Zekken wasn't the best player at that time, at all other events it really wasn't close Zekken was miles ahead of John but just for that event because the number were close and John was IGLing I think its fair he gets it

I understand for Berlin because he lost the final but that final was closer than the 3-0 shows and up until that he had A 1.45 Rating, 1.63 KD, 1.07 KPR, 304 ACS and 190 ADR which if those were for the whole event would EASILY be the records for players with enough rounds and didn't lose a map in that span, though I could totally see NAts winning it because he was playing out of his mind and gambit were unbelievable at that event

Izu was very good but Trent was quite a bit better and that final was the most buttclenchingly close thing i've ever seen (rooting for T1 at least)
I considered Alfa but with their ratings being relatively close, Forsaken actually winning it and being an IGL I chose to give it to him, but it was VERY close and I originally chose Alfa but ended up going with Forsaken instead for those reasons

yes pretty much any match I could, sure Zekken won them that final and his split performance was out of this world especially on defense but this is an MVP for the whole event not a finals MVP, overall John was outright better than him the entirety of the playoffs not even including him being IGL which for me makes it not even close

The only other person who could reasonably win the MVP for Madrid was Zekken and a rating difference of .03 is not enough to overcome the fact that John was IGL on top of his stats

Frankly I think if you had a strong enough campaign like JohnQT and Forsaken as an IGL where their opponents so to speak in the MVP race were Zekken 1.15 rating vs JohnQT's 1.12 rating and Alfajer 1.17 rating vs Forsaken's 1.12 rating, I think the value of being an IGL and in Forsaken's case actually winning the event outweighs the rating difference, now you could make an argument that Alfa was so much better than him IE: .24 better KD, 49 more ACS and .22 KPR more outweighs the fact that Forsaken won the event and was IGL but I think it depends on what you value but yet again it's splitting hairs here

it was neither here nor there for me and just going off how the ratings system works he had WAY more first kills and a higher ACS he would have probably gotten the highest rating therefore for me he would get MVP but it could just as easily be Meteor

Similar to HLTV, most MVPs will go to the winner but you don't necessarily have to win the event as long as you are clearly the best player and had a deep run

Masters Reykjavík 21': Tenz, 1.35 rating, 1.02 KPR, won the event undefeated
Masters Berlin: Yay: 1.33 rating, lost the final but was miles ahead of everyone
Champions Berlin: CNed: 1.15 rating, won event
Masters Reykjavík 22': Yay, 1.19 rating, won event
Masters Copenhagen: Shao, 1.19 rating, won event
Champions Istanbul: Yay, 1.30 rating, 460 total kills, lost in final but was so much better than everyone its not even funny
LOCK//IN São Paulo: Leo, 1.30 rating, won event, Shao was a demon though
Masters Tokyo: Alfajer, 1.33 rating, only lost 1 map the whole event
Champions LA: Demon1, 1.26 rating, 40% HS, won event
Masters Madrid: Johnqt, 1.12 rating, IGL, won event
Masters Shanghai: Texture, 1.21 KD (no ratings), won event
Champions Seoul: Chichoo, 1.18 rating, won event
Masters Bangkok: Trent: 1.21 rating, lost in final but T1 didn't have someone who had an MVP level performance at the event
Masters Toronto: Forsaken: 1.12 rating, IGL, won the event, though you could make an argument for Alfajer
Esports World Cup: Chronicle: 1.30 rating, lost in Final but he was so much better than everyone else at the event I felt it was fair to give him the MVP
Champions Paris: Brawk: 1.16 rating, won event
Masters Santiago: Xross 1.14 rating, won event

If you have any suggestions for this list LMK
Also notably Yay had 3 MVPs, sad to HES NOT ON A TEAM considering he was legitimately the best player in Valorant for the pre-franchising era
Also the weakest MVP is (excluding IGLs) is Brawk in Paris (though that doesn't do him justice)
The strongest MVP is EASILY Tenz in Reykjavík 21' though it was in the Valorant stone age

I've done rankings in the past heavily favoring team success, I've done rankings heavily favoring individual success as this is a top 20 individual players, but how else would should I rank them, yes you could add nuances such as hard entries and players playing supports (imitators, smokes) to those stats but then this list because much harder to understand and diminishes the value of the ratings, I do agree with the fact that a player like Jinggg's stats are less reflective of how good he truly is but simultaneously I have to stick to structure if I am going to rank players and stats + team success are the most reliable thing to go off of

I love Boostio as much as the next guy but by that argument Boaster and Saadhak definitely deserve to be there too and that completely changes the scope of this list because then the list would basically be all IGLs, top 20 in value on winning, EASILY, top 20 player not a chance in hell

Where would you have him, looking at this objectively, he had the highest rating on a role that is not build for stat stuffing and won the most by far, I really didn't even consider anyone for 1, Demon1's LA the only reason people would say he has an argument Leo while on initiator was .03 ratings behind him, I really don't even think anyone else has an argument, but where do you have him?