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.

All my ops will be jobless.

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.

My crypto king needs no money, so why stream?

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.

fair, minicheckmate.

Valorant colonizer. fixed

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.

But you win more.

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.

• https://youtu.be/Up5ruUogyYs?si=9WG0mLnuoNiRWSNW

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:

• https://tracker.gg/valorant/profile/riot/mfour%2300002/weapons?platform=pc&playlist=competitive&season=4c4b8cff-43eb-13d3-8f14-96b783c90cd2

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.

11k posts and still struggling is wild.

you spelled "better" as "bette" ... So I guess not :/ Broken English isn't my strong suit.

"they were better than RRQ" ... loses to RRQ. I didn't watch... hmm.

?

5th-6th stage 1.
3rd stage 2.

top 2 in your heart?

How we got here:
Sgares showed the community that everyone is throwing for crypto.
Community said wow... but nobody cheats in Valorant so you're wrong.
Ban gets banned and now everyone is like wow... but nobody cheats in Valorant.
Community is split.
Hence your question.

"top" ... like fourth?

What gives you this confidence? Certainly you haven't been watching the games...

https://www.vlr.gg/team/matches/8304/talon/?group=completed

it wasn't... just bored and trying to wake up vlr. ty for the mild enjoyment <3

https://tracker.gg/valorant/profile/riot/coco%23lilyy/matches?platform=pc&playlist=competitive&season=4c4b8cff-43eb-13d3-8f14-96b783c90cd2

VLR is the mob. Trying to express a thoughtful opinion to a mob of people is impossible. If you want to be liked by a mob, express emotions. They understand those.

Don't try to explain laziness to this community. It's like trying to describe air. They praise and deserve the laziness.

Approved list. Will build a sculpture in you glory on Bennett Island.

I knew sayaplayer when he was posting on YouTube his highscores on Aim Hero. We didn't deserve his talent.

Who is this? They def have a point.

wrong website.

Phantom superior when holding an area under 20m. Vandal superior while taking 1v1s and long distance fights. Phantom feels superior on certain maps because of the distances in the spaces you take. In the release maps, no spaces really had longer than 20m unless they were clearly a long angle for an operator. That's why you had the overreaction of Breeze which exaggerated the space and made Vandals superior on that map.

#killfranchising

OPEN LANS. KILL FRANCHISING.

How come I've never seen this topic on VLR before? What's with the British invasion of Valorant? The best historical team yal got is 4kings. Too much British representation in Valorant. There should be way more Norway and Sweden in this scene. Just sayin...

damn bro im on the list twice?