0 Commentaires
Enregistrements Match
Record/Temps/Carte
Val/M
Établi par
Adversaire
Dégâts des grenades HE en moyenne (par tour)
11.53.4
Éliminations avec Galil en moyenne par carte
41.8171
Dégâts avec Galil en moyenne (par tour)
22.65.8
Éliminations avec M4A1 en moyenne par carte
114.491
Dégâts avec M4A1 en moyenne (par tour)
44.116.3
Fumigènes lancés en moyenne sur une carte
1914.6931
Dégâts des cocktails Molotov en moyenne (par tour)
6.72
Fumigènes lancés en moyenne sur une carte
2014.6931
Éliminations avec USP en moyenne par carte
71.6074
Dégâts avec USP en moyenne (par tour)
22.44.7
Historique Taux de victoire par carte 6 derniers mois
Inferno
64%
Anubis
23%
Ancient
21%
Vertigo
12%
Nuke
7%
Mirage
7%
Overpass
0%
Dernières 5 cartes
Inferno
64%
25
2
Anubis
50%
4
33
Ancient
44%
18
8
Vertigo
29%
7
14
Nuke
38%
8
19
Mirage
60%
15
4
Overpass
44%
18
7
Dernières 5 cartes
Inferno
0%
1
43
Anubis
73%
15
4
Ancient
65%
20
6
Vertigo
17%
6
19
Nuke
31%
16
14
Mirage
67%
12
3
Overpass
44%
9
22
Derniers résultats
Face à face
Matchs précédents
- gpppp
- pppgp
Informations
Match analysis of EYEBALLERS vs PERA by the Bo3.gg Team
In the CS2 match between EYEBALLERS and PERA, a series of thrilling battles unfolded with a score of 2-0, on the following maps: Overpass, Mirage, and victory was secured by EYEBALLERS. The MVP of this match was HEAP.
EYEBALLERS analytics
The team EYEBALLERS secured 26 out of 40 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations. They won on the maps Overpass, Mirage. They also successfully set 3 bombs during the match.
The standout players for EYEBALLERS were HEAP contributed 34 kills and JW contributed 36 kills. Their exceptional skills played a pivotal role in securing the win. Thanks to coordinated effort, the team inflicted 16363 overall damage.
On the defensive side, EYEBALLERS held their ground firmly, successfully defending 13 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control proved to be crucial.
PERA analytics
The team PERA managed to secure 14 out of 40 rounds, but faced challenges in adapting to their opponent's strategies. Capturing 3 plants during the match did not lead the team to victory.
The standout players for PERA were DGL contributed 32 kills and Porya contributed 24 kills. 13698 of total damage by PERA could not prevent EYEBALLERS from securing the victory
On the defensive side, PERA struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 6 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Commentaires