0 Comments
Teams advantage
Score
5.5
6.6
Ancient1.5
Win Rounds
20
32
Ancient8
Kills
166
200
Ancient32
Damage
19.35K
21.59K
Ancient1847
Economy
1.12M
1.23M
Ancient97950
Records Match
Record/Time/Map
Val/Avg
Set by
Rival
Historical Maps winrate Last 6 months
Inferno
L
100%
Anubis
100%
Vertigo
L
67%
Nuke
67%
Mirage
52%
Overpass
46%
Dust II
38%
Ancient
7%
Last 5 maps
Inferno
100%
1
0
Anubis
0%
0
2
Vertigo
100%
2
0
Nuke
0%
1
1
Mirage
0%
0
0
Overpass
0%
0
1
Dust II
0%
0
0
Ancient
50%
2
0
Last 5 maps
Inferno
0%
0
18
Anubis
100%
1
0
Vertigo
33%
9
6
Nuke
67%
12
3
Mirage
52%
21
1
Overpass
46%
13
4
Dust II
38%
8
4
Ancient
57%
14
4
Info
Match analysis of LAKAKA vs Aurora by the Bo3.gg Team
In the CS2 match between LAKAKA and Aurora, a series of thrilling battles unfolded with a score of 0-2, on the following maps: Nuke, Ancient, and victory was secured by Aurora. The MVP of this match was Lack1.
Aurora analytics
The team Aurora secured 32 out of 52 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations. They won on the maps Nuke, Ancient. They also successfully set 4 bombs during the match.
The standout players for Aurora were Lack1 contributed 57 kills and Norwi contributed 38 kills. Their exceptional skills played a pivotal role in securing the win. Thanks to coordinated effort, the team inflicted 21587 overall damage.
On the defensive side, Aurora held their ground firmly, successfully defending 20 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control proved to be crucial.
LAKAKA analytics
The team LAKAKA managed to secure 20 out of 52 rounds, but faced challenges in adapting to their opponent's strategies. Capturing 2 plants during the match did not lead the team to victory.
The standout players for LAKAKA were Jackinho contributed 45 kills and robiin contributed 32 kills. 19348 of total damage by LAKAKA could not prevent Aurora from securing the victory
On the defensive side, LAKAKA struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 12 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Comments