0 Comments
Teams advantage
Score
4.9
7.1
Nuke2.1
Win Rounds
6
16
Nuke10
Kills
52
93
Nuke41
Damage
6.45K
9.75K
Nuke3304
Economy
387K
548.05K
Nuke161050
Records Match
Record/Time/Map
Val/Avg
Set by
Rival
Historical Maps winrate Last 6 months
Inferno
70%
Ancient
46%
Overpass
L
45%
Dust II
40%
Vertigo
37%
Mirage
L
30%
Nuke
L
4%
Last 5 maps
Inferno
0%
0
0
Ancient
0%
0
1
Overpass
100%
2
0
Dust II
0%
2
0
Vertigo
0%
3
0
Mirage
100%
1
1
Nuke
56%
9
0
Last 5 maps
Inferno
70%
37
6
Ancient
46%
13
22
Overpass
55%
22
12
Dust II
40%
5
29
Vertigo
37%
19
25
Mirage
70%
37
3
Nuke
52%
27
10
Last results
Head to head
Past matches
- l
- wwwww
Info
Match analysis of LF0 vs Into the Breach by the Bo3.gg Team
In the CS2 match between LF0 and Into the Breach, a series of thrilling battles unfolded with a score of 0-1, on the following maps: Nuke, and victory was secured by Into the Breach. The MVP of this match was dobbo.
Into the Breach analytics
The team Into the Breach secured 16 out of 22 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations. They won on the maps Nuke. They also successfully set 1 bombs during the match.
The standout players for Into the Breach were dobbo contributed 22 kills and RuStY contributed 21 kills. Their exceptional skills played a pivotal role in securing the win. Thanks to coordinated effort, the team inflicted 9750 overall damage.
On the defensive side, Into the Breach held their ground firmly, successfully defending 9 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control proved to be crucial.
LF0 analytics
The team LF0 managed to secure 6 out of 22 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 LF0 were eightz999 contributed 15 kills and JACKPOT contributed 9 kills. 6446 of total damage by LF0 could not prevent Into the Breach from securing the victory
On the defensive side, LF0 struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 0 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Comments