0 Comments
89
99
23
-10
369
16:10
25
1
Dust II6.1
+2%
Records Match
Record/Time/Map
Val/Avg
Set by
Rival
Lineups
Lineup
- Starter
- Starter
- Starter
- Starter
- Starter
Historical Maps winrate Last 6 months
Vertigo
42%
Ancient
33%
Mirage
31%
Inferno
27%
Nuke
14%
Dust II
5%
Overpass
0%
Last 5 maps
Vertigo
67%
3
0
Ancient
33%
9
0
Mirage
75%
4
4
Inferno
0%
0
4
Nuke
64%
11
3
Dust II
45%
11
0
Overpass
0%
3
0
Last 5 maps
Vertigo
25%
4
6
Ancient
0%
0
6
Mirage
44%
18
1
Inferno
27%
15
0
Nuke
50%
10
2
Dust II
50%
10
1
Overpass
0%
2
4
Last results
Head to head
Past matches
- wlllw
- lwlwl
Info
Match analysis of QUAZAR vs Zero Tenacity by the Bo3.gg Team
In the CS2 match between QUAZAR and Zero Tenacity, a series of thrilling battles unfolded with a score of 1-0, on the following maps: Dust II, and victory was secured by QUAZAR. The MVP of this match was Shady.
QUAZAR analytics
The team QUAZAR secured 0 out of 26 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations. They won on the maps Dust II. They also successfully set 0 bombs during the match.
The standout players for QUAZAR were Shady contributed 32 kills and la3euka contributed 22 kills. Their exceptional skills played a pivotal role in securing the win. Thanks to coordinated effort, the team inflicted 10769 overall damage.
On the defensive side, QUAZAR held their ground firmly, successfully defending 0 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control proved to be crucial.
Zero Tenacity analytics
The team Zero Tenacity managed to secure 26 out of 26 rounds, but faced challenges in adapting to their opponent's strategies. Capturing 4 plants during the match did not lead the team to victory.
The standout players for Zero Tenacity were nEMANHA contributed 22 kills and brutmonster contributed 21 kills. 9607 of total damage by Zero Tenacity could not prevent QUAZAR from securing the victory
On the defensive side, Zero Tenacity struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 11 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Comments