0 Comments
Records Match
Record/Time/Map
Val/Avg
Set by
Rival
Galil kills on a map
51.8164
Galil kills on a map
41.8164
GLOCK kills on a map
31.4482
Trades on a map
93.428
Openning kills on a map
82.8324
Speed Round (sec)
00:24s01:55s
Player score (round)
38391010
Multikill x-
4
Multikill x-
4
Clutch (opponents)
2
Historical Maps winrate Last 6 months
Vertigo
65%
Inferno
50%
Dust II
36%
Anubis
24%
Mirage
11%
Ancient
5%
Nuke
1%
Last 5 maps
Vertigo
65%
20
4
Inferno
0%
1
19
Dust II
36%
11
2
Anubis
69%
61
5
Mirage
48%
21
3
Ancient
51%
51
5
Nuke
34%
32
2
Last 5 maps
Vertigo
0%
1
27
Inferno
50%
6
6
Dust II
0%
0
0
Anubis
45%
11
10
Mirage
37%
19
5
Ancient
46%
13
5
Nuke
33%
9
13
Info
Match analysis of UNiTY vs 500 by the Bo3.gg Team
In the CS2 match between UNiTY and 500, a series of thrilling battles unfolded with a score of 0-1, on the following maps: Ancient, and victory was secured by 500. The MVP of this match was M1key.
500 analytics
The team 500 secured 13 out of 20 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations. They won on the maps Ancient. They also successfully set 1 bombs during the match.
The standout players for 500 were Oxygen contributed 18 kills and SHiPZ contributed 17 kills. Their exceptional skills played a pivotal role in securing the win. Thanks to coordinated effort, the team inflicted 8407 overall damage.
On the defensive side, 500 held their ground firmly, successfully defending 7 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control proved to be crucial.
UNiTY analytics
The team UNiTY managed to secure 7 out of 20 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 UNiTY were M1key contributed 21 kills and Levi contributed 14 kills. 6862 of total damage by UNiTY could not prevent 500 from securing the victory
On the defensive side, UNiTY struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 2 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Comments