0 Comments
79
46
29
+33
449
15:3
25
0
+25%
46
79
10
-33
295
3:15
10
1
-20%
Teams advantage Mirage (M1)
Records Mirage
Record/Time/Map
Val/Avg
Set by
Rival
Deagle kills on a map
41.6755
Deagle damage (avg/round)
22.25.4
GLOCK kills on a map
31.4429
GLOCK damage (avg/round)
17.33.9
HE damage (avg/round)
12.13.4
M4A1 kills on a map
124.5517
M4A1 damage (avg/round)
50.516.3
USP kills on a map
41.6107
USP damage (avg/round)
13.54.7
Galil kills on a map
61.8161
Info
Map Analysis of Zero Tenacity vs CYBERSHOKE by the Bo3.gg Team
Zero Tenacity on Mirage Analysis
Zero Tenacity demonstrated their prowers on Mirage, securing 13 out of 18 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations on this specific map. Victory on this map contributed to their overall success in the match.
The standout players for Zero Tenacity on Mirage were simke, who contributed 22 kills, and brutmonster, who added 17 kills to the team's efforts. Their exceptional skills and coordination were instrumental in securing the map win. Throughout the match on Mirage, the team inflicted a total of 8079 overall damage.
On the defensive side of Mirage, Zero Tenacity held their ground firmly, successfully defending 10 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control on this map proved to be crucial in their victory.
CYBERSHOKE on Mirage Analysis
Mirage proved to be a challenging battleground for CYBERSHOKE, as they managed to secure 5 out of 18 rounds on this map. Adapting to their opponent's strategies on this particular map presented difficulties for them.
The standout players for CYBERSHOKE on Mirage included flamie, who contributed 15 kills, and Re1GN, who added 10 kills. Despite their individual efforts, inflicting 5310 total damage, CYBERSHOKE couldn't prevent Zero Tenacity from securing victory on Mirage
On the defensive side of Mirage, CYBERSHOKE struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 3 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges on this map, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Comments