0 Comments
Records Match
Record/Time/Map
Val/Avg
Set by
Rival
M4A1 kills on a map
114.491
Headshots on a map
18.060.3141
Player score (round)
41031011
Damage (total/round)
40073
Multikill x-
4
Multikill x-
4
Historical Maps winrate Last 6 months
Nuke
62%
Vertigo
60%
Overpass
54%
Mirage
52%
Inferno
45%
Anubis
14%
Ancient
9%
Last 5 maps
Nuke
0%
0
1
Vertigo
100%
1
0
Overpass
0%
0
1
Mirage
0%
2
0
Inferno
100%
1
1
Anubis
67%
3
0
Ancient
50%
6
0
Last 5 maps
Nuke
62%
26
18
Vertigo
40%
5
25
Overpass
54%
28
4
Mirage
52%
25
12
Inferno
55%
20
4
Anubis
53%
34
11
Ancient
41%
29
15
Last results
Past matches
- wwwlw
- lwlww
Info
Match analysis of FLuffy Gangsters vs ECLOT by the Bo3.gg Team
In the CS2 match between FLuffy Gangsters and ECLOT, a series of thrilling battles unfolded with a score of 0-1, on the following maps: Mirage, and victory was secured by ECLOT. The MVP of this match was Dytor.
ECLOT analytics
The team ECLOT secured 13 out of 21 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations. They won on the maps Mirage. They also successfully set 3 bombs during the match.
The standout players for ECLOT were Dytor contributed 21 kills and FORSYY contributed 19 kills. Their exceptional skills played a pivotal role in securing the win. Thanks to coordinated effort, the team inflicted 8382 overall damage.
On the defensive side, ECLOT held their ground firmly, successfully defending 7 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control proved to be crucial.
FLuffy Gangsters analytics
The team FLuffy Gangsters managed to secure 8 out of 21 rounds, but faced challenges in adapting to their opponent's strategies. Capturing 0 plants during the match did not lead the team to victory.
The standout players for FLuffy Gangsters were Djon8 contributed 23 kills and h1ghnesS contributed 13 kills. 7159 of total damage by FLuffy Gangsters could not prevent ECLOT from securing the victory
On the defensive side, FLuffy Gangsters struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 6 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges, making it difficult to maintain site control.
Comments