Rating The tactical differentiation of fracture and the counter cultural defense that Propone Riot Games
The Fracture strategy is a labyrinth of doors. Open one, advance, and suddenly you have three more than what to choose. Tours the knob, advance and appear fifteen more. That is basically the process by which one, little by little, is understanding the tactical complexity involved in the new map of Valorant. And it is normal to feel surpassed in a case like this, in which the change of paradigm in the attack and defense positions poses so many doors to open. But there is no reason to stress; The map has already reached the competitive and we can progress.
At the moment, where there have been more fracture retransmissions is in Spain. LVP and Riot Games introduced him on October 21 at Rising Series. It has also been played in some American tournaments and in the Game Changer, without retransmission, and has shyly appeared in the storm circuit. But where we have been able to see – in the sense literal- clashes of higher level has been with UCAM, Vodafone Giants, LDN UTD, stainstar and Acond. Five teams that have left us to intuit where the shots can go, although this is only the beginning of the principle.
The Contracture Defense of Valorant in Fracture
Since his presentation, some could already intuit the reality that Fracture poses. And it is that the fracture, to put it in some way, is not alone on the map. It is also in the need for the defense to take an aggressive dynamic and go beyond the natural limits of the pump point, thus breaking the map with the conquest of its areas. In the end, it seems to be the way in which the apparent advantage of the aggressors is going to be alleviated by the design of the scenario.
The teams, generalizing, are also beginning to flow in this direction. From the 80 rounds played at the moment in this scenario of the Rising Series, only by 5% of them the defense has been raised without some kind of aggression in the first seconds of each round. Everything points to aggressive control of the areas in dispute, from having a simple player holding the angle of microfit of three agents willing to win the area. Something that happens in all maps, of course, but it seems to exaggerate in it.
Even so, we can not understand that all teams are being aggressive in the same way. We have seen LDN UTD, for example, raise against staining a defense with constant aggressions from both sites, making micros between two players with some confidence. Thus they earned two-band information and at the same time opened the possibility of winning the attack of the attacker quickly. But, on the other hand, we have also seen Vodafone Giants defend himself from UCAM at the opposite end, throwing an eye without exposing himself too much and retreating to the pump point with ease.
Undoubtedly, this is simply a door that we have seen, but as we begin to see more fracture in the competitive one will have to cross it and talk about what is behind. To what extent will be a key to victory to have a defense with aggressive dynamics? Can this be one of the pillars on which the result is agreed?
At the moment we have ahead of competitions, like the Red Bull Home Ground, where maybe we can see more Fracture, the approach that teams have their defense and the results that remain on the table.