Editorial: My approach on Virtus.pro splitting strategy
Take a look at a very unique strategy
For the second time yesterday, VP has used a very unusual strategy during the Weekly Finals at PGI.S.
The strategy, which could be described as a very opportunist split, consists of having two players in two opposite loot spots at the start of the game: two players in the Zharki area and two players in Novorepnoye.
Even if one could pretend this strategy to be a good one, I believe this strategy to actually be a really poor one, especially in a traditional format, and I’ll explain to you why.
Facts
First of all, even if this strategy has been used on two really different circles, VP had similar approaches in both games:
- Very standard looting phase with late timing,
- Edge gameplay,
- Willing to regroup in mid-game (zone 3),
- Transition mid to late game as 4.
If you stick to these points, the strategy could be a really good one: you gather much more information in mid-game to prepare your transition to late-game, and not only you have a really good reading about the overall dynamic of the match (enemy teams position and presence on the map), but you also seem guaranteed to have a favorable entry point no matter the pattern (where the game is likely to end).
In both games, they ended 9th with a single kill, but they had an opportunity to fight their way in the final circles and could have had better games.
Analysis
In my opinion, this strategy is against fundamentals of VP playstyle, but also against fundamentals bases.
It shows strong weaknesses in key areas:
- Macro-game:
When it comes to early macro games, your goal as a team is usually to preserve your resources (manpower and vehicles), but also to have a strong dynamic when it comes to taking control of an environment. You try to organize your team position to have both the opportunity to gather information and gather extra points, cutting down other teams’ rotations, or picking up knock/flush on your way in.
With this strategy, you still have the opportunity to gather extra points, but you lose a lot of priority in terms of position because you can’t afford to cover too much territory, and you’re very vulnerable to other teams’ initiatives. You have to play behind other teams and concede a lot of terrain.
- Shifts:
Both from circle 1 to circle 2, and from circle 2 to circle 3, there is still a lot of room on the edges, and if you’re given the opportunity thanks to a favorable shift, you want to pick a very strong position which will guarantee you an excellent game plan for the late-game.
With this strategy, and even more if other teams start to figure out you’re consistently doing so for a given plane path, you’ll not be able to claim a top tier compound : teams around you could figure out you’re two men down, and you don’t even have the possibility to back up the other duo easily. Once again, you have to play behind other teams in order to preserve your resources.
- Transition to late-game:
In a standard game, from circle 4 and so on, you try to figure out and decide how you want to approach the late-game: where do I want to play from? What are other teams going to do? You want to be both flexible and be able to take decisions fast.
With this strategy, you have an extra step before you can get to this point, which is to regroup with the other duo. This step has two consequences: you’re really vulnerable during your rotation and you’re likely to lose any timing you may have during one of the most important steps of the game.
The logical deduction from these points is your incapacity to be active at any stage of the game before the late game, which is a really huge problem when you’re a team with excellent fighting skills, and a strong appeal for pressuring enemy teams and exploiting mistakes. You often end up as well with a very poor mid to late-game transition. You’re more likely to play from an average (or bad) position, and you can also be low on resources (heals and gears) when it comes to crucial team fights.
This reality shows up through their individual statistics, with very bad damage dealt/damage taken ratio:
Conclusion
Even if it sounds promising in the first place, I believe VP has really strong reasons not to use this strategy as they deprive themselves of their primary assets, especially in a format where you are supposed to gather as many points as possible over ten games.
Maxime “Znooper” GONY
Resources : twire.gg
