The TRUTH Behind G2's Jump Off

There's a lot of drama and opinions around G2's strategy at Champs on Abyss, where they jumped off the map and threw away their eco. Let's dive into the actual statistics and data surrounding this strategy to determine if it really makes sense.

#vct #vct2024 #vctchampions

[YanNyeinAung]

Lothar the kind of person to call lurkers 'cowards' because he doesn't know what the shift key and map awareness are

[farambe]

Lothar has somehow managed to have some of the most consistently horrid takes since the BETA, truly one of the analysts of valorant.

[WendlerTV]

Hey Platoon, appreciate the analysis on the premise of jumping off. For ref, i was one of the strategic coaches helping josh, peter, and G2 during the past few months. Just wanted to give some additional insight on how its hard to look at this specific situation with the math behind R2/R14 Eco Percentages on its own.

This situation of jumping off, is strictly viable on the condition of being down 9-3 or greater out of halftime and why the ideal of denying ultimate orbs comes into play. Under any other round situation (6-6/7-5) where advantage is relatively more median, there is no incentive to do the 5 man jump off and is backed by the data you showed within the video.

Why it matters in this specific situation, is denying 5 orbs + Kill money for gun purchase + Plant money, allows us more room to equalize and claw back (since eco equalizes assuming conversion) and not have to worry about Lev's Aggro Focused Ultimate's getting online sooner to snowball by round 11 and close the game. Itll be interesting if this becomes a more sought after option or if riot will implement some type of eco penalty. With how niche this situation is though in my head i dont think we will see any major changes any time soon. But thanks for the breakdown either way!

[natnaelendale-dhvr]

amazing vid ma boi cant even think about how long the research must have taken

[flytelp]

I think there's a bit of an underrated mental aspect to the strategy. It's like you are just getting the round over with and focusing up on the next round to come. You get a brief moment of hilarity at the absurdity of your strategy which could also be a morale boost. Whether it's backed with statistics or not, if G2 had won the game afterwards we would be biased towards looking at these intangible benefits which we assume to not exist because of the outcome alone.

[omgitsbluebird]

platoom never fails to fill me up with his content

[kodaflash]

Important thing to keep in mind when coming to the conclusion of the video is that this map would be nearly as hard as pearl to win a defending eco.
Abyss is very exec heavy, which would mean eco stacking is probably the only valid strategy, but if they don't hit the stacked site retaking is on either site would probably realistically be less than a 2% chance against harbor because of the poor weaponry. If they have to retake, they already granted orbs and plant money. Even if they attack the stacked site, unless they buy utility, the stack will not work on abyss without granting too many ult points or blatantly giving away the stack. If you could jump off ascent (11:34) the stats would still be favored for defending eco success rates, because it's more favored to defend compared to Abyss.
Feeding harbor ult points could realistically allow for Lev to have an even chance at winning round 15, which is why G2 opted for the safer option by jumping.

[_DRACrY]

Great insight! Thanks for the video, you're always coming up with something interesting.

[oweyy_]

There's a reason why Lothar is nothing but a spectator who whines on the sidelines while the players are in the game playing. Even if it's "wrong" in some twisted way, you're not the one who's playing. Also, the fact Lothar makes it controversial in the first place is stupid, it's really not; just an incredibly stupid take from him. It's strategy, let G2 do what they do - yeah "stats" might say otherwise, but it's an acceptable outcome.

Zekken provided a really good counter-argument, just to really shut up this whole thing. If what G2 did is wrong, how is teams dying to spike fine? With the spike there's further disadvantages like the enemies getting some ult orbs, plant money... falling off the map denies this AND saves time instead of 5 players with classics waiting for 40 seconds to die to bomb.

[supermonkeyqwerty]

Good work on the stats. Too often, people let the available stats modify the kind of analysis that they end up doing (eg looking only at FK, FD when maybe looking at the first 2 or 3 gunfights would be more effective)
But figuring out the kind of analysis you want to do, THEN finding the data to check if it actually lines up feels so much more effective

[tangobango]

Platoon, you (and your team, if you have one) are doing great things. Your hardwork will pay off. You deserve more recognition for what you are doing.

[cameronmaclean]

I like the title change, I didn’t click with the old title, I did with this one. Whoever cooked the title is doing there job correctly, good shit.

[BobJoe-cqcy]

Very insightful video, and I think you have shown clearly through your analysis that 'instantly dying' would not be a beneficial strategy when averaged across all maps and considering the current/recent professional metas (past 2 years as mentioned).

Still, I think there is an argument to be made that this strategy on abyss has merit, as these statistics tends to look at things on the broad scale (naturally, since you need a large enough sample size to make meaningful conclusions). Taking an example from the video, where Pearl is an outlier in terms of eco win % on defense, it might be the case that, from G2's perspective, abyss also is a similarly difficult to defend map on eco rounds and thus this type of strategy has more value than in a generic setting. Additionally, there might be other factors present on Abyss rather than other maps that make the overall benefit of this strategy higher/lower (position of neutral ult orbs, how often teams will opt for the FNC kind of buy on this map, etc.).

In my opinion, it's really impossible at this point to definitively say that G2 made the (right/wrong) decision by playing that specific round this way, as we just don't have enough data on Abyss. Plus, even if we were to revisit this question later, we would have to try and consider and control for various other factors that will have changed, particularly agent changes and how they impact the general meta. Perhaps the next agent significantly boosts the likelihood of eco winning % for example.

Thanks again for your insight and analysis, was a great watch!

[kenchen]

Your statistical analysis is amazing, I applaud your hard work

[xNolva]

Wow this is my first video I’m watching from you and it’s very good. Keep it up

[utsavmanandharz]

We should also note that the attackers in this case have more control on who gets the ult orbs. On lotus attack teams already do this where they'll send their raze to be as aggro as possible in round 2 in hopes of a round 3 showstopper which, if achieved, nearly GUARANTEES site control on C site ( and usually the win). It is so common to see games snowball from that round 3 ult that if there was a way to do this on lotus it would 100% be the better strategy.

Obviously abyss is new and the meta hasn't settled so there are less hugely impactful ults( astra ult maybe?) but valorant is so monentum based that G2 is justified in doing this imo.

[babusseus]

Platoon masterclass as always, I admire the work dude

[solarrxenon]

i love how shit the eco WR is on defense pearl/sunset and how high it is on ATK pearl/sunset, shows how unbalanced those maps are

[angryapricot]

I love the videos and the data is really well organized.
But for the ult orbs on deaths, as everyone is aware, are not equally likely to be gotten from the pistol-winning team vs the pistol-losing team so they dont really cancel each other out.
More importantly though with the money prevented by teams attempting an eco is that when a team like Gen G buys on round two they often use cheap guns or sheriffs in order to snowball the economy as mentioned. However because of this they aren't losing 800 credits from dying with a sheriff on round two because they would not be using that gun either way come round 3. Im not sure if this was considered or not but that could potentially account for 1600+ credits worth of strewed data.

Anyway love the vids and keep up the great work
🐐

[chanelymoo]

the man is giving us a phd thesis every vid 😭 thanks for another super interesting analysis Platoon <3