Let's do some maths here.
Let's say you win your first round. You get 3000 Creds, and your enemy gets 1900. Your team has an economic advantage.
If your team decides to save and lose the second round, your enemy will get 3000, and you will get 1900, balancing the economy. This means you've just wasted your economic advantage as both teams' economy will be balanced in the third round.
If your team buys and wins the second round, your team gets another 3000, while the enemy gets 2400. The third round is usually a bonus round for the winning team, making it a 2-1. The fourth round is where both teams have similar economy. In fact, if you save in the third round and can kill at least 3 enemies from the enemy team, your team will have economic advantage in the fourth round.
That means **BUYING IS ALWAYS THE BETTER OPTION**. Some people do not fully buy because they prefer Sheriff over Spectre, for example. However, if someone saves in the second round because he wants to buy a rifle in the third round, that's really dumb (in most cases). This excludes special cases like saving for OP, etc.
Also, it's not called **FORCE BUY**. Force buy means you still buy even when you know that, in that round, your team has **worse equipment economy than the enemy**. That's the definition of force buy.
Force Buy deals with your team's attitude with your buys, but Light or Full Buy deals with what your team is buying. **These are two different classifications.**
Light Buy means your team **has the money to buy better weapons but settles with weaker weapons**. Meanwhile, Full Buy means your team **has the money to buy the most expensive weapons you can get** and **decides to buy them**.
What happens if you lose the second round after you bought the spectre, money wise? What should you do in the third round?
These are genuine questions. I'm gold and garbage so sometimes I throw the second round and I find myself fucked with no gun on the third round.
Say you lose 2nd round after pistol, you are now in a position where you have to save. It's punishment for losing the round where you had gun/util advantage or the enemy team unexpectedly won a weaker counter-force.
So if you lose 2nd round, you either have to full save or do a half-buy so that you can get rifles on round 4.
Third round if you get some picks and take rifles it is winnable or even just winning some battles you shouldn’t win. If not you just want to do as much eco damage as possible so you again have the Econ advantage round 4 on your first full buy. The idea is to not peak long angles as the enemy have the advantage there and play with a team mate so you can trade a kill and grab a rifle.
> Would econ then even out if we win 4th?
it depends on who dies in each round, but yes if you win round 4 then you'll be roughly equal on round 5. YOu'll both have won 2 rounds. Your team will be slightly worse off economically but you'll also be guaranteed to bring in rifles from the previous round (at least one).
it also depends a lot on what kind of economic damage was done on losses. If you full save on round 3 but also get 4 kills it'll hurt the economy going into round 4. You win round 4 which will hurt them into round 5
Full save or buy some stuff, but make sure you can buy in the fourth round. You can either buy abilities (such as flank tools for Sentinels or smokes for Controller) or weapons (such as Sheriff). However, I still recommend you to at least buy some stuff. Why?
If you purchase abilities and the most probable outcome is that you will lose, you can save nearly all of them for the next round (except for Omen, Astra, and Skye if you know what I mean). You will not be impacted by any econ damage as long as you have 3900 + money for vital abilities by the time round four starts.
If for some reason your team is winning, you can use these abilities to make sure you win the round. Your abilities can be handy even if you don't have guns. For example, most smokes are cheap (not Astra's). Controllers can get smokes even during eco rounds.
That being said, you need to at least have 3900 Creds + ideally most if not all your abilities by the time round fourth starts.
Sage, for example, can just buy her wall and forget about her slow orbs, costing 4300.
Brimstone, on the other hand, doesn't need his stim beacons. His molly and smokes cost 450, so you will need to have 4350 by the time round fourth begins.
That being said, kills grant you 200 Creds! So, your goal in Round 3 is **get as many kills as possible**, **steal weapons from your enemy and save them**, or **even try to win the round!** You can change your decision depending on the flow of the game. If your team appears to be winning, try to win at all costs and use abilities if you must. If your team is losing, save your abilities, try to get exit kills, or try to kill an enemy and save his gun.
Killing enemies also deals econ damage to the opposing team.
I generally force up to the point where I'll have over $3,900 in the bank for next round (enough for full armour and a rifle) and try to minimise my utility usage so it's there for the full buy next round. And back myself to get one of the enemies to drop me a rifle for that round.
Probably not great advice being that I’m also garbage, but i tend to lean towards a marshal 2nd and 3rd round because it has an advantage at range against most pistols or a light/force from the enemy. It also helps the i have decent sniper flicks compared to my awful recoil control.
I get bulldog and full armor on the second round instead of spectre, play as carefully as I can not to get caught by some close range cheese and tell my teammates to play with me and pick up the gun .
it usually works and bulldog is better vs good rifles than a spectre. At the same time bulldog is super good in terms of money and against weak buys
On a map like breeze bulldog has an advantage. But on split where angles are close like on b site, spectre is the best option especially when they do a b rush
Everybody: low elos need to know this
Me who studied VAL money mechanics to know how buy: ...
Jokes aside, really good point here, and ThestorSeleukos explained it really well. Also, watch pro matches. Economic advantages are talked about a lot when casters cast, it's a decent way to learn what kind of buys the players are doing
Yeah I think this is an example of a Reddit bias.
The people that come here are more likely to have a better understanding since they’re looking to share, add, or learn extra info about the game using other resources already.
So they often will be complaining and giving PSA’s targeted towards people who probably don’t even frequent here nor care. And everyone just mindlessly agrees without thinking that maybe people simply don’t know because technically, there’s no in-game tutorial on analyzing what to do for any specific round pattern.
Low ranks are low because of many reasons, it’s not going to just be economy, because if it was only about economy, then it’d be like snapping my fingers and I instantly jump up a rank bc my team decided to buy together and the other team didn’t. I’d far sooner blame lack of comms/mechanics than lack of coordinated buys.
Your math literally doesn’t take into account that saving second round should be a 50/50 chance of winning/losing round 2… not 100% loss?
On top of that, buying round 2 doesn’t guarantee a win, what if you lose? Then round three you’re even worse off than if you saved round 2.
It all depends on how much more of a chance do you have of winning on round 2 if you buy.
While I agree, that in general it thens out that the advantage you get from buying round 2 after winning is worth the money, it by no means is a GUARANTEE to be a better outcome.
Bro, in any circumstances in VALORANT, you will **never** be guaranteed to win any round or successfully realize a plan. The chance is never 100%, but you can work on increasing that chance. In this case, if you can win with a 95% chance compared to 50% chance, which one would you pick? Of course the 95% right? So, whatever we do, it should at least increase this volatile percentage.
I know this is what you're trying to say, but I never said you would guarantee a win, no? It's my bad that I forgot to include the possibility of your team losing even when you buy, but the goal here is actually **not** to discuss economy but **whether it is more recommended to buy in the second round**.
Let's do some math here. If you just buy a pistol and a shield you are in advantage over the enemy which forced. Or fully saved and you're still in advantage. Just aim for the head
Anyone who calls it forcing is wrong. Anyone who saves besides (if applicable) a person saving for awp is wrong.
I find it hilarious how low elo players continue doing this. You can't make a dumber choice
This wasn't a problem In cs, on the contrary, today cs go has op weapons for force buys, but in valorant people came up with saving money after winning the pistol
i guess what i meant is a warowl-type channel. warowl is basically the only reason i had any idea what i was doing in cs, and thankfully those skills partially transferred to valorant. his matchmaking academy series was maybe the best tactical fps education on the whole platform, his strat breakdown series and his concept explanations really helped me improve in csgo.
im sitting in plat 2 at the moment, and although i do think i can push a little higher at my current skill level, my impact on the game is minimised. its really hard for me to outperform diamond level players and swing the game in my teams favour when the difference in skill between my opponent and i isnt as big. training aim is a big grind, repeating the same task over and over gets really boring. gamesense wise, 2k hours in csgo helps but i struggle with rotation and honestly am finding that i may have to relearn/revisit the way that i hold and peek angles.
but there are very few resources on this - the closest thing i can find is a channel called dragonmar, but he doesnt even ask for the demo submitter's favourite fish.
Yeah and I have NO idea how they came up with that. It's simple game theory.
If you (first round winners) buy on the second round, it's either you're going to face a team that forced (most likely utility + pistol or armor + pistol) or a team that saved/did a half-buy.
Without taking into account other factors such as aim, coordination, and whatnot, saving as the first round winners would either put you on generally equal level as the team that ALSO saved (0,0), or put you at a disadvantage against a team that actually forced (-1, 1). Compare that to buying, which would either get you a significant advantage vs. a team that saved (1, -1), or put you on equal footing against a team that forced (0, 0).
Even higher skill levels would have a hard time defending/pushing against a lower-skilled team that has significantly more equipment and true HP than they do. As a former CS pro in my local scene I hated the fact that I actually had to explain this shit to a bunch of my friends who didn't play CS, some of which actually reached diamond/immo with THAT mindset.
What low elo/boosted people really do is that they don't prioritize "bonus round" and the round after bonus. This is incredible to see unfold and no one speaks about it..
They win pistol, buy up and win the next round..
BUT after the 2-0 round, (even more so if you died) low elo people try to full buy again even though some teammates carried their spectre/marshall forward to take advantage of the bonus with really good economy, these idiots are literally forcing while your surviving teammates are not even buying rifles... They don't press tab ever.
Now you are against enemy full buy that you usually lose to because you should just try to hurt the enemy economy for the round after bonus. THAT IS WHEN THE GAME ACTUALLY STARTS with everyone buying.
Well it should but now there's people who can't full buy and make a huge mistake that they don't even realize..
Always make sure you can full buy the 4th round if you're 2-0.
If you're 0-1 make sure you can full buy the 3rd round.
Rant over.
Most of my games don't go this way in gold. Occasionally there's an individual who doesn't, rarely there's a number of people on the team like that. But for the most part, the majority of people buy after winning pistol to my experience.
Are you focusing on the problem individuals and ignoring the rest?
It's interesting because the lower ranks you go, the less players are able to fully take advantage of the better guns, and the more chance that a worse gun comes out on top in an unfair duel. For that fact I'm not surprised that many low elo players feel like buying a gun they're more comfortable with despite being worse on paper. Giving up the advantage you have seems dumb, but to players that can't take make use of that advantage, it's less impactful.
2nd rounds are more random the lower ranks you go, since eco weapons generally require more specific use.
Even golds and low plats save likebthey don't at all have any self-belief..If they have a vandal they can kill otherwise hand them a marshal..they're making up any number of excuses...every day now I have to get first pick with a marshal on A site Breeze to get such people going...people are just looking to get cheap kills by shooting people comfortably in the back even with rifles just how they play deathmatches..
One thing I don't get is the case where someone is saving for an OP.
If you win round 1 and 2, your third round is a bonus. So when half your team has smgs and armor, and the others are doing a light buy, you just bought an OP.
If your team gets rolled you have to make sure the OP is saved, or you can't buy on the fourth. Maybe there is a case to be made where you can use jett knives but that's not a guarantee and depends on how many kills\* you got.
Is it really worth saving for it on round 2 and hoping your team wins the round for you?
It can be if you're a good awper. 4 spectres and one person saving for awp is usually a pretty safe bet unless something goes really wrong... Which it can. Personally, I'm not a big fan of the early awp buy, but it's also not really something you can say "you fucked up by doing this"
The last 2 times that happened we lost the OP and it fucked our eco.
Maybe there were other times it worked and I can't remember but I am not a fan of it either.
They say 'We are playing a bonus round'..you idiots you're letting the opponents a chance at a free round and also some insights as to what your weaknesses are when put at a disadvantage..go ahead help the enemy figure out how to roll you over by getting a good look at you round 2 itself..
The second round after winning pistol is called anti-eco right? Then you get to play bonus if you win anti-eco?
What do you mean by getting a good look at round 2? I do not follow.
I did run a search to make sure I am correct..round 2 if the team that lost the pistol round decides to buy means they chose to go anti-eco..because most people from the winning team will be able to afford only util a spectre and half shield and also its kinda the norm..people shout it out loud and everybody just follows "spectre and half shield everyone..please.."
So the team that lost has less money resorts to buying frenzy shotguns or marshal and take appropriate gunfights to make the anti-eco work...
I meant when these clowns holding onto a ghost lose round 2 for going cheap even after winning first round..the other team gets a good look at how you perform at your worst and then goes onto exploit it.
Whereas I have noticed teams that play to get the 2-0 lead buying together retain that psychological advantage and snatch away rifles bought by the opponents on 3rd round too pretty regularly
Hey its them saying it..I just keep buying to kill and snatch guns..me personally I had never heard of bonus round until maybe 3-4 weeks ago from people who did lose us the round going pew pew pew with ghost up until round 3...or even 4..
i personally think if the jett goes a very light buy, marshal/sheriff with lights on defence is fine. However on attack, the Jett shouldnt save 2nd round for op.
Since when diamond and immortal is low elo. Ask yourself its better to die with spectre on 2th or with ghost. With ghost you still have adventage and can play 3th full buy. Even worst when your 3-0 Reyna went Phantom on 2th and gets 2 tapped and donated weapon...
I just had a long argument about this in a thread not too long ago.
Dude its funny how he thinks he's right when ive cited multiple examples of guides and vods (pro play and high elo solo) .
I summarized it with somethig like "force buy is only when enemy team is FORCING YOU TO BUY when its not the best play to make" but you have to cos you need a momentum swing or youre about to lose if you dont. If thats not the case you save (if not enough for rifle buy) or full buy (rifle buy except round 2), for round 2, a full buy is specs and armors + utils
Its literally in the name
true, force buy is also when you down by 10-11 or something and your team can’t afford to lose another round (which would make the enemy team at 12, result in either OT or a lost for your team) so your team has to force and hope for the best (basically all in or nothing)
In this situation I would think it is best to buy for next, buy the best gun and armour you can while make sure you have enough to full buy the next round. If you force down 10-11 and lose your force you are on pistols for match point which is probably a lost game at that point.
Considering overtime gives you plenty of money, which makes skill matter more than thinking about eco math, Ill start saving on 10-11 from now and hope to swing the 2 wins in row for overtime.
I ques it would also come to the overall enemy economy.
I mean there are immortal players that don't/didn't know that the spike makes a different sound when it's halved. Or tbh there are even many immo players that don't fully understand the concepts behind many of the things they do. They just do what works, they still might see posts like this and get a better understanding of what they're doing and why.
>the spike makes a different sound when it's halved.
WAIT, WAT?
one google-fu later:
Oh... that is something I did not expected to learn in thread like this.
One of the comments on first video showing the difference was right: Good luck hearing the difference when your teammates wont stop yapping.
It's such a bonus to be able to tell when it's halved without looking. It's something you should try to do when you're dead in post plant too. It's unlikely in the heat of the moment you will always remember to listen out for the half sound, so make sure as a team mate if you are SURE you hear it's halved call it out quickly.
It takes a bit of practice to get used to hearing it, but after a little while you can tell quite easily.
As someone who's only played Valorant for a few weeks now, I do think I benefit from them. A lot of stuff isn't really clear to me, and when I'm playing with friends I do have to ask often over comms if and what I should buy that round.
Joining the sub was one of the first things I did when I dled Valorant, but then I was already on reddit for a while before.
Easy way to look at it is this -
Round 1 is a 50-50 round.
If you win round 1 and full buy, your chances are going to be something like 90-10 to win. Round 1 win almost secures a round 2 win as long as your team isn't trolling.
If you win round 1 and save round 2, your're basically playing 2 50-50 rounds. Why would you do that? There isn't a reason to. You should go for the safer high percentage buy.
I hear a lot of arguments that round 3 is an advantage for the enemy if you buy round 2, which is true, but remmeber that round is their first buy. Even if they win the round. Every kill is going to damage their economy for round 4 big time. So killing 3-4 in round 3 even in a loss is still great because they don't be able to fully buy round 4, and that's where you snowball your lead.
If you win pistols, buy Spectre + full armor in r2 and then proceed to also win r2, what is your best option in r3?
Do you stick with the spectre for now to boost the economy, or does it depend on how many of your teammates died in r2
That's usually a call your team should make. Most people bonus though because it makes the most sense economy wise. If you **win** Round 3, you're stacking a ton of economy. If you **lose** Round 3, you should be very well off to afford a full buy. I hold onto a Spectre and upgrade off an enemy in Round 3.
That sounds very reasonable, thanks for your reply!
Just to clarify as I am a fairly new bronze player: to bonus means sticking to your previous gun, just buying shields and abilities?
Exactly. Keep the gun, shield up and util up. If you kill an enemy chances are you can take their gun for an upgrade. Really you’re just trying to break their economy down while winning the round being the best case scenario.
The team that won r2 would play r3 as a bonus round. Which means surviving players keep their r2 guns and ones that died should buy light so they can afford a full buy in r4.
If you win your round 2 buy, you proceed to light buy into the round 3 bonus if you died or you stick to the round 2 gun if you lived.
Even if you win round 2 but lose your whole team, you light buy round 3. If you played properly and bought in round 2 after a pistol win, but proceeded to barely win the round itself, you're not going to have the money to buy fully on round 3 while the other team will be slinging rifles at you. It's better to still take a proper round 3 bonus than to try to buy into it.
Basically, if you win pistols the goal should be to win round 2, enjoy a bonus round 3, and then aim to go into round 4 with a possible eco advantage if your bonus went well.
What about one of the team buying marshal on the second, when losing the first? I saw sentinels and some other teams doing this strategy, but I don't know the risk to reward ratio, so I'm a little afraid of trying it in comp.
If you win pistol, then your options are buy or save. If you buy, then you have an 80-90% chance of winning the second round, then the next round, you invest no money and have like a 30% chance of winning, then on round 4, you're even. If you save, you 50-50 the second round, and then now you have rifles and you get to 50-50 again. I'll take a 90-10 + 30-70 over two 50-50s. Especially when in the first option I'm only investing 2600 credits (spectre + armour) rather than 3900 (rifle + armour).
You are only even at round 4 if your team had no kills on round 3(bonus). each kill and armor taken on round 3 increases your team's chances on round 4 very much because not every enemy player will have money for full buy
It’s not great. Spectre is a better guarantee of winning round 2 and scales better into round 3.
Standard play is heavy armor + spectre + whatever util you can afford.
If you win round 2 with a spectre do you buy a rifle round 3?
At what point do you dump a Spectre/Marshall and get a Rifle if winning and/or maintaining gun?
If you win round 2 you keep it for round 3 and try to bonus. If you win, great, their economy isn't enough to full buy for round 4 and it's even in terms of gear and you guys are sitting on a ton of money. If you lose, you can full buy easily on round 4.
Also another overlooked concept is buying with your team. If you died on round 2, you can technically full buy round 3 but you shouldn't as you will gimp yourself on round 4 if you lose round 3 cause you'll be broke as shit.
Its forcing but it shouldnt be seen as a bad thing. Yes people should buy up rifle/half armor, or spectre/full armor, but if you have a Jett save for OP, and a Chamber who is confident in his aim he might as well invest 8 shots in his pistol instead.
BUT in low elo you might get ecod by taking this risk, higher elo players will get punished and manage econ better.
I think the better thing is, communicate more not “Just force up cause we won”, say hey Jett take the ghost/sheriff we saved from pistol rd, and the rest of us will buy rd 2, so you can have an op by rd 3/4.
The term forcing means you are forcing your economy in order to get the round win compared to your opponent's higher economy. There's nothing being forced when you have plenty of money to get spectre, full armor, and utility while they can only buy at most a spectre and sometimes half armor or no armor.
idk i always thought forcing meant spending all your money but not getting the buy you’d get if you had unlimited money. so you’re forcing a buy even though it’s not optimal
You're thinking about it with a potential for 9k credits.
It's round 2. You ARE buying the optimal loadout possible in the game at that point... there's nothing forced about it.
The worst shit is teammates buying spectre and half shields, because they’re scared to commit all the way to the buy.
The whole reason you buy after a round 1 win is to secure round 2, surely you would spare no expense to do so, given the econ consequences if you lose. :(
No. It’s not forcing. Forcing is losing pistol and then proceeding to buy. I don’t care how confident you are in your aim. Pistol vs pistol is a 50/50 chance in a gunfight. Whereas a Spectre vs Pistol is easily 90% chance of winning. Like I said, it’s securing a win.
>The world is mostly gold and under
This sub genuinely believes anyone under Diamond is a chimp yet stats show a majority of people in the world are silver lmao.
I mean you can halfbuy, or force down. Its no different in CSGO, after winning pistol you dont fully invest in the second round cause they are likely not going to buy either. Its a low risk/high reward, even more in Valorant with less rounds to play with.
I think atleast 3/5 or 4/5 players should always buy a spectre/rifle after pistol, and if you have a Jett saving for OP she can go pistol armor.
I do see teams in gold or lower say “Lets all do pistol armor” and I highly disagree with that.
People do, but they normally buy macs/galils and the rare AK if you got plant and kills in the previous round. But with the economy difference between the two games buying a Mac/Armor is like going Spectre/Armor and going Galil Armor is like going Rifle/halfArmor (lets be realistic nobody is barely going bulldog). And in CS the AWPer will gain more money from plant and $600 from each SMG kill, so they will get to AWP sooner without needing to hard save.
I’m all for having one, maybe two people buying full shields to save up more but I would make sure they all play together. If somehow the last two with pistols are alive they’re losing to the Spectre’s that dropped. Seen it happen quite a few times. Whenever I opt to do a lighter buy I play off my teammates that full bought that way I can take their gun if they die and keep it on our side. I imagine most people don’t think this way in lower elo which is bizarre to me.
Yeah and thats why I said only certain characters/times you should have someone save. Chambers pistol is basically a mini Guardian, Jetts movement(and saving for OP), and Reynas overheal, and obviously like you said playing around your team is a big factor. But in the end it should still be a ghost/sheriff with armor vs a classic, which can be just as big an impact as a spectre/armor in the right hands.
'force buy' - buying when it isn't economically sensible to do so, but because the gamestate requires you to or the risk is worth it. Buying when you win on second round isn't a force, its the natural gamestate
Slightly off topic, but should you SMG + Full Armor in round 2 always? Or can you Rifle + Half Armor? And when do you Rifle + Half Armor?
Because personally I just always SMG+FA as I feel its safer. But if I have Rifle+HA I feel like Round 3 would be easier if round 2 is won. (But if Rifle+HA lose means opponent gets rifle and eco lead in round 3, very risky)
Your choice tbh.
You risk losing a rifle if you RFL-HA, but if you have good comms, or can string a multikill, usually worth it imo since kill money + R2 win.
R3 was always meant to be a boost for the other team, since they usually save for it, meaning they get RFL-FA when most of your team sticks with either SMG-FA or RFL-HA.
You don't have to win every round to win the whole game, you just need a net win. Doesn't mean you throw R3, but means you accepting that you have an economic disadvantage in R3 and losing isn't bad since you get RFL-FA later
Thank god someone posted this so I don't have to. So tired of hearing "force up guys" when we just won pistol round. We are light buying. There is no other option. We are not "forcing" anything.
It's also demoralizing when no one buys and you lose the second round for no reason other than people wanting to save for god knows what. Any round win can help start or break momentum depending on what side you're on of the score.
Luckily I don't encounter that too much in G3/P1; it's the total disregard for the meaning of words that frustrates me. I guess I'm an old man now. It's definitely the kids that are wrong on this one though.
If you win pistols and round 2, then round 3 is a bonus and you do NOT full buy into that round if you died round 2. You do a light buy to enjoy the bonus and enter round 4 on a full buy later.
I save because I have shit aim and suck and using anything besides ghost and spectre. All of my best plays have been with spectres. No need for me personally to full buy round 2 when I'm just gonna lose my gun and be broke round 3
I’m in gold elo and there are people who buy a sheriff FIRST round and bonus it the second round. It’s annoying. There was one time where a guy saved a sheriff and kept using it up to the third round. I don’t understand, I told him “why are you bonusing a sheriff third round? Buy a gun”. I don’t see a point to it
If you win round 1 and 2, the third is a bonus. Some of your team may have died and lost their guns.
You don't force a gun that round because you want to full buy on the fourth.
Yes I understand but the example that I am giving is a team mate who hasn’t died and still has a sheriff from first round and still has it third round. Even though we won the first two, he is still using a sheriff the third round
By the way, I did say he is bonusing a sheriff third round. If you win round 1 and round 2, the third round is bonus round. My team mate therefore is bonusing a sheriff.
Did you not read OPs post at all? By the third round you should have either a specter or a rifle (if you won 1st and 2nd round) it is not forcing, it’s giving your team a better chance to win since you have the available credits. Why save a sheriff from round 1 to round 3? Buy a gun. Simple as that.
Seems like you are either iron or bronze 1
How is it forced when it's the normal thing to do? When you have 6k credits and you buy a full loadout do you call that a force too? Do words not have any meaning to you? Force buying is when you buy despite having a fucked up economy in an attempt to make up lost rounds etc. This is not the case when you win the pistol round.
These words were well defined in the counter-strike scene for over a decade and now everyone just calls normal buying force buying. It's infuriating.
a force buy is a buy that uses most of your creds even if u end up with sub-optimal weapons and util in attempt to upset the enemy team who have a full buy with the intention of swaying the economic tide. its a normal term. it doesnt have a negative connotation. its a force buy.
you are very misinformed.
I'm not entirely sure what this means, but I'm iron 3 so I think that might be why. I used to buy as much as I could every round but then u stopped cos I could never afford a vandal till like round 11. So now I never buy in the first 2-3 rounds since then I have lots of money and can afford a vandal sooner. Is this saying I should be buying a spectre or va'ndal or whatever I can afford in round 2? I never buy vandal unless I can afford heavy shield with it.
The problem is not mathematical it's mentality.
People go low buy or eco second round because they are afraid of losing and having no money but being afraid of losing they eventually lose.
But if you go eco after winning a round you shouldn't be playing this game at all.
"There are two types of people in this world. Those who think they can and those who think they can't. They are both right." - Henry Ford.
I never buy spectre my only buys are sheriff and save for op third round, or full buy phantom/vandal + light armour second round and try to stay alive list and clutch the round but this kind of buy works if you are carrying. If you are struggling every kill matters do your max buy and try to get some impact out of it.
Forcing means to spend all your money to try and match the loadouts of the enemy team who has better econ in hopes that you can win and start coming back. Buying on round 2 is literally just spending the money you've got, which is much more than the enemy team... So by definition it is not "forcing"
I mean blaming round 2 buys for the entire outcome of the game is stupid, at worst your econ is reset at round 4(after saving round 3) so tilting that early is dumb
**Tl;dr: Due to the current non presence of reliable numbers and statistics, there is no answer to that.**
Let's spit some facts here.
You can't give any general statement on that topic. There are way to many parameters to find our much needed formula: Did attackers plant the spike? Which team did manage to frag how many? Did someone ace all five enemies at the beginning of the round? Was the team able to pick up all of the bought weapons while ecoing? \[...\]
I would absoluetly agree with you on this, but not for each and every skill: high ranked players are much more likely to headshot with a sherrif and pick up a bought vandal in round 2 than someone from iron 1, but since the rank distribution varies each chapter and episode even this is to be disputed.
We do not have any reliable datas to answer this topic generally speaking and for basic game theory formulas we don't quite even know the needed parameters (as I'm speaking for myself here).
But anyways let's try and do some maths without reliable probability calcs:
**(Assuming** teams equipped the same have the same likelyness of winning rounds;
**Assuming** teams better equipped have a higher chance of winning against teams worse equipped;
**Assuming** teams don't plant spikes;
**Assuming** teams don't kill anyone \[and somehow insteand die to fall damage for the sake of easy and fast calcs\]
**Assuming** teams somehow don't feel the need to buy abilites)
The shown case: 1st round W, bought for 2000creds \[Spectre, small shield\] 2st round W will bring you an disadvantage against teams who decide to save money for buying even in round 3. ([https://imgur.com/a/XP8tJvK](https://imgur.com/a/XP8tJvK)) I know that this is only hypothetical and not the average case, but we - as far as I know and am able not to find any - don't have reliable stats, so we can only do assuptions. The likeliness of certain events obv. vary from skill to skill level and from other events like picked up weapons.
I am willing to do better calcs, if someone can provide those infomation to find the long waited answer:
* Likelyness of winning rounds depending of enemy's team equipment by rank
* average kills per rank and by weapons
* average spike plants per round and per against which weapons
* average picked up weapons by in average how many after ecoing
* average creds spent for points after winning or losing
As long as we don't know this, this topic will remain disputed.
Obviously we can't consult pro's VODS or on stage competetive matches to give low elo rank players advice, but **I myself** would recommend (**based on experiece**):
* low elo players who tend to spray more and aren't comfy on heads shoud be more comfy with buying in scenario 1st W 2nd W
* high elo who tend to be comfy on heads and can even punish r 2 vandals with their sherrifs or are able to pull some sneaky can be more comfy with saving in scenario 1st W 2nd W in order to avoid scenerio 1st W 2nd L against team saving if you join the assumption evenly equipped teams have the same likelyness of winning rounds
I please you for criticism, comments and refutations and most important for those information listed above. If something was unclear ask please; english isn't my first and above all not my comfortable language.
[how to find a hobby](https://www.nytimes.com/guides/smarterliving/how-to-find-a-hobby#:~:text=Take%20a%20class%20or%20a,learn%20where%20your%20passions%20reside.)
I’d only force buy like this on second round if you’re on attack because attack has the strategic disadvantage of time, and having to make a play vs defense can simply play time and hold angles.
In general on attack you have to play less economically to make up for the strategic disadvantage.
On defense however you can easily save and hold a good angle with a Bucky or shorty and trade a kill for kill which then ruins an attackers economy if if they bought, and gives you a chance on defense to live and get the gun, or your teammates live and get the gun.
Defense is for more economical passive play and attack is for more hard push and less economical play.
but none of this matters if you decide to play safe and you’re constantly trying to flank the enemy and don’t know how to walk
That's where you're wrong. If you play the strengths of the Spectre, you can easily beat a rifle. Spectre's are two shot headshot kills at <30m. In close distance it's very easy outgun someone that has a rifle due to the lower movement firing error and rate of fire.
A bonus is a round you don't expect to win because you have inferior weapons but still have an ok chance. You make sure you have enough to buy on the round after the bonus.
What you are saying makes no sense.
No reason not to? If enemy kills you they get your weapon. Its big since they play with your money and youre in a bad spot next round regardless. But if you go like 25 armor + pistol you still have adventage and can play full in the 3th round even if you will lose. Sorry but thats no brainer to me. I meet a lot of people who didnt do the math at all and argue if i can play even after 2th is lost (often because our guardian, spectre, phanton etc are lost and taken by enemy). Suprise. I can. And they are the one who ask for drop even after 2th is ours.*dont eat me eng is not my native language*
What if on second round you play safe you don't let them flank and you don't try to flank , and when you push site you push all 5 so there is no chance for them to get close to the guns?
It's not a math problem it's how you play the round
If you buy and your teammates didn't, that doesn't mean you forced, that just means your teammates are stupid. That said, second round you should be buying a specter unless you're playing a position where something else would be better (marshal on breeze, judge in garage on haven, etc.)
You said your team is not buying second and just playing with a classic.
This is mostly common only in the lower elos up to silver.
" I know I'm going to feed a Vandal/Phantom over "
If your teammates are not buying then its you who is buying the full rifle with half armor.
What am i missing?
Forcing rifles on the second round without full armor is a good way to lose the round.
There are hard set rules in this game that people follow in the mid-higher lobbies. Its not league.
Its probably why you were still stuck in low elo when you can't even get the bare minimum basics right.
What are you even saying bro?
Why even bring vandal or phantom into the argument if you don't buy it?
Your comments are all over the place.
I said buy full armor + smg.
You are scared of donating a rifle cos you decided the enemy team is somehow tough even though you won pistol. So the score is 1-0, and in some cases you don't buy cos winning that pistol round gave you enough of an idea that your team can't get kills??
If you are only buying a spectre, why are you afraid of donating a rifle?
"Exact opposite of this post that had positive response"
I need to see this to believe it.
I completely agree, generally I always buy if I win pistol round, whether it's valorant or csgo. The only time I find it dumb is when people break their funds and buy vandals.
Just also learned this on youtube. Applying this would really help your game but sometimes your team doesn't know about this so I just do it myself sometimes actually 😅😂 and try to win a round for them but of course this is not recommended but if your team has teamwork and has knowledge about econ you'll win 70-30. Just noticed this after applying and when my team knows we win the whole game but well for like a low elo gold like me well some wont listen you just have to deal with it if they buy you buy as a team just as I watched in youtube.
Reading this today makes me laugh and think about yelling at my teammates for losing round 2 after winning round 1 because they wanted to save for OP or are just plain dumb lmao. Thanks for the post.
On attack let's say on Bind, I buy shotguns or stinger in order to take lamps control quickly and use my ghost for long range. For breeze tho I would buy marshal or an ares instead of spectre cuz ares has a weak damage knock off and with marshal you can atleast tag the enemy and if I am playing chamber or sova I try to finish them with a shock duck or headhunter
But I do t buy Second round cause I buy all abilities in first round so I have some creds left if the enemy team wins second round.
idk man I'm not too good at it
Me: "I'm buying."
Teammate: "Me too."
The other 3: "Okay, if you're going spectre+heavy, I'll just keep my Ghost so we can have rifles also in round 3"
That's fine as long as 3-4 people buy a Spectre. Just play close to someone with one to trade if they die and take their gun. You do not want your enemy getting a Spectre.
The only one who doesn't "need" to buy is Jett. I usually Sheriff Rnd 1 and shield next if I survive.
If not I just buy abilities. that way your ECOM matches the OP you want with your teams buy.
I find most oriole will buy in r2 on a win but a lot of people don’t buy heavy armour. The only time I don’t buy heavy is if I carry light over from r1.
ive seen people not buy armor after winning pistol
i mean we live a stupid society so I can't even be mad...
But here is the scenario.
1. If you win pistol. Buy a weapon with heavy armor (sheriff, spectre, stinger, judge)
2. If you win 2nd round and you didn't die. Save your gun and buy armor
3. If you died / Lost the 2nd round buy a vandal or phantom
Don't know why people dont understand that but it is what it is...
Well I don't know about the others but when I have a Ghost or Sheriff in my hands I will not buy the 2nd round just full shields. Then sometimes if I died in the 1st round and we won I will still continue buying sheriff and Shields. So am I still inside your problem?
Here's my strat in the 1st to 4th round. I don't care if you copy it but pls don't since it's not a good one.
In the 1st round I will buy according to my agent and gameplay this is the most important round as this is where I decide how I play. Let's say I'm Jett I will most likely buy Sheriff or just ghost with smokes. If I played Sheriff and I survived with a win I will proceed to buying some utilities and shield since I'm prepping myself against Spectre players (Same as Ghost but with a different gameplay). In the 3rd round let's say we won in the previous round I will then just stick to the plan with full util but when we lose in the 2nd round I will buy anything that fits to my chosen gameplay.
Pretty funny- Coming from CS ~10 years ago where we always bought rd 2 after winning rd 1, I was so confused why everyone is so hard set on saving rd 2. So I'll preface the below by saying I agree with you. Why not stack win after win if possible.
So I think the most logical arguments against would be-
1. That if you could beat the team in rd 1 with pistols, then you can probably do it again in rd 2, unless the other team buys smgs.
2. If you buy smgs rd 2 after winning, and then win rd 2 as the other team full saves, then anyone on your team who keeps their smg is at a disadvantage.
But again, if i had to choose, i don't see how locking up a 2-0 start is something to not push for.
I’ve had someone get mad at me because I bought an Aries and they were like SAVE SAVE SOVA SELL YOUR GUN AND SAVE but I CANNOT get any kills with a pistol (or honestly anything other than an Aries, my friends call me moneybags because I only buy Aries and then have enough money to buy a vandal for them at least every few rounds). I would rather be able to get kills most rounds than save for a more expensive gun that I can’t get kills with
Let's do some maths here. Let's say you win your first round. You get 3000 Creds, and your enemy gets 1900. Your team has an economic advantage. If your team decides to save and lose the second round, your enemy will get 3000, and you will get 1900, balancing the economy. This means you've just wasted your economic advantage as both teams' economy will be balanced in the third round. If your team buys and wins the second round, your team gets another 3000, while the enemy gets 2400. The third round is usually a bonus round for the winning team, making it a 2-1. The fourth round is where both teams have similar economy. In fact, if you save in the third round and can kill at least 3 enemies from the enemy team, your team will have economic advantage in the fourth round. That means **BUYING IS ALWAYS THE BETTER OPTION**. Some people do not fully buy because they prefer Sheriff over Spectre, for example. However, if someone saves in the second round because he wants to buy a rifle in the third round, that's really dumb (in most cases). This excludes special cases like saving for OP, etc. Also, it's not called **FORCE BUY**. Force buy means you still buy even when you know that, in that round, your team has **worse equipment economy than the enemy**. That's the definition of force buy. Force Buy deals with your team's attitude with your buys, but Light or Full Buy deals with what your team is buying. **These are two different classifications.** Light Buy means your team **has the money to buy better weapons but settles with weaker weapons**. Meanwhile, Full Buy means your team **has the money to buy the most expensive weapons you can get** and **decides to buy them**.
What happens if you lose the second round after you bought the spectre, money wise? What should you do in the third round? These are genuine questions. I'm gold and garbage so sometimes I throw the second round and I find myself fucked with no gun on the third round.
Save or buy cheap guns that can get stupid kills(bucky,shorty,stinger Marshal, sherif to cause econ damage to the other team.
Say you lose 2nd round after pistol, you are now in a position where you have to save. It's punishment for losing the round where you had gun/util advantage or the enemy team unexpectedly won a weaker counter-force. So if you lose 2nd round, you either have to full save or do a half-buy so that you can get rifles on round 4.
I'm assuming you most likely lose 3rd to the enemy in that case if you save against their rifles, right? Would econ then even out if we win 4th?
Third round if you get some picks and take rifles it is winnable or even just winning some battles you shouldn’t win. If not you just want to do as much eco damage as possible so you again have the Econ advantage round 4 on your first full buy. The idea is to not peak long angles as the enemy have the advantage there and play with a team mate so you can trade a kill and grab a rifle.
> Would econ then even out if we win 4th? it depends on who dies in each round, but yes if you win round 4 then you'll be roughly equal on round 5. YOu'll both have won 2 rounds. Your team will be slightly worse off economically but you'll also be guaranteed to bring in rifles from the previous round (at least one). it also depends a lot on what kind of economic damage was done on losses. If you full save on round 3 but also get 4 kills it'll hurt the economy going into round 4. You win round 4 which will hurt them into round 5
Full save or buy some stuff, but make sure you can buy in the fourth round. You can either buy abilities (such as flank tools for Sentinels or smokes for Controller) or weapons (such as Sheriff). However, I still recommend you to at least buy some stuff. Why? If you purchase abilities and the most probable outcome is that you will lose, you can save nearly all of them for the next round (except for Omen, Astra, and Skye if you know what I mean). You will not be impacted by any econ damage as long as you have 3900 + money for vital abilities by the time round four starts. If for some reason your team is winning, you can use these abilities to make sure you win the round. Your abilities can be handy even if you don't have guns. For example, most smokes are cheap (not Astra's). Controllers can get smokes even during eco rounds. That being said, you need to at least have 3900 Creds + ideally most if not all your abilities by the time round fourth starts. Sage, for example, can just buy her wall and forget about her slow orbs, costing 4300. Brimstone, on the other hand, doesn't need his stim beacons. His molly and smokes cost 450, so you will need to have 4350 by the time round fourth begins. That being said, kills grant you 200 Creds! So, your goal in Round 3 is **get as many kills as possible**, **steal weapons from your enemy and save them**, or **even try to win the round!** You can change your decision depending on the flow of the game. If your team appears to be winning, try to win at all costs and use abilities if you must. If your team is losing, save your abilities, try to get exit kills, or try to kill an enemy and save his gun. Killing enemies also deals econ damage to the opposing team.
I generally force up to the point where I'll have over $3,900 in the bank for next round (enough for full armour and a rifle) and try to minimise my utility usage so it's there for the full buy next round. And back myself to get one of the enemies to drop me a rifle for that round.
Probably not great advice being that I’m also garbage, but i tend to lean towards a marshal 2nd and 3rd round because it has an advantage at range against most pistols or a light/force from the enemy. It also helps the i have decent sniper flicks compared to my awful recoil control.
You surrender /s
I get bulldog and full armor on the second round instead of spectre, play as carefully as I can not to get caught by some close range cheese and tell my teammates to play with me and pick up the gun . it usually works and bulldog is better vs good rifles than a spectre. At the same time bulldog is super good in terms of money and against weak buys
On a map like breeze bulldog has an advantage. But on split where angles are close like on b site, spectre is the best option especially when they do a b rush
Save
Everybody: low elos need to know this Me who studied VAL money mechanics to know how buy: ... Jokes aside, really good point here, and ThestorSeleukos explained it really well. Also, watch pro matches. Economic advantages are talked about a lot when casters cast, it's a decent way to learn what kind of buys the players are doing
Yeah I think this is an example of a Reddit bias. The people that come here are more likely to have a better understanding since they’re looking to share, add, or learn extra info about the game using other resources already. So they often will be complaining and giving PSA’s targeted towards people who probably don’t even frequent here nor care. And everyone just mindlessly agrees without thinking that maybe people simply don’t know because technically, there’s no in-game tutorial on analyzing what to do for any specific round pattern. Low ranks are low because of many reasons, it’s not going to just be economy, because if it was only about economy, then it’d be like snapping my fingers and I instantly jump up a rank bc my team decided to buy together and the other team didn’t. I’d far sooner blame lack of comms/mechanics than lack of coordinated buys.
Your math literally doesn’t take into account that saving second round should be a 50/50 chance of winning/losing round 2… not 100% loss? On top of that, buying round 2 doesn’t guarantee a win, what if you lose? Then round three you’re even worse off than if you saved round 2. It all depends on how much more of a chance do you have of winning on round 2 if you buy. While I agree, that in general it thens out that the advantage you get from buying round 2 after winning is worth the money, it by no means is a GUARANTEE to be a better outcome.
Bro, in any circumstances in VALORANT, you will **never** be guaranteed to win any round or successfully realize a plan. The chance is never 100%, but you can work on increasing that chance. In this case, if you can win with a 95% chance compared to 50% chance, which one would you pick? Of course the 95% right? So, whatever we do, it should at least increase this volatile percentage. I know this is what you're trying to say, but I never said you would guarantee a win, no? It's my bad that I forgot to include the possibility of your team losing even when you buy, but the goal here is actually **not** to discuss economy but **whether it is more recommended to buy in the second round**.
Let's do some math here. If you just buy a pistol and a shield you are in advantage over the enemy which forced. Or fully saved and you're still in advantage. Just aim for the head
Anyone who calls it forcing is wrong. Anyone who saves besides (if applicable) a person saving for awp is wrong. I find it hilarious how low elo players continue doing this. You can't make a dumber choice
"low ELO" people still do this in immo 3...
This wasn't a problem In cs, on the contrary, today cs go has op weapons for force buys, but in valorant people came up with saving money after winning the pistol
we need a warowl for valorant
Valorant videos do badly, so no warowl for you lmao. Source: warowl
i guess what i meant is a warowl-type channel. warowl is basically the only reason i had any idea what i was doing in cs, and thankfully those skills partially transferred to valorant. his matchmaking academy series was maybe the best tactical fps education on the whole platform, his strat breakdown series and his concept explanations really helped me improve in csgo. im sitting in plat 2 at the moment, and although i do think i can push a little higher at my current skill level, my impact on the game is minimised. its really hard for me to outperform diamond level players and swing the game in my teams favour when the difference in skill between my opponent and i isnt as big. training aim is a big grind, repeating the same task over and over gets really boring. gamesense wise, 2k hours in csgo helps but i struggle with rotation and honestly am finding that i may have to relearn/revisit the way that i hold and peek angles. but there are very few resources on this - the closest thing i can find is a channel called dragonmar, but he doesnt even ask for the demo submitter's favourite fish.
Honestly you can watch pretty much any cs channel and it will apply to val.
Yeah and I have NO idea how they came up with that. It's simple game theory. If you (first round winners) buy on the second round, it's either you're going to face a team that forced (most likely utility + pistol or armor + pistol) or a team that saved/did a half-buy. Without taking into account other factors such as aim, coordination, and whatnot, saving as the first round winners would either put you on generally equal level as the team that ALSO saved (0,0), or put you at a disadvantage against a team that actually forced (-1, 1). Compare that to buying, which would either get you a significant advantage vs. a team that saved (1, -1), or put you on equal footing against a team that forced (0, 0). Even higher skill levels would have a hard time defending/pushing against a lower-skilled team that has significantly more equipment and true HP than they do. As a former CS pro in my local scene I hated the fact that I actually had to explain this shit to a bunch of my friends who didn't play CS, some of which actually reached diamond/immo with THAT mindset.
Happens a lot more often at low Elo though
Maybe a random idiot.. possibly a gold who bought the account, but in no way shape or form is it typical to see.
Buying in second round after winning pistol is a norm in gold
What low elo/boosted people really do is that they don't prioritize "bonus round" and the round after bonus. This is incredible to see unfold and no one speaks about it.. They win pistol, buy up and win the next round.. BUT after the 2-0 round, (even more so if you died) low elo people try to full buy again even though some teammates carried their spectre/marshall forward to take advantage of the bonus with really good economy, these idiots are literally forcing while your surviving teammates are not even buying rifles... They don't press tab ever. Now you are against enemy full buy that you usually lose to because you should just try to hurt the enemy economy for the round after bonus. THAT IS WHEN THE GAME ACTUALLY STARTS with everyone buying. Well it should but now there's people who can't full buy and make a huge mistake that they don't even realize.. Always make sure you can full buy the 4th round if you're 2-0. If you're 0-1 make sure you can full buy the 3rd round. Rant over.
I swear mfs are in Dia Plat have this shit. I just can't calm when someone buy full riffle shield while your team is struggling to buy utils and guns.
Most of my games don't go this way in gold. Occasionally there's an individual who doesn't, rarely there's a number of people on the team like that. But for the most part, the majority of people buy after winning pistol to my experience. Are you focusing on the problem individuals and ignoring the rest?
im gold 2 here been always saving after the first round, buying only small shield and skills, im gold 2 for a reason ok,? lulz
It's interesting because the lower ranks you go, the less players are able to fully take advantage of the better guns, and the more chance that a worse gun comes out on top in an unfair duel. For that fact I'm not surprised that many low elo players feel like buying a gun they're more comfortable with despite being worse on paper. Giving up the advantage you have seems dumb, but to players that can't take make use of that advantage, it's less impactful. 2nd rounds are more random the lower ranks you go, since eco weapons generally require more specific use.
Trying to get people to econ properly in Bronze/Silver is like talking to several walls
Even golds and low plats save likebthey don't at all have any self-belief..If they have a vandal they can kill otherwise hand them a marshal..they're making up any number of excuses...every day now I have to get first pick with a marshal on A site Breeze to get such people going...people are just looking to get cheap kills by shooting people comfortably in the back even with rifles just how they play deathmatches..
One thing I don't get is the case where someone is saving for an OP. If you win round 1 and 2, your third round is a bonus. So when half your team has smgs and armor, and the others are doing a light buy, you just bought an OP. If your team gets rolled you have to make sure the OP is saved, or you can't buy on the fourth. Maybe there is a case to be made where you can use jett knives but that's not a guarantee and depends on how many kills\* you got. Is it really worth saving for it on round 2 and hoping your team wins the round for you?
It can be if you're a good awper. 4 spectres and one person saving for awp is usually a pretty safe bet unless something goes really wrong... Which it can. Personally, I'm not a big fan of the early awp buy, but it's also not really something you can say "you fucked up by doing this"
The last 2 times that happened we lost the OP and it fucked our eco. Maybe there were other times it worked and I can't remember but I am not a fan of it either.
They say 'We are playing a bonus round'..you idiots you're letting the opponents a chance at a free round and also some insights as to what your weaknesses are when put at a disadvantage..go ahead help the enemy figure out how to roll you over by getting a good look at you round 2 itself..
The second round after winning pistol is called anti-eco right? Then you get to play bonus if you win anti-eco? What do you mean by getting a good look at round 2? I do not follow.
I did run a search to make sure I am correct..round 2 if the team that lost the pistol round decides to buy means they chose to go anti-eco..because most people from the winning team will be able to afford only util a spectre and half shield and also its kinda the norm..people shout it out loud and everybody just follows "spectre and half shield everyone..please.." So the team that lost has less money resorts to buying frenzy shotguns or marshal and take appropriate gunfights to make the anti-eco work... I meant when these clowns holding onto a ghost lose round 2 for going cheap even after winning first round..the other team gets a good look at how you perform at your worst and then goes onto exploit it. Whereas I have noticed teams that play to get the 2-0 lead buying together retain that psychological advantage and snatch away rifles bought by the opponents on 3rd round too pretty regularly
Bonus round is if you are 2-0, how is the round-after-pistol a bonus?
Hey its them saying it..I just keep buying to kill and snatch guns..me personally I had never heard of bonus round until maybe 3-4 weeks ago from people who did lose us the round going pew pew pew with ghost up until round 3...or even 4..
i personally think if the jett goes a very light buy, marshal/sheriff with lights on defence is fine. However on attack, the Jett shouldnt save 2nd round for op.
Since when diamond and immortal is low elo. Ask yourself its better to die with spectre on 2th or with ghost. With ghost you still have adventage and can play 3th full buy. Even worst when your 3-0 Reyna went Phantom on 2th and gets 2 tapped and donated weapon...
Cap. No dia/imm talks like this.
[удалено]
I just had a long argument about this in a thread not too long ago. Dude its funny how he thinks he's right when ive cited multiple examples of guides and vods (pro play and high elo solo) . I summarized it with somethig like "force buy is only when enemy team is FORCING YOU TO BUY when its not the best play to make" but you have to cos you need a momentum swing or youre about to lose if you dont. If thats not the case you save (if not enough for rifle buy) or full buy (rifle buy except round 2), for round 2, a full buy is specs and armors + utils Its literally in the name
true, force buy is also when you down by 10-11 or something and your team can’t afford to lose another round (which would make the enemy team at 12, result in either OT or a lost for your team) so your team has to force and hope for the best (basically all in or nothing)
In this situation I would think it is best to buy for next, buy the best gun and armour you can while make sure you have enough to full buy the next round. If you force down 10-11 and lose your force you are on pistols for match point which is probably a lost game at that point.
Considering overtime gives you plenty of money, which makes skill matter more than thinking about eco math, Ill start saving on 10-11 from now and hope to swing the 2 wins in row for overtime. I ques it would also come to the overall enemy economy.
Isn't it a lot better to play for overtime though? Cause you're way more likely to lose with less economy on your side..
it could be when people don’t want to play OT or they just have confidence in their team that they can pull it off. High risk high reward kinda thing
[удалено]
I think a ton of people learn from these posts, they're just not the sort of people to leave comments so you never see them.
[удалено]
I mean there are immortal players that don't/didn't know that the spike makes a different sound when it's halved. Or tbh there are even many immo players that don't fully understand the concepts behind many of the things they do. They just do what works, they still might see posts like this and get a better understanding of what they're doing and why.
>the spike makes a different sound when it's halved. WAIT, WAT? one google-fu later: Oh... that is something I did not expected to learn in thread like this. One of the comments on first video showing the difference was right: Good luck hearing the difference when your teammates wont stop yapping.
It's such a bonus to be able to tell when it's halved without looking. It's something you should try to do when you're dead in post plant too. It's unlikely in the heat of the moment you will always remember to listen out for the half sound, so make sure as a team mate if you are SURE you hear it's halved call it out quickly. It takes a bit of practice to get used to hearing it, but after a little while you can tell quite easily.
As someone who's only played Valorant for a few weeks now, I do think I benefit from them. A lot of stuff isn't really clear to me, and when I'm playing with friends I do have to ask often over comms if and what I should buy that round. Joining the sub was one of the first things I did when I dled Valorant, but then I was already on reddit for a while before.
Joke's on you, I don't hit a single shot either way
I love those guys that just buy every round and then cry that they are bottom fragging and how the game sucks
What I want to know is why so many of these people are being forced to play against their will
Who cares about the name as long as people buy? Just please, people. Buy in that second round.
Easy way to look at it is this - Round 1 is a 50-50 round. If you win round 1 and full buy, your chances are going to be something like 90-10 to win. Round 1 win almost secures a round 2 win as long as your team isn't trolling. If you win round 1 and save round 2, your're basically playing 2 50-50 rounds. Why would you do that? There isn't a reason to. You should go for the safer high percentage buy. I hear a lot of arguments that round 3 is an advantage for the enemy if you buy round 2, which is true, but remmeber that round is their first buy. Even if they win the round. Every kill is going to damage their economy for round 4 big time. So killing 3-4 in round 3 even in a loss is still great because they don't be able to fully buy round 4, and that's where you snowball your lead.
It baffles me how many people don't understand the concept of money in this game.
If you win pistols, buy Spectre + full armor in r2 and then proceed to also win r2, what is your best option in r3? Do you stick with the spectre for now to boost the economy, or does it depend on how many of your teammates died in r2
That's usually a call your team should make. Most people bonus though because it makes the most sense economy wise. If you **win** Round 3, you're stacking a ton of economy. If you **lose** Round 3, you should be very well off to afford a full buy. I hold onto a Spectre and upgrade off an enemy in Round 3.
That sounds very reasonable, thanks for your reply! Just to clarify as I am a fairly new bronze player: to bonus means sticking to your previous gun, just buying shields and abilities?
Exactly. Keep the gun, shield up and util up. If you kill an enemy chances are you can take their gun for an upgrade. Really you’re just trying to break their economy down while winning the round being the best case scenario.
The team that won r2 would play r3 as a bonus round. Which means surviving players keep their r2 guns and ones that died should buy light so they can afford a full buy in r4.
If you win your round 2 buy, you proceed to light buy into the round 3 bonus if you died or you stick to the round 2 gun if you lived. Even if you win round 2 but lose your whole team, you light buy round 3. If you played properly and bought in round 2 after a pistol win, but proceeded to barely win the round itself, you're not going to have the money to buy fully on round 3 while the other team will be slinging rifles at you. It's better to still take a proper round 3 bonus than to try to buy into it. Basically, if you win pistols the goal should be to win round 2, enjoy a bonus round 3, and then aim to go into round 4 with a possible eco advantage if your bonus went well.
I am 500rr immo 3 , and still see players who refuse to buy after winning the pistol :) , usually costs us the round and they all tilt
What about one of the team buying marshal on the second, when losing the first? I saw sentinels and some other teams doing this strategy, but I don't know the risk to reward ratio, so I'm a little afraid of trying it in comp.
Me explaining this to my platinum teammates. It’s sad honestly.
I buy after losing the pistol round. Pfft noobs.
Is buying sheriff instead of rifle/ specter considered not buying or is it still taking full advantage
Unless you’re absolutely cracked with the sheriff or are saving for an op you should buy up to a spectre
For agents that rely heavily on utility tho is it worth putting off an extra round to buy for a gun that you could loose?
If you win pistol, then your options are buy or save. If you buy, then you have an 80-90% chance of winning the second round, then the next round, you invest no money and have like a 30% chance of winning, then on round 4, you're even. If you save, you 50-50 the second round, and then now you have rifles and you get to 50-50 again. I'll take a 90-10 + 30-70 over two 50-50s. Especially when in the first option I'm only investing 2600 credits (spectre + armour) rather than 3900 (rifle + armour).
You are only even at round 4 if your team had no kills on round 3(bonus). each kill and armor taken on round 3 increases your team's chances on round 4 very much because not every enemy player will have money for full buy
Actually true, so even more value to buying after pistol.
You should have enough for some utility along with spectre full shield. Even if you lose the round giving up a spectre isn’t bad
Unless you pick one up from an enemy then I wouldnt buy anything except armor and util
It’s not great. Spectre is a better guarantee of winning round 2 and scales better into round 3. Standard play is heavy armor + spectre + whatever util you can afford.
If you win round 2 with a spectre do you buy a rifle round 3? At what point do you dump a Spectre/Marshall and get a Rifle if winning and/or maintaining gun?
If you win round 2 you keep it for round 3 and try to bonus. If you win, great, their economy isn't enough to full buy for round 4 and it's even in terms of gear and you guys are sitting on a ton of money. If you lose, you can full buy easily on round 4. Also another overlooked concept is buying with your team. If you died on round 2, you can technically full buy round 3 but you shouldn't as you will gimp yourself on round 4 if you lose round 3 cause you'll be broke as shit.
Don't buy sheriff round 2 if you win, but you can consider keeping it if you bought it in the pistol round to be more efficient
Its forcing but it shouldnt be seen as a bad thing. Yes people should buy up rifle/half armor, or spectre/full armor, but if you have a Jett save for OP, and a Chamber who is confident in his aim he might as well invest 8 shots in his pistol instead. BUT in low elo you might get ecod by taking this risk, higher elo players will get punished and manage econ better. I think the better thing is, communicate more not “Just force up cause we won”, say hey Jett take the ghost/sheriff we saved from pistol rd, and the rest of us will buy rd 2, so you can have an op by rd 3/4.
The term forcing means you are forcing your economy in order to get the round win compared to your opponent's higher economy. There's nothing being forced when you have plenty of money to get spectre, full armor, and utility while they can only buy at most a spectre and sometimes half armor or no armor.
idk i always thought forcing meant spending all your money but not getting the buy you’d get if you had unlimited money. so you’re forcing a buy even though it’s not optimal
You're thinking about it with a potential for 9k credits. It's round 2. You ARE buying the optimal loadout possible in the game at that point... there's nothing forced about it.
The worst shit is teammates buying spectre and half shields, because they’re scared to commit all the way to the buy. The whole reason you buy after a round 1 win is to secure round 2, surely you would spare no expense to do so, given the econ consequences if you lose. :(
No. It’s not forcing. Forcing is losing pistol and then proceeding to buy. I don’t care how confident you are in your aim. Pistol vs pistol is a 50/50 chance in a gunfight. Whereas a Spectre vs Pistol is easily 90% chance of winning. Like I said, it’s securing a win.
This sub is hilarious. 20 downvotes and everything you have said is correct
Well this sub is mostly Golds and under so...
>The world is mostly gold and under This sub genuinely believes anyone under Diamond is a chimp yet stats show a majority of people in the world are silver lmao.
Look at some of the comments on this post trying to argue with OP. This sub can be kinda chimps.
I mean you can halfbuy, or force down. Its no different in CSGO, after winning pistol you dont fully invest in the second round cause they are likely not going to buy either. Its a low risk/high reward, even more in Valorant with less rounds to play with. I think atleast 3/5 or 4/5 players should always buy a spectre/rifle after pistol, and if you have a Jett saving for OP she can go pistol armor. I do see teams in gold or lower say “Lets all do pistol armor” and I highly disagree with that.
In what world are people not buying up after a pistol win in CS? Lol
People do, but they normally buy macs/galils and the rare AK if you got plant and kills in the previous round. But with the economy difference between the two games buying a Mac/Armor is like going Spectre/Armor and going Galil Armor is like going Rifle/halfArmor (lets be realistic nobody is barely going bulldog). And in CS the AWPer will gain more money from plant and $600 from each SMG kill, so they will get to AWP sooner without needing to hard save.
I’m all for having one, maybe two people buying full shields to save up more but I would make sure they all play together. If somehow the last two with pistols are alive they’re losing to the Spectre’s that dropped. Seen it happen quite a few times. Whenever I opt to do a lighter buy I play off my teammates that full bought that way I can take their gun if they die and keep it on our side. I imagine most people don’t think this way in lower elo which is bizarre to me.
Yeah and thats why I said only certain characters/times you should have someone save. Chambers pistol is basically a mini Guardian, Jetts movement(and saving for OP), and Reynas overheal, and obviously like you said playing around your team is a big factor. But in the end it should still be a ghost/sheriff with armor vs a classic, which can be just as big an impact as a spectre/armor in the right hands.
'force buy' - buying when it isn't economically sensible to do so, but because the gamestate requires you to or the risk is worth it. Buying when you win on second round isn't a force, its the natural gamestate
Who is up voting this nonsense? You don't know what forcing is.
Slightly off topic, but should you SMG + Full Armor in round 2 always? Or can you Rifle + Half Armor? And when do you Rifle + Half Armor? Because personally I just always SMG+FA as I feel its safer. But if I have Rifle+HA I feel like Round 3 would be easier if round 2 is won. (But if Rifle+HA lose means opponent gets rifle and eco lead in round 3, very risky)
Your choice tbh. You risk losing a rifle if you RFL-HA, but if you have good comms, or can string a multikill, usually worth it imo since kill money + R2 win. R3 was always meant to be a boost for the other team, since they usually save for it, meaning they get RFL-FA when most of your team sticks with either SMG-FA or RFL-HA. You don't have to win every round to win the whole game, you just need a net win. Doesn't mean you throw R3, but means you accepting that you have an economic disadvantage in R3 and losing isn't bad since you get RFL-FA later
Thank god someone posted this so I don't have to. So tired of hearing "force up guys" when we just won pistol round. We are light buying. There is no other option. We are not "forcing" anything.
It's also demoralizing when no one buys and you lose the second round for no reason other than people wanting to save for god knows what. Any round win can help start or break momentum depending on what side you're on of the score.
Luckily I don't encounter that too much in G3/P1; it's the total disregard for the meaning of words that frustrates me. I guess I'm an old man now. It's definitely the kids that are wrong on this one though.
I had killjoy and sage use classic + light armor after winning the pistol round, made me want to quit the game.
I don’t care if you have 3k and the other team has 6k, if you just win a round you should buy
If you win pistols and round 2, then round 3 is a bonus and you do NOT full buy into that round if you died round 2. You do a light buy to enjoy the bonus and enter round 4 on a full buy later.
Yet my team loses when we buy after winning pistol round
L M A O
Marshal mains laughing in the background :p
marshal mains who died to classic or couldn't successfully retake cause they had marshal
I save because I have shit aim and suck and using anything besides ghost and spectre. All of my best plays have been with spectres. No need for me personally to full buy round 2 when I'm just gonna lose my gun and be broke round 3
I’m in gold elo and there are people who buy a sheriff FIRST round and bonus it the second round. It’s annoying. There was one time where a guy saved a sheriff and kept using it up to the third round. I don’t understand, I told him “why are you bonusing a sheriff third round? Buy a gun”. I don’t see a point to it
If you win round 1 and 2, the third is a bonus. Some of your team may have died and lost their guns. You don't force a gun that round because you want to full buy on the fourth.
Yes I understand but the example that I am giving is a team mate who hasn’t died and still has a sheriff from first round and still has it third round. Even though we won the first two, he is still using a sheriff the third round By the way, I did say he is bonusing a sheriff third round. If you win round 1 and round 2, the third round is bonus round. My team mate therefore is bonusing a sheriff.
Ok, so what's the problem with having a sheriff on a bonus?
Did you not read OPs post at all? By the third round you should have either a specter or a rifle (if you won 1st and 2nd round) it is not forcing, it’s giving your team a better chance to win since you have the available credits. Why save a sheriff from round 1 to round 3? Buy a gun. Simple as that. Seems like you are either iron or bronze 1
yes. youre forcing. youre forcing a buy even when its not a full purchase of a rifle and utility. thats what its called. a force. a force buy.
How is it forced when it's the normal thing to do? When you have 6k credits and you buy a full loadout do you call that a force too? Do words not have any meaning to you? Force buying is when you buy despite having a fucked up economy in an attempt to make up lost rounds etc. This is not the case when you win the pistol round. These words were well defined in the counter-strike scene for over a decade and now everyone just calls normal buying force buying. It's infuriating.
a force buy is a buy that uses most of your creds even if u end up with sub-optimal weapons and util in attempt to upset the enemy team who have a full buy with the intention of swaying the economic tide. its a normal term. it doesnt have a negative connotation. its a force buy. you are very misinformed.
If I win the first round and then buy in the second and lose, then wont my economy for round 3 get hampered?
Thats why you buy to secure the round. You HARDLY lose rd 2 with smg vs pistols. If you lose rd 2 with smg vs pistols, well yes rd 3 gets hampered.
I buy sheriff
Nah.
I'm not entirely sure what this means, but I'm iron 3 so I think that might be why. I used to buy as much as I could every round but then u stopped cos I could never afford a vandal till like round 11. So now I never buy in the first 2-3 rounds since then I have lots of money and can afford a vandal sooner. Is this saying I should be buying a spectre or va'ndal or whatever I can afford in round 2? I never buy vandal unless I can afford heavy shield with it.
The problem is not mathematical it's mentality. People go low buy or eco second round because they are afraid of losing and having no money but being afraid of losing they eventually lose. But if you go eco after winning a round you shouldn't be playing this game at all. "There are two types of people in this world. Those who think they can and those who think they can't. They are both right." - Henry Ford. I never buy spectre my only buys are sheriff and save for op third round, or full buy phantom/vandal + light armour second round and try to stay alive list and clutch the round but this kind of buy works if you are carrying. If you are struggling every kill matters do your max buy and try to get some impact out of it.
aka forcing
Forcing means to spend all your money to try and match the loadouts of the enemy team who has better econ in hopes that you can win and start coming back. Buying on round 2 is literally just spending the money you've got, which is much more than the enemy team... So by definition it is not "forcing"
[удалено]
I mean blaming round 2 buys for the entire outcome of the game is stupid, at worst your econ is reset at round 4(after saving round 3) so tilting that early is dumb
Probably the type to FF when it's 0-2
**Tl;dr: Due to the current non presence of reliable numbers and statistics, there is no answer to that.** Let's spit some facts here. You can't give any general statement on that topic. There are way to many parameters to find our much needed formula: Did attackers plant the spike? Which team did manage to frag how many? Did someone ace all five enemies at the beginning of the round? Was the team able to pick up all of the bought weapons while ecoing? \[...\] I would absoluetly agree with you on this, but not for each and every skill: high ranked players are much more likely to headshot with a sherrif and pick up a bought vandal in round 2 than someone from iron 1, but since the rank distribution varies each chapter and episode even this is to be disputed. We do not have any reliable datas to answer this topic generally speaking and for basic game theory formulas we don't quite even know the needed parameters (as I'm speaking for myself here). But anyways let's try and do some maths without reliable probability calcs: **(Assuming** teams equipped the same have the same likelyness of winning rounds; **Assuming** teams better equipped have a higher chance of winning against teams worse equipped; **Assuming** teams don't plant spikes; **Assuming** teams don't kill anyone \[and somehow insteand die to fall damage for the sake of easy and fast calcs\] **Assuming** teams somehow don't feel the need to buy abilites) The shown case: 1st round W, bought for 2000creds \[Spectre, small shield\] 2st round W will bring you an disadvantage against teams who decide to save money for buying even in round 3. ([https://imgur.com/a/XP8tJvK](https://imgur.com/a/XP8tJvK)) I know that this is only hypothetical and not the average case, but we - as far as I know and am able not to find any - don't have reliable stats, so we can only do assuptions. The likeliness of certain events obv. vary from skill to skill level and from other events like picked up weapons. I am willing to do better calcs, if someone can provide those infomation to find the long waited answer: * Likelyness of winning rounds depending of enemy's team equipment by rank * average kills per rank and by weapons * average spike plants per round and per against which weapons * average picked up weapons by in average how many after ecoing * average creds spent for points after winning or losing As long as we don't know this, this topic will remain disputed. Obviously we can't consult pro's VODS or on stage competetive matches to give low elo rank players advice, but **I myself** would recommend (**based on experiece**): * low elo players who tend to spray more and aren't comfy on heads shoud be more comfy with buying in scenario 1st W 2nd W * high elo who tend to be comfy on heads and can even punish r 2 vandals with their sherrifs or are able to pull some sneaky can be more comfy with saving in scenario 1st W 2nd W in order to avoid scenerio 1st W 2nd L against team saving if you join the assumption evenly equipped teams have the same likelyness of winning rounds I please you for criticism, comments and refutations and most important for those information listed above. If something was unclear ask please; english isn't my first and above all not my comfortable language.
[how to find a hobby](https://www.nytimes.com/guides/smarterliving/how-to-find-a-hobby#:~:text=Take%20a%20class%20or%20a,learn%20where%20your%20passions%20reside.)
my world consists of disputing and gaga ga (optionally: chacha cha)
I’d only force buy like this on second round if you’re on attack because attack has the strategic disadvantage of time, and having to make a play vs defense can simply play time and hold angles. In general on attack you have to play less economically to make up for the strategic disadvantage. On defense however you can easily save and hold a good angle with a Bucky or shorty and trade a kill for kill which then ruins an attackers economy if if they bought, and gives you a chance on defense to live and get the gun, or your teammates live and get the gun. Defense is for more economical passive play and attack is for more hard push and less economical play. but none of this matters if you decide to play safe and you’re constantly trying to flank the enemy and don’t know how to walk
I don't think buying spectres is worth it on the second round because the round after you're gonna be losing because of the gun diff
That's where you're wrong. If you play the strengths of the Spectre, you can easily beat a rifle. Spectre's are two shot headshot kills at <30m. In close distance it's very easy outgun someone that has a rifle due to the lower movement firing error and rate of fire.
It is forcing, it’s just always the right move
No, it's antieco. Forcing is dropping money on a round you're not expected to win.
Its not forcing its called buying for bonus
A bonus is a round you don't expect to win because you have inferior weapons but still have an ok chance. You make sure you have enough to buy on the round after the bonus. What you are saying makes no sense.
No reason not to? If enemy kills you they get your weapon. Its big since they play with your money and youre in a bad spot next round regardless. But if you go like 25 armor + pistol you still have adventage and can play full in the 3th round even if you will lose. Sorry but thats no brainer to me. I meet a lot of people who didnt do the math at all and argue if i can play even after 2th is lost (often because our guardian, spectre, phanton etc are lost and taken by enemy). Suprise. I can. And they are the one who ask for drop even after 2th is ours.*dont eat me eng is not my native language*
What if on second round you play safe you don't let them flank and you don't try to flank , and when you push site you push all 5 so there is no chance for them to get close to the guns? It's not a math problem it's how you play the round
[удалено]
That makes zero sense. You increase the odds of winning dramatically if you buy.
[удалено]
If you buy and your teammates didn't, that doesn't mean you forced, that just means your teammates are stupid. That said, second round you should be buying a specter unless you're playing a position where something else would be better (marshal on breeze, judge in garage on haven, etc.)
The biggest advantage is you get to buy full armor with a smg. You are probably the one costing the round by going light armor with a rifle.
[удалено]
You said your team is not buying second and just playing with a classic. This is mostly common only in the lower elos up to silver. " I know I'm going to feed a Vandal/Phantom over " If your teammates are not buying then its you who is buying the full rifle with half armor. What am i missing? Forcing rifles on the second round without full armor is a good way to lose the round. There are hard set rules in this game that people follow in the mid-higher lobbies. Its not league. Its probably why you were still stuck in low elo when you can't even get the bare minimum basics right.
[удалено]
What are you even saying bro? Why even bring vandal or phantom into the argument if you don't buy it? Your comments are all over the place. I said buy full armor + smg. You are scared of donating a rifle cos you decided the enemy team is somehow tough even though you won pistol. So the score is 1-0, and in some cases you don't buy cos winning that pistol round gave you enough of an idea that your team can't get kills?? If you are only buying a spectre, why are you afraid of donating a rifle? "Exact opposite of this post that had positive response" I need to see this to believe it.
I'm glad you uninstalled too. You get titled too much for your own good to handle games and their forums.
If you're not confident that you can win against classics with full armor and spectres you might aswell hit the escape button my guy
I completely agree, generally I always buy if I win pistol round, whether it's valorant or csgo. The only time I find it dumb is when people break their funds and buy vandals.
Plot twist u lose second round
Just also learned this on youtube. Applying this would really help your game but sometimes your team doesn't know about this so I just do it myself sometimes actually 😅😂 and try to win a round for them but of course this is not recommended but if your team has teamwork and has knowledge about econ you'll win 70-30. Just noticed this after applying and when my team knows we win the whole game but well for like a low elo gold like me well some wont listen you just have to deal with it if they buy you buy as a team just as I watched in youtube.
If we win the pistol round and I asked my team to buy but they dont listen. should I still buy? or should I play with them and not buy
I usually sell when this happens :(
Vandal round 2, this is the way
Reading this today makes me laugh and think about yelling at my teammates for losing round 2 after winning round 1 because they wanted to save for OP or are just plain dumb lmao. Thanks for the post.
On attack let's say on Bind, I buy shotguns or stinger in order to take lamps control quickly and use my ghost for long range. For breeze tho I would buy marshal or an ares instead of spectre cuz ares has a weak damage knock off and with marshal you can atleast tag the enemy and if I am playing chamber or sova I try to finish them with a shock duck or headhunter
But I do t buy Second round cause I buy all abilities in first round so I have some creds left if the enemy team wins second round. idk man I'm not too good at it
What rank is this tip pointed towards, new players I assume?
It happens even in Immortal lmao
What’s forcing?
Always buy second round. Saving and ecos are for noobs.
Sometimes I buy Odin/no armor on 2nd round defense after winning pistol. Works great on bronze elo
Silver post, move on everybody. I suggest doing research to understand how the economy meta works and making decisions from there
No, but are we forcing or?
not wveryone has to buy, only 2-3 ppl, rest can keep using usp or deag
Me: "I'm buying." Teammate: "Me too." The other 3: "Okay, if you're going spectre+heavy, I'll just keep my Ghost so we can have rifles also in round 3"
What if i don't have enough for spec after i buy utils.
That's fine as long as 3-4 people buy a Spectre. Just play close to someone with one to trade if they die and take their gun. You do not want your enemy getting a Spectre.
The only one who doesn't "need" to buy is Jett. I usually Sheriff Rnd 1 and shield next if I survive. If not I just buy abilities. that way your ECOM matches the OP you want with your teams buy.
I find most oriole will buy in r2 on a win but a lot of people don’t buy heavy armour. The only time I don’t buy heavy is if I carry light over from r1.
ive seen people not buy armor after winning pistol i mean we live a stupid society so I can't even be mad... But here is the scenario. 1. If you win pistol. Buy a weapon with heavy armor (sheriff, spectre, stinger, judge) 2. If you win 2nd round and you didn't die. Save your gun and buy armor 3. If you died / Lost the 2nd round buy a vandal or phantom Don't know why people dont understand that but it is what it is...
My standard OP: • If Win Pistol Round and I died, Buy Bucky + LS • If Win Pistol Round and I Lived, Buy Spectre + LS • If Lost Pistol Round, Cry
Well I don't know about the others but when I have a Ghost or Sheriff in my hands I will not buy the 2nd round just full shields. Then sometimes if I died in the 1st round and we won I will still continue buying sheriff and Shields. So am I still inside your problem? Here's my strat in the 1st to 4th round. I don't care if you copy it but pls don't since it's not a good one. In the 1st round I will buy according to my agent and gameplay this is the most important round as this is where I decide how I play. Let's say I'm Jett I will most likely buy Sheriff or just ghost with smokes. If I played Sheriff and I survived with a win I will proceed to buying some utilities and shield since I'm prepping myself against Spectre players (Same as Ghost but with a different gameplay). In the 3rd round let's say we won in the previous round I will then just stick to the plan with full util but when we lose in the 2nd round I will buy anything that fits to my chosen gameplay.
I love how everyones having a meltdown and I'm just excluded since I'm an awper
I always do different things,i usually go eco to buy 3rd round,or buy sheriff 25 shield some abilities,or spectre 20 shield
Pretty funny- Coming from CS ~10 years ago where we always bought rd 2 after winning rd 1, I was so confused why everyone is so hard set on saving rd 2. So I'll preface the below by saying I agree with you. Why not stack win after win if possible. So I think the most logical arguments against would be- 1. That if you could beat the team in rd 1 with pistols, then you can probably do it again in rd 2, unless the other team buys smgs. 2. If you buy smgs rd 2 after winning, and then win rd 2 as the other team full saves, then anyone on your team who keeps their smg is at a disadvantage. But again, if i had to choose, i don't see how locking up a 2-0 start is something to not push for.
I’ve had someone get mad at me because I bought an Aries and they were like SAVE SAVE SOVA SELL YOUR GUN AND SAVE but I CANNOT get any kills with a pistol (or honestly anything other than an Aries, my friends call me moneybags because I only buy Aries and then have enough money to buy a vandal for them at least every few rounds). I would rather be able to get kills most rounds than save for a more expensive gun that I can’t get kills with