@ It’s this misconception that results in cod strategically being so far behind. When reviewing cod if you intentionally defined and categorised game states I.E, rotations, when you’re hard blocking and also blocking the other primary spawn, one person spawning in and the rest of the team being out, playing a hill differently because you win on that hill and don’t need to worry about the next hill, sequential patterns in gunfights you’re getting in etc you’d realise how easy it is to manipulate outcomes. It’s why shotzzy and players like him are so effective they disrupt the habitual pattern of cod players as most lack intentionality beyond the first and second order of effects. Pros always say after a certain amount of reps you’re no longer learning anything new you’re just refining the execution of your win conditions as you get into similar gunfights again and again. Obviously there’s the small changes when the slower teams learn the game but it doesn’t change much. Whenever I intentionally go about playing snd to pick up on player habits you notice everyone does the same shit, it’s like there’s a hive mind consciousness that most cod players are tapped into, its hilarious once you see it.
@@SDargz The tops teams do all of this already... So I'm confused as to why you still think CoD is behind strategically. But you also have to be able to react quickly based on something unforeseen. There are so many potential outcomes to any situation in CoD that it's impossible to define everything. But the best players are always able to act on the fly and react accordingly. That's what sets the top players/teams apart from the bottom. You can only prepare so much because when it comes down to the game things just start happening, that you weren't prepared for (a new wall bang, a player slipped through the cracks, someone lost the opening gunfight etc.) but when something like that happens you use instinct and game knowledge to respond and react accordingly. But all teams plan for key situations, CoD isn't behind strategically at all.
@@theicyplays7370I think the best cod pros understand spawns at a high level, but the best teams still rely more so on in game strategy like for SND, and maybe a few hardpoint setups. Even top players have said they don’t fully care about the stats. Scump himself said it didn’t apply to OpTic, they didn’t even have a coach. This type of analysis only exists in the last 2 years for a 20 year old game and not many teams even have a data guy like JP to this day. At the end of the day cod players are cod players, not known for IQ, ie GA chat. I’m confused if you even watched the video though? JP acknowledges how far you have to break the data down for these guys, so there is no way the rest of the league is up to speed if OpTic is a top 2 team with 2 of the smartest players of all time and it’s still a struggle
@@Jackwill2349 I understood the clip differently, I understood it like the data means nothing on its own. If JP tells them they get broken 80% of the time that means nothing without the context of why they're getting broken. And he said himself that the data shouldn't be the end all be all for all situations, and that the players inputs/feelings are also valued. Also bringing up the OpTic dynasty for not having a coach was a bad example because they are notorious for not playing fundamentally at all and just relying on their gunskill to overpower teams (and teams that played fundamentally + matched their gunskill would be a struggle for them like AW FaZe or BO3 EnVy). I think for the longest time COD was definitely behind strategically, but to say that they still are is objectively wrong. The only reason teams don't have more rounded coaching staff is because of financials, but other members of the coaching staff take on those responsibilities.
am a pure math major, i like this progress. usning statistciss and whatnot mathematics and programming is the way.GGs
u still working on the cod pack opening website jp?
People don't appreciate topics like this, shows how far behind cod is strategically.
Curious why you say that? CoD is so fast paced and reaction based you can only plan so much strategy. Most of the strategy is in the moment
@ It’s this misconception that results in cod strategically being so far behind. When reviewing cod if you intentionally defined and categorised game states I.E, rotations, when you’re hard blocking and also blocking the other primary spawn, one person spawning in and the rest of the team being out, playing a hill differently because you win on that hill and don’t need to worry about the next hill, sequential patterns in gunfights you’re getting in etc you’d realise how easy it is to manipulate outcomes. It’s why shotzzy and players like him are so effective they disrupt the habitual pattern of cod players as most lack intentionality beyond the first and second order of effects.
Pros always say after a certain amount of reps you’re no longer learning anything new you’re just refining the execution of your win conditions as you get into similar gunfights again and again. Obviously there’s the small changes when the slower teams learn the game but it doesn’t change much.
Whenever I intentionally go about playing snd to pick up on player habits you notice everyone does the same shit, it’s like there’s a hive mind consciousness that most cod players are tapped into, its hilarious once you see it.
@@SDargz The tops teams do all of this already... So I'm confused as to why you still think CoD is behind strategically. But you also have to be able to react quickly based on something unforeseen. There are so many potential outcomes to any situation in CoD that it's impossible to define everything. But the best players are always able to act on the fly and react accordingly. That's what sets the top players/teams apart from the bottom.
You can only prepare so much because when it comes down to the game things just start happening, that you weren't prepared for (a new wall bang, a player slipped through the cracks, someone lost the opening gunfight etc.) but when something like that happens you use instinct and game knowledge to respond and react accordingly.
But all teams plan for key situations, CoD isn't behind strategically at all.
@@theicyplays7370I think the best cod pros understand spawns at a high level, but the best teams still rely more so on in game strategy like for SND, and maybe a few hardpoint setups. Even top players have said they don’t fully care about the stats. Scump himself said it didn’t apply to OpTic, they didn’t even have a coach. This type of analysis only exists in the last 2 years for a 20 year old game and not many teams even have a data guy like JP to this day. At the end of the day cod players are cod players, not known for IQ, ie GA chat. I’m confused if you even watched the video though? JP acknowledges how far you have to break the data down for these guys, so there is no way the rest of the league is up to speed if OpTic is a top 2 team with 2 of the smartest players of all time and it’s still a struggle
@@Jackwill2349 I understood the clip differently, I understood it like the data means nothing on its own. If JP tells them they get broken 80% of the time that means nothing without the context of why they're getting broken. And he said himself that the data shouldn't be the end all be all for all situations, and that the players inputs/feelings are also valued.
Also bringing up the OpTic dynasty for not having a coach was a bad example because they are notorious for not playing fundamentally at all and just relying on their gunskill to overpower teams (and teams that played fundamentally + matched their gunskill would be a struggle for them like AW FaZe or BO3 EnVy).
I think for the longest time COD was definitely behind strategically, but to say that they still are is objectively wrong. The only reason teams don't have more rounded coaching staff is because of financials, but other members of the coaching staff take on those responsibilities.