Unreal HeavenThe home of 2v2 and 3v3 iCTFUnreal HeavenThe home of 2v2 and 3v3 iCTF30 Oct 2026, 17:09
Deck16][
| Player | Score | Kills | Deaths | Suicides | Shots | 360 | K/D | Eff | Acc | HSK | HSA% | TTL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| cG | 50 | 50 | 11 | 0 | 218 | - | 4.55 | 82% | 29% | 21 | - | 0:56 |
| tomm | 9 | 10 | 28 | 1 | 195 | - | 0.36 | 26% | 9% | 3 | - | 0:22 |
| dim | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | - | 1.00 | 50% | 0% | 0 | - | 0:24 |
| Player | Double | Multi | Ultra | Monster | Ludicrous | Holy Shit | Best |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| cG | 2 | 1 | 4 kills |
| Player | Killing Spree | Rampage | Dominating | Unstoppable | Godlike | Best |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| cG | 3 | 1 | 21 kills |
Loading player feedback...
Generated from the match events and player statistics.
A tight NW DM match took place on DM-Deck16][-UH, with 3 active players recorded in the report.
cG produced the strongest overall performance, finishing with 50 score, 50 kills, and 82% efficiency.
cG led the fragging pace with 50 kills.
cG posted the best accuracy at 29%.
Banter read: cG made the table look personal with 50 score and 82% efficiency.
The final table reflects the players who converted pressure most consistently across the match.
Match feedback based on the player's usual level and their role in this game.
| Player | Verdict | Role | Performance Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| cG | Godlike | Combat | Great game, this was a really strong performance from you at 2.10x. You gave your team strong combat value, especially because your kills came with good efficiency. 82% efficiency is a strong sign that you picked good fights and stayed alive after winning them. Next focus: keep the fragging up, but make the kills happen around weapons, armour, belt, and routes your team needs. |
| dim | Feeding | Combat | You had a rough game at 0.75x, so I think your goal should be to simplify and rebuild from safer plays. Your influence came through fighting, so the big levers are efficiency, positioning, and staying near useful areas of the map. Your combat stats were fairly balanced, so one fewer needless death or one cleaner powerup fight could move the rating up. Next focus: build pressure from safer positions, then contest armour, belt, or key weapons when you have the stack to survive. |
| tomm | Feeding | Combat | You had a rough game at 0.47x, so I think your goal should be to simplify and rebuild from safer plays. This was mostly about combat basics for you: win cleaner fights, keep better positions, and avoid giving away easy deaths. 26% efficiency hurt you here; I think the priority is taking fewer low-percentage fights and resetting before you are forced into bad trades. Next focus: value your life more, reset from weak fights, and make the enemy work harder for every frag. |
Red versus Blue balance for this match only.
Per-player kills by weapon for this match.
Per-player pickup control for this match.
| Player | AMP | BELT | PADS | ARMOR | HEALTH | VIALS | BOOTS | INVIS | REDEEMER | WEAPONS | AMMO | TOTAL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| cG | 4 | 10 | 35 | 22 | 1 | 13 | 62 | |||||
| tomm | 7 | 7 |
Weapon kills and pickup control for this match only.
Red vs Blue armor, pads, belt, and amp control for this match.
Click the coloured player buttons to show or hide lines. Hover dots for killer, victim, and match time.
Each coloured line is a player. Hover dots to see which pickup they collected.
| 12 |
| 2 |
| 1 |
| 41 |
| 56 |
| 27 |
| 34 |
| dim | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Totals | 4 | 1 | 10 | 42 | 29 | 1 | 42 | 99 |
Kills by weapon in this match.
Best player and weapon pairings in this match.
Different summary from the timeline graph: pickup types, power pickups, and first/last control moments.
Dots are real headshot events from combat_events. Warmup is hidden; extra time is shown when needed.
Pickup Control graph is unchanged. This line graph shows timed pickups where raw pickup events are available.
Uses the match ngLog and UHNet connection values: client NetSpeed, client FPS when logged, and ping samples across the match. Min, Avg and Max summarise the ping range, the trace shows the connection pattern, and spikes mark sudden jumps.
| Player | Client NetSpeed | Client FPS | Refresh | Min | Avg | Max | Spikes | Ping Trace | Pattern |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| tomm | - | - | - | 45 | 57 | 162 | 2 | Occasional lag spikes | |
| dim | - | - | - | 43 | 43 | 43 | 0 | Limited ping data | |
| cG | - | - | - | 112 | 120 | 220 | 2 | Occasional lag spikes |
