The various degrees of roster changes — Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Rostermania had me wondering about all the unique intricacies and nuances of a ‘5 man CS:GO roster’. Why do teams change or not change their players? There are an array of benefits and drawbacks to such a process and I hope to bring up some of them, discuss them and perhaps unpack some concepts of roster changes that aren’t the first things that come to mind when it comes to roster moves.

The Styles:

Teams utilise roster moves to varying degrees, some frequently, some every now and again and others few and far between. I thought to put together some examples to demonstrate this:

Mousesports:

I like Mousesports’ current line-up so much and its been super exciting to see their success thus far, especially with Oskar looking so strong and Ropz with so much potential. But this team has gone through many iterations to get to this point and they lend themselves to this idea of chopping and changing players to make it work. Losing Niko was thought to be the nail in the coffin for what alooked like an exhausted team, but seeing Nex leave (before Niko) along with Spiidi and Lowel for Sunny and Styko as well Ropz this roster has blown everyone away taking away wins at ESG Mykonos and StarSeries Finals 4. Not to mention legend status at the Eleague Boston Major and their recent win at V4.

What I think Mousesports has been able to achieve through their more frequent cycling of players is impressive. For now this current line-up is proving its worth and I think it really has lots of potential. But keeping in mind, this roster took many iterations prior before it got here and it appears that is the trade off to get some good wins and short term success perhaps. I think the FaZe roster is comparable but obviously they have more options on the table in terms of players to choose from due to the money behind the FaZe brand. What is interesting too is that both these line-ups are international ones which indicates that these teams aren’t interested in locking themselves in to keeping to a particular nationality for their team — again this has its own set of dilemmas but thus far this approach to rosters has provided two of the strongest rosters at the moment.

Of course both perspectives are important, so Hellraisers is an example of this approach to team building that maybe didn’t work as well as it did for FaZe or Mouz. Hellraisers has seen some real talent go through their organisation, but have yet to hit a sweet spot set of players that go on to bring in some trophies and top finishes at consequent events. Using mousesports as a guide you could suggest it’s a waiting game, but there in lies the conundrum because there is never a guarantee and it will become a very dry, displeasing and maybe expensive wait.

Astralis:

To look more at a middle ground approach to roster moves I think Astralis is a really good example of having a core set of players or attitude to the game, and changing the last few pieces every now and again to get that final gear the team needs to really pull trophies. Astralis has always been a strong team, especially going back to their TSM roots. But the team has had no problems taking out some pieces and trying out some different ones. With players like Karrigan, Cajunb and Kjaerbye leaving the team they’ve been able to add some additional pieces that have unlocked them as a roster in some regard. Focusing more on the era when Gla1ve entered the team we saw this team eventually crack the code and go on to win many events including the Eleague Major 2017. At no point was the team doing overly poor before, but it shows that even a change here and there can elevate the team immensely.

Astralis have been able to take all their progress and work and rather than chop and change all their players and start from scratch or continually build from the ground up, they opted to keep their foundations and make changes accordingly, adapting as required. The current SK gaming roster have shown similar trends, from when they added Fnx and Taco at the end of 2015. We saw them peak throughout 2016 but into 2017 forced to make changes, adding Felps and then continuing to show dominant form. We then saw Boltz be put into the roster for Felps and now as Taco steps down we wait to see what choices this core will make, but it is quite clear they, like Astralis have opted for this methodical and calculated approach to roster changes, carrying them out in order to maximise their strengths and opportunities.

Virtus Pro:

It can be quite easy to sit back and just go in on the Ninjas in Pyjamas and Virtus Pro for being so hesitant with their roster changes, having some of the longest standing rosters we’ve ever seen. Of course there are a lot of elements that play a part in this choice, for example that core 4 on NiP and the ‘Golden 5’ on VP are some of the most well known and respected groups of players in Global Offensive. To mess with these cores sometimes seems ridiculous — but also has a lot of emotion in it. No one wants to watch some of the most well versed line-ups split and that pressure keeps them together, perhaps this is the case with Virtus Pro who only recently changed out TaZ for Michu. Part of the issue with keeping the team together through thick and thin can also be its biggest strength as they know each other very well and have so much more team practice under their belt. However, when its not working and the teams keep trying to force it I feel the pros do not make up for the cons. Some of the biggest issues in the team can be covered up by surprise wins and placements, as we saw with VP and their competitive run at EPICENTER in 2017 or NiP winning IEM Oakland in 2016. These wins mask some bigger issues but give the team and community confidence that the team is through the troubles. Its good to see that these teams have made an effort of late to make some changes, especially NiP who are looking much stronger with ReZ, Draken and Dennis. But could some pain have been avoided if these teams did this earlier?

Another mention is Vega Squadron, who have been together as a 5-man unit for as long as the VP ‘Golden 5’. They have broken out a bit recently, particularly in the majors, how much of their success came down to how long the roster has been together I’m not sure but it definitely played a part. What we don’t know is the extent of this teams struggles over the last few years in comparison to NiP and VP. But with Vega Squadron making a bit of a name for themselves we can begin to keep an eye out and see what happens.

Closing thoughts:

In summary, each style has its own set of pros and cons, which is exemplified in the teams who use these styles.

For teams who make a lot of changes:

These teams are able to assemble some really strong and dangerous rosters, like FaZe and Mouz. Full of the best players and really high skill they can often achieve instant success, but we sometimes see these ‘honeymoon periods’ end and the roster not live up to the expectations. The style is also excellent for recruiting young talent that can redefine teams and raise their skill immensely. Another downside though is that the constantly changing line-up can be a hassle for the players, IGL and coach alike, having to constantly build from the ground up.

For the teams who opt for balance and change pieces as needed every now and again:

Once a roster has found a strong core and has a good style/approach to the game I think this is the best method to tackle roster changes. With SK and Astralis we’ve seen them make a couple changes that are still in line with their particular mentality and approach to Counter-Strike that pushed them into their peaks. It works well because it helps to correct minor issues and details that are inhibiting the team from being any stronger or more consistent. There isn’t as many drawbacks in this scenario and is why I like it so much.

And the teams who hold onto their roster:

Some of the benefits of this style are powerful in a team game like Counter-Strike. Being able to understand all the unique nuances and dynamics of the players on your team and team as a whole from months if not years of playing together is a massive benefit to the roster. Despite this, glaring flaws and inherit issues in the team will not get fixed without some kind of change and combined with the incredible pressure from fans, other teams, the organisation all begin to stack up — sometimes this can be good but goes both ways.

Overall, these styles of roster change all have their place and can also be seen in cycles, where some rosters will start with changing heaps of player, then going into a more middle ground stance to then locking in that roster when its all working really well. Each style has its benefits and its drawbacks and its super interesting to look into some teams to see how it all works in practice.