Why more and more IGLs are taking up the 'supportive rotator' role

With the rise of specialist anchors and a need for more precise mid-round calling, IGLs are placing themselves in star positions more often — here's why.

In-game leaders come in all shapes and sizes. There are AWPing captains, like Dzhami "⁠Jame⁠" Ali, Casper "⁠cadiaN⁠" Møller, and now Nicolai "⁠device⁠" Reedtz. There are star riflers who coordinate their troops while remaining star players, like Garidmagnai "⁠bLitz⁠" Byambasuren, Benjamin "⁠blameF⁠" Bremer, and Johannes "⁠tabseN⁠" Wodarz.

But the vast majority take a more sacrificial tone. Captaincy correlates with experience but also offers a route into tier one for players that are individually far below the average. Finn "⁠karrigan⁠" Andersen and Marco "⁠Snappi⁠" Pfeiffer are perfect examples of this, veterans of Counter-Strike 1.6 who rarely average a rating above 1.00.

Having this type of in-game leader is a boon for teams despite their lack of fragging because of the tactical advantages they can provide. In a game with limited resources and room for stars to shine, it's also helpful to have players who do not need to worry as much about their own output.

But on CT side, it can offer a problem: Where do you put your IGL? The conventional wisdom is to place them in positions that see the least action, with B on Mirage acting as the perfect example. Opposition teams know spots in advance and are more than aware of who their enemy team's weakest fragger is.

So what happens if teams just run at the IGL ten times a half? That's what teams used to do against Natus Vincere in 2018, aiming right at Danylo "⁠Zeus⁠" Teslenko with a full execution behind them. Given how hard these small sites are to retake, too, it was a potent strategy. NAVI, of course, adapted. Oleksandr "⁠s1mple⁠" Kostyliev cropped up in B a few rounds a half. Information plays allowed for stacks.

But the base problem of a player that needed 'covering' remains up to today's CS, where lurkers will actively prowl for picks on lower-skilled anchors. In-game leaders, even those with solid individual talent, simply do not have the luxury of hours upon hours of deathmatch a day to be able to compete.

One failed solution was that of role compression. Mathias "⁠MSL⁠" Lauridsen famously earned an MVP AWPing for North by using the 'easy' sniper rifle to put up okay numbers with a core of four able riflers around him. But there is a reason it never caught on. The AWP is too powerful to waste it on a low-fragging player, whether they are calling or not. AWPing IGLs like Jame and device are still part of the fragging core.

So we are back to square one, with rifling and low-fragging IGLs as the clear meta. And this is how teams have solved it.

Here's the most popular position for in-game leaders on each map. B on Mirage still pips the cake, but very narrowly at just 26% of all B players. On the other six maps, the most common place to find an in-game leader is in a rotation position. On Overpass, it's the B rotator, the first man to go to A and able to provide supportive utility both at home on B and on the rotate upstairs.

This is the trend across maps. On Vertigo, they're usually the A rotator, providing useful utility to a star sidekick on the A Ramp and the first to leave for Mid or B. Inferno is the same, but on B, with in-game leaders like karrigan and Aleksi "⁠Aleksib⁠" Virolainen farming utility damage acting as the supportive half of the B bomb-site defence.

Middle on Anubis can be played by stars, but can easily be played more supportively as the A anchor's first responder. B Cave on Ancient, full of wall-bangs and knowing when to support your B anchor, was a star role initially — and still is for players like Martin "⁠stavn⁠" Lund and Mareks "⁠YEKINDAR⁠" Gaļinskis —, but is taken up by the likes of karrigan and Snappi.

We've mentioned the ability to be supportive here, but they are also key rotate positions. Having your in-game leader, the player with the best knowledge of the game and opponent, as the one to decide when to gamble on a setup change is a logical outcome.

On Nuke, in-game leaders are spread out a fair bit but every position except the A Floor player has a huge responsibility when it comes to rotations.

The same analysis can be seen on the least popular in-game leader spots. A Pit on Inferno is a turret spot, with little room for fun rotations and more of a reliance on micro (as opposed to macro) utility and first-bullet headshots. B on Vertigo, Monster on Overpass, and A on Ancient and Anubis, are similar positions. If a lurker walks out and gets a frag, the round is over. Teams cannot place that duty onto an IGL.

B Short on Mirage, an active position but with less potential for supportive play, is also very unpopular. Lukas "⁠gla1ve⁠" Rossander, a traditional A Connector player, is the only in-game leader in the top 20 to take up residency there.

When viewed in a supportive lens, this all makes sense. gla1ve was a trailblazer in this aspect, taking up rotation positions across the board and giving himself the best view of the map possible. Having star anchors like Emil "⁠Magisk⁠" Reif and Andreas "⁠Xyp9x⁠" Højsleth helped, but the theory was proved to work.

Even then, from a pure fragging standpoint (that did not apply to prime gla1ve), IGLs occupying these 'star' positions is far from optimal. Most of these are high-intensity areas, bright white on a heatmap, and encounter enemies in default rounds. The average rating in these spots is far higher than your traditional small-site anchor roles, too. In-game leaders who are failing to frag in spots like Cave or A Connector are acting as a firepower deficit.

This is true even when you take into account the fact that rotating in-game leaders can put up a higher rating, on average. When you take Mid control against FaZe on Mirage, with karrigan jump-spotting on B, you are running into David "⁠frozen⁠" Čerňanský and Robin "⁠ropz⁠" Kool together. That is a far more frightening prospect than going into Dan "⁠apEX⁠" Madesclaire and Lotan "⁠Spinx⁠" Giladi, at least on paper.

But having apEX there is worth it. Vitality signed Shahar "⁠flameZ⁠" Shushan, a Connector player on OG, and used him as a B player initially before moving him to A Anchor duty when William "⁠mezii⁠" Merriman arrived. There is method behind these choices.

"In our team that's the current decision because apEX is calling a lot in the mid-round," Spinx told HLTV in Copenhagen. "On CT side I'm trying to help a bit but it's mostly apEX. Maybe someone else in Connector would have better stats, but for the team it wouldn't be beneficial.

"Maybe Connector is a 'star position,' but if you have a really good support guy in this position it can make the A guy and Window guy pop off really well. There's good and bad in everything, but right now it's for the best."

Read more

Why are modern IGLs so aggressive?

And this lands on a crucial point, one that can't be measured too easily. CT sides are highly evolved in professional play, with a call at the start of the round into certain configurations. In-game leaders can't just take their hands off the wheel on defence anymore.

But, when they are busy jumping on the B bomb-site, it is far harder for them to get the correct read. On T side most in-game leaders put themselves in the centre of map control takes to give themselves the most information possible. On CT, anchor IGLs like karrigan often have the least of all five players.

The way to solve this, for teams that persist with anchor captains, is for star players to take more responsibility. AWPers already have to call their plays at the start of rounds, but this is true for riflers too. Aggression on CT can be more effective when you are the player calling for it, at a time you think will work.

Take HEROIC and Guy "⁠NertZ⁠" Iluz as an example. "On CT side I'm struggling because I'm taking a lot of initiative," he told us. "On most of the maps I'm calling on CT side and taking a lot of risk." More freedom does not always mean better fragging.

Look at Major champions Natus Vincere, and it is Mihai "⁠iM⁠" Ivan taking initiative with Aleksib on B. In Andrey "⁠B1ad3⁠" Gorodenskiy's words, "iM's main goal is to become a permanent second voice in the team and to constantly offer ideas, moving the team in the proper direction if he sees a gap. We worked on this aspect a lot on the boot camp and he succeeded very well."

Even when in-game leaders are in rotate positions, they cannot see the other bomb-site well. Most teams operate with a loud AWPer floating between sites in addition to what Jonathan "⁠EliGE⁠" Jablonowski called 'site leaders.' A player is nominated on each site to call setups, when to give up space, information pushes, and rotates.

In addition, even the players without the named responsibility of being an IGL, site leader, or AWPer has to call for themselves too. device rubbished the notion of a designated second caller entirely. It is all to do with maps, positions, and information available.

The trade off when an in-game leader occupies these positions, then, is a complicated one. They are more supportive, throwing on average 0.11 extra flashbangs per round than non-calling riflers in the same position. They frag less, with an average rating deficit of 0.07. But what about the intangible impact of having your lead tactician as a site leader?

One way to try and measure this is by CT round-win percentage when an in-game leader occupies a spot and when they do not. This is not bullet-proof; just look at the +14% for Mirage's A site, thanks in large part to Leonid "⁠chopper⁠" Vishnyakov's 69.7% CT win-rate inflated by Danil "⁠donk⁠" Kryshkovets and FURIA's 60.3% with Andrei "⁠arT⁠" Piovezan as the A anchor who spends the least amount of time on A out of anyone in the list.

But it does tell us something, as an example, that Outside on Nuke offers a 5.9% hit to round win rate when your in-game leader is there. It is a spot where game knowledge can help in terms of rotations and smoke spams but a supportive rotator more set on harassment and delay is clearly less useful than having a bulldozer like donk or rotation specialist like Håvard "⁠rain⁠" Nygaard that win rounds on their own.

Across all rotation positions, the average change in round win percentage is -2.8% (and rating -0.09) when an in-game leader is present. This isn't a huge deficit, but it does show the risk in-game leaders are taking when putting themselves into traditional star positions. The drop-off in fragging has to be worth it.

Teams can clearly find success with their in-game leader in any position provided the constellation works as a whole. If an in-game leader is blessed with star anchors like Magisk, Kaike "⁠KSCERATO⁠" Cerato, or ropz, they can hunt for all the information needed safely knowing that their K-D is not the crux upon which the game rests.

The same can be said for the opposite way: If an in-game leader can trust their rotation players with much of the CT calling, the best of both worlds is available. Your best players are in the most important and most frequent gunfights and can call their own shots and plays.

In-game leaders also should (and do) have the individual skill available to not be complete duds as anchors. With most maps having two more low-intensity or anchor spots, a star anchor will not always spare your IGL from bomb-site duty. And, plenty of that anchor job is about delay, timing, and utility; you don't have to drop three instant Valeriy "⁠b1t⁠" Vakhovskiy-style headshots to have done your job.

Counter-Strike setups are a delicate balancing act in a game of limited resources and differences in approach are proof that it remains an unsolved problem. One size does not fit all.

But there are visible trends towards more active positions, even if IGLs play them less actively than a star player would. For most teams, there is a clear anchor, a clear star rotator, and the other two riflers are a bit of both worlds.

Freedom score is calculated as an average of a player's positions, with each being ranked between 0 (e.g. B on Mirage) and 10 (e.g. AWPing, or Connector on Mirage).

NAVI are an example of this, with Aleksib rotating on some maps but not all. "We tried to put everyone on spots they are comfortable with," he told us. "I can play anchor, but I can also play this supportive rotator role, gathering info and being annoying. I think we just stuck with something and are making it work. That's the most important thing, giving your players time, giving your team time, to understand the system and how we play."

When Aleksib plays Outside on Nuke, he is not expected to out-frag A Floor anchor Justinas "⁠jL⁠" Lekavicius or Ramp player b1t. It's more complicated than that.

The same pattern is visible across the map pool. 'Star positions' are still a useful way of viewing the game, and resources being allocated around a team; but how an IGL fits into the puzzle can knock that off course.

And, more and more, they are placing themselves closer to the action on at least part of the map pool. The supportive rotator, aiming for info and guerrilla delay tactics, ready with a flash for their AWPer or a nearby rifler, is now the most common place to find an in-game leader on defense.