Drop in your match demos and get back player stats, team stats, a report per match, and the patterns your team repeats without noticing — each one counted, with the rounds it came from printed beside it. Built for league teams, measured against league teams.
No card. No install. You get a link before your next match.
Layout preview using figures from a synthetic test match. Every line in a real report carries its denominator and the round numbers it came from.
Upload a season's matches once. Everything below comes out of the same parse, so there is nothing else to set up and nothing to keep in sync.
One page per match: how the rounds actually went, where the score moved, and the handful of moments worth pulling up at practice.
The things your team does over and over without deciding to — same site off the same utility, same rotation trigger, same buy after the same loss. Counted across every match, not eyeballed from one.
Role as observed rather than as labelled, weapon breakdown, opening duels taken and won, and where each player actually stands at freeze-end.
Map pool with round records rather than just match records, side splits, economy habits, and how often you convert the situations you get into.
Top-down playback of the rounds a report flags — ten seconds either side, so you watch the thing that mattered instead of scrubbing a whole demo to find it.
Which decisions cost you rounds you were winning. The part nobody else does — and the part still being calibrated. What "beta" means here →
Most analytics tools score your team against a population you have never played. A collegiate roster measured against professionals comes back "below average at everything" — true, useless, and slightly insulting. Counterplay does not do that.
Tendencies come from parsing demos and counting what happened. There is no estimate anywhere in the scouting section, so there is nothing to be wrong about.
When your team is compared to another, both were in the same match, in the same tier, against the same opposition. Any bias applies to both sides and cancels.
Below eight chances you get raw counts and a warning label, never a percentage. A rate off four rounds is noise wearing a percent sign.
Every claim lists the rounds it came from. Open the demo, watch round 14, and check us. If a line is wrong you can see that it is wrong.
Team name, league, and your FACEIT team page. That is the whole setup.
Whatever you have — league matches, scrims, a whole season at once. Grab them while they are fresh: platforms delete match demos after a few weeks, so the ones worth keeping are the ones you save now.
Stats, patterns and a report per match, updating as you add matches. Send the link to your roster; no accounts for them to make, nothing for anyone to install.
Everything else on this page is counting. This one is a model, so it gets its own label and its own warning.
It answers a question no other Counter-Strike tool answers: not how did we play, but which decision cost us that round.
The engine estimates how often a situation like that one is won, then compares what you did to what teams in the same tier actually did from the same spot. Rounds you were comfortably winning and threw away surface first, because those are the ones worth talking about.
Why it is beta: the comparison is only as good as the pool it compares against, and the league pool is still being built — by the teams using this. Until it is big enough, decision scoring shows its sample size on every row and stays out of anything that looks like a grade. If it says something that does not match what you remember, tell us. That feedback is worth more to us than the subscription would be.
Nobody has collegiate or league baselines, because nobody has collegiate or league demos. Every analytics platform in Counter-Strike is trained on professional matches — a different game played by different people.
The teams that use this now are what make those baselines exist. In exchange you are the only teams that ever get measured against them, instead of against professionals. That is the deal, plainly: your matches build the reference, and you get the reference.
Until there is enough of it to be trustworthy, the comparison features stay switched off rather than shipping numbers that do not describe your league.
If your athletics department or IT office asks, this section is the answer, and you are welcome to forward it.
Things this does not do today, so nobody finds out the hard way: no live in-game overlay, no 3D replay, no practice servers, and no scouting of opponents whose demos you do not have. There is also no ranking of you against professional teams — that one is deliberate and it is not coming. If you need those, Skybox, Refrag and CS2.CAM each do one of them well.
Everything here is built to compare league play against league play. A solo-queue tool measures you against solo-queue players; a professional tool measures you against professionals. Neither describes a Wednesday-night collegiate match, which is the only thing this is trying to describe.
Send us a few demos and we will come back with your first report. If it is not worth your time, tell us and we will stop.