Considering no one seems to have bothered trying to figure out the stats I tried to do it for a limited number of games.
I looked at all games of the UTT2 main tourney, including the Bronze-Match. Additionally to that I looked at the finals and bronze-games of both qualification rounds.
I might have made a mistake somewhere but here is what I have come-up with.
Finals
Scotch/Noggano vs CN/Seeking -> 5:0 for Allies
Bronze-Match
Brosras/Artavick vs DevM/Luvnest -> 3:2 for Allies
Semi-Finals
Brosras/Artavick vs CN/Seeking -> 3:1 for Axis
Scotch/Noggano vs DevM/Luvnest -> 4:1 for Allies
Quarter-Finals
Noggano/Scotch vs Orangepest and Barton -> 1:1
Seeking/CN vs Troyd and Tar -> 1:1
Refero/Hooligan vs Artavick/Brosras -> 3:0 Allies
Luvnest/DevM vs Asha and Asia -> 2:1 Allies
UTT qualification round 2 stats
Finals -> 2:1 Allies
Bronze- Match -> 3:0 Allies
UTT Qualification round 1
Finals match 1:1
Bronze-Match 1:1
Total number of games:39
Allied wins: 27 -> 69,2%
Axis wins: 12 -> 30,8%
UTT2 stats
22 Jun 2020, 11:07 AM
#1
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
22 Jun 2020, 11:10 AM
#2
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Conclusion:
Sample size is irrelevant for any accurate balance evaluation as no strategy or units were showing exceptional performance compared to alternatives we've seen - better players won.
Sample size is irrelevant for any accurate balance evaluation as no strategy or units were showing exceptional performance compared to alternatives we've seen - better players won.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
22 Jun 2020, 11:12 AM
#3
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
Interesting is also that the only series in which Axis did better than Allies features USF.
The Soviet-UKF combo was not beaten in any series between quarter finals to the grand finals of the UTT main-round and was also not beaten in either the bronze or the finals series of both qualification rounds.
The Soviet-UKF combo was not beaten in any series between quarter finals to the grand finals of the UTT main-round and was also not beaten in either the bronze or the finals series of both qualification rounds.
22 Jun 2020, 11:14 AM
#4
Posts: 600
every one of his posts is about making a conclusion on the state of balance based on tournament results.
people keep telling him those are not actually that insightful when it comes to faction strenght and performance but he keeps on doing this anyway
people keep telling him those are not actually that insightful when it comes to faction strenght and performance but he keeps on doing this anyway
22 Jun 2020, 11:15 AM
#5
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
I think USF lacked a dominant meta to crutch on and has a huge weakness to the Ostheer sniper, so players were hesitant to pick it.
22 Jun 2020, 11:17 AM
#6
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I think USF lacked a dominant meta to crutch on and has a huge weakness to the Ostheer sniper, so players were hesitant to pick it.
That's pretty much the only accurate conclusion we can draw from the games.
Sorry @OP at one point you need to accept the fact that thing that sucks most and makes you lose constantly is in front of your own keyboard.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
22 Jun 2020, 11:30 AM
#9
Posts: 1273
Yeah, sad times for USF. It was UKF which was the monkey in the last tournaments, now its USF.
22 Jun 2020, 11:36 AM
#10
Posts: 600
Yeah, sad times for USF. It was UKF which was the monkey in the last tournaments, now its USF.
whats the problem with this? its called meta
22 Jun 2020, 11:36 AM
#11
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
I think using faction win rates is useful as an indication of how bad OKW is.
USF pick rates are not a balance issue.
USF pick rates are not a balance issue.
22 Jun 2020, 11:55 AM
#12
Posts: 306
I feel like okw got crushed this patch but not becouse of okw per se, but becouse of the buff of the british. Brits are just too good for okw, and the constant threat of t70+ aec + valentine doubleling on OH forces them into puma evry single game. Ginving them limited lategame options. Main Balance issues Imo lies with certain british tanks and abilities. Some examples:
Valentine comes too fast and threatens to rek OH.
AVRE just instantly wiping sqad (look final on elst)
Concentration barrage + free recon on the entire map.
Conclusion: if brit infantry is going to stay that strong some of the offmap and abilities need to go.
Another reason why allied performed so well is the easy click abilities to remove heavy TDs that seemed to be natural counter to ISU. That on the other hand is very hard to balance IMO. If you nerf the abilities exactly those heavy axis TDs might have no counte, but thats certainly something to be worth looking at. (slight adjustments to soviet rocket strafe would always be welcome
)
Valentine comes too fast and threatens to rek OH.
AVRE just instantly wiping sqad (look final on elst)
Concentration barrage + free recon on the entire map.
Conclusion: if brit infantry is going to stay that strong some of the offmap and abilities need to go.
Another reason why allied performed so well is the easy click abilities to remove heavy TDs that seemed to be natural counter to ISU. That on the other hand is very hard to balance IMO. If you nerf the abilities exactly those heavy axis TDs might have no counte, but thats certainly something to be worth looking at. (slight adjustments to soviet rocket strafe would always be welcome
)
FIRE AND TERROR PLAYERCARD https://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198321057937
22 Jun 2020, 11:59 AM
#13
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Tournaments are not proof of balance issues but they are indication.
The indication is more probable to be correct the bigger the gap is.
A 70-30 Gap is pretty big even if the size in not large enough for safe conclusions.
The indication is more probable to be correct the bigger the gap is.
A 70-30 Gap is pretty big even if the size in not large enough for safe conclusions.
22 Jun 2020, 12:00 PM
#14
Posts: 857 | Subs: 2
Tournaments are not proof of balance issues but they are indication.
The indication is more probable to be correct the bigger the gap is.
A 70-30 Gap is pretty big even if the size in not very big.
+1
22 Jun 2020, 12:02 PM
#15
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
Tournaments are not proof of balance issues but they are indication.
The indication is more probable to be correct the bigger the gap is.
A 70-30 Gap is pretty big even if the size in not very big.
A 70-30 gap over almost 40 games is significant indeed. These games were played by the very best players on competitive maps with each side trying as hard as possible to win.
And this 70-30 gap existed despite Perimeter Overwatch being banned. So the Allies already had a handicap and couldn't even play to their full power.
22 Jun 2020, 12:07 PM
#16
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
A 70-30 gap over almost 40 games is significant indeed. These games were played by the very best players on competitive maps with each side trying as hard as possible to win.
And this 70-30 gap existed despite Perimeter Overwatch being banned. So the Allies already had a handicap and couldn't even play to their full power.
No, its not.
How many of the games were 1 sided stomps?
How many of these game were wins under 100VP?
You ignore ALL the values that do not suit your biased narrative just to get confirmation bias.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
22 Jun 2020, 12:09 PM
#17
Posts: 1273
Most of the games were pretty tight with the VP there was no snowball effect, it shows that it was the best players won. Balance is pretty much on par except a few exceptions here and there. There are too many variables which are omitted, maps were quite unfair and pro allies to start with.
ergo: stats can be read and interpreted in any way that one wants to.
ergo: stats can be read and interpreted in any way that one wants to.
22 Jun 2020, 12:11 PM
#18
Posts: 600
katitof talking about bias..^^
but yeah,
lets say we were playing League of legends and not coh2
by blvdreams logic all champions outside the approx. 15 champions played in the LCS would be considered garbage. Urgot UP!!!
but yeah,
lets say we were playing League of legends and not coh2
by blvdreams logic all champions outside the approx. 15 champions played in the LCS would be considered garbage. Urgot UP!!!
22 Jun 2020, 12:13 PM
#19
Posts: 213
I feel like okw got crushed this patch but not becouse of okw per se, but becouse of the buff of the british. Brits are just too good for okw, and the constant threat of t70+ aec + valentine doubleling on OH forces them into puma evry single game. Ginving them limited lategame options. Main Balance issues Imo lies with certain british tanks and abilities. Some examples:
Valentine comes too fast and threatens to rek OH.
AVRE just instantly wiping sqad (look final on elst)
Concentration barrage + free recon on the entire map.
Conclusion: if brit infantry is going to stay that strong some of the offmap and abilities need to go.
Another reason why allied performed so well is the easy click abilities to remove heavy TDs that seemed to be natural counter to ISU. That on the other hand is very hard to balance IMO. If you nerf the abilities exactly those heavy axis TDs might have no counte, but thats certainly something to be worth looking at. (slight adjustments to soviet rocket strafe would always be welcome
Maybe the valentine,aec and t70 combo is too good, but isnt the puma the optimal unit vs that?
From what i have seen okw performed quite decent in the mid game. Puma was able to threaten light tanks, stuka wiped team weapons and stg volks dealt with sections and cons. But the longer the game lasted the more the okw player had problems.
Volks cant push is and cons, Kt is worthless, panther is ok but at only and obers die way too fast vs rocket arty. The only reliable late game unit was the stuka. Okw has like no way to deal with blobs/inf in the later stages of the game.
And yeah can we pls remove scopes from jaeger armor and mark target+il2 from the isu doc?
22 Jun 2020, 12:18 PM
#20
Posts: 320
People tend to walk over a fact that spawns were fixed for allies/axis and having south spawn as allies on Elst Outskirts and on Rails and Metal is giving them an edge (Elst is due to easier access to VPs, while R&M is due to horrible terrain and approach to both fuels for axis).
On the other hand there are also maps that some doctrines are broken on like Royal Artillery on Crossing in the Woods is OP with wide 100MU offmap totally disabling axis forces in the connecting piece of map between flanks (high traffic area), also damaging and blinding Elefant all the time.
Observations presented above are actually more constructive than a statement that "Allies OP".
On the other hand there are also maps that some doctrines are broken on like Royal Artillery on Crossing in the Woods is OP with wide 100MU offmap totally disabling axis forces in the connecting piece of map between flanks (high traffic area), also damaging and blinding Elefant all the time.
Observations presented above are actually more constructive than a statement that "Allies OP".
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
5 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.586215.732+1
- 4.1098613.642+2
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231
Board Info
669 users are online:
669 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
6 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
6 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49057
Welcome our newest member, maservices
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, maservices
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM