Login

russian armor

win-lose-ratio from 15.9. - 25.9.2014 + much more

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (9)down
28 Sep 2014, 14:52 PM
#61
avatar of ludd3emm

Posts: 292

Dont nerf OKW too hard
Just BUFF USF more.


OKW needs to be nerfed down to Ostheers level and USF needs to be buffed to Soviets level. Then we're getting close.

Of course it is more complicated than that, it's just a generalization but you get the point.
28 Sep 2014, 15:33 PM
#62
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

Let's add some more information EDIT: 1vs1 stats

A bit of SPC flow chart. the SPC flow chart is a method to monitor a process in order to improve it - here, each faction meta in the current meta. How does it work: it takes the average (from each day faction victory ratio - from the google excel doc) and show the limit of the process/balance. I took the data from 15 to 25 sept but I cut the graph in two side as a patch has been deployed on 23 sept, so a modification in the game meta/process. To analyze the data after 23.9, I need more daily data, at least for a complete week.

What the meta/process is: Top200 players + game balance. If a patch goes out (like the 23.9) we reinitialize the flow chart.

If we look below we can see that OKW faction is design for a victory ratio that goes from 59% to 82% until 23 of september
So in fact, during that period the OKW meta is build to not let the faction going below 59% victory per day.
USF faction, 49% to 71%, so the faction meta has been design to be 10% less effective than OKW faction.

To know how it goes after this last patch, I need the same data from 23 to today and a bit more days to improve the calculation of limits.

If someone wants the flow chart for Sov and Ostheer, I can add them, but since they're between OKW and USF ratios, it's not going to show much more.


OKW flow Chart


UFS Flow Chart


Ozz
28 Sep 2014, 15:37 PM
#63
avatar of Ozz

Posts: 1

Sorry but weren't Germans strong in reality?
28 Sep 2014, 15:37 PM
#64
avatar of ludd3emm

Posts: 292

Esxile, is this all game modes or just 1v1?
28 Sep 2014, 15:43 PM
#65
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Sep 2014, 15:37 PMOzz
Sorry but weren't Germans strong in reality?

At 1944-45 where the mutiplayer is set?
Not really.

They were strong at the beginning of the war where their tanks and infantry tactics simply outclassed everything else at the time.

But its completely irrelevant for balance. If a faction is considerably stronger in all game modes without exception, we have a huge balance problem that starts in 1v1 and expands to catastrophically levels at higher games, which the graphs show quite clearly.

Basically, you want easy wins even if you can't play, you go for axis 4v4.
28 Sep 2014, 15:44 PM
#66
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

Will relic finally start balancing team games separately from 1v1?

28 Sep 2014, 15:48 PM
#67
avatar of astro_zombie

Posts: 123

It's nice having your gut feelings verified.
28 Sep 2014, 15:55 PM
#68
avatar of Brachiaraidos

Posts: 627

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Sep 2014, 11:17 AMJohnnyB
Good work with these statistics.
I see there are many people who thinks that Axis "popularity" is due to the fact that they are more "easy" to play. Let me ask you something: If a game has several factions, what would be the faction you would play the most? The most OP (strong overall, standard units and easy to play) or the one who is more challanging (high risk-high profit, cool units, etc)
That's the question you need to ask yourselves.


Pro tip: Make arguments that support your case, not ones that highlight the weakness of it.

It's one of the most basic principles of human psychology that given enough time at a repetitive task we gravitate towards the path of least resistance, not the 'coolest looking' or 'most challenging'.

We back-dash everywhere in castlevania SotN because it's faster than walking. We use combat rolls everywhere in LoZ: OoT because it's faster than walking. We take the shortest & most convenient paths to work.

And in CoH2 the overall population gravitates towards the fraction that strikes the best balance between ease and power to match our play styles..

Claiming anything other than is pretty silly. As it stands, OKW is super powerful and easy to play in 4v4, ergo 4v4 is full of it and full of it winning.


There is no way to claim the bias of play being so large is anything but an imbalance issue. Stop trying.

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Sep 2014, 15:43 PMKatitof
At 1944-45 where the mutiplayer is set?
Not really.

They were strong at the beginning of the war where their tanks and infantry tactics simply outclassed everything else at the time.


Nonsense.

German equipment at the beginning of WWII was trash. It was trash because it had to be assembled and prepared under the eye of a world still unimpressed with what it had been doing in WWI (and it lost at).

German start of the war tanks were terrible, their infantry armament was mediocre, and their infantry no better trained than the rest of the world.

Good leadership and a modern approach to war against a France trying desperately to fight like it was WWI won them the fight. Not technological or training superiority.

If people actually spent ten sodding minutes researching history with attention to real world performance and statistics and introduction dates? This whole 'Omg Germany super engineer WIZZARDS' myth wouldn't be so prevalent.

It bugs me. Learn your history, people.

In 1945, specifically, Germany was suffering massive resource shortages, manpower shortages, poor quality and often disrupted production, and the burden of a government sinking huge amounts of cash into white elephants like the Maus project (Lol @ that hilarious waste of space). Their air superiority was gone, their indirect fire batteries scattered, their armies divided or gone.

So yeah, no. Germany should arguably be the army with the least access to vehicles and elite troops. And yet, the perpetuation of poorly understood recounts of history means we get the exact opposite. It's sad.
28 Sep 2014, 16:06 PM
#69
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

Yes it seems silly now to say people "prefer" axis due to their cooler units, when there are hundreds if not thousands of more games played as Axis.

What we do not have yet, is the win ratios between certain factions EX: USA vs OKW. Looking at the statistics gathered by LEgend, we can that Axis have higher winrates in 2v2 and up. We cannot say they are OP yet, but the numbers show that there is something wrong like Luddeemann said.

Since ths data from the top 200 player, their winrate will be higher than 50 percent. When they beat or lose against someone outside of top 200, that information will be recorded as well. Obviously top 200 players will perform better than those < rank 200. However, looking at the data for 3v3 and 4v4, it seems like even top 200 Allied players have consistent trouble in winning! Scary thought eh




German equipment at the beginning of WWII was trash. It was trash because it had to be assembled and prepared under the eye of a world still unimpressed with what it had been doing in WWI (and it lost at).

German start of the war tanks were terrible, their infantry armament was mediocre, and their infantry no better trained than the rest of the world.

Good leadership and a modern approach to war against a France trying desperately to fight like it was WWI won them the fight. Not technological or training superiority.

If people actually spent ten sodding minutes researching history with attention to real world performance and statistics and introduction dates? This whole 'Omg Germany super engineer WIZZARDS' myth wouldn't be so prevalent.

It bugs me. Learn your history, people.

In 1945, specifically, Germany was suffering massive resource shortages, manpower shortages, poor quality and often disrupted production, and the burden of a government sinking huge amounts of cash into white elephants like the Maus project (Lol @ that hilarious waste of space). Their air superiority was gone, their indirect fire batteries scattered, their armies divided or gone.

So yeah, no. Germany should arguably be the army with the least access to vehicles and elite troops. And yet, the perpetuation of poorly understood recounts of history means we get the exact opposite. It's sad.


Good post! France and the USSR actually had very good equipment and tanks. THe USSR actually had the T34/76 already which could roflpwn all German armor at the time of Barbarossa. France actually had more tanks than Germany at the beginning of the Invasion, but suffered from strategic failures not ubermensch superiority
28 Sep 2014, 16:12 PM
#70
avatar of Blendersching

Posts: 9

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Sep 2014, 14:07 PMCruzz


Because this is top-200 only, they're getting their wins off lower ranks, especially axis in teamgames where the gap between games played is absolutely huge between axis top-200 and allies top-200.

Ah I see, thanks. But then this statistics doesn't say very much, e.g. since slightly more people usually search games as axis, the top 200 of axis will be matched more often against allied players of lower skill while allied top two hundred will have an opponent of equal skill waiting in line more often, making stomps more often for top 200 axis players than vice versa.

The statistic should be filtered to count only games against other top 200 players. Of course we wouldn't have this problem if mirror matches were allowed (screw historical acurateness, we already have USF fighting against the OKW in the east, Soviets in France and so on).
28 Sep 2014, 16:17 PM
#71
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070


Ah I see, thanks. But then this statistics doesn't say very much, e.g. since slightly more people usually search games as axis, the top 200 of axis will be matched more often against allied players of lower skill while allied top two hundred will have an opponent of equal skill waiting in line more often, making stomps more often for top 200 axis players than vice versa.

The statistic should be filtered to count only games against other top 200 players. Of course we wouldn't have this problem if mirror matches were allowed (screw historical acurateness, we already have USF fighting against the OKW in the east, Soviets in France and so on).


It seem to be a very vicious cycle.

1. 4v4 game mode
2. Axis and Allies load up a game
3. Perceived or actual balance issues force Allied players to go Axis in order to get wins/less frustration
4. An even smaller number of Allied players searching
5. Leads to more bad matchups due to matchmaking
6. Repeat step one
28 Sep 2014, 16:31 PM
#72
avatar of ludd3emm

Posts: 292


Ah I see, thanks. But then this statistics doesn't say very much, e.g. since slightly more people usually search games as axis, the top 200 of axis will be matched more often against allied players of lower skill while allied top two hundred will have an opponent of equal skill waiting in line more often, making stomps more often for top 200 axis players than vice versa.

The statistic should be filtered to count only games against other top 200 players. Of course we wouldn't have this problem if mirror matches were allowed (screw historical acurateness, we already have USF fighting against the OKW in the east, Soviets in France and so on).


True but you have to take into account that top 200 allies players will also go up against Axis players that are below top 200 sometime. Random teams often go up against other random teams, mixing, for example, 2 high ranked players and 2 low ranked players in each team. You can look at 2vs2 where "games played" are more or less equal between the factions except for OKW and Ostheer being the least played faction a few days, both Axis factions still have a significant advantage in win ratio.





Regarding the statistics, the only data you can collect from the ladders are games played and win ratio, only Relic knows what are the win ratio between all the top 200 players when they go up against each other.
28 Sep 2014, 16:40 PM
#73
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

The sample size of top 200 players is a technical limitation. Relic holds the real key. Support my numbers are sexy thread on the official forums.
28 Sep 2014, 16:42 PM
#74
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Sep 2014, 16:17 PMNinjaWJ


It seem to be a very vicious cycle.

1. 4v4 game mode
2. Axis and Allies load up a game
3. Perceived or actual balance issues force Allied players to go Axis in order to get wins/less frustration
4. An even smaller number of Allied players searching
5. Leads to more bad matchups due to matchmaking
6. Repeat step one


10/10 salmons awarded for this post. Another interesting stat to have would be the player churn rate. How many have played the game once as Allied and have never come back?
28 Sep 2014, 16:50 PM
#75
avatar of Arclyte

Posts: 692

Most popular game mode is 4v4, team games make up 78% of all games played. Time to start balancing team games relic

22% of the top 200 players are playing 1v1, but you can bet that if it were stats on ALL players, the game modes would be skewed much more in the favor of team games than it already is
28 Sep 2014, 17:08 PM
#76
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Sep 2014, 16:50 PMArclyte
Most popular game mode is 4v4, team games make up 78% of all games played. Time to start balancing team games relic

22% of the top 200 players are playing 1v1, but you can bet that if it were stats on ALL players, the game modes would be skewed much more in the favor of team games than it already is


unfortunately, Relic has already made a statement (hopefully others can help me find it) saying they intend to balance 1v1 first, in order for it to "trickle" upwards
28 Sep 2014, 17:14 PM
#77
avatar of astro_zombie

Posts: 123



Pro tip: Make arguments that support your case, not ones that highlight the weakness of it.

It's one of the most basic principles of human psychology that given enough time at a repetitive task we gravitate towards the path of least resistance, not the 'coolest looking' or 'most challenging'.

We back-dash everywhere in castlevania SotN because it's faster than walking. We use combat rolls everywhere in LoZ: OoT because it's faster than walking. We take the shortest & most convenient paths to work.

And in CoH2 the overall population gravitates towards the fraction that strikes the best balance between ease and power to match our play styles..

Claiming anything other than is pretty silly. As it stands, OKW is super powerful and easy to play in 4v4, ergo 4v4 is full of it and full of it winning.


There is no way to claim the bias of play being so large is anything but an imbalance issue. Stop trying.



Nonsense.

German equipment at the beginning of WWII was trash. It was trash because it had to be assembled and prepared under the eye of a world still unimpressed with what it had been doing in WWI (and it lost at).

German start of the war tanks were terrible, their infantry armament was mediocre, and their infantry no better trained than the rest of the world.

Good leadership and a modern approach to war against a France trying desperately to fight like it was WWI won them the fight. Not technological or training superiority.

If people actually spent ten sodding minutes researching history with attention to real world performance and statistics and introduction dates? This whole 'Omg Germany super engineer WIZZARDS' myth wouldn't be so prevalent.

It bugs me. Learn your history, people.

In 1945, specifically, Germany was suffering massive resource shortages, manpower shortages, poor quality and often disrupted production, and the burden of a government sinking huge amounts of cash into white elephants like the Maus project (Lol @ that hilarious waste of space). Their air superiority was gone, their indirect fire batteries scattered, their armies divided or gone.

So yeah, no. Germany should arguably be the army with the least access to vehicles and elite troops. And yet, the perpetuation of poorly understood recounts of history means we get the exact opposite. It's sad.


the least resistance argument was EXACTLY the same I was going to make.

It's been true in every game I've ever played, and this one is certainly no different. Time for people to stop deluding themselves and accept reality.
28 Sep 2014, 18:38 PM
#78
avatar of Array
Donator 11

Posts: 609


Nonsense.

German equipment at the beginning of WWII was trash. It was trash because it had to be assembled and prepared under the eye of a world still unimpressed with what it had been doing in WWI (and it lost at).

German start of the war tanks were terrible, their infantry armament was mediocre, and their infantry no better trained than the rest of the world.



Have to disagree with some of this. Germany's early equipment had many of the issues you state and by 1945 I agree that much of the elite infantry was dead but at the start of the war they had a significant training advantage over nearly everyone. The army had developed its new tank doctrines by training hidden in the depths of Russia since the early 30's (thanks Stalin old pal!), and then practised these in Spain along with its new doctrines of close air support with stuka divebombing. One general captured in North Africa bemoaned that he had only managed 21 tank engagements in Africa compared to over 300 in Spain. Before it turned West its troops had taken Czechoslovakia and then fought the theoretically formidable Polish. Good leadership and tactics were the key but these need trained troops to execute. All German youth had by this point several years (military) training in the Hitler Youth. Behind all this was the fact that Germans were simply excellent material for soldiers, disciplined, educated, technically minded and frequently ideologically driven.

Compare this to Britain which, whilst it had the experienced (from WW1) but small BEF was also very badly hampered in equipment and training. In the mid-thirties the British were still carrying out maneuvers with flags to represent tanks and AT guns. One corporal was reprimanded for placing his AT gun (flag) in a tree but was able to protest that he had never seen an AT gun but didn't know. The Russians had as we know shot many of the experienced officers and were still in the process of responding to their Finnish debacle when the Germans invaded.

Were the Germans uber-engineering Wizards? I give you the magnetic mine, the 88mm, the MG42, the Fritz-X homing missile, the ME262 and of course the V1 and V2.
28 Sep 2014, 18:50 PM
#79
avatar of frostbite

Posts: 593

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Sep 2014, 11:30 AMKatitof
^Seeing nowadays players and ther mentality?

Easiest goes without saying.

Sorry, but hardly anyone except very best players are looking for a challenge, players love to have stuff instantly and effortlessly.

Developers have spotted that years ago, so let me ask you JohnnyB, why do you believe 99% of "mainstream" non indie games are extreemly easy to play and even if you do a fuck up you are either rewarded for it in some way or just game automatically loads you back just moments before the event that messed you up?

If you believe axis armies are high risk high reward and people play them for the challenge, well, you're lying to yourself.

If people wanted challenge they would play AGAINST okwokw this symbol, not with it.

usa so easy mode usa tanks can only take 2 hits to get destroyed. okw tanks can take up to 20-30 hits /misses in some cases. I have many replays of shit bouncing/missing and then 10 penetrates to kill
28 Sep 2014, 18:59 PM
#80
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Sep 2014, 18:38 PMArray



Have to disagree with some of this. Germany's early equipment had many of the issues you state and by 1945 I agree that much of the elite infantry was dead but at the start of the war they had a significant training advantage over nearly everyone. The army had developed its new tank doctrines by training hidden in the depths of Russia since the early 30's (thanks Stalin old pal!), and then practised these in Spain along with its new doctrines of close air support with stuka divebombing. One general captured in North Africa bemoaned that he had only managed 21 tank engagements in Africa compared to over 300 in Spain. Before it turned West its troops had taken Czechoslovakia and then fought the theoretically formidable Polish. Good leadership and tactics were the key but these need trained troops to execute. All German youth had by this point several years (military) training in the Hitler Youth. Behind all this was the fact that Germans were simply excellent material for soldiers, disciplined, educated, technically minded and frequently ideologically driven.

Compare this to Britain which, whilst it had the experienced (from WW1) but small BEF was also very badly hampered in equipment and training. In the mid-thirties the British were still carrying out maneuvers with flags to represent tanks and AT guns. One corporal was reprimanded for placing his AT gun (flag) in a tree but was able to protest that he had never seen an AT gun but didn't know. The Russians had as we know shot many of the experienced officers and were still in the process of responding to their Finnish debacle when the Germans invaded.

Were the Germans uber-engineering Wizards? I give you the magnetic mine, the 88mm, the MG42, the Fritz-X homing missile, the ME262 and of course the V1 and V2.


They were about to fail their invasion in France, The only tank brigade France had push them back because the P3 was too weak compare to French tanks, it could barely pierce the armor.
What make them finally won: of course, competent Head of Army than French ones (not difficult at this time), Tank radio on every tank (only the tank battalion leader had a radio on French side) and Stukas. Germamy won the early war with a better airforce (well French airforce was barely inexistent, it goes in peer with the HQ level of competency) and lost it when they lost they're air superiority.
France army could also have retreat over the Seine and hold here, but they decided to surrender...
PAGES (9)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

478 users are online: 478 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49063
Welcome our newest member, jennifermary
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM