Tournament Statistics! (and no pretty graphs DEAL WITH IT)

I would gladly buy all of you guys a beer

so would you say map design has a much bigger impact on the outcome than the current balance between factions?

It was derived out of round 2, with okw chosen/axis chosen (38/58) which roughly equals 65.5%. I know faction choosing is inherently biased, but if I account for the tournament rules, I fear there isn't much data to go on.

I think you misunderstood me, in the OP it says that round 2 has had 120 games recorded. Now you say only 58 games has had an axis player? Considering the set-up (BO3, each side plays axis and allies once, VP leader chooses faction in G3, top player in brackets plays allies first) I don't understand how you can have so few axis games (in which a player must choose ost or okw).

Also, judging by the brackets there should have been 128 games played. Ro64, bo3 = at least 128 games played if ever match has a 2-0, 2 walkovers, 4 matches going to game 3 -> 128 games.

Edit: I was mistaken in my calculation: should've been 64 games, not 128.

so would you say map design has a much bigger impact on the outcome than the current balance between factions?

Great question! Looking at this tournament only, I decided to do a chi-square independence test with win/loss and map with a layer of faction underneath. This proved to have some interesting results. Basically what this test does is determine if the two variables are independent of each other, meaning if map has an effect or not on win or loss.

alpha of 0.05, assumptions, etc. aside,

Faymonville seems to have an effect on win and loss. Probably attributed to the fact that okw has won 17 (expected was 12.5) and ost has won 2 (expected was 5.5). However, I don't have enough data to ensure to say this with complete confidence.

Ferma seems to not have an effect on win and loss.

Langres and semois I hesitate to make a decision on because of too few counts. But as a very introductory look, semois definitely has an effect on win and loss while langres does not.

I could collapse it into allies and axis to get enough counts, and I need to fill in the data to see whether or not faction-faction balance has an effect. So bare with me.

I think you misunderstood me, in the OP it says that round 2 has had 120 games recorded. Now you say only 58 games has had an axis player? Considering the set-up (BO3, each side plays axis and allies once, VP leader chooses faction in G3, top player in brackets plays allies first) I don't understand how you can have so few axis games (in which a player must choose ost or okw).

Also, judging by the brackets there should have been 128 games played. Ro64, bo3 = at least 128 games played if ever match has a 2-0, 2 walkovers, 4 matches going to game 3 -> 128 games.

Ah now I get what you are saying.

First off, I messed up (I told myself to fix this but then I most likely got distracted by something) in doing the total game counts. Will fix that cordially.

And there is a slight flaw in your logic. Sure, there are 64 players, but it takes 2 players to play 1 game. So if we assume that all games were aces, there would be a minimum of 64 games.

But you are right in that I messed up in the total game count. xD

^^ ^^


You wanna write a Newspost on this? We've got the Writers to help you

Ah now I get what you are saying.

First off, I messed up (I told myself to fix this but then I most likely got distracted by something) in doing the total game counts. Will fix that cordially.

And there is a slight flaw in your logic. Sure, there are 64 players, but it takes 2 players to play 1 game. So if we assume that all games were aces, there would be a minimum of 64 games.

But you are right in that I messed up in the total game count. xD

Great point, can't believe I missed that Thanks for clarifying, all the work you've done is damn impressive.

Got rid of some of the overly specific stats and collapsed into tournament wide stats. Added some new stat (what faction winning against another faction). Formatted it to be visually slightly easier.

Next up is probably shortening the playercard list, adding a more proper disclaimer, and what not.

WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE