Team games now

Same reason most Star Wars games have more guys doing Sith than Jedi. People want to play the bad-guys, nothing to do with balance.

Even those patches when allies where very OP there has always been more people playing germans.

Bad guys have the best uniforms

Same reason most Star Wars games have more guys doing Sith than Jedi. People want to play the bad-guys, nothing to do with balance.

Even those patches when allies where very OP there has always been more people playing germans.

People like to play Germany. People like to play as the Empire. But the Empire was based off of Nazi Germany. Coincidence? I think not!

People like to play Germany. People like to play as the Empire. But the Empire was based off of Nazi Germany. Coincidence? I think not!

In secret people just want to follow a strong leader and go around massacring without a care in the world

I would say it's more about the "coolness" factor. Just look the forum arguments. PANTHER WAS DA BEST TANK, TIGER IZ DIS, KT IS DAT, MG42 DAKADAKA HISTORY GERMAN OP SHERMAN PAPER ARMOR. There is an aura of coolness around German army which makes players to play axis more.

There is an aura of historical disillusion amongst fanboys, I think you meant to say.

Seriously, though, there are just as many fans of the Soviets, Brits and Americans in WWII. They just tend to be less shouty, in my modest experience.

People always fall back to the mainstay 'oh it's just for the aesthetic' or whatever when time and time again we see clearly that the player distributions in games follow the relative balance of available options unfalteringly, with a slight delay after patches while a new meta evolves.

Your special game isn't special enough to be immune to global trends, sorry.

People always fall back to the mainstay 'oh it's just for the aesthetic' or whatever when time and time again we see clearly that the player distributions in games follow the relative balance of available options unfalteringly, with a slight delay after patches while a new meta evolves.

Your special game isn't special enough to be immune to global trends, sorry.

So how would you explain more searching as axis when allies have been op? How come it is like that now when DeadManzShoes has 21 straight wins although a normal ratio would be 50/50.

So how would you explain more searching as axis when allies have been op?

The few patches in memory since the beta I began in where the allies had the absolute advantage, I saw allied automatch rise and overtake axis. Such times have been rare, especially when the majority of players aren't in 1v1 but in 2v2 and above, where the axis have rarely (if ever) been on the back foot.

In the days of snipers in M3's and M5's zooming about the map having a merry yolo life I regularly saw the searching as axis hit 0%.

How come it is like that now when DeadManzShoes has 21 straight wins although a normal ratio would be 50/50.

Learn 2 statistics, specifically standard distribution with respect to outliers.

Learn 2 statistics, specifically standard distribution with respect to outliers.

Because it's the most likely that the one case we hear about is freak outlier?

Because it's the most likely that the one case we hear about is freak outlier?

You asked me how someone can have 21 wins when the 'average' would be 50/50 (which, frankly, I very much doubt. I don't have the win ratios of all nations and game modes on hand to verify, but it's a very unlikely outcome, let's be honest.)

The reason is because there is no reason this should not happen and a single case proves literally nothing.


Anything else you need spelling out slowly and in small words?

You doubt the normal win ratio would be 50/50? When the game tries to match people with similar skill? I'd like to see your statistical explaination behind that. In slow and small words if you like.

They can nerf axis forever, it will always be more people wanting to play axis. Tiger or Sherman? M1 Garand or MP44? Easy choices. Nobody wants to play as bolsheviks.

What the garden did you just say about me? You little Facist? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in surviving Stalinst Purges and I've been involved in numerous secret human wave assaults on Wehrmacht positions, and I have over 300 confirmed executions. I trained in attrition warfare and I'm the top commissar in the Soviet armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another facist. I will wipe you the garden out with volume of fire the likes of which has never been seen before on the Eastern Front, mark my gardening words. You think you can get away with saying that garden to me over the Internet? Think again, gardener. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of NVKD officers across the Soviet Union and your radio position is being traced right now so you better prepare for the blizzard, maggot. The blizzard that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re gardening dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with mosin-armed conscripts. Not only am I extensively trained in executing my men in droves, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the Soviet Army and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little garden. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your gardening tongue. But you couldn't, you didn't, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will garden conscripts all over you and you will drown in them. You’re gardening dead, kiddo.

You doubt the normal win ratio would be 50/50? When the game tries to match people with similar skill? I'd like to see your statistical explaination behind that. In slow and small words if you like.

As requested, small words slowly.

There are two possible results to a game of CoH2. Win, or Loss. Simple, easy. Does not mean the probability of each is 50/50. Does not mean the average trend of all players on a particular side is 50/50.
Of course, for every game played there has to be a winner and a loser, but I'm making the assumption you're not assuming I somehow don't realise that. Right... right? We split the win ratios against Allies and Axis and examine each separately because the data is otherwise utterly meaningless

Examples of things which will skew results:

State of Balance in the game.
Americans in 1v1, for example, are considered very, very powerful, whilst Ost is often marked as the biggest struggle. Win ratios for Americans and Allies in 1v1 will likely be skewed in respect to this.

Automatch mechanics and player weights
A long standing abundance of axis players in the queue against a minority allies and a generally imperfect automatch system mean that we're not, in fact, all guaranteed to face off against people of equal skill. Nor does it mean we will average people of equal skill. Just because more games are being made does not mean that the system in place will trend towards a match of people against their opposite number as a net average.

There's two. Want more?

What the garden did you just say about me? You little Facist? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in surviving Stalinst Purges and I've been involved in numerous secret human wave assaults on Wehrmacht positions, and I have over 300 confirmed executions. I trained in attrition warfare and I'm the top commissar in the Soviet armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another facist. I will wipe you the garden out with volume of fire the likes of which has never been seen before on the Eastern Front, mark my gardening words. You think you can get away with saying that garden to me over the Internet? Think again, gardener. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of NVKD officers across the Soviet Union and your radio position is being traced right now so you better prepare for the blizzard, maggot. The blizzard that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re gardening dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with mosin-armed conscripts. Not only am I extensively trained in executing my men in droves, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the Soviet Army and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little garden. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your gardening tongue. But you couldn't, you didn't, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will garden conscripts all over you and you will drown in them. You’re gardening dead, kiddo.

apology for poor english
when were you when soviet with partisan tactics dies?
i was sat at city 17 fighing nazis when pjotr ring

‘vet 3 sniper is kill’
‘no’

There's two. Want more?

So the NORMAL w/l ratio would not be 50/50? Then what would it be? Remember that I reacted on the 21 streak as a result a new game imbalance since patch (still more search as axis), as a normal w/l ratio in a balanced game with skill matchmaking would result in 50/50 overall. Look, you won't be able to plausibly argue anything else. Maybe you just misunderstood. But by all means, bring the rest if you have any.

And yes I am similarly aware that the matchmaking system is not perfect, much like you knew that for every win there is a loss.

...

Population:
1v1: generally doesn't have too much difference in search since a few people looking for one or either faction will change the %.
2v2: depends on timezone, but in general you are gonna have a higher axis %. BUT, balance issues tends to modify the behaviour of the search in 10-30% in my experience. 1 every 15 games i would see 50/50 or more allies searching on the last patch. Nowadays i'll say it's 1 in 4.
3v3+: Lol, axis "ez mode" (randoms).

W/L:
W/L ratio depends on the sample of players you are gonna take into account.
-While old, this is a good example of a sample of top200 (random for 2v2+): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pkFRjN9K7ewdJbcGtMJa3paYkttHGUDe_7BjiZkBM-c/edit#gid=0
-If we take into account the whole population, that normalize near 50 with a variance of 1-10% depending on game mode and patches.

There are very few allied fanboys

U can check thier playercards and see that they may be baised. but atleat play axis.

There are many axis fanboys

and when u ask them y they have literally 0 allied games?

they say

"check my AT's"

*I check*

OK 4 allied games

Then they get mad when u call them fanboys

So the NORMAL w/l ratio would not be 50/50? Then what would it be? Remember that I reacted on the 21 streak as a result a new game imbalance since patch (still more search as axis), as a normal w/l ratio in a balanced game with skill matchmaking would result in 50/50 overall. Look, you won't be able to plausibly argue anything else. Maybe you just misunderstood. But by all means, bring the rest if you have any.

as a normal w/l ratio in a balanced game with skill matchmaking

I think you were looking for a game which is not CoH2.

In fact, I think you're looking for a game which has a theoretically infinite number of players to ensure the MM never manages to induce any sort of skill based imbalance.

The 'normal' average W/L in a perfectly balanced game with limitless players and a skill based system that worked perfectly would fluctuate around and gradually trend towards 50/50, yes.

But no game is perfectly balanced or has infinite players and a perfect matchmaking skill algorithm.

CoH2 sure as hell doesn't.

All of this is massive amounts of conjecture, regardless, about the foibles of statistical trends when subjected to reality and not idealized constructs. Which is meaningless.


The point is that players having a +21 win streak is nothing new and nothing abnormal. The best players are going to win lots and the worst players are going to lose lots, so waving around '+21!' is a pointless exercise.

The point is that players having a +21 win streak is nothing new and nothing abnormal. The best players are going to win lots and the worst players are going to lose lots, so waving around '+21!' is a pointless exercise.

It is abnormal. The best players are outliers. Using dots, a symmetrical bell shaped standard deviation curve starts to crystalize at sample size 30+. So, not requiring sample of "limitless". What elchino7 writes about varience of 1-10% sounds reasonable.

It is abnormal. The best players are outliers. A normal bell shaped standar deviation curve starts to crystalize at around 30. So, not requiring samples of "limitless". What elchino7 writes about varience of 1-10% sounds reasonable.

It would be abnormal if lots of players had +21 streaks.

You've given me one.

One is not abnormal.

So they have some more nerfing of axis to do then in your opinion.

Why? 60:40 axis/allies, it is almost perfect ratio

After Relic add Pershing, it will be 50:50

Ok well doing onesided buffing is an indirect nerf so that works too