OCF Statistics

Please separate stats by rounds. R1 to R4 were one sided on most cases.

Update of Round 3
Trying to take into account your remarks

Pleassseee give faction win/loss numbers!

Pleassseee give faction win/loss numbers!

not before R4 or R5

Update of R4 (opening the pandora box)

unbelievable more ppl play axis and soviets more than brits and USF sad face =(

USF and UKF's "best" commanders were banned along with UKF machine gun.

USF and UKF's "best" commanders were banned along with UKF machine gun.

more insult to the injury...

more insult to the injury...

Dude. Look at the stats. I mean, how do you manage to ignore the elephant in the room with such panache?

Even without the broken stuff, the Allied factions currently are vastly superior.

Sorry forum post bugged up with the small downtime.

Dude. Look at the stats. I mean, how do you manage to ignore the elephant in the room with such panache?

Even without the broken stuff, the Allied factions currently are vastly superior.

I think you can narrow it down further than that. Soviets seem to be the go-to Allied faction by a long shot. We don't have match-up win percentage numbers yet to back it up but USF (and poor Brits) are both being chosen way less and with a lesser degree of success.

Dude. Look at the stats. I mean, how do you manage to ignore the elephant in the room with such panache?

Even without the broken stuff, the Allied factions currently are vastly superior.

hmmmmmm...

I think you can narrow it down further than that. Soviets seem to be the go-to Allied faction by a long shot. We don't have match-up win percentage numbers yet to back it up but USF (and poor Brits) are both being chosen way less and with a lesser degree of success.

Actually, as you can see from the stats, US has the the highest winrate of all factions so far - if by a narrow margin - and if rifle company was allowed, this margin would be far more pronounced. In automatch, the instavet flamer rifle blob plus pak howie runs roughshot over everything, its glorious.

The only explanation besides allies better (not necessarily OP) overall is that in best of 3 match ups that went all 3 rounds, the better player who got to pick faction in ace game overwhelmingly chose allies and won through higher skill. Lots of rounds were decided 2-0 so better player only played axis and allies once each anyway. Also, if top players are picking allies for ace game what does that say about who they view as better overall. As other commenters mentioned this was with the best USA commander missing and crippling UK with no HMG or croc. Only axis hamstring was elite troops.

I think relic is actually closer on balance than all hand wringing indicates but the idea that Allies are completely UP overall is laughable.
*IMPORTANT CAVEAT: all aforementioned comments apply strictly to one v one play.

This is again, not an alternative narrative. Its fairly obvious why people pick Allies in an ace game...they are quite simply stronger, and by a considerable margin. Also mind you, this is not representative of automatch, where Rifle Company, Partisans, and the Vickers bug are all exploited ad nauseam, leading to a nosedive in Axis winrates...consider the development since the last patch here.
http://coh2chart.com/

You should also consider the maps been played on as a factor of faction choice.

Honestly I don't know why it's so hard to belive, soviet have always been better or easy mode (when all you had to do was cons spam into 34/85s) as much as OKW at the time, they have all the tools and a very good earl/mid/late game, their doctrines range from good to stupidly powerful (if before it was guard motor now it's shock rifle) and generally speaking and this goes for USF aswell, allies lead the flow of the game, they dominate the early which results in increased resources for mid/late game, thus if the allied player will play propely he'll also have a late game advantage.

In other words, axis factions need to play defensively still they can snowball, but this snowballing can only be achieved by exploiting allied fuck ups, for example losing core units or their early tanks without trading effectively, thus to put it simply, an allied player that plays perfectly will always win against an axis player that also plays perfectly, an axis player that plays perfectly will always win against an allied player that fucks up at some point.

Obviously players aren't perfect machines and there's always opportunity for errors, but when playing axis you can feel the pressure and it's easier to make mistakes, this was incredibly evident in the old OST vs USF MU where ost would literally get raped for the first 10 minutes of the game without a way out and often lose in the first 20 minutes.

Atleast that's my 2 cents and that's also an issue I've observed since I started playing.


Edit: this is talking about 1v1, but everything said here can be applied to all other game modes, it's just that the snowballing effect kicks in earlier for axis in 2s,3s,4s thus allies need to be faster in their moves, but usually they fail considering that the general quality for 3s/4s only players is way lower than people who play abit of all modes.

R5 and R6 updated

So far so good, axis are still op! XD

Thx for the great work btw!

Some very solid work djey. I'm sure it was a tough endeavor to plow through all the games (I did the 1k tournament games) and you are doing it like 500x faster than me!

Here are some mistakes that I spotted and some suggestions:
Round 5 was arnhem checkpoint, not semois winter.
Round 6 replay is missing (tho it is easily found)
I would recommend showing percentages when counts were given and vice versa. It helps put the number in perspective and allows it to be measurable.
It's probably too late, but consider adding what commanders were chosen during the game. I'm sure many people are interested to see what commanders are meta and what are not.
Consider adding category that divides everything by what map the games were played on. It's not that meaningful now, as qualifiers only really double dipped in angoville, but it might be more interesting once the main event goes through (or just separate the main event entirely).
I think adding in which games went to the ace game would be beneficial. Thus we could see (therefore largely assume) what the roughly even match ups are and what faction takes the ace game.

Some very solid work djey. I'm sure it was a tough endeavor to plow through all the games (I did the 1k tournament games) and you are doing it like 500x faster than me!

Here are some mistakes that I spotted and some suggestions:
Round 5 was arnhem checkpoint, not semois winter.
Round 6 replay is missing (tho it is easily found)
I would recommend showing percentages when counts were given and vice versa. It helps put the number in perspective and allows it to be measurable.
It's probably too late, but consider adding what commanders were chosen during the game. I'm sure many people are interested to see what commanders are meta and what are not.
Consider adding category that divides everything by what map the games were played on. It's not that meaningful now, as qualifiers only really double dipped in angoville, but it might be more interesting once the main event goes through (or just separate the main event entirely).
I think adding in which games went to the ace game would be beneficial. Thus we could see (therefore largely assume) what the roughly even match ups are and what faction takes the ace game.

Thx!
I will correct my mistakes in the following minutes.

Can you give help me on that point? did you save your replays against pmynsky (R3G2) and again Lyconious?

For the Commanders used during the event, I still don't know how I will deal with... Maybe only for round 6?

Did someone knows who follows DevM on twitch?