GCS main round stats w/ updates

its real funny that u say that because most of the time there is alot more axis calling for nerfs on allies and thats why there is so many nerfs to allies, and u know how allies respond? they just adjust and keep playing. almost every patch in the last 2 years , each one of the patches have more allies nerfs then axis nerfs. proven fact

`
It's literally the opposite. Unless you want a return to suppressing kubels, non doctrinal sturmtiger, obers with bonus accuracy to retreating units, volk schreck blobs, garbage soviet t1, terrible t34, no usf mortar, etc etc.

This is the first patch that majorly focuses on allies nerfs since WFA dropped. I'm not saying the OKW nerfs weren't deserved, btw.

Updated, to include results from day 3&4;

Currently, 7 replays (including the complete Luvnest/Finndeed and Barton/TwistedTootsie series) are missing, so no commander picks for those (yet).

Oh look, once a bigger sample size and more even matchups come in the factions converge around a 50% winrate, who would have guessed that?

Oh look, once a bigger sample size and more even matchups come in the factions converge around a 50% winrate, who would have guessed that?

Oh look, its just on meta synergy from soviet, that only mean that thay are bad.

Updated to include the formerly missing replays from Luvnest vs. Finndeed and Barton vs. TwistedTootsy. Also, pimped the game list to also include commander picks.

Oh look, once a bigger sample size and more even matchups come in the factions converge around a 50% winrate, who would have guessed that?

Well, the bigger sample size helps, but the matchups of day 3 and 4 weren't significantly more even than before; 5 out of the 8 rounds were 3:0 sweeps. So, it is probably more an indication of the diverse faction preferences of the top players (which in itself I find interesting...).

Oh look, its just on meta synergy from soviet, that only mean that thay are bad.

Not 100% sure what you mean. I guess with "meta" you mostly refer to commanders?

If you want to say that the Dshka commanders overperform: Ok, fair enough (not saying they do or do not, but I can see why you might want to argue that way). If you want to say that they are bad if they wouldn't have those doctrines: That would be a stretch based on this data.

Talking about "synergy" with commanders: I find that a tricky thing with Soviets. The faction was clearly designed around a somewhat weaker core that has all the basic tools but does not particularly excel at specific tasks, which then is augmented by the commander to add missing bits.

Like, all commanders have one form of elite infantry or conscript upgrades (guards, shocks, PPsh, partizans), upgraded versions of stock team-weapons (120mil, Dshka) and something that helps for the lategame (e.g. T34-85, Mark Target, IS-2...), unlike OH doctrines.

So, saying that SOV without doctrinal units suck: Well, it seems likely that that's intended (even though you might not like that design choice).

Awesome work Siphon! I really like to look at these stats!

To others: please leave this thread alone when you wish to flame about any kind of balance interpretations. Just make your own thread and reference to these results.

Not 100% sure what you mean. I guess with "meta" you mostly refer to commanders?

If you want to say that the Dshka commanders overperform: Ok, fair enough (not saying they do or do not, but I can see why you might want to argue that way). If you want to say that they are bad if they wouldn't have those doctrines: That would be a stretch based on this data.

Talking about "synergy" with commanders: I find that a tricky thing with Soviets. The faction was clearly designed around a somewhat weaker core that has all the basic tools but does not particularly excel at specific tasks, which then is augmented by the commander to add missing bits.

Like, all commanders have one form of elite infantry or conscript upgrades (guards, shocks, PPsh, partizans), upgraded versions of stock team-weapons (120mil, Dshka) and something that helps for the lategame (e.g. T34-85, Mark Target, IS-2...), unlike OH doctrines.

So, saying that SOV without doctrinal units suck: Well, it seems likely that that's intended (even though you might not like that design choice).

Commanders and build.
If players almost play one meta doc and build its bad. Its only mean that no another way to play normal.

Commanders and build.
If players almost play one meta doc and build its bad. Its only mean that no another way to play normal.

Well, it is boring to watch, sure. However, it mostly means that the players thought that this would yield the best chanced of winning. It does neither mean that that is actually the case, and it also does not mean their chances would have been worse if they would have used some other doctrines.

If you only count the games where neither Land Lease nor Defensive, you end up with 4 wins in 10 games. And that's a) neither statistically significant below 50% and b) also means that we exclude most top players like VonIvan or Jesulin.

So, while eventually it might turn out that this is the only way to play SOV and everything else is not working, currently this hypothesis is not supported by the numbers.

Updated, including the six games from the 7th of May. Up to 63 games in total now.

Updated faction and map stats only with the games on the the 14th;

I'm waiting a little longer for replays to come it to update the rest.

oh look soviets with highest winrate and okw with lowest....and people still asking nerf okw and buff soviets,i hope mr.smith pay's attention to these

..updated the rest of the stuff (commanders, games) with data from the available replays...

No new updates this week, I´m on vacation which means away from the machine that gathers the stats; I´m back next monday.

Updated, now including all games from the round of 31 and round of 16.

Ah, forgot, the player list now only contains players that made it to the quarterfinals, otherwise the post would have gotten too long...

Faction stats

Factions

	ostheer	soviets	okw	usf	ukf
picked	33	37	51	27	20
won	18	20	21	13	12
won(%)	54	54	41	48	60

Matchups

Matchup	ostheer/soviets	ostheer/usf	ostheer/ukf	okw/soviets	okw/usf	okw/ukf
games	15	9	9	22	18	11
Allied victory	7	2	6	13	11	6
Allied victory (%)	46	22	66	59	61	54

Reading this numbers we can say:
1- OKW are not that OP as everyone claim.
2- OST and Sovs are more or less balanced between them.
3- OP Brits are really hard to beat with both OKW and OST.
4- For some strange reason OST are raping USF.

USF has literally no answer to OST sniper or mortar at all

rifles bleed too much manpower late game and the pop cap upkeep tax for stuff like ambulance is terrible

stug/pak shits on every single late game tank they can push out including pershing

previously USF could bleed OST manpower with light vehicle play, that's totally gone now

if OST just camps on their own gas and transitions to mid/late game without losing too much to rifles then USF autoloses

Reading this numbers we can say:
1- OKW are not that OP as everyone claim.
2- OST and Sovs are more or less balanced between them.
3- OP Brits are really hard to beat with both OKW and OST.
4- For some strange reason OST are raping USF.

1vs1 is pretty much balanced today. But:
Sov is extensively using the Penal/Dhsk combo to win. People is accordingly saying it need to be nerfed, the problem is how do you balance Sov uppon that.
OKW remains the most picked Axis faction by a huge margin compare to Ostheer. Even if we are watching TOP players, there is still important skill gap between many of them. OKW stat are depreciated because as the best Axis faction, lower skilled players of the tournament are naturally trying their luck using that faction when facing a better player.
On the same topic, UKF is the less picked faction as Allied with at the same time with the biggest win rate. This doesn't say anything else than players who picked the faction knew what they were doing, IE map dependant, knowledge over their opponent weaknessess etc...

On the same time we have too few records for the Ostheer / USF matchup and OStheer/UKF matchup to say anything constructive about balance between them.

1vs1 is pretty much balanced today. But:
OKW remains the most picked Axis faction by a huge margin compare to Ostheer. Even if we are watching TOP players, there is still important skill gap between many of them. OKW stat are depreciated because as the best Axis faction, lower skilled players of the tournament are naturally trying their luck using that faction when facing a better player.
.

keep in mind that all allied games are spread over 3 factions while the axis games are spread between 2 factions.
i think that OKW is just the safer option to play in a competition, because we all know if you fuckup Ostheer early/early-mid(losing a single gren squad, or worse a support weapon) game its pretty much GG against a equal player.

Updated, now includes the quarterfinal games;