Profile of pagep

Question:
Did you consinder the fact, that a 2at premade team ofen search for 4vs4 and playing it? Does your system get those players then or not?

That match would not be counted. If they are 2at team only their 2v2 games against top 200 plyaers would be counted.

I still think it should be based on a % rather than the top 200. The 1v1 Wehr ladder has nearly 3150 players, while the 1v1 Brit ladder is 1400. This means you are comparing the top 6% of the Wehr ladder against the top 14% of the British ladder.

wehr - 3371
brit - 1602

I think we would end up with even less matches. With the current calculation for the top 200, there is only ~12 brit games per day, which is way to low. Even week stat for this would be just 84 games which is not enough... I can see the stats to "stabilize" around 200 games at least.

But let's take a look, if we would take top 10% of players:
That's 160 positions of brits VS 330 positions of wehr.

Hm is there a difference in a skill? I can't really tell. For example if player ranked 160 would play against 330 ?
I am personally around rank 1k - level 10 . When I play against people 1k+ , even just few ranks worse, or level worse. I totally stomp them or usually have no problem winning. But when I play against people from top ~500 I can feel the difference immediately, sometimes someone plays really weird but usually I can feel that those players are on a completely different level them me. Would that be a case in 160 vs 330 player? Or is that more or less on a same level already?

Btw the more I think about it. It makes sense to have it based on the % in the ladder. However it would require way more work. I don't have full ladders, I would need to do additional development of lot of things.

Also another question if we applied different amount of people from each faction - it would affect the amount of games and the statistics what race is more played would be biased but on the other hand we already know this from the ladders. Hm...???


But let's say we want to have it as %, what the number should be?
1v1 - brit - 1450
1v1 - wer - 3158
1v1 - wgen - 2711
1v1 - usf - 1887
1v1 - soviet - 3158

For 2v2
2v2 - brit - 2440
2v2 - wer - 4321
2v2 - wgen - 3852
2v2 - usf - 2504
2v2 - soviet - 3757

team2 - allies - 8097
team2 - axis - 8148

Obviously we would need different values for arranged and random teams, because if we applied the same % it would be completely different amount of people which would be counted in.

But I am too tired getting the values for 3v3,4v4

(EDIT: Btw you are stating in the info section that there were 100k games per day. The site you linked shows about 110-120k games per week, if I understand it correctly. So only about 17k games per day.)

You are right, I did not noticed that the chart does aggregation. However if you count on that page all the modes/ranks I counted 244k games/week , that's 34k games.

But thanks for pointing that out!

Btw my next plans is to really filter only top 200 games - all players needs to be in that range. Will see how many games will stay. But not sure when I will have time to look into it - hopefully next weekend.

Is it possible to see it for months?I guess yes but only for future?

Month view and March has been added https://coh2stats.com/stats/month/1614556800/1v1/wermacht
We started regularly logging on 8th March. So it's data 8.3 -> 31.3

Currently month view can be seen only when month ended.

Does that mean if I'm a top 200 player in 3v3, my matches would be counted when I play 1v1?

Oh yeah. You are right. Those can affect the stats! However what I see from the stats. Usually when someone is really good with one faction they are also pretty good with other too

I'm not sure how it's done right now, but can there be a filter added so only matches get counted where all participants were top 200 as opposed to just one of them?

Would cut down the number of games, but get rid of the worst of the stomps.

This could be possible. I have snapshot of the leaderboards for each day. I could search in it for their steam ids.

How to approach it? 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4 ??
There are several approaches

1. Only one player in the match is in top 200 -- current implementation
2. At least 1 player from each team needs to be in top 200
3. At least 50% of players needs to be from top 200
4. All the players needs to be in top 200
5. something else?

Or games where the average rank was 200 or better for both sides.

I can't get the ranks for all the players in the match So I can't really make average rank.
The previous stats coh2charts.com he had huge benefit of direct access to the relic DB

Overloading the calls is indeed an issue, but maybe you can space those out? One call every 10 min would give 144 checked ranks per day. After a week there will be 1000 games annotated.
But maybe that's not that necessary after all.

The issue is that every day new matches are played and added (the amount of games is insane). Everything needs to be done in a single day so you are ready to process matches next day.

I am little bit scared of Relic. I think it was also reason the last project was shutdown because it was "stressing" their servers too much.

It's not official API. I don't have dev API key or something, it's basically "hacking" their API which they use to display the statistics which you can see on their site and also in-game. They could do some actions - which could make really hard to get this data. To be honest I have no idea how much we are stressing their system. Maybe they did not even noticed it


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional note to their API. It was not designed to provide a lot of data. It's designed to support the function COH2 currently have in-game / on their site. This makes everything more complicated and the process is fairly ineffective.