Profile of Siphon X.

Avatar Area

Offline Germany
Posts: 1138 | Subs: 2

General Information
Steam: 76561198013661984
Nationality:

Germany

Show Latest Posts

Thread: ESL cup statistics, part 1: Factions8 Apr 2016, 13:12 PM

8 Apr 2016, 12:07 PMSpinflight

Is there any way to tell which faction was picked first?

Faction pick and counter faction pick would be interesting to know, particularly on specific maps.

As far as I know that's not the case.

Reading the rules, the first pick is defined by a coin-toss the result of which isn't noted anywhere as far as I can tell. Maps are determined by a veto system, but from the rules it's not clear if the faction or the maps are fixed first.

I could check which faction was picked by the VP leader in the decider game, again not sure if that happens before or after the map is determined. Also, this will obviously reduce the sample size significantly; but yeah, that might be worthwhile to look into.

So, which was first, factions or map?

Edit:

Uhm, at least for the first two games it must be maps first (even though they are mentioned after the faction pick).

Anything else would be strange because the coin-toss winner would have to pick his faction without knowing the map, while the loser can pick his faction in the second game knowing the map...

In: Lobby

Thread: ESL cup statistics, part 1: Factions8 Apr 2016, 07:52 AM

7 Apr 2016, 22:08 PMRedxWings

Great work!

Let me know if you are missing any games from me. (I personally don't upload if I lost the round overall, I leave that to the victor). The upload thing has been wonky on me so that might explain why some games are missing.

It would be great if you can find:

NA#5, Quarterfinals vs Paul
NA#9, Quarterfinals vs Dusty
NA#12, BO3 for 3rd, vs Dusty (I'm missing game 1 there, I have G2&G3).

Otherwise GG covered you pretty well

In: Lobby

Thread: ESL cup statistics, part 1: Factions7 Apr 2016, 19:47 PM

7 Apr 2016, 15:25 PMDullahan

It should be a requirement in the rules that replays have to be uploaded.

There's all sorts of reasons for this: arbitration, casting, historical log etc.

Actually it is in the rules. Tricky to be strict on this, though, given that the most recent replay will be overwritten unless you remember to specifically save it...

In: Lobby

Thread: ESL cup statistics, part 1: Factions7 Apr 2016, 09:38 AM

7 Apr 2016, 09:01 AMtightrope

Yeah it is a shame Paul didn't upload his replays that must have been a big % of the missing ones

Yes, but he's not the only one; the list of people in NA that did upload replays consistently is actually pretty short...

Unfortunately I started with this mid February. It took me a while to figure out how to check out older twitch-casts

, and by that time the very early casts where not available anymore.

Low point is NA#2 for which I could only find stats for 9 out of 23 games, and the info on the final is actually from Yukiko's report. The final for NA #3 is lost as well.

EU is better in terms of available replays (although I don't recall seeing on uploaded e.g. by Jove). And it also does help that later EU cups were covered by multiple casters.

In: Lobby

Thread: ESL cup statistics, part 1: Factions7 Apr 2016, 07:58 AM

With the ESL Go4Coh2 series finished, it’s time for new round of statistics.

I checked out the replays and twitch-casts for all EU & NA cups for all BO3 rounds (which means quarterfinals and up as well as the 2 qualifier rounds for the EU March monthly). I did omit the RUKAcl party final of EU#13, though.

The total number of games that went into this is 464. There are several games missing because no replays have been uploaded anywhere and games either have not been casted live or casts are no longer available. I’d guesstimate that roughly 35% of the NA and 13% of the EU games are lost (about 25% in total).

Let’s start with faction selection and win percentages for all ESL cups:

Faction	Picked	Picked (%)	Won	Won (%)
okw	174	38%	82	47%
soviets	265	57%	142	54%
usf	106	23%	58	55%
ostheer	290	63%	141	49%
brits	93	20%	41	44%
Sum:	928	100%	464	50%

Next table includes only games after the most recent patch (which are cups #11-#13 and the February and March monthlies):

Faction	Picked	Picked (%)	Won	Won (%)
okw	61	41%	31	51%
soviets	93	63%	50	54%
usf	27	18%	12	44%
ostheer	87	59%	45	52%
brits	28	18%	10	36%
Sum	296	100%	148	50%

Results for each matchup (all cups):

Matchup	Played	Allied won	Allies won (%)
soviets vs. ostheer	159	84	53%
soviets vs. okw	106	58	55%
usf vs. ostheer	67	36	54%
usf vs. okw	39	22	56%
brits vs. ostheer	64	29	45%
brits vs. okw	29	12	41%
Sum	464	242	52%

Results for matchups (Feb/#11/#12/#13/Mar):

Matchup	Played	Allied won	Allies won (%)
soviets vs. ostheer	53	29	55%
soviets vs. okw	40	21	53%
usf vs. ostheer	16	7	44%
usf vs. okw	11	5	45%
brits vs. ostheer	18	6	33%
brits vs. okw	10	4	40%
Sum	147	72	49%

You'd have to take in particular the percentages for USF and UKF matchups with a grain of salt, due to the comparably small sample size.

Then I subdivided the cups into (roughly) 2 week intervals, containing 2x2 or 3x2 cups, with 52-82 games each. The dashed, black lines in the figures below indicate when a patch/hotfix was applied.

Between #2 and #3: Mostly a buff to the UKF AEC
Between #8 and #9: Various changes, just to mention a few: Nerf to Calliope and Panzerwerfer, buff to 222, change of AEC, new UKF commanders, nerfs to abilities of older UKF commanders; after some hotfixes basically no veterancy for late-game infantry squads
Between #10 and Feb monthly: Veterancy working again (?)

Factions picked:

Win percentage for each faction:

For #1/#2 there is one UKF game on record, which RoyalHants won vs. Alucard (yay, 100% win rate!). I did omit that point here...

Over the next week or so, I plan to post two more parts, one looking at maps and the other at doctrines.

Edit: Update adding the results reported by Redxwings

In: Lobby

Thread: New player trying to get into the game5 Apr 2016, 12:43 PM

5 Apr 2016, 10:27 AMCartoonVillain

So I keep seeing the term 'snare' around here. What does it mean exactly?

A snared unit is a unit that moves slower than normal.

Around here it's mostly used in the context of a vehicle receiving an engine critical by hitting a mine or being hit by an anti-tank grenade or Panzerfaust. So, you could "snare a tank" with e.g. a Panzerfaust in order to prevent it from rushing your position or escaping. The device to actively snare a vehicle (e.g. the Panzerfaust) in turn is then also referred to as "a snare".

Infantry can also me snared (e.g. by being exposed to Blendkörper or white phosphorous smoke or simply suppressed), although the term seems to be less used in that context around here...

In: Replay Reviews

Thread: ESL Replay Pack5 Apr 2016, 08:50 AM

In case you haven't figured it out yet (sorry for the late reply):

First you go to the brackets of the cup you are interested in, for example

EU#1

In the brackets you click on the "VS" between the player's names of the round you are interested in, which would get you e.g. to

EU#1, Finals: Barton vs. Jesulin

On the right hand side, below "Media" you find links to the page with the replay description; click on one of those, then click on the download button.

Now, several times you'll find that no or at least not all replays have been uploaded by the players so the media section is empty; in particular the NA cups tend to have a lot of replays missing...

In: Lobby

Thread: Introducing: Imba Cup Tourney rules9 Mar 2016, 21:19 PM

The basic idea is that one player creates the most imbalanced matchup at the price that he has to win within a certain time. So the map/faction imbalance is balanced by the handicap set by the players. Rounds work like this:

Players take turns on nominating factions they are willing to play (they have to at least nominate one axis and one allied faction). Once a player passes, the other player may nominate any number of factions and the nomination part ends.

Details:
Both players take turns on bidding how quickly they would win. Whoever bids the shortest time now is the "attacker", while the other is the "defender". Top seed starts with a mandatory bid of 60 minutes.
The attacker picks the map out of the automatch pool; he also choses which faction he will play (from the list he originally nominated) and which the defender will play (from the defender's list). It has to be allies vs. axis. The attacker may use any commanders and bulletins, while the defender might only use common commanders and no bulletins (optional: the defender might not use any commanders).
The ensueing game is won by the attacker, if he manages to win within the time that he bid initially. Otherwise the defender wins.

So, the defender only has to stall until time runs out for the attacker. Simply winning still works though. In fact, if no player bids (beyong the initial 60 minute bid), the game would be a pretty normal one (well, except for that one of the players would pick the map and both factions...).

Comments:

Nominating factions is trickier than might seem at first. Nominating a lot of factions will be advantageous when you turn out to be the attacker (you have more factions too chose from) but will tend to weaken you when you end up defending (because the attacker has more choice when picking your faction for you).
This works well with BO1, but of course it can be used in BO3 rounds. Another advantage for organizers is that the maximum time for a game is limited to 60 minutes (of course a lower default can be chosen as well).
When bidding for times you have to take into account that there is little incentive for the defender to surrender prematurely. When time runs out we might even see attempts at annihilation victories...
It should be interesting to see match-ups/commanders/maps that are not used commonly.

So, what do you think, could this work? What factions would you nominate? Which match-ups and maps would you expect to see? How quickly would you expect to win against an equally skilled player in what faction/map combination?

In: Lobby

Thread: t34 76 now useless4 Mar 2016, 14:57 PM

What about making the T34-76 an optional side-grade at T3, while also leaving it in T4?

The cost could be fairly low (like, 20 MP/30 FU), so you can start producing T34-76 earlier and don't need to build T4 only for T34s (which is what everybody does now, right?). No discount for T4 though, if you decide to build that later on as well.

In: COH2 Balance

Thread: ESL cup statistics23 Feb 2016, 17:20 PM

23 Feb 2016, 16:14 PMGdot

Brits have a 90% win rate on langreskaya

Well, there are not that many samples for UKF/USF per map, but assuming these numbers are at least somewhat accurate:

Why is USF doing comparably poor on Faymonville?
Crossing and Langreskaya are often assumed to be similar in that they are fairly open, so, why do UKF win a lot on Langreskaya while not so much on Crossing? Is Crossing that much larger?

23 Feb 2016, 15:53 PMA_E

I don't but I did try to talk through these stats with 1100 viewers live at the time, getting a shout out is pretty nice if you've done something cool for the community.

Well, I thought it was nice, thanks A_E

In: Lobby