Profile of Serrith

it would be wise however to view objective data with greater value than the opinion of a few players... opinions are prone to biases and factionalism however data stands...

Its easy enough to look at a single statistic like winrate and come to a quick conclusion about it without considering any potential confounding variables.

Let's take achpawel's playercard for example.
In 1v1(his primary game mode), his least played faction is OKW with 329 matches. His most played is Ostheer with 1035 matches followed closely by soviets with 985. Third is USF with 801 and then there is a huge drop to UKF with 392.

From these stats on their own we might conclude that achpawel is going to be most biased AGAINST OKW because its his least llayed faction. After all, you avoid factions you dislike, not ones you like. And we might also conclude he will be most biased FOR ostheer followed by soviets.

But thats not a whollistic way of looking at the situation. UKF might be his favorite faction but perhaps they were his most recent purchase.

Coming from wargaming titles(world of tanks and warships) only a fool looks at the winrate alone of a particular vehicle and concludes that vehicle is over or under performing. You factor in the availability of the vehicle(is it new or exclusive?) The average damage dealt per battle, the average kills per battle, the average deaths per battle, the amount of spotting damage done etc. And when you factor in these other variables sometimes the winrate just doesn't matchup with the performance of the vehicle for whatever reason. Maybe the ship/tank is an extremely high damage dealer but low durability means it can't carry matches which reduces its overall winrate despite OP damage output.

The point is that the winrate MAY be indicative of an issue but it might not be the issue you think it is. Jumping to the conclusion that soviets are underpowered with ladder winrate as the primary-or only- metric is very problematic.

True

A complicated question. Generally as OKW you can't make as many mistakes as U can when playing allies. Plus U really can't lose your engineer while at the same time U have to use it efficiently on the front line, which is difficult. Generally, the automatch system will match U against weaker players (inferior micro skills, etc) who will play as allies to compensate for OKW's worse performance. Sometimes it will still lead to frustration as U will probably be able to see that U are a better player and make better decisions but they don't necessarily transfer into advantage. With allies you are more likely to feel pity for your axis opponent when you are exploiting certain advantages they have (to see that you have to play all factions).

I dont think I can accept your psycho analysis of player mindsets while playing. You might be just projecting on other people, but in my experience players do no generally think like this. At least not in CoH.

That said, despite what the graph says I do think OKW has a tough time in 1v1 specifically.


Sometimes looking at stats doesn't give the whole picture.
For example, my winrate DRAMATICALLY increases based on the length of the game- the longer the games last, the more likely I am to win.
One might interpret this to mean that I am more skilled at the late game then I am in the early game, or that I am particularly vulnerable to early timing specific offensive builds.
But the reality is, if I let a game last longer its because I see there is still a chance for me to win. Once I see that slip away I tend to just quit. As a result games that end early for me tend to be because I saw the situation as hopeless and just left- if I fought to the bitter end in every match, the win rates would even out.


The point is that what the numbers reveal is clear as mud. Maybe OKW has a higher win rate because its a better "noob stomping" faction so as long as you are paired against someone with any degree lower rank you are almost guaranteed a victory but against someone of equal or superior rank you have only an even chance at best. Or any of a thousand other possibilities and variables.

I am not dismissing the numbers, I think they have some interesting implications but you can't just conclude "faction A is worse than Faction B" just by factor of them having a 1-2% difference in winrate not factoring in any other variables.

Don't wanna be the "fun at parties" guy but don't know if ppl trolling so I have to give some numbers:

KT armor: 375
SU76M long range pene: 160

That gives a 43% chance to pen long range >> 1/20=5%

I was just screwing around. To counter the soviets op reeee narrative i guess.

But thanks for the math. Its better then i remeber it being according to the math. Vut rng probably screwed me over.

Oh i know the pentration and armor values, I was wondering if the educated individual i replied to did.

But seriously who builds su76 to counter heavies lol. Even on maps where you "don't get flanked".

No because if you rush the t34 you don't buy the upgrade. You will get it for free when you get t4


That makes more sense then, but I still think it should get the cooldown bonus back after t4

That's my point. You don't get it because it slows the rush down. Plus you get it for free. If you purchased it you would have 7 man conscripts up to 4 minutes earlier then if you were just to wait for tier 4. But nobody does because it slows your actual power spike(t70/t-34).

What are you talking about? You can already choose to ignore the upgrades until after t70 now

But if you built 3-4 cons and don't have mollys OR AT nades before t70, you are in for a rough time

That's my point. People don't buy the HQ upgrade now. And even if the upgrade were MANDATORY, people still wouldn't get it until after the T70. If you remove the HQ upgrade, make the 7man upgrade available after tier 3 is built but nerf the potency, people will actually be inclined to build tier 3 earlier to gain access to the 7man upgrade earlier. If there is a fuel cost attached to it, people are still going to be getting the T70 FIRST.

Also, who gets molotovs before T70? lol The AT grenades are important I'll grant- if you don't get guards, m-42 or penals with ptrs. But neither AT grenades or molotovs require tier 3...

Well that explains it. I might be getting small discrepancies but this pushes the difference between that 4.5%/13.5% to 8.27%15.53% if we were to account for the reload bonus which is close to what the DPS comparison showed up in the patch notes.


So no, the cooldown modifier doesn't increase the dmg at all ranges between 15/20%. It's closer to 5% to 15%.

Fair enough.