Login

russian armor

CoH2 statistics of top200 ONLY.

20 Apr 2021, 07:48 AM
#1
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 472

https://coh2stats.com/stats/month/1614556800/4v4/wermacht?statsSource=top200

coh2stat site now comes with top 200 ONLY! matches. (My thanks to maintainers of the repo)

From the previous threads such as

What do you think about the new match statistics & UKF?

or

4v4 win rates disparity

some modders claimed that since the stat includes match that includes 200+ ranked player. (Which was somewhat fair, but I don't believe it can be the reason to simply ignore stat. But anyway)

Now the site comes with top 200 player ONLY.

I won't show you all the stats, will just present you one-month stat of March. Which is the only month that is provided for now. See weekly or future month stat from the site later.










Do I have to keep remind you how bad UKF is at the moment...?

42.6% on 1v1
40.3% on 2v2

is that still low but fairly in the range of statistically acceptable...?
20 Apr 2021, 07:55 AM
#2
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


....

Do I have to keep remind you how bad UKF is at the moment...?

42.6% on 1v1
40.3% on 2v2

is that still low but fairly in the range of statistically acceptable...?

Yes UKF seem to be low. It is also worth noting that:

The number of game with UKF is simply very low at that level. (893 game total)

There is huge difference when including only 200+ and the all games with the UKF/OKW increasing the difference from 0.2% to 6%.

This might be an indication that although UKF are weak they are strong vs OKW.
20 Apr 2021, 07:57 AM
#3
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 472

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 07:55 AMVipper

The number of game with UKF is simply very low at that level. (893 game total)


Do you not think the reason behind it is just like UKF shown 3 games out of 65 in ML, they have very low played game BECAUSE they sucks...?

I myself quit playing UKF, and went to USF & OST. I simply cannot win with UKF.
20 Apr 2021, 07:58 AM
#4
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



Do you not think the reason behind it is just like UKF shown 3 games out of 65 in ML, they is very low played game BECAUSE they sucks...?

I myself quit playing UKF, and went to USF & OST. I simply cannot win with UKF.

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 07:55 AMVipper

Yes UKF seem to be low. It is also worth noting that:


It might be worth looking how well UKF do against Ostheer and OKW separately.
20 Apr 2021, 08:00 AM
#5
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 472

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 07:55 AMVipper

It is also worth noting that
20 Apr 2021, 08:01 AM
#6
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 472

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 07:58 AMVipper



It might be worth looking how well UKF do against Ostheer and OKW separately.


I have asked for it to the maintainers.


And with probably Kor. community agreeing with me, build JLI if you are having trouble vs UKF with OKW.
20 Apr 2021, 08:08 AM
#7
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17892 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 07:55 AMVipper

Yes UKF seem to be low. It is also worth noting that:

The number of game with UKF is simply very low at that level. (893 game total)

There is huge difference when including only 200+ and the all games with the UKF/OKW increasing the difference from 0.2% to 6%.

This might be an indication that although UKF are weak they are strong vs OKW.


You really are going overboard with mental gymnastics to bend statistics into your narrative.

Perhaps its time to accept that OKW is much stronger then UKF and is on pair with other factions, while UKF is rock bottom instead of attempting to manipulate narrative that can't be contested here?

There is no "hidden OP" here, sample size of almost 900 games is large enough to be accurate and there is no skill disparity games taken into account that would influence win ratios.

UKF is UP, OKW is not, accept reality and cope.


42.6% on 1v1
40.3% on 2v2

is that still low but fairly in the range of statistically acceptable...?

5% deviation from perfect outcome of 50% would be acceptable, anything higher then that I would call is an indicator of imbalance.

These ratios only confirm why UKF is dead on competitive scene.
20 Apr 2021, 08:18 AM
#8
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


...
And with probably Kor. community agreeing with me, build JLI if you are having trouble vs UKF with OKW.

Imo not having any problems but imo it worth checking if there a noticeable gap between UKF vs Ostheer and UKF vs OKW. That might also help come up with more specialized solutions.
20 Apr 2021, 08:21 AM
#9
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 472

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:18 AMVipper

Imo not having any problems but imo it worth checking if there a noticeable gap between UKF vs Ostheer and UKF vs OKW. That might also help come up with more specialized solutions.


Truely it will tell us more. I've just said that because you've mentioned that UKF is stronger against OKW but I think UKF vs OKW is the most broken match in 1v1 currently. In favor of OKW of course. You simply cannot win against JLI + panther with UKF.
20 Apr 2021, 08:24 AM
#10
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:08 AMKatitof


You really are going overboard with mental gymnastics to bend statistics into your narrative.

Pls avoid personal comments (12 time)

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:08 AMKatitof

Perhaps its time to accept that OKW is much stronger then UKF and is on pair with other factions, while UKF is rock bottom instead of attempting to manipulate narrative that can't be contested here?


You seem to have completely missed the point. (once more I might add). Try reading more carefully:

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 07:55 AMVipper

Yes UKF seem to be low. It is also worth noting that:


jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:08 AMKatitof

There is no "hidden OP" here, sample size of almost 900 games is large enough to be accurate and there is no skill disparity games taken into account that would influence win ratios.

UKF is UP, OKW is not, accept reality and cope.

The fact that UKF win rates drop are increased by 5% when 2100 games are included is an indication that there is something there. It certainly is not "hidden OP" what ever you mean by that but there is something there.
20 Apr 2021, 08:32 AM
#11
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 472

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:24 AMVipper

Pls avoid personal comments (12 time)



You seem to have completely missed the point. (once more I might add). Try reading more carefully:




The fact that UKF win rates drop are increased by 5% when 2100 games are included is an indication that there is something there. It certainly is not "hidden OP" what ever you mean by that but there is something there.


No 3v3 is where UKF played least games. (around 200) and I'm sorry I played some 3v3 in March. Which probably increased some wr. How sad that one player can influence total faction's wr.

And I am with him on the fact that you are trying to ignore the facts from the stat.

UKF consistently have lowest wr from 1v1 ~ 4v4. Not by little but by far.

If you are not willing to accept the fact, please bring me some data or evidence so that I can understand your side of argument.
20 Apr 2021, 08:36 AM
#12
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 472

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:24 AMVipper
]

The fact that UKF win rates drop are increased by 5% when 2100 games are included is an indication that there is something there. It certainly is not "hidden OP" what ever you mean by that but there is something there.

+ it's not 2100. You added one more 0.

It means 3v3 has so little match counted, it gave us what people say "outlier". Yet it is still one of the lowest.
20 Apr 2021, 08:37 AM
#13
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



No 3v3 is where UKF played least games. (around 200) and I'm sorry I played some 3v3 in March. Which probably increased some wr. How sad that one player can influence total faction's wr.

And I am with him on the fact that you are trying to ignore the facts from the stat.

UKF consistently have lowest wr from 1v1 ~ 4v4. Not by little but by far.

If you are not willing to accept the fact, please bring me some data or evidence so that I can understand your side of argument.

I am not sure why you think I am not accepting facts. My first line is that UKF are low.

Imo you should also not take "sides", this a forum for people to give their opinion not for people to fight.

More over what katitof has posted has very little to do with what I have posted.


+ it's not 2100. You added one more 0.

It means 3v3 has so little match counted, it gave us what people say "outlier". Yet it is still one of the lowest.

When "all players" option is included the total number for games played by UKF in 1vs1 is around 2.100. (1.125+1.018)
20 Apr 2021, 08:45 AM
#14
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 472

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:37 AMVipper

I am not sure why you think I am not accepting facts. My first line is that UKF are low.

Imo you should also not take "sides", this a forum for people to give their opinion not for people to fight.


When "all players" option is included the total number for games played by UKF in 1vs1 is around 2.100.


God... I posted this thread BECAUSE all player is not reliable to see balance.(Which modders already aruged) Because I myself can win eeeeasily anyone behind 200. Or even 100.

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:24 AMVipper

The fact that UKF win rates drop are increased by 5% when 2100 games are included is an indication that there is something there.


It does not mean something is there. It's simply people 200+ is very hard to win against top 200 player.

End of discussion. Okay?

How can I not see you as biased when you are trying to find something when there is nothing to find.
I know I'm biased to UKF (obviously), but I have stats and arguments to back me up.

You on the other hand seems biased toward axis, maybe it's just me. IDK.
But to me, it seems you are trying to act as to be faired, but clearly not. You already chose your side. Which is fine, that's the whole point of the debate.
20 Apr 2021, 08:46 AM
#15
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17892 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:37 AMVipper

I am not sure why you think I am not accepting facts. My first line is that UKF are low.

You're also trying to tell OKW is closer to UKF, despite the uncontested hard evidence its not anywhere close and is on pair with 3 other factions.

Any particular reason why you deflect that?
20 Apr 2021, 08:50 AM
#16
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


God... I posted this thread BECAUSE all player is not reliable to see balance.(Which modders already aruged) Because I myself can win eeeeasily anyone behind 200. Or even 100.

It does not mean something is there. It's simply people 200+ is very hard to win against top 200 player.

End of discussion. Okay?

This is no way to debate in forum


How can I not see you as biased when you are trying to find something when there is nothing to find.
I know I'm biased to UKF (obviously), but I have stats and arguments to back me up.

You on the other side seems biased toward OKW, maybe it's just me. IDK.
But to me, it seems you are trying to act as to be faired, but clearly not. You already chose your side. Which is fine, that's the whole point of the debate.

That simply does not explain why it makes such a huge difference particularly on UKF.

But you since you are "biased to UKF" we better agree to disagree.
20 Apr 2021, 08:52 AM
#17
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:46 AMKatitof

You're also trying to tell OKW is closer to UKF, despite the uncontested hard evidence its not anywhere close and is on pair with 3 other factions.

Any particular reason why you deflect that?

Now check the "hard evidence again":
https://www.coh2.org/file/19617/stat.jpg

OKW 47.7 winrate
UKF 47.5 winrate

Can you give it rest with your conspiracy theory already?
20 Apr 2021, 08:53 AM
#18
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 472

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:50 AMVipper

This is no way to debate in forum


That simply does not explain why it makes such a huge difference particularly on UKF.

But you since you are "biased to UKF" we better agree to disagree.


Nope I was about to make a reply about it.

As I argued previously, UKF is easy peace of cake IF you know how to counter them. Which is shown is this thread's stat.

200+ players do not know how to counter them. Probably the reason I see many people complaining in this forum about emplacements(which is not usable at all in most cases) & IS.

I know it's kinda harsh, but sometimes you need to l2p to win...

If you do not know how to counter early UC & IS. or against emplacement(not a big issue in 1v1 I guess), UKF can seems tough to you.
20 Apr 2021, 08:58 AM
#19
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 472

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 08:52 AMVipper

Now check the "hard evidence again":
https://www.coh2.org/file/19617/stat.jpg

OKW 47.7 winrate
UKF 47.5 winrate

Can you give it rest with your conspiracy theory already?


1. this thread is top 200 only stat. I already posted thread about all player. Why keep bring it in?

2. OKW has the highest 2v2 ~ 4v4. While UKF has lowest on 1v1 ~ 4v4 even in all player. How can they are the smae...?

And I already agreed on other thread that OKW is showing weak spots on 1v1. Probably because of pg not doing great at late game. (or maybe I did on Kor. community. Sorry keep posting on the both side. But yes I do agree OKW is a bit behind on 1v1 but not by a huge gap)

20 Apr 2021, 09:00 AM
#20
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



Nope I was about to make a reply about it.

As I argued previously, UKF is easy peace of cake IF you know how to counter them. Which is shown is this thread's stat.

200+ players do not know how to counter them. Probably the reason I see many people complaining in this forum about emplacements(which is not usable at all in most cases) & IS.

I know it's kinda harsh, but sometimes you need to l2p to win...

If you do not know how to counter early UC & IS. or against emplacement(not a big issue in 1v1 I guess), UKF can seems tough to you.

Or
it might be that UKF ranks are overinflated because there far less people playing as UKF.
or
it might be some other reason

Now what is more probable that 200+ players are noobs? or that a UKF is easier to reach +200 than an OKW or Ostheer player?

I will recap and leave here because this debate is not very constructive. UKF seem to be low and they need changes (probably a wider redesign than buff to here and there), but difference in win rates is an indication that something is off.




1. this thread is top 200 only stat. I already posted thread about all player. Why keep bring it in?

2. OKW has the highest 2v2 ~ 4v4. While UKF has lowest on 1v1 ~ 4v4 even in all player. How can they are the smae...?

And I already agreed on other thread that OKW is showing weak spots on 1v1. Probably because of pg not doing great at late game. (or maybe I did on Kor. community. Sorry keep posting on the both side. But yes I do agree OKW is a bit behind on 1v1 but not by a huge gap)


I do not keep bringing it up I am responding to kaitof's bogus accusation that I am making numbers up.


As I said we have to agree to disagree (although I am not sure to what).
Have a nice day.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

426 users are online: 426 guests
4 posts in the last 24h
31 posts in the last week
138 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45140
Welcome our newest member, Karins
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM