One thing I find myself doing is making assumptions about how competitive (or not competitive) matches are on battle nights. So I decided to do some n00b stats on the last war to see what the experience was like in general. Are matches highly competitive? Where blow outs occurring more than 50% of the time? Is there really a skill imbalance in the community? I was curious, so here are the results.
Method:
I calculated a rating for each match played (not counting forfeits or matches without stats reported).
The rating is a simple percent difference with an additional check for close games. If the score was tied or a team lost by a single point (flag capture, kill, second, etc) the rating was 0 meaning absolute competitiveness.
Excel Formula:
W = Winning Team Score
L = Losing Team Score
=IF(ABS(W-L)<=1, 0, (W-L)/AVERAGE(W, L))
This formula rated teams on a scale of 0 to 2 where 2 is a complete routing and 0 is a tied (or almost tied game).
Example Games With Ratings:
As you can see, gametypes with lower total points scored tend to have higher ratings for a smaller absolute point difference between scores. This is why I included the rule that games that ended with a 1 point difference were considered absolutely competitive.
Now for the pretty pictures: (Note, the limits below each bar are the upper bound for that column)
Interoperate the stats as you will. How do you define a good matchup?
Is a 50 - 40 Conflict game close? (Rating .222)
Is a 5 - 2 Liberation competitive? (Rating .857)
Is a 3 - 1 Sabotage fun? (Rating 1)
Is a 15 - 9 Extraction intense? (Rating .5)
I'm not sure where we should draw the line, but now you'll have pretty pictures to back up your assertions about the matches we played last war.
Also, if you want the raw stat book go here. If you want the excel document I put the formulas in, message me.
