1v1 pairings - revenge of the stats

[Tripper]

Soo, I was procrastinating yesterday and I decided to count up the numbers of wins and losses of each continent in 1v1. Bert tells me this can't be easily detected by Dedcons, so it seemed that the screenshots posted in the ladder thread would be as good a way of sampling as any.

I think this is a significant sample because:

• almost all games have screenshots or short debriefs (except for Ace who usually links to Dedcon recordings, and some of the old hosting links which have expired)
• it has a large number of games (111 so far, although when you break that down into 15 pairings, the numbers are individually still low)
• all the games are random territories so there's no selection bias
• all the games are played at quite a high standard, so there's less noise from poor tactics (although good play still clearly makes a difference)

Anyway, compare and contrast the following with my earlier back-of-the-envelopethread.

Summary:
Asia: Strong (26-14)
Africa: Strong (26-14)
SA: Neutral/weak (14-17)
EU: Neutral/weak (17-21)
NA: Neutral/weak (16-21)
Russia: Weak (12-24)

Code: Select all

        vs  NA        SA        EU        Africa     Rus       Asia

NA          .         3-4        6-7       2-4       2-3       3-3   

SA          4-3       .          2-5       1-3       3-1       4-5   

EU          7-6       5-2        .         1-5       2-3       2-5 

Africa      4-2       3-1        5-1         .       9-5       5-5   

Rus         3-2       1-3        3-2       5-9       .         0-8   

Asia        3-3       5-4        5-2       5-5       8-0       .   


So this just confirms what we already knew - the only whitewash pairing is Asia-Russia, although Africa-EU is pretty one-sided, but not impossible (I remember seeing other EU victories that didn't make it in to this sample). Africa-Russia also gives a statistical advantage, but one that can be overcome by good play. And SA-NA is pretty even - grr those last few million kills White Rabbit!

I'll keep on updating the spreadsheet occasionally and we'll see how the numbers change - although this is about 3 months worth of ladder matches so it won't change that fast.

Comments, suggestions anyone?

Cheers, Tripper

[Pox]

Pretty much just statistical backing for what we all already figured... although the NA vs SA figures are a bit surprising, but the way each player chooses to play can make a big difference in that one.

[Xocrates]

I was unaware of such a bias in Europe Vs Africa (but then again, I've been away for a long time).

You know, maybe, just maybe, IV should make the armpit of India non sailable

[Pox]

I was unaware of such a bias in Europe Vs Africa (but then again, I've been away for a long time).

You know, maybe, just maybe, IV should make the armpit of India non sailable

Nah, that'd take away all the fun.

[rus|Mike]

although the NA vs SA figures are a bit surprising

Hehehehe (a laugh turns into diabolical)
Mike takes all the credit 2 (or even all 3?) of those SA victories are my victories against Hyperion Thanks my ingenious evil tactic

[Tripper]

although the NA vs SA figures are a bit surprising

Hehehehe (a laugh turns into diabolical)
Mike takes all the credit 2 (or even all 3?) of those SA victories are my victories against Hyperion Thanks my ingenious evil tactic

Well I followed your advice in my last game and very nearly beat white rabbit as na v sa - I can only blame my failure on lack of skill in the execution

[rus|Mike]

Well I followed your advice in my last game

Hehe another advice then: don't put your silos so that they can be reconed right at Defcon 3

[Ace Rimmer]

Well I followed your advice in my last game

Hehe another advice then: don't put your silos so that they can be reconed right at Defcon 3

or put your fleet where you can counter-recon his at the same time.

[Tripper]

Well I followed your advice in my last game

Hehe another advice then: don't put your silos so that they can be reconed right at Defcon 3

nah, that's all part of the plan The trick (I think) is to put them just outside sub range ...

[White--Rabbit]

The SA v NA is just as lopsided as Asia v Russia unless US can somehow take quick control of the pacific. And it is difficult for the US to get carriers close enuf to the northern coast of SA to do much scouting unless that player is willing to loose fleet units to naval nuking. It is also very difficult to get the NA fleet units through the gap between Africa and asia. Trip wont like to hear this but its two games in a row that Ive held of most of his fleet from entering that gap with 2 battleships and 2 carriers (brought more around after they were done pumelling US cities tho ). If the US tries to put their silos out of recon range it puts USA at even a greater disadvantage. A smart player will see that and know the are free to hit cities without the fear of having most of the attacking nukes shot down. Just avoid naval battle and concentrate on pounding the cities. I personally think its easier to win playing russia v asia than being NA in a SA v NA battle.

[rus|Mike]

Pffft...

[White--Rabbit]

Pffft...

Pfft ...... What does that mean mr mikey

[Ace Rimmer]

I personally think its easier to win playing russia v asia than being NA in a SA v NA battle.

And I'll answer for rus|Mike...

It's very simple as NA vs SA. All you have to do is place a small "harassment" fleet in the pacific and keep your bombers long enough to naval nuke that area well known for subs. You don't even have to keep SA from using the subs, just harass them into moving them back or delaying the launch long enough to give bombers from airbases time to safely move in. Put the rest of the fleet in the Atlantic and take control before defcon 1. That is the key to winning with NA using general tactics.

It is true that holding a gap can be done with a very small fleet. Which is why you only need a small one to put enough doubt into the other players mind about a "safe" sub launch from below Mexico. Heh, I've kept you away from my S. American coast line (coming from your Asia under Africa) a few times with minimal forces. The pass next to Iceland is the most obvious gap.

[White--Rabbit]

I personally think its easier to win playing russia v asia than being NA in a SA v NA battle.

And I'll answer for rus|Mike...

It's very simple as NA vs SA. All you have to do is place a small "harassment" fleet in the pacific and keep your bombers long enough to naval nuke that area well known for subs. You don't even have to keep SA from using the subs, just harass them into moving them back or delaying the launch long enough to give bombers from airbases time to safely move in. Put the rest of the fleet in the Atlantic and take control before defcon 1. That is the key to winning with NA using general tactics.

It is true that holding a gap can be done with a very small fleet. Which is why you only need a small one to put enough doubt into the other players mind about a "safe" sub launch from below Mexico. Heh, I've kept you away from my S. American coast line (coming from your Asia under Africa) a few times with minimal forces. The pass next to Iceland is the most obvious gap.

You can stop the bombers and any harasment fleet with fighters (for the bombers from NA airbases) and by setting up a picket line (with battleships or carrier battleship pairs) to prevent any enemy fleet from doing any serious harm to your attacking units. Ive done this twice with trip and was succesfull both times. Ive also done it against lesser players but thatdoesnt really count. What id like to try is a 5 game mini match against Ace, Rusmikey, hyp or Mojo. I am the4 weaker player out of the 4 so id like to see if a weaker player could win more that they would loose in this situation

[Tripper]

The SA v NA is just as lopsided as Asia v Russia unless US can somehow take quick control of the pacific. And it is difficult for the US to get carriers close enuf to the northern coast of SA to do much scouting unless that player is willing to loose fleet units to naval nuking. It is also very difficult to get the NA fleet units through the gap between Africa and asia. Trip wont like to hear this but its two games in a row that Ive held of most of his fleet from entering that gap with 2 battleships and 2 carriers (brought more around after they were done pumelling US cities tho ). If the US tries to put their silos out of recon range it puts USA at even a greater disadvantage. A smart player will see that and know the are free to hit cities without the fear of having most of the attacking nukes shot down. Just avoid naval battle and concentrate on pounding the cities. I personally think its easier to win playing russia v asia than being NA in a SA v NA battle.

I knew what you were up to! Thing was, I didn't even bother trying to get into the south atlantic (like you say, it's easy to defend). NA's advantage relative to Russia is that SA is easier to counterattack - most of SA is scoutable from any coast, and since NA owns the north atlantic, at least some of NA's silos will be unscoutable. So SA will more or less have to launch first, and unless the SA silos are in patagonia, they're vulnerable to subs and bombers from just off Brazil. Also, I don't mind having a few silos scouted at DEFCON 3, because they can get off most of their nukes once they start taking fire, taking out either cities that are hard for NA bombers to reach (like Lima) or silos if SA has opened (which SA probably will do because the NA silos are out of sub range - and it's not that easy to get those silos with bombers either.

In both games I also sneaked subs through the pacific too - though in the second game they were still too far away when you launched

_I_ reckon I lost because I wasted nukes targeting silos at the very end. Only one city short of catching you ...

Looking forward to our next meeting! Cheers, Tripper

PS - I was on the phone when the next posts happened ... my response above assumes leaving the pacific completely unchallenged ... although another idea to piss off SA would be to send a 24 ships + c. 6 subs strike force west in to the middle of the pacific at DEFCON 5 (to try to outflank any "picket line"), then rush it towards Mexico at DEFCON 3 - that's something that the Russian can't do vs the Star!