Stats for WCS AM/EU quarterfinals day 1

Today, the WCS season finals begin for Europe and America. I compiled a few stats that I posted to Team Liquid and are reproduced below.

 

MC (P) v StarDust (P)
1. StarDust beat MC 2-0 at IEM Cologne. The games lasted 6:56 and 8:38 with MC attacking early in both games (ref)

2. MC is 3-9 (25%) in PvPs lasting 20-25 minutes, but 6-1 (86%) in PvP >25 minutes (ref)

3. MC is diligent in using his Phoenixes. Although he makes slightly fewer (.54 v .65) Phoenixes per game than his opponents, he uses Graviton Beam more often (2.81 v. 1.61) (ref 1) (ref 2)

VortiX (Z) v. jjakji (T)
1. VortiX opened Hatch First in 18/20 (90%) of ZvTs. It’s usually a 15 Hatch followed by a 16 Extractor or Pool. (ref)

2. VortiX is 4-0 in games 8-12 minutes long, all of which were Roach Baneling all-ins. However, he’s only 4-4 in games going Roach Baneling overall (ref)

Alicia (P) v. Bomber (T)
1. Alicia is 19-6 (76%) in games longer than 16 minutes, while only 69% overall. (ref)

2. Don’t play Bomber straight up in TvP. He’s 2-7 in games <16 minutes and 11-4 in games >16 minutes. Blink Stalkers and Dark Templar are good bets (ref 1) (ref 2)

TaeJa (T) v. HyuN (Z)
1. At ASUS ROG Summer 2013, TaeJa beat HyuN 3-2 (ref)

2. HyuN can be deadly in the early game. He’s 9-0 before 12 minutes and 13-2 before 16 minutes (ref)

Methodology
I used the data from Spawning Tool to generate all of these statistics. Notably, replays for WCS 2013 season 3 and the current WCS season have not been released, so those are not included in the current sample. Some players have more data from other recent tournaments, whereas others may be based on older data with different play styles.

If you get chance, please poke around with the data on Spawning Tool and share any other interesting trends you find!

IEM Katowice PvT Blink: 64%. PvT Overall: 61%, a game theoretic analysis

2 weeks ago, IEM Katowice showed off some sick games. My favorite was sOs’s Phoenix into Colossi into Carriers on Alterzim Stronghold, but the biggest news apparently was Blink Stalkers in PvT. After several crushing games by HerO and sOs, it really looked like Blink was imbalanced in this matchup. The most insightful analysis I saw was from bwindley, and now I have had a chance to label data and crunch numbers, here’s my take on the situation with a few numbers, a little analysis, and some game theory.

The easiest point to make here is the raw win rates. In 33 PvTs, Protoss went Blink Stalkers in 11 of them. The overall PvT win rate was 20-13 for 61% (ref). In games where Protoss went Blink, the win rate was 7-4 for 64% (ref).

For comparison, in Spawning Tool, the overall PvT win rate is 804-767 for 51% (ref). In games where Protoss researched Blink before 6:00, the win rate is 71-58 for 55% (ref).

So Blink wins slightly more than normal, but it’s pretty dang close. One would hope that different strategies would have different win rates, or else the meta-game had stagnated as no strategy would confer an advantage over any other (more on this below). Continue reading

In-game scorekeeping for StarCraft?

So far, Blizzard has given the community amazing tools for doing replay analysis, and the community has compiled a lot of stats and built services to work with that data. Even so, I think there’s a gap in levels of analysis. At the top, we have aligulac, which compiles win-loss data into accessible predictions but doesn’t give much insight into a playstyle or why the data is the way it is. At the bottom, we have ggtracker, which provides graphs and data for individual games and can compile stats from low-level mechanics in games, but is missing higher-level analysis.

In-between is where I think theorycrafting reigns: strategy. What build orders work against what? Which players are the best at worker harass? Who has the best forcefield placement? These details lie below win-loss analysis, and although these may be extractable from the replay data, this analysis requires some qualitative analysis to determine what constitutes specific tactics or plays. Even the best machine learning techniques (supervised learning) require labeled examples to learn from. Continue reading

“How important is having a supply advantage?” continued

A week and a half ago, I slapped together some graphs about the importance of supply differences and posted it to reddit. There were a ton of very thoughtful comments from the community, some of which I riffed on to create more graphs and investigate more of the data. This post is a summary of the rest of what I found, with all data available in this spreadsheet.

Win Rates by Supply Difference

The first graph shows the global win rates and win rates in mirror matchups given certain supplies. The most direct way to use the data is to observe a game and point back to the graph at any time to figure out how much of an edge someone has. Continue reading

Explanation of win rates by supply difference

Casters use a lot of different information to make predictions and analyze the state of a game of StarCraft 2. One often used stat is supply difference: if player A has 120 supply and player B has 100 supply, we might say that player A has a 20 supply advantage. I wanted to determine how important a supply advantage is by looking a lot of data and seeing what a player’s win percentage is given a certain supply advantage.

Results and Discussion*

Win Rates by Supply Difference

You can view the original data at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjlUNdJN-kiedFc5QkZxRVRoUHBWNGRCUUVjOGFmVUE&usp=sharing Continue reading

Spawning Tool update after a hiatus

Sorry things have gone silent on Spawning Tool recently. Various personal factors (some mentioned in my personal blog) took precedence over Spawning Tool, but I’m somewhat back now. Although most things tend to slow down around the holiday season, I’ll be trying to ramp up as I find more free time to be working on it. As such, I have a few different updates. Continue reading

Reviewing stats from Blizzcon yesterday

Unfortunately, I didn’t actually get to watch any of the WCS Grand Finals at Blizzcon yesterday. Thankfully, there are VODs (stream 1, stream 2) for me to leaf through, so I’m watching just enough of the games to evaluate my predictions. Let’s see how those turned out

SoulKey (Z) v. NaNiwa (P)

I predicted that SoulKey would play a lot of different strategies. He used a 9 Pool, Hatch first into Roach Hydra, a Pool double expand into defense, and then another 9 Pool. That’s quite varied.

Bomber (T) v. MMA (T) Continue reading

Stats for the BlizzCon round of 16 matchups

Over the past week and a half, I have been going through games from the BlizzCon round of 16 players and tweeting out interesting things that I have found by going through the Spawning Tool research page. I just posted a summary of that to TL. That’s reproduced below for your convenience.

BlizzCon is approaching, and there are some pretty amazing match-ups in the round of 16. In anticipation of that, I went through each player’s history in the match-up to see there were any interesting statistics that came out of it. Here’s what I came up with (methodology at the bottom):

SoulKey (Z) v. NaNiwa (P)

  • SoulKey does a little of everything in this matchup. Just check out the tags (ref)

Bomber (T) v. MMA (T)

  • Expect Banshees. They both open Banshees in ~45% of TvT games (ref 1)(ref 2)
  • MMA plays a very Marine-heavy bio in TvT. He made ~80% more Marines on his opponents and went bio in 10/13 games (ref)

HerO (P) v sOs (P)

  • They before in the WCS season 1 finals. They games were really cheesy (ref)
  • HerO likes early Stalkers in PvP, making ~50% more in the first 10 minutes than his opponent (ref)

Polt (T) v. aLive (T)

  • They played in season 1. aLive won 2-1 (ref)
  • By the unit counts, Polt’s TvT looks remarkably normal. One thing is that he doesn’t really play mech much (ref)
  • aLive doesn’t 1 rax expand much in TvT. He does, however, really like to open 1/1/1 into some nifty tech (ref)

Dear (P) v. TaeJa (T)

  • In TvP, TaeJa is 32-2 in games less 25 minutes and 2-5 in games longer than 25 minutes. I guess the strategy is to wear out his wrists (ref)
  • TaeJa also scans on average 2 more times per game (MULEs 2 less times) than other WCS TvZ players. I think this is attributed to his eagle eye in sniping Observers (ref 1)(ref 2)

Jaedong (Z) v. Mvp (T)

  • In ZvT, Jaedong is 11-4 in games less than 20 minutes and 4-17 in games longer than 20 minutes. I think there’s some bias in the quality of the opponents, but that’s still pretty striking (ref)
  • In comparison, Mvp is 8-5 in TvZ longer than 20 minutes, and 62% of his games went that long. (ref)

Maru (T) v. MC (P)

  • Maru could use anything. In 11 games, he went proxy 2 rax twice, 1/1/1 twice, 14 CC 3 times, and 1 rax expand in 4 games. This guy knows how to mix it up (ref)
  • MC has a strange win rate in TvP: he’s 5-0 in games less than 12 minutes, 1-3 in games 12-16 minutes, and 5-3 in games longer than 16 minutes. Looking at the games, he wins fast with cheese in a lot of games, loses mid-length games after failed cheese (usually Oracles), and then does okay in long games (ref)

INnoVation (T) v. duckdeok (P)

  • The only INnoVation TvP games I have are the season 1 finals against sOs. Here’s the link for fun (ref)
  • duckdeok plays REALLY short TvPs. None of 8 games went longer than 20 minutes (ref)

Methodology

I used Spawning Tool for all of these stats. For each, player, I pulled up all of their games in the relevant matchup and, if feasible, looked at the builds (and some replays in ambiguous cases) to determine what builds they used. If you’re interested, I recommend you also play around with the system to see if you can find anything interesting in the data as well.

The replays are largely from major tournament over the past 6 months or so. The data may skewed for 2 major reasons. First, WCS season 3 replays have not been released and are not in the data. Second, WCS season 1 replays are pre-Hellbat nerd. Of course, the usual disclaimer is that players do change styles.

These stats originally appeared on twitter @spawningtool.

And the pitch: the site is only as good as the data, so if you have replays, please upload them! Also, if you’re interested in labeling replays or have ideas for features, PM me or tweet at me. And to stay updated, follow me on twitter @spawningtool. I’ll try to put more stats out as we find out what the match ups for the later rounds are

Hierarchical tags for Spawning Tool

I just deployed one of the most exciting Spawning Pool updates ever. Well, most exciting to me, that is: hierarchical tags. Previously, to tag something on Spawning Tool, there were a few heuristics applied to the replays on upload, but the rest were manual tagging of categories and tags. Now, there is structure behind the tags so that a whole tree of tags can be applied when you apply only a single one. This is probably best explained by example.

The primary use case for this feature is build orders. Let’s say you open “15 Hatch, 17 Pool”. That itself is a tag. This build, however, is also a “Hatch First” build as well as a “Fast Expand” build. Previously, you would need to enter all 3 of these tags to get the replay to appear under all 3 types, and if you uploaded another “15 Hatch, 17 Pool”, you would have to do the work all again. Now, the backend knows the structure that “15 Hatch, 17 Pool” is a type of “Hatch First” build, so it will implicitly label the build for browsing. Check out http://spawningtool.com/replays/?tag=309 to see it in action. Continue reading

Follow me on twitter, @spawningtool

Quick update on Spawning Tool progress.

Sorry that actual development of the site has been slow recently. There are various factors, but the most important one is that I have been having a lot of forearm soreness recently, so I’m trying to let my hands rest. I readjusted my desk both at work and at home, and I’m stretching regularly over the course of the day. I think it’s working, and I plan to get back into serious development next week.

To stay active, though, I have made a big push recently towards marketing and content. I posted an official TeamLiquid thread for Spawning Tool. It’s decayed a bit, and I’m not really sure what the proper etiquette is for appropriate bumping, but I guess I’ll learn soon.

I’m also tweeting from @spawningtool. Again, I don’t really use my personal twitter account, so I’m not really sure what the proper etiquette is here, but I’ll try to avoid major gaffes. My plan is to regularly tweet interesting stats derived from replay data as a proof of concept for the site. Follow me on twitter if you’re interested in that. Continue reading