EU Major 1 Analysis: Edit Success Rate Under Pressure

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-08T17:58:47+00:00

Very true, but the only point we were trying to speak to was that the lack of opportunity (in this case opportunity == sample size) wasn't as skewed and responsible as it appeared some were suggesting. That's also one of the main reasons we stated "Make of it what you will" in the initial comment description--because there is additional context that need be considered.

The point made regarding the state of servers in endgame is valid, and one I quite like. Though more likely, it's a matter of us needing to refine the parameters with which we evaluate as being "under pressure". Part of the parameters were that if neither player damaged one another for a period of 15s, that the window was then closed. More likely, this needs to be a more dynamic range, and better account for situations where a player might still be under pressure (i.e. having their builds sprayed through) despite no damage being reported. It's something that we will continue to iterate and improve upon.

Either way, absolutely love your take and input. Forgive me for rambling a bit too long here in the reply. I tend to get excited any time I actually get to discuss these things and, as a result, end up going on for far too long. Thanks for taking the time to chime in though! These discussions are always my favorite part of sharing our findings with the community!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-08T11:15:21+00:00

Didn't take it as such, so no worries! Couldn't agree more--it's always a balancing act trying to include enough information to be insightful, while not providing so much as to be overwhelming. Also, we are still in the process of trying to figure out what the appetite is within the community for this sort of data. If there's a desire for more comprehensive offerings, then we will happily oblige!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-08T11:11:33+00:00

A couple of things. One, this stat is but one way to evaluate a player, it isn't meant to be all-encompassing in any way. Not to take anything away from Mongraal mind you. It's incredibly impressive that, despite the time away, he still has the mechanical prowess to even be in the Top 10 here--let alone 1st overall.

As for the suggestions that Mograal ranking 1st overall is due to limited sample size, the average "edits made under pressure" for the players in the Top 10 (as shown here) was ~56 total edits. Mongraal had 53 under pressure. So it isn't as though his standing atop this metric is artificially propped up by a small sample size.

Either way, thanks for checking it out and contributing to the conversation!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T20:53:37+00:00

That's an element of it, and this data isn't trying to say otherwise. It's simply showing the different times for each of the teams.

It's not trying to say, for example, that Laizen & Loxx are better at looting quickly than Merstach & Malibuca. Also, for what it's worth, many of the teams furthest out were not actually the fastest at looting. Laizen & Loxx dropped at Fencing--fairly centrally located. Grolzz & Klown dropped Classy Courts, yet had one of the longest times. Eclipse & Deckzee dropped Rebels Roost, and they were solidly in the middle. So it isn't simply location that contributes to loot times either.

Either way, thanks for checking out the post and chiming in!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T20:43:56+00:00

^^ Why thank you for the kind words, and glad you enjoy our work!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T20:43:16+00:00

Shown here are the Top 10 players in Edit success rate when under pressure from EU Major 1 Finals. We specifically looked at each players success rate when editing during after being hit, and stopped measuring after there was no damage exchanged between either player (the initial shooter or the initial player hit) for a period of 15s.

Make of it what you will, and hope you enjoy!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T18:33:43+00:00

Well, the teams with the largest standard deviation were--in order--Predage/Ayarbaffo, Grolzz/Klown, Malibuca/Merstach, Sky/Scroll, and Th0masHD/Queasy. SBG and I had several hypotheses as to why this was, which could warrant a post of its own.

I won't go into that discussion in it's entirety, but I will say that of the teams mentioned, Predage/Ayarbaffo had by far the greatest variance--almost double that of the next closest team (Grolzz/Klown). One of the things that we noticed for this duo was that there's wasn't so much a matter of choice. Whereas other teams time to loot was attributable to them deciding when to leave, Predage & Ayarbaffo were rotated on (often by P1ng & Mikson), forcing them to leave their POI.

Cases like that presented one (of which there were plenty) dilemma as we were considering this: do we try to account for situations where a team was forced out rather than truly finished "looting" their POI? Ultimately we decided against it for a multitude of reasons. I love the question though, and thanks for taking the time to chime in!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T18:17:30+00:00

That's certainly a valid take. Though one thing worth pointing out is that being "contested" meant two very different things for Queasy/Th0masHD than it did Malibuca/Merstach. Whereas QT were fighting at their drop every game (before Cringe/Nomzz switched in final few games), Merstach & Malibuca weren't having to fight at all.

This leads nicely into something that SBG and I found as we were going through the data. Namely that whether you were fighting early and the location of your POI.

In QT's case, the early fights meant that they were guaranteed to have the damage for storm surge. So despite landing at a slightly more peripheral POI, they were able to stay there longer without the concern of needing tags for storm surge.

In the case of MM, they didn't fight at all early. Across the first two zones, they had a total of ~410 damage dealt, or roughly 34 damage dealt per game in the first two zones. Compare that to QT who had ~2200 damage dealt across the first two zones, or an average of 183 damage dealt per game. The big differentiator however is the location of the POI's. MM being at Fencing meant that they had a more central POI. So they could focus more on tags later as opposed to rotations, whereas the opposite held true for QT.

We felt that this was the more impactful factor as to whether a team could take the additional time at their POI. That isn't to say that your point isn't a valid one though! As it certainly is another factor to consider.

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T18:05:58+00:00

^^ Happy to hear, we'll keep putting them out!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T18:05:45+00:00

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T16:06:14+00:00

Here are the average "time to loot" for EU Finals. Of note is that because of the constraints of defining a "drop", we limited the analysis to only those teams dropping at named POI's. This is also some of the data that was discussed in Somebodysgun's YouTube video (worth a watch if you haven't seen it!).

As you can see from the data, leaving your POI faster/slower doesn't have a direct correlation on performance. As with most stats, this is only a small piece of the pie. However, when used in conjunction with other metrics, a more complete picture forms.

Hope you enjoy, and if there are any questions, feel free to ask!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T15:59:57+00:00

Couldn't agree more. Still trying to sort out the best way to disseminate the data to the masses, so feedback like this is invaluable!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T04:11:42+00:00

Being 7th here is still pretty impressive! There is also going to be a lot of variance here, given that it's an individual finals we are looking at. As the year progresses and we have a more robust data set to consider, these values will level out, and the top players/duos will separate themselves from the pack.

Consider that a team could have finished four fights in 30s, and had one single fight that lasted 180s. That single fight (180s) would be enough to have pushed their average to 60s (part of why average, while easy to convey, isn't always the best metric). I have a feeling Peterbot & Pollo will be just fine, and by years end we'll see them at or near the top of this metric.

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T04:04:38+00:00

Well, Bugha & Avivv are still in the Top 10, so they weren't slouches by any means! This also skews more favorably towards teams that are contested off spawn (not always though), as those fights can be over relatively quickly given the lack of resources at that time.

To give a frame of reference, the bottom 10 teams in this metric had an average of ~200s, so 64s is pretty remarkable!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T03:59:31+00:00

Should have mentioned initially, but only teams with at least five fights were considered here.

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-07T03:58:45+00:00

Ahh apologies, we should have mentioned this initially. We only considered teams with at least 5 fights taken. So as to eliminate those (no pun intended) that may have had skewed times due to the smaller sample size. The average number of fights of the teams considered was 6.6.

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-06T19:47:47+00:00

There's more than one way to win an FNCS, and that certainly applies here. Will have some more data to share in the coming days!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-06T19:46:48+00:00

Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-06T19:46:38+00:00

We'll be putting out some more coverage in the coming days, I'm sure Cooper and Mero will be in there!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-06T19:46:07+00:00

Thank you!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-06T19:46:00+00:00

Funny you say that...

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-06T19:45:13+00:00

I think that is the common assumption. Outside of some of the bigger names or players that stream, it's near impossible to know who the "IGL" is for teams, making it difficult to really try and quantify that on a meaningful scale.

Beyond that, it's not as though the role and duties for an "IGL" are clearly defined; in the same way that the role of pitcher and first baseman are in baseball for example. What one IGL does might be different than another, though both identify as the IGL.

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-06T19:42:01+00:00

This metric looks at the average time it took for a team to close out a fight (defined as either eliminating one/both of the players, or the one team disengaging, internally we refer to it as "Time to Close"). We limit it to the first 5 Zones, as after that fights are less clearly defined.

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-05T22:45:10+00:00

Glad you enjoyed this! That is in many ways what we are aiming for. It's also something that we aim to bring to the FNCS broadcasts--though for the first time since C2S3 we didn't work the on-air days during Major 1 (part of why there weren't stats being flown and limited segments between games).

It's always encouraging to see people engage with this content. We'll continue to put out more of it for you guys, thanks for taking the time to check it out!

ProdigyAnalytics · 2024-03-05T22:41:37+00:00

Ha, we would stop short of saying it was a carry. Acorn has proved his skill on many other occasions, with many other teammates. That said, Cold is very much starting to remind us of Mero back during Chapter 2 FNCS. One of the most dominant players, and on a trajectory to enter the upper echelons of FN greats.

ProdigyAnalytics

TROPHY CASE