Teapot Tournament Stats

[bethekey.8314]

https://imgur.com/a/j6kel0Z

Amused by how kitten GW2 PvP metas are and have been, I decided to track both EU and NA stats from Teapot's tournament today. I know it's not the perfect analysis, but I think some may find it interesting.

EU

- Data was collected from 22 games.

- Every class used their EoD elite specialization for the most part.

- There wasn't a single Warrior, Mesmer, or Engineer in the majority of games.

- When played, there was only 1 Warrior, Mesmer, or Engineer per game and they typically lost.

- On average, 2 Necromancers and 4 Guardians were present in every game.

- Guardians always occupied a DPS (Willbender) and support (Core) role. Their high #s per game, win rate, and appearance rate suggest they are best in slot for both roles.

- When played, EU Warriors are as good as Guardians.

- Thieves, Rangers, and Revenants typically made up the two remaining spots on teams.

- Thieves and Revenants have much higher win rates than Rangers.

- Elementalists appeared in the majority of games, but tied Engineers and Mesmers for the lowest win rate of all.

NA

- Data was collected from 18 games.

- EoD elite specializations were the most common, with Engineer (Holosmith, Scrapper), Elementalist (Tempest), and Mesmer (Chrono, Mirage) being exceptions.

- There wasn't a single Mesmer, Warrior, Ranger, Engineer, or Elementalist in the majority of games.

- When played, there was only 1 Mesmer, Warrior, Ranger, or Engineer per game. They ALWAYS lost, except for Ranger.

- On average, 2 Necromancers and 4 Guardians were present in every game.

- Guardians remained BIS for DPS and Support.

- When played, NA Warriors aren't as good as Guardians.

- Thieves and Revenants typically made up the remaining team spots. NA was not as baited by Boyce's Ranger.

[Tralse.1982]

Thank you for compiling these stats, good to have it put together.

That goes with what I have seen. From my (granted, relatively little) experience of PvP in the current seasons you win pretty much based on this: Which team has more Necros and/or Guardians? Does your team have more? You won. Congrats. If both teams have equal, then its down to which teams necro/guardian plays better, that determines it. 

In the roughly 50 games I've played over the last 2 ranked seasons, this has held almost 100% true (mostly for Harb classes, I don't have as much info for the Willbender, but it's looking to be the same)

[Kuma.1503]

Anet: So what you're saying is nerf core engi?

[semak.7481]

3 hours ago, Kuma.1503 said:

Anet: So what you're saying is nerf core engi ,mesmer, warrior?

Fixed

[Hotride.2187]

8 hours ago, bethekey.8314 said:

- On average, 2 Necromancers and 4 Guardians were present in every game.

Woah eod drop sure has shaken up the meta. Used to be 4 necros and 2 guards per game.

[TrollingDemigod.3041]

Is it me or that link doesn't work?
What I can say here though? Looks balanced since HoT release. :')

[Bale.3851]

Isnt the data provided kinda useless? I mean the number of games is so low that on EU the win rate of warrior and guard is the same. Which suggests that war is in the same state as guard. Followed by necro, thief and rev. Even if you consider the total play rates of each class it looks like thief, rev and necro are nearly equally effective on EU.

 

Is there a way to get more data? Cause statistically this sample is nearly useless. Its a sample which fullfills the the necessary condition but not the sufficient one to draw a sound conclusion. So more data is needed.

E.g. a conclusion could be to nerf guard, necro, thief and rev (maybe even warrior) or to buff mesmer ingi with no changes to ranger. The fault tolerance is to high.

Edited May 22, 2022 by Bale.3851

[Loboling.5293]

In think it's about time we nerf lava font again. And double the duration the meteors fall, same damage...

 

Warrior needs more stationary attack skills.

 

Mesmer should get 50 endurance back on mirage, but dodging costs are doubled.

 

Engineer needs to have bomb kit 4 changed from a smoke field to a chaos field. To indicate how chaotic it is to play kits...

 

There, balance!

 

 

Ps: also doubling the damage from guardian gs2 and harbinger shroud two skills.🙂

[Stand The Wall.6987]

buff shatterstone

[bethekey.8314]

8 hours ago, Kuma.1503 said:

Anet: So what you're saying is nerf core engi?

 

5 hours ago, semak.7481 said:

Anet: So what you're saying is nerf core engi ,mesmer, warrior?

Yeah, basically.

I'm not sure if Core Mesmer / Warrior were as targeted as Core Engi for nerfs when their respective Elite specs were overperforming. But best nerf them anyway to be sure.

[bethekey.8314]

1 hour ago, Bale.3851 said:

Isnt the data provided kinda useless? I mean the number of games is so low that on EU the win rate of warrior and guard is the same. Which suggests that war is in the same state as guard. Followed by necro, thief and rev. Even if you consider the total play rates of each class it looks like thief, rev and necro are nearly equally effective on EU.

 

Is there a way to get more data? Cause statistically this sample is nearly useless. Its a sample which fullfills the the necessary condition but not the sufficient one to draw a sound conclusion. So more data is needed.

E.g. a conclusion could be to nerf guard, necro, thief and rev (maybe even warrior) or to buff mesmer ingi with no changes to ranger. The fault tolerance is to high.

I agree that more data would be helpful, but the overarching trends are already clear. Saying it's useless is a bit harsh.

Warriors win rate is a silly result of it being played once and winning.

Also, while it is ~20 games of data, that's ~200 characters. That's a decent sample size for what people choose to pick in a tournament setting. Win rate could definitely use more data though.

Edited May 22, 2022 by bethekey.8314

[Lighter.5631]

- When played, EU Warriors are as good as Guardians.

i'm not sure what this is implying, you mean player skills, or class efficiency?

[Crab Fear.8623]

32 minutes ago, Lighter.5631 said:

- When played, EU Warriors are as good as Guardians.

i'm not sure what this is implying, you mean player skills, or class efficiency?

 

EU warriors are better than NA warriors.

[Lighter.5631]

3 minutes ago, Crab Fear.8623 said:

 

EU warriors are better than NA warriors.

still doesn't explain the relation to guardian.

and i'm sure it's common knowledge that EU players are better in a general sense

Edited May 22, 2022 by Lighter.5631

[Crab Fear.8623]

9 minutes ago, Lighter.5631 said:

still doesn't explain the relation to guardian.

and i'm sure it's common knowledge that EU players are better in a general sense

It was the win rate.

But, it was dishonest to compare because 1 game is hard to generate a "rate" from.

[Kuya.6495]

The problem with the stat of guardian representation is also that when when a team didn't play a willbender, there was always a core guard. In fact, i think the only time there wasn't a core guard was when a team went full dps and took no supports. 

[Shao.7236]

They can beat the dead horse that Revenant is, when Bunker is the only viable solution in the spamtastic meta we have, I couldn't care less for trying. I know they won't take the time to fine tune anything. EoD really slowed down the game with the over abundance of soft CC, to think having merely 12 seconds total of weakness was enough to have players complain at me, guess they forgot about the triple amount that was just introduced with the new content.

[Paradoxoglanis.1904]

1 hour ago, Shao.7236 said:

They can beat the dead horse that Revenant is, when Bunker is the only viable solution in the spamtastic meta we have, I couldn't care less for trying. I know they won't take the time to fine tune anything. EoD really slowed down the game with the over abundance of soft CC, to think having merely 12 seconds total of weakness was enough to have players complain at me, guess they forgot about the triple amount that was just introduced with the new content.

"bunker vindicator" with jalis and retribution does as much damage as shrio herald...

[ArthurDent.9538]

36 minutes ago, Paradoxoglanis.1904 said:

"bunker vindicator" with jalis and retribution does as much damage as shrio herald...

 

Not even close, there's a reason why basically everything was able to stalemate the actual bunker vindicators in the tourney today including specters and a zerk herald which had no trouble doing so where as pre EoD duelists like core ranger and fire weaver would make mince meat of a herald and force them to run for their life in under a minute at most. You are probably getting rekt by more offensive variants and not picking up on it as vindi does have a fairly large amount of build flexibility at the moment as we saw in the EU open bracket.

[otto.5684]

17 hours ago, Bale.3851 said:

Isnt the data provided kinda useless? I mean the number of games is so low that on EU the win rate of warrior and guard is the same. Which suggests that war is in the same state as guard. Followed by necro, thief and rev. Even if you consider the total play rates of each class it looks like thief, rev and necro are nearly equally effective on EU.

 

Is there a way to get more data? Cause statistically this sample is nearly useless. Its a sample which fullfills the the necessary condition but not the sufficient one to draw a sound conclusion. So more data is needed.

E.g. a conclusion could be to nerf guard, necro, thief and rev (maybe even warrior) or to buff mesmer ingi with no changes to ranger. The fault tolerance is to high.

I would generally agree, however, in this is case you are absolutely wrong. This is not a population of Timmies. This is a population of most of the best PvP players. If all the most skilled players avoid certain classes/builds, it is extremely dumb to shrug this off as inconclusive sample.

[otto.5684]

14 hours ago, Kuya.6495 said:

The problem with the stat of guardian representation is also that when when a team didn't play a willbender, there was always a core guard. In fact, i think the only time there wasn't a core guard was when a team went full dps and took no supports. 

I think there is a PvP balance issue where all supports, but guardian, are dead. Most teams run at 1 core support guardian. This is surely increasing the number  of guardians compared to any other class. It would be interesting to see how WB stacks against other dps. I would say we need more supports. The issue is pre EoD the meta was so kittening tanky and the game pace slower than a dial connection. 
 

As for the balance, ya, it is kitten. Most PoF elites were way over nerfed. HoT elites are not fairing much better. Core is nearly out of the meta, barring guardian. It would be nice to see PoF, HoT and core get buffed. And we could start seeing various supports. But CMC only knows one thing. Nerf it until it is no longer viable. Undead meta coming back very soon. 

[greedywholesome.9081]

On 5/22/2022 at 10:16 AM, bethekey.8314 said:

https://imgur.com/a/j6kel0Z

Amused by how kitten GW2 PvP metas are and have been, I decided to track both EU and NA stats from Teapot's tournament today. I know it's not the perfect analysis, but I think some may find it interesting.

EU

- Data was collected from 22 games.

- Every class used their EoD elite specialization for the most part.

- There wasn't a single Warrior, Mesmer, or Engineer in the majority of games.

- When played, there was only 1 Warrior, Mesmer, or Engineer per game and they typically lost.

- On average, 2 Necromancers and 4 Guardians were present in every game.

- Guardians always occupied a DPS (Willbender) and support (Core) role. Their high #s per game, win rate, and appearance rate suggest they are best in slot for both roles.

- When played, EU Warriors are as good as Guardians.

- Thieves, Rangers, and Revenants typically made up the two remaining spots on teams.

- Thieves and Revenants have much higher win rates than Rangers.

- Elementalists appeared in the majority of games, but tied Engineers and Mesmers for the lowest win rate of all.

NA

- Data was collected from 18 games.

- EoD elite specializations were the most common, with Engineer (Holosmith, Scrapper), Elementalist (Tempest), and Mesmer (Chrono, Mirage) being exceptions.

- There wasn't a single Mesmer, Warrior, Ranger, Engineer, or Elementalist in the majority of games.

- When played, there was only 1 Mesmer, Warrior, Ranger, or Engineer per game. They ALWAYS lost, except for Ranger.

- On average, 2 Necromancers and 4 Guardians were present in every game.

- Guardians remained BIS for DPS and Support.

- When played, NA Warriors aren't as good as Guardians.

- Thieves and Revenants typically made up the remaining team spots. NA was not as baited by Boyce's Ranger.

 

Appreciate the effort, thanks for compiling this for our reference. 

[Bale.3851]

1 hour ago, otto.5684 said:

I would generally agree, however, in this is case you are absolutely wrong. This is not a population of Timmies. This is a population of most of the best PvP players. If all the most skilled players avoid certain classes/builds, it is extremely dumb to shrug this off as inconclusive sample.

Yeah and this is why this data is even more uncertain. Behind each match is a team. So 5 players who seek to win by choosing the best teamcomp. By taking this stance multiple factors are added to the evaluation like synergy between classes, the purpose of each build (roamer, bruiser, bunker, support), etc. This inflatuates the already poor data even more.

 

I dont deny that you can see a trend. Necro and guard is played often. This is backed by player experience from SPVP. But to deduct more then just some assumption from this specific data is nearly impossible. Its just not enough. This is all im saying. Cause the aim of samples like this is to balance pvp and with this kind of sample you cant.

 

From my personal experience i instantly agree buff core classes espacially mesmer and engi. But generally spoken i know abit about data science and this is not how it works (in this specific case).

[Shao.7236]

7 hours ago, Paradoxoglanis.1904 said:

"bunker vindicator" with jalis and retribution does as much damage as shrio herald...

Look I know that damage is whack, not many asked for it and honestly it doesn't do much against the actual meta specs but it wasn't bunker.

 

When I was fighting you I was quite literally just pure glass and actual able to fight you without having to deal with permanent weakness on me, most of the damage is no difference than Core when I was playing it. Only different is that it's one evade with lots of vul and have access to 25% damage constantly rather than having a below 50% health requirement.

 

Arch skill buffs were rather unecessary where as Treesong healing per condition was the real issue while the amount of condition cleared gave a chance to fight back in the meta. I do not disagree that the sustain health was also busted at the time and still is a lil tid bit.

 

In actual high level gameplay the fights are so BORING and never ending with such a degree of unavoidable debuffs on the new specs. Like said as Rev you're better off just Bunker because none in the specs in the meta that's currently overused allow you to fight back properly, most notably harbinger for the weakness spam and specter with the shroud bugs, mobility and general soft/hard cc spam all over the place.

Edited May 23, 2022 by Shao.7236

[Paradoxoglanis.1904]

8 hours ago, ArthurDent.9538 said:

 

Not even close, there's a reason why basically everything was able to stalemate the actual bunker vindicators in the tourney today including specters and a zerk herald which had no trouble doing so where as pre EoD duelists like core ranger and fire weaver would make mince meat of a herald and force them to run for their life in under a minute at most. You are probably getting rekt by more offensive variants and not picking up on it as vindi does have a fairly large amount of build flexibility at the moment as we saw in the EU open bracket.

You can go zerk and still side node. Once again people look at the tournament finals builds and claim that everything else is useless lol.