Terra Therma – Detailed Terrain Map

This should help speed along the learning process with the new map.

 

Textured map with Conquest points

Pseudo topographical map (lighter = higher terrain)

 

– Neon green = impassable terrain; hard, tall cover

– Pale green = ledges, one-way terrain, plateaus

– Grey = structures and platforms

– Orange = the floor is lava!

 

Fwiw, here’s one for Forest Colony as well that I made ages ago and never posted.

In-Depth Stats Analysis From QP Leaderboard Season 2

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GH1X96GWcteoBN8bmYSbiIt1CeHmuBYGmfXn_CDiUxM/edit#gid=1246543983

If you’re new to Google Sheets, don’t forget that there are multiple sheets in the document – access via the tabs along the bottom.

Thanks to u/kyborgi for pulling this data off of the source page on the MWO site.

 


Overview – this sheet is just the raw totals for each weight class (including Global). On average, every stat in the game favours more tonnage… … …well, except for death rate (because lights are irritatingly fast and hard to kill), and consequently tie rate (because lights are more likely to drag a match out to a tie.) I’m puzzled by the fact that the global WLR is not 1.00 – in fact there are 8,889 more wins than losses. And this is global – so it’s a closed system, taken from a frozen period of time, it’s not like the data was being collected while matches were still being played and added to the database. My only guess is that disconnects (specifically, zero-pingers) don’t get entered into the database. This may be a bug, or may be intentional.

 

All of the remaining charts are of the “Top N%” kind. Basically, you can read them as “N% of players have at least this.” For instance, only 1% of light mech pilots hit at least 306 match score on average, while 50% of lights only hit at least 169 match score on average. Along the bottom is the average overall (this is not the same as the 50th percentile, because median does not equal average). Also, these will all be excluding data from players with fewer than 30 matches played, because that data tends to be unreliable for this kind of analysis.

 

Match Score – for each percentile, always assault > heavy > medium > light. You can see the further down you go into potatoland, the greener the heavies are and redder the mediums are, which indicates to me that the further you go down in skill level, the more high tonnage dominates. But perhaps more interesting is the standard deviation. While I don’t have it there on the sheet, the standard deviations were largest at the top and bottom percentiles, and smallest right at the median. There’s room for interpretation here.

 

KDR – more tonnage almost universally has higher kill/death ratios. Except apparently among the very highest performing players. As you get closer to the very top players, the trend starts to shift toward lights having the best KDRs and heavies having the worst. I was curious if the trend continued onward until assaults were ultimately the worst performing class at the top, but instead I found this interesting symmetrical pattern, where lights are only the best in KDR among the top 3% of pilots, and it veers back toward assaults again toward the top 0.5%. Cool.

 

Kill rate – pretty much the same as KDR

 

Death rate – what a clear distinction here. About 50% of pilots die the most in light mechs, but the other 50% die the least in light mechs. I guess the take away from this is that… half the players in the game are terrible at lights, while the other half actually gets it. Assaults die the most, almost universally, and heavies are the most survivable among the bottom 50% of players.

 

WLR – lights are bad at winning games. Hands down, at all skill levels, no exceptions. I was honestly surprised at how ubiquitous this was. In fact, I’m probably gonna go back and redo this set of calculations just to make sure I didn’t pants-on-head something. Check back later if you’re interested, I’ll leave a note here.

 

Matches Played – heavier = more play time, universally. The average pilot only plays about 80 matches per month. 25% of pilots play 100 matches or more per month. Obviously, I didn’t filter this to players with >30 matches like I did for all the other charts.

 

 

Steam Stats – 

http://steamspy.com/app/342200

  • People who have played MWO on Steam: 485,441 ± 17,951
  • Steam players in the past two weeks: 28,719 ± 4,369
  • Actual MWO players in the past two weeks: ~38,382

My guess is that at least ~70% of MWO players use the Steam client and ~30% or fewer use the standalone client without Steam. This is some super rough guesswork. But hey, can’t be too incredibly far off.

MechWarrior Online: All Leaderboard Event Stats circa 9/29/2016

gmlwry2

I was starting to think we’d never get a heavy mech leaderboard, and that my little collection of leaderboard stats posts would forever have a gaping void. But alas, much to the matchmaker’s dismay, we got the final piece of the puzzle.

 

The above image shows the table sorted by average score. If you’d like to see the table sorted in other manners, see below:

Yes, those are just two tabs in the same document. And there’s other tabs if you’re feeling particularly nosey.

 

 


What is this “normalised by tonnage” jazz anyways?

This means 20 tons = 100 tons. How I do this is plot out all the data points on a graph,

… and then I just level it off. This is done by applying a formula to all scores, (score × inverse tonnage) + (score ÷ some arbitrary weighting factor) … The resultant scores represent nothing on their own (it’s not as simple as score÷tonnage or anything like that), it is only the relationship between the scores that actually matters. Here is the result:

You can see there how the red trend line now lays nearly flat. I opted to leave it banking a little upward toward the assault side of things. The “arbitrary weighting factor” is just a number I pick that makes the trend line roughly level, and the value is entirely dependent upon the data collected (because all sets of data will have a different trend line that requires a different amount of slope correction to be made level).

 


Special note:

  • The light mech leaderboard ran for 7 days.
  • The medium mech leaderboard ran for 5 days.
  • The heavy mech (+NTG) leaderboard ran for 6 days.
  • The assault mech leaderboard ran for 6 days.
  • The Viper leaderboard ran for 8 days.
  • The Cyclops leaderboard ran for 7 days.

The Viper, Cyclops, and Night Gyr were the only three mechs that didn’t have a “chassis” leaderboard, but were rather broken up into individual “variant” leaderboards. What I did was take the top 75 scores across all variants and use that as my data for these two chassis. Also, I used the Viper data from the 7th day, and the Cyclops data from the 6th day, so NOT the final event scores for those chassis. This is closer to fair because their events lasted longer and they would have otherwise had more time to farm scores up. It’s perhaps worth noting that “omg, but the Night Gyr scores are so high because of this, it’s basically cherry picked!” … no, not really. Because I did the same thing for the Viper and the Viper had abysmal scores, lol. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)


 

EXTRA!

There was an event that I missed – I forgot to post it to Reddit. But you can see it here: Weight Of The World Leaderboard STATS

Now here’s a little bonus. The final rank of each chassis from all of the chassis leaderboard events compared with the final rank of each chassis that made it onto the Weight Of The World event, all sorted by the average of everything: