Hi, i had some time to kill so i reviewed the last 55 ladder games i played to see if there is any interesting patterns concerning starting picks (only games against 1700+ are taken into account, most game are against 1850-1950)
Obviously the sample is ridiculus so there isn't much to analyse, but its a start. Here are the results





And here is the same data from one of the top players, with the same sample size:



Edited 10/17/2015 14:59:36

Interesting. Thank you for sharing those data.

Did you get that data manually?

You lost with 2,3,6?

bad picking then :P

have to agree with timinator :P

@KKND: Yeah, took me an hour or so. (although i only needed to enter the result of each game in the win&lost columns, the rest filled up automatically)

@Timinator:
No doubt about it. If i remember correctly, the guy triple picked West Russia, wich suprised me because it was not safe at all for triple picking. I had countered WR with 3,4,5, but my 6 was not in the area (to be honest, the 6th pick i usually choose pretty randomly). I ended up with something like Central america, south america and west africa, or west US. Pretty far away from him.

Edited 10/17/2015 13:37:02

I added the data from a top player, but i don't see any major difference in the picking patterns (that we can get from these numbers).

Overall, it seems that most of the games, we end up with 123, 124 or 125, so that could be a good thing to keep in mind while picking.

You lost with 2,3,6?

bad picking then :P

What is the best strategy to choose the 6th pick then?

Who is this top player? Unless you are playing low level u should never get 1 2 3 usually...

Your 6th should counter 5th and 4th pick. Or 1st. But you shouldn t counter your 2nd or 3rd.

Edited 10/17/2015 15:33:50

@gnuffone

well that was also what i was thinking, that i had to much 123. I don't think it would be appropriate to say who the player is, but to his credit, i'd say half of his 123 were triple picks (apparently he is a fan of the boston triple pick)

getting 123 isn't bad. it shouldn't always be necessary to Counter your Opponent. if you got good first 3 picks you're alright

@125ch209, your stats against top players is much better :)

@KKND: not my stats, it is the stats i got from another player

https://www.warlight.net/Forum/96596-analysis-picks-win

oh wow, thank you for that. Do you know how he got his data?

so basically you can say getting 1, 3, 5 is the worst possible outcome. maybe because the 5th was tought as a Counter for 3 and 4 but failed?

yeah, 135 often occurs with a failed attempt to counter 34, at least in my experience (bad counter strategy probably).

ideally 6th pick should be a wasteland that counters the 5th pick

So how would you pick in the current 1vs1 ladder?

In the actual 1vs1 ladder it's much more about countering your opponent. You can calculate exactly how many armies you need to get a bonus and still counter him strong enough. If you get a counter you win