CoG 2020 - race balance
I parsed the tournament manager’s detailed results log (text file of 5601 lines for 5600 games plus one header line) from CoG 2020 with my own software. Here is a crosstable which exactly matches the official results.
| overall | Star | Purp | Bana | Beta | Micr | XIAO | McRa | Meta | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stardust | 1223/1396 87.61% | 171/199 86% | 126/199 63% | 153/200 76% | 193/200 96% | 190/200 95% | 193/200 96% | 197/198 99% | |
| PurpleWave | 990/1398 70.82% | 28/199 14% | 83/200 42% | 140/200 70% | 168/200 84% | 199/200 100% | 177/200 88% | 195/199 98% | |
| BananaBrain | 971/1393 69.71% | 73/199 37% | 117/200 58% | 134/200 67% | 148/200 74% | 195/200 98% | 128/200 64% | 176/194 91% | |
| BetaStar | 718/1388 51.73% | 47/200 24% | 60/200 30% | 66/200 33% | 142/200 71% | 93/200 46% | 141/200 70% | 169/188 90% | |
| Microwave | 568/1400 40.57% | 7/200 4% | 32/200 16% | 52/200 26% | 58/200 29% | 163/200 82% | 83/200 42% | 173/200 86% | |
| XIAOYI | 512/1400 36.57% | 10/200 5% | 1/200 0% | 5/200 2% | 107/200 54% | 37/200 18% | 199/200 100% | 153/200 76% | |
| McRave | 443/1400 31.64% | 7/200 4% | 23/200 12% | 72/200 36% | 59/200 30% | 117/200 58% | 1/200 0% | 164/200 82% | |
| MetaBot | 152/1379 11.02% | 1/198 1% | 4/199 2% | 18/194 9% | 19/188 10% | 27/200 14% | 47/200 24% | 36/200 18% |
As usual, the results file is somehow different in every tournament. I got this table by excluding the 23 games in which the loser’s score is given as -1. 22 of these games are reported in the detailed results text file as NORMAL game end type, and in the HTML detailed results as NO_REPORT. It bothers me that the two sources do not match. The Starcraft AI Ladder documentation on game end states says “this could be caused by the Tournament Manager client crashing, or a network error, etc.” so it’s correct to exclude these games. The remaining game shows GAME_STATE_NEVER_DETECTED, where apparently neither side was able to start. The NO_REPORT results are not necessarily the fault of the bot, but in fact 2 of the games had Stardust as loser and the other 21 had MetaBot, so there is a strong correlation.
Here are the versus-race results. They are strongly skewed by protoss dominance, and of course there is only one terran participant. So these numbers are not much use.
| bot | race | overall | vT | vP | vZ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stardust | protoss | 87.61% | 95% | 81% | 96% |
| PurpleWave | protoss | 70.82% | 100% | 56% | 86% |
| BananaBrain | protoss | 69.71% | 98% | 63% | 69% |
| BetaStar | protoss | 51.73% | 46% | 43% | 71% |
| Microwave | zerg | 40.57% | 82% | 32% | 42% |
| XIAOYI | terran | 36.57% | - | 28% | 59% |
| McRave | zerg | 31.64% | 0% | 32% | 58% |
| MetaBot | protoss | 11.02% | 24% | 5% | 16% |
Next: Maps per player, in the same format as this post on AIIDE 2019. I need some updates to my software first.
Trackbacks
No Trackbacks
Comments