Unpopular Opinion: Rialto

General Discussion
28

Jeff, love when you do these posts.

29

Except you cannot identify who is the Attacker and who is the Defender in a Competitive format, because they switch sides after every round.

In which case, the only stat pool you can pull from IS the Quick Play statistics.

30

Whether you can identify who the attacker and defender is, is of no concern because as you said, the OP was asking about how often does Rialto go to Point C, which, according to the stats, is 49.35% of the time

2 Likes
31

Rialto is an amazing map imo. It’s fun and pretty! :slight_smile:

32

Why should that matter? Imo it’s actually better map design. Payload maps get annoying when it’s so easy to push all 3 points for both teams; games drag on forever. It’s one of the reasons I love rialto cause you can actually defend and games aren’t dragged out forever.

33

I’m not going to deny that a 50/50 is impressive in terms of balance, but that’s not the crux of the argument, and it’s also a completely different format.

  • The win condition in QP is get to point C.

  • The win condition in Comp is push farther than the opposing team at the end of all of the rounds.

And in the Comp format, specifically because of a different win condition, it’s entirely possible that the map has a disproportionate number of rounds ending somewhere BEFORE Point B is captured, compared to any other Payload map.

The win percentage based on Attackers and Defenders doesn’t and could never identify this specific detail.

Gibraltar, Route 66, Junkertown, and Dorado all could (hypothetically) have a 25/25/25/25 split, where Point A is never captured/Point A is captured but Point B isn’t/ Point B is captured but Point C isn’t/Point C is captured.

Rialto, by comparison, could (also hypothetically) have a 33/66/0/0 split on the same “Point A is never captured/Point A is captured but Point B isn’t/ Point B is captured but Point C isn’t/Point C is captured.”

Rialto could also have a 25/75/0/0, or even 0/100/0/0.

We simply cannot know this detail just based on Attacker/Defender win percentages.

Which is why OP said that he/she has noticed that matches seem to never even approach Point C. There’s a perception that Rialto feels different enough from the rest of the payload maps.

It’s entirely possible to have an even 50/50 Attacker Defender winrate, but in Competitive never reach Point C.

2 Likes
34

Destroyed by words

35

This is one of the better maps if you ask me…

2 Likes
36

The stats Jeff provided literally answer that. Attackers win a round (AKA reach point C) 49.35% of the time.

Edit: Wait, are you asking specifically for the stats for competitive mode? In that case, nevermind because Jeff never really specified.

1 Like
37

Is that based on Quick Play (and its overall longer Escort timer)?

I’m not sure how you’d be able to base stats like these on Competitive since the winning conditions are based on both defense and offense so any winning team wins after both defending and attacking.

1 Like
38

Yes, I was asking for Comp stats, and whether or not in Comp, Rialto matches other Payload maps in point capture frequency for Point C.

OP was presumably asking for Comp stats too.

39

The problem though is that in Seoul Dynasty vs LA Gladiators they couldn’t get past the first chokes. THAT is problematic

40

That’s the thing, though. That’s not necessary in comp, you can win without even getting the payload to the first check point. I’m not sure if these percentages could even include competitive.

1 Like
41

From what i understand from the stats, Attackers clear Point C, 49.35% of the time.

In Comp, i think you’re missing one aspect which is:
The 1st round the attackers are trying to clear point C. If the defenders manage to stop it (in 50.65% of the cases), then it becomes a “Who pushed the cart the furthest” game (which i believe would fall under a different statistic).

I would imagine this statistic would account for that aspect.

42

In that case, the percentages would even out to a 50/50:
Defending team wins, attacking team loses.
Attacking team wins, defending team loses.
50% for each.

If the attackers don’t win, but win on the defense, then it’s not a 50/50:
Attacking team loses, defending team wins.
Attacking team loses (AKA doesn’t beat previous attacking team), defending team wins.
In this case, it’s a 0/100.

43

Droppin those bombs of data. Gotta love data.

1 Like
44

You’re assuming that whichever side the team starts out on is what they are categorized into for Attackers/Defenders.

Doing so would just highlight the issue OP suggested even more, because we can’t separate the win/loss from frequency of point captures.

Does Rialto have fewer Point C captures than the other maps?

This question contains the only metric that addresses the perception that the map never surpasses the second choke.

1 Like
45

So you go after low hanging fruit instead of tackling the communities biggest concerns…got it

1 Like
46

So, should the thread title be changed to “Wrong Opinion”? :sweat_smile:

1 Like
47

Oh, I’m not. I took that into account in my post. It’s a bit hard to distinguish when a team is switching in my comment I guess. Just imagine there’s “Team 1” and “Team 2”

Edit: In fact, I don’t even think it matters which team is which, as long as we acknowledge that they switch after each round (Which I did)

Yeah, I suppose Jeff’s stats aren’t really specific enough. I’m betting he’s talking about who wins rounds rather than plainly reaches point C, so it doesn’t really answer that question.

Would it really realistically matter though? The stats clearly show it’s at least balanced. The map could potentially be infinitely long and it probably wouldn’t make a difference.