Radiant vs Dire By Duration June 25th, 2014 10:52 GMT Text by phantasmal Graphics by Heyoka



Focus Mode

Turn off Focus Mode [x]

Radiant vs Dire By Duration



In light of our



So which side wins more often? The answer is quite clearly Radiant.







In 18 of the 20 samples, Radiant had the higher win rate. The only exceptions were competitive games in patches 6.74 and 6.79. Despite this, the two sides have been relatively balanced in the post 6.74 period, with the largest measured discrepancy at 2.03% for 6.80 High.



One trend that was unnoticed by me before is that recently the balance between Radiant and Dire went in completely different directions for Pub and Professional play between 6.74 and 6.77. Way back in the 6.75 patch notes we had this change:



* Aegis reclaim time decreased from 10 to 6 minutes



Many people speculated this would make Dire weaker, but back in 6.77 I pointed out that this was not the case for my samples of pub games. However, in competitive play 6.74->6.77 represented a 3.43% shift in favor of the Radiant's fortunes. Since then, things have stabilized with Radiant enjoying a relatively constant win rate around 51.42% with the exception of Dire's brief advantage in 6.79. As for explaining this brief dip, my best guess is that it derives from this pair of changes:



6.79

* Roshan will respawn at a random time between 8 and 11 minutes after death



6.80

Roshan no longer stops upgrading his hp/damage/armor at 45 minutes

Roshan upgrade rate increased by 20%

Roshan bounty rescaled from 105-600 to 150-400



In any case, what is clear, if somewhat unsurprising, is that competitive play is significantly more sensitive to Roshan changes than public play. While the transision between 6.74 and 6.77 was weakening the Dire at a professional level, in pubs the reverse effect was occurring at all levels of play. The pro-Radiant shift between 6.79 and 6.80 was more consistent across all skill levels, but it also became more watered down the further you got from the highest levels of play. Between 6.79 and 6.80, Radiant received a 1.72% boost in competitive play compared to only 0.52% / 0.37% / 0.16% in Very High, High, and Normal rated pubs respectively.



But while Roshan does not appear to influence pub play nearly as much as he does competitive, there's another, more persistent finding when it comes to side balance: the early game Radiant advantage.







In every single period (other than the aforementioned anomaly of Competitive 6.79) Radiant enjoys a pronounced advantage over Dire in games that finish in under 30 minutes. This effect grows more pronounced the higher the skill level of the game, and the time frame in which this effect plays out appears to be significantly accelerated in competitive play, which makes sense given professional teams' proclivity to put Roshan into play earlier.



What drives this early game advantage is still unclear, but I have laid out some of the theories in previous articles. More recently, a League of Legends stat site released results that indicate a similar advantage for their bottom-left team, lending perhaps some credence to the camera angle theory.



Returning now to our sample, there are some peculiarities in the distribution, such as how the Radiant advantage is much more dramatic in pub games that fall between 20 and 30 minutes in duration than in games shorter than 20 minutes. This can perhaps be credited to the fact that most sub 20 minute pub games are caused by a complete team collapse due to factors such as an early leaver, and that the side that collapses is essentially a coin flip. For other anomalies, it's important to keep in mind that while our overall sample size is quite large, many of the slices are quite small and introduce the potential for significant sample error. For those of you interested in seeing the sample sizes, they can be found here.



Looking at the distribution numbers this way reveals one final fact that may influence the Radiant vs Dire balance: Dota matches are significantly shorter than they used to be. One particularly clear way to display this is by looking at the percentage of "short" games per patch period.







But for those of you interested in the more exhaustive take, I leave you with this:











Credits:

Writer: phantasmal

Editors: TheEmulator

In light of our Dire Straits article, where KF91 looked at the side specific strategies at the Summit finals, and DotaBuff's recent addition of Radiant and Dire win rates for player profiles, I thought it would be a good time to put together the complete collection of Radiant vs Dire data that I have available. This includes 9358 professional Dota games over six different patch periods courtesy of datdota.com , as well as 705,525 pub games divided by skill levels that I have collected through the Dota 2 API. Patches 6.75 and 6.76 were ignored because they were extremely short patches competitively, and because I have no pub data from that period.In 18 of the 20 samples, Radiant had the higher win rate. The only exceptions were competitive games in patches 6.74 and 6.79. Despite this, the two sides have been relatively balanced in the post 6.74 period, with the largest measured discrepancy at 2.03% for 6.80 High.One trend that was unnoticed by me before is that recently the balance between Radiant and Dire went in completely different directions for Pub and Professional play between 6.74 and 6.77. Way back inwe had this change:Many people speculated this would make Dire weaker, but back in 6.77 I pointed out that this was not the case for my samples of pub games. However, in competitive play 6.74->6.77 represented a 3.43% shift in favor of the Radiant's fortunes. Since then, things have stabilized with Radiant enjoying a relatively constant win rate around 51.42% with the exception of Dire's brief advantage in 6.79. As for explaining this brief dip, my best guess is that it derives from this pair of changes:In any case, what is clear, if somewhat unsurprising, is that. While the transision between 6.74 and 6.77 was weakening the Dire at a professional level, in pubs the reverse effect was occurring at all levels of play. The pro-Radiant shift between 6.79 and 6.80 was more consistent across all skill levels, but it also became more watered down the further you got from the highest levels of play. Between 6.79 and 6.80, Radiant received a 1.72% boost in competitive play compared to only 0.52% / 0.37% / 0.16% in Very High, High, and Normal rated pubs respectively.But while Roshan does not appear to influence pub play nearly as much as he does competitive, there's another, more persistent finding when it comes to side balance:(other than the aforementioned anomaly of Competitive 6.79). This effect grows more pronounced the higher the skill level of the game, and the time frame in which this effect plays out appears to be significantly accelerated in competitive play, which makes sense given professional teams' proclivity to put Roshan into play earlier.What drives this early game advantage is still unclear, but I have laid out some of the theories in. More recently,that indicate a similar advantage for their bottom-left team, lending perhaps some credence to the camera angle theory.Returning now to our sample, there are some peculiarities in the distribution, such as how the Radiant advantage is much more dramatic in pub games that fall between 20 and 30 minutes in duration than in games shorter than 20 minutes. This can perhaps be credited to the fact that most sub 20 minute pub games are caused by a complete team collapse due to factors such as an early leaver, and that the side that collapses is essentially a coin flip. For other anomalies, it's important to keep in mind that while our overall sample size is quite large, many of the slices are quite small and introduce the potential for significant sample error. For those of you interested in seeing the sample sizes, they can be foundLooking at the distribution numbers this way reveals one final fact that may influence the Radiant vs Dire balance:. One particularly clear way to display this is by looking at the percentage of "short" games per patch period.But for those of you interested in the more exhaustive take, I leave you with this: Writer

TheEmulator Profile Joined July 2010 12999 Posts #2 Interesting stats phantasmal. Thanks a lot! Administrator

Diavlo Profile Joined July 2011 Belgium 1828 Posts Last Edited: 2014-06-25 11:11:36 #3

http://www.liquiddota.com/forum/dota-2-general/452864-the-international-2013-retrospective-part-1



For example, yesterday in D2L, EG picked Dire over Radiant or first/second pick in the first game against Na'Vi. It's interesting that the results in competitive Dota match the results in pub so much considering that in pro Dota the side of the map and first/second pick are connected. Would be interesting to see a detailed analysis of teams tendencies when it comes to picking side or drafting order, just like you guys did last year for TI3:For example, yesterday in D2L, EG picked Dire over Radiant or first/second pick in the first game against Na'Vi. "I don't know how many years on this Earth I got left. I'm gonna get real weird with it."

Vallelol Profile Joined March 2011 Germany 341 Posts #4 Great article! Got 56% winrate on radiant and 51% on dire in my profile on dotabuff with 99% of the games being in "Very High".

Was always wondering why its such a big difference, guess its still a mystery :D

Laurens Profile Joined September 2010 Belgium 1715 Posts Last Edited: 2014-06-25 11:34:18 #5



It's an interesting observation. Does Radiant not have first pick more often? Maybe that explains higher win rates? But then in the longer games the dire roshan advantage comes into play more and they have the advantage? idk



e: on my Dotabuff, I have 57,98% winrate on dire, and 53,97% on radiant Camera angle being a factor for more radiant wins in short games seems somewhat far-fetched, no?It's an interesting observation. Does Radiant not have first pick more often? Maybe that explains higher win rates? But then in the longer games the dire roshan advantage comes into play more and they have the advantage? idke: on my Dotabuff, I have 57,98% winrate on dire, and 53,97% on radiant

goody153 Profile Joined April 2013 33366 Posts #6 wow this looks amazing this is a quote

BobMcJohnson Profile Joined October 2010 France 1145 Posts #7 The LoL link is actually really interesting when considering the camera angle argument because the game mode where the difference between the two teams is the most pronounced (All Random All Mid, 45-55%) is the one where the camera angle is the only difference between the two teams since it uses a special map that is perfectly symetric and picks are randomed at start.



In the other modes, other factors such as map assymetry (LoL map is not 100% symetric) and pick order can play a significant role on the team winrate (iirc blue team always has first pick in LoL) and the winrates are much closer. Romanes eunt domus

Vallelol Profile Joined March 2011 Germany 341 Posts #8 On June 25 2014 20:33 Laurens wrote:

Camera angle being a factor for more radiant wins in short games seems somewhat far-fetched, no?



It's an interesting observation. Does Radiant not have first pick more often? Maybe that explains higher win rates? But then in the longer games the dire roshan advantage comes into play more and they have the advantage? idk



e: on my Dotabuff, I have 57,98% winrate on dire, and 53,97% on radiant Camera angle being a factor for more radiant wins in short games seems somewhat far-fetched, no?It's an interesting observation. Does Radiant not have first pick more often? Maybe that explains higher win rates? But then in the longer games the dire roshan advantage comes into play more and they have the advantage? idke: on my Dotabuff, I have 57,98% winrate on dire, and 53,97% on radiant





As for Matchmaking games, I think most of the games are not CM/CD so firstpick doesn't matter



As for Matchmaking games, I think most of the games are not CM/CD so firstpick doesn't matter

Manit0u Profile Joined August 2004 Poland 941 Posts #9 On June 25 2014 20:49 BobMcJohnson wrote:

The LoL link is actually really interesting when considering the camera angle argument because the game mode where the difference between the two teams is the most pronounced (All Random All Mid, 45-55%) is the one where the camera angle is the only difference between the two teams since it uses a special map that is perfectly symetric and picks are randomed at start.



In the other modes, other factors such as map assymetry (LoL map is not 100% symetric) and pick order can play a significant role on the team winrate (iirc blue team always has first pick in LoL) and the winrates are much closer.



The camera angle could be fixed easily I believe. Why not just fix the camera at a different angle for both teams, this way it would seem to both of them as playing from the bottom left to the upper right (map turned 180 degrees basically). Would feel damn strange in the beginning for sure The camera angle could be fixed easily I believe. Why not just fix the camera at a different angle for both teams, this way it would seem to both of them as playing from the bottom left to the upper right (map turned 180 degrees basically). Would feel damn strange in the beginning for sure Time is precious. Waste it wisely.

BobMcJohnson Profile Joined October 2010 France 1145 Posts Last Edited: 2014-06-25 12:25:17 #10 On June 25 2014 21:10 Manit0u wrote:

Show nested quote +

On June 25 2014 20:49 BobMcJohnson wrote:

The LoL link is actually really interesting when considering the camera angle argument because the game mode where the difference between the two teams is the most pronounced (All Random All Mid, 45-55%) is the one where the camera angle is the only difference between the two teams since it uses a special map that is perfectly symetric and picks are randomed at start.



In the other modes, other factors such as map assymetry (LoL map is not 100% symetric) and pick order can play a significant role on the team winrate (iirc blue team always has first pick in LoL) and the winrates are much closer.



The camera angle could be fixed easily I believe. Why not just fix the camera at a different angle for both teams, this way it would seem to both of them as playing from the bottom left to the upper right (map turned 180 degrees basically). Would feel damn strange in the beginning for sure The camera angle could be fixed easily I believe. Why not just fix the camera at a different angle for both teams, this way it would seem to both of them as playing from the bottom left to the upper right (map turned 180 degrees basically). Would feel damn strange in the beginning for sure



Yeah turning the camera 180° when playing Dire so that your team is always in the bottom left would feel so fucking weird lol. Might create issues with perspective though (for example placing wards next to a cliff that only your team can see due to perspective or somethings) Yeah turning the camera 180° when playing Dire so that your team is always in the bottom left would feel so fucking weird lol. Might create issues with perspective though (for example placing wards next to a cliff that only your team can see due to perspective or somethings) Romanes eunt domus

mutantmagnet Profile Joined June 2009 United States 2990 Posts #11 On June 25 2014 20:49 BobMcJohnson wrote:

The LoL link is actually really interesting when considering the camera angle argument because the game mode where the difference between the two teams is the most pronounced (All Random All Mid, 45-55%) is the one where the camera angle is the only difference between the two teams since it uses a special map that is perfectly symetric and picks are randomed at start.



In the other modes, other factors such as map assymetry (LoL map is not 100% symetric) and pick order can play a significant role on the team winrate (iirc blue team always has first pick in LoL) and the winrates are much closer.



Exactly this.



It's a curious phenomena when everything else is strictly controlled like the ARAM.





http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18078536



Exactly this.It's a curious phenomena when everything else is strictly controlled like the ARAM. Abstract



The reason people read from top to bottom is unknown, but could be related to brain-mediated directional biases or environmental factors. To learn if there is a brain-mediated directional bias responsible for top-down reading direction, we evaluated the directional scanning in the vertical dimension by using directional letter and face cancellation tasks. Twenty participants were instructed to cancel either target letters or faces using either an up-down or down-up direction, with the stimuli located in left, right, and center hemispace. The results indicated significant differences in completion time between the search direction (up vs. down) and spatial position for the letter cancellation task, with a faster completion time for the bottom-up scan in right space and top-down in left space. Because the left hemisphere primarily attends to contralateral right hemispace our results suggest that, when attending to letter stimuli, the left hemisphere is biased to scan in a proximal to distal (upward) direction. Although the reasons why this is reversed in left hemispace and why we did not see directional biases in the face condition remains unclear, these results do suggest that the direction in which we learn to read is inconsistent with the brain's intrinsic directional bias.



It seems our brains are biased to process information faster going from the bottom up. It seems our brains are biased to process information faster going from the bottom up.

Aikin Profile Joined April 2010 Austria 81 Posts #12 Had to look at dotabuff after reading this. Was really surprised to see my stats



49% Dire and 60% Radiant. And I felt like I was doing better as dire for some reason o.O



Seems to fit with your stats tough since most of my games seem like they are at least kinda decided by the 30 min mark with one team having a clear advantage. [A]dmiral Bulldog | Naniwa | [A]lliance

ahswtini Profile Joined June 2008 Northern Ireland 16336 Posts #13 I also win more games on Radiant, interesting "As I've said, balance isn't about strategies or counters, it's about probability and statistics." - paralleluniverse

Plansix Profile Joined April 2011 United States 44957 Posts #14 The camera angle thing is real, it has to do with the way out brains process information. But people need to remember that those stats came up over a massive number of games in LoL.



I don't think it is a huge deal, but something to remember when you are setting up you next team fight. You wanna get up under them if you are trying to suprise them. I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6

Kleinmuuhg Profile Joined September 2010 Vanuatu 487 Posts #15 Interesting analysis , though I would have choses the colours in accordance to their proximity to 50% .

Dark green = 50% = good , as that is the state of balance we want to achieve. 70% or 30% = dark red = terribad

Anyhow , good job This is our town, scrub

BluemoonSC Profile Joined November 2010 SoCal 7987 Posts #16 This is interesting, everyone always talks about the dire advantage..I wonder what the reason for this is. Is it warding spots? Distance from jungle to runes? Sellout @BluemoonGG_ | The past is your lesson. The present, your gift. And the future.. your motivation.

nimdil Profile Joined January 2011 Poland 347 Posts #17 Question: why can't dire see the game from the same angle; the 3d environment should be easy to rotate 180 degrees.

Yacobs Profile Joined March 2010 United States 354 Posts #18 It may be quite easy to do. But a lot of times games that have a mostly fixed perspective use code and level design tricks to optimize performance based on the fact that you'll never see things from an angle that would reveal it.

nimdil Profile Joined January 2011 Poland 347 Posts #19 On June 25 2014 22:13 Yacobs wrote:

It may be quite easy to do. But a lot of times games that have a mostly fixed perspective use code and level design tricks to optimize performance based on the fact that you'll never see things from an angle that would reveal it.

Fair enough, but it still should be relatively fine to address. And considering that the game allows to some close ups I'd say there is not that much to change. Fair enough, but it still should be relatively fine to address. And considering that the game allows to some close ups I'd say there is not that much to change.

BluemoonSC Profile Joined November 2010 SoCal 7987 Posts #20 On June 25 2014 22:15 nimdil wrote:

Show nested quote +

On June 25 2014 22:13 Yacobs wrote:

It may be quite easy to do. But a lot of times games that have a mostly fixed perspective use code and level design tricks to optimize performance based on the fact that you'll never see things from an angle that would reveal it.

Fair enough, but it still should be relatively fine to address. And considering that the game allows to some close ups I'd say there is not that much to change. Fair enough, but it still should be relatively fine to address. And considering that the game allows to some close ups I'd say there is not that much to change.



I thought about this, but I feel like it would be super confusing to wrap my head around since at this point the map is engrained in my brain at one angle. If i were to be dire with our base bottom left I feel like Id never be able to navigate the map lol I thought about this, but I feel like it would be super confusing to wrap my head around since at this point the map is engrained in my brain at one angle. If i were to be dire with our base bottom left I feel like Id never be able to navigate the map lol Sellout @BluemoonGG_ | The past is your lesson. The present, your gift. And the future.. your motivation.

1 2 3 4 Next All